Differential effect of beta-blocker therapy on insulin resistance as a function of insulin sensitizer use: results from GEMINI

Vaccine Targeting Alpha 1D-Adrenergic Receptor Improved Metabolic Syndrome in Mice

PURPOSE

Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is a complex chronic disease that includes obesity and hypertension, with rising evidence demonstrating that sympathetic nervous system (SNS) activation plays a key role. Our team designed a therapeutic vaccine called ADRQβ-004 targeting the α1D-adrenergic receptor (α1D-AR). This study was performed to investigate whether the ADRQβ-004 vaccine improves MetS by modulating SNS activity.

METHODS

C57BL/6N mice were fed a high-fat diet (HFD) and Nω-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester (L-NAME) combination diet for 18 weeks to elicit MetS. The MetS mice were subcutaneously immunized with the ADRQβ-004 vaccine four times to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy in obesity and hypertension and other associated abnormalities related to MetS by conducting echocardiographic, histological, and biochemical analyses.

RESULTS

The ADRQβ-004 vaccine induced strong antibody production and maintained a high anti-ADR-004 antibody titer in MetS mice. The ADRQβ-004 vaccine improved obesity (P < 0.001) and decreased systolic blood pressure (P < 0.001). Improvements in dysregulated glucose homeostasis and dyslipidemia resulting from the ADRQβ-004 vaccine were also confirmed. Furthermore, the ADRQβ-004 vaccine attenuated cardiovascular functional (P = 0.015) and structural changes (P < 0.001), decreased fat accumulation (P = 0.012) and inflammation (P = 0.050) in the epididymal white adipose tissue, and alleviated hepatic steatosis (P = 0.043) involved in MetS. Moreover, the ADRQβ-004 vaccine improved systematic and visceral organs SNS activities in the MetS.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated for the first time that the ADRQβ-004 vaccine targeting α1D-AR improved obesity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and dysglycemia, and further reduced end-organ damage, which may provide new motivation for MetS research.

Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Fatty Liver Disease (MAFLD)-A Condition Associated with Heightened Sympathetic Activation

Metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) is the most common liver disease affecting a quarter of the global population and is often associated with adverse health outcomes. The increasing prevalence of MAFLD occurs in parallel to that of metabolic syndrome (MetS), which in fact plays a major role in driving the perturbations of cardiometabolic homeostasis. However, the mechanisms underpinning the pathogenesis of MAFLD are incompletely understood. Compelling evidence from animal and human studies suggest that heightened activation of the sympathetic nervous system is a key contributor to the development of MAFLD. Indeed, common treatment strategies for metabolic diseases such as diet and exercise to induce weight loss have been shown to exert their beneficial effects at least in part through the associated sympathetic inhibition. Furthermore, pharmacological and device-based approaches to reduce sympathetic activation have been demonstrated to improve the metabolic alterations frequently present in patients with obesity, MetSand diabetes. Currently available evidence, while still limited, suggests that sympathetic activation is of specific relevance in the pathogenesis of MAFLD and consequentially may offer an attractive therapeutic target to attenuate the adverse outcomes associated with MAFLD.

Effect of carvedilol vs metoprolol succinate on mortality in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Beta blocker therapy is indicated in all patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) as per current guidelines. The relative benefit of carvedilol to metoprolol succinate remains unknown. This study aimed to compare survival benefit of carvedilol to metoprolol succinate.

METHODS

The VA's databases were queried to identify 114,745 patients diagnosed with HFrEF from 2007 to 2015 who were prescribed carvedilol and metoprolol succinate. The study estimated the survival probability and hazard ratio by comparing the carvedilol and metoprolol patients using propensity score matching with replacement techniques on observed covariates. Sub-group analyses were performed separately for men, women, elderly, duration of therapy of more than 3 months, and diabetic patients.

RESULTS

A total of 43,941 metoprolol patients were matched with as many carvedilol patients. The adjusted hazard ratio of mortality for metoprolol succinate compared to carvedilol was 1.069 (95% CI: 1.046-1.092, P value: < .001). At six years, the survival probability was higher in the carvedilol group compared to the metoprolol succinate group (55.6% vs 49.2%, P value < .001). The sub-group analyses show that the results hold true separately for male, over or under 65 years old, therapy duration more than three months and non-diabetic patients.

CONCLUSION

Patients with HFrEF taking carvedilol had improved survival as compared to metoprolol succinate. The data supports the need for furthering testing to determine optimal choice of beta blockers in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Meta-analysis of the effects of carvedilol versus metoprolol on all-cause mortality and hospitalizations in patients with heart failure

Long-term treatment with appropriate doses of carvedilol or metoprolol is currently recommended for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) to decrease the risk of death, hospitalizations, and patients' symptoms. It remains unclear if the β blockers used in patients with HFrEF are equal or carvedilol is superior to metoprolol types. We performed a meta-analysis of the comparative effects of carvedilol versus metoprolol tartrate and succinate on all-cause mortality and/or hospitalization. We conducted an Embase and MEDLINE search for prospective controlled trials and cohort studies of patients with HFrEF who were received to treatment with carvedilol versus metoprolol. We identified 4 prospective controlled and 6 cohort studies with 30,943 patients who received carvedilol and 69,925 patients on metoprolol types (tartrate and succinate) with an average follow-up duration of 36.4 months. All-cause mortality was reduced in prospective studies with carvedilol versus metoprolol tartrate. Neither all-cause mortality nor hospitalizations were significantly different between carvedilol and metoprolol succinate in the cohort studies. In conclusion, in patients with HFrEF, carvedilol and metoprolol succinate have similar effects in reducing all-cause mortality.

Metabolic syndrome: a sympathetic disease?

Metabolic syndrome is associated with adverse health outcomes and is a growing problem worldwide. Although efforts to harmonise the definition of metabolic syndrome have helped to better understand the prevalence and the adverse outcomes associated with the disorder on a global scale, the mechanisms underpinning the metabolic changes that define it are incompletely understood. Accumulating evidence from laboratory and human studies suggests that activation of the sympathetic nervous system has an important role in metabolic syndrome. Indeed, treatment strategies commonly recommended for patients with metabolic syndrome, such as diet and exercise to induce weight loss, are associated with sympathetic inhibition. Pharmacological and device-based approaches to target activation of the sympathetic nervous system directly are available and have provided evidence to support the important part played by sympathetic regulation, particularly for blood pressure and glucose control. Preliminary evidence is encouraging, but whether therapeutically targeting sympathetic overactivity could help to prevent metabolic syndrome and attenuate its adverse outcomes remains to be determined.

Metabolic dysfunction in diabetic cardiomyopathy

Diabetic cardiomyopathy (DCM) is defined as cardiac disease independent of vascular complications during diabetes. The number of new cases of DCM is rising at epidemic rates in proportion to newly diagnosed cases of diabetes mellitus (DM) throughout the world. DCM is a heart failure syndrome found in diabetic patients that is characterized by left ventricular hypertrophy and reduced diastolic function, with or without concurrent systolic dysfunction, occurring in the absence of hypertension and coronary artery disease. DCM and other diabetic complications are caused in part by elevations in blood glucose and lipids, characteristic of DM. Although there are pathological consequences to hyperglycemia and hyperlipidemia, the combination of the two metabolic abnormalities potentiates the severity of diabetic complications. A natural competition exists between glucose and fatty acid metabolism in the heart that is regulated by allosteric and feedback control and transcriptional modulation of key limiting enzymes. Inhibition of these glycolytic enzymes not only controls flux of substrate through the glycolytic pathway, but also leads to the diversion of glycolytic intermediate substrate through pathological pathways, which mediate the onset of diabetic complications. The present review describes the limiting steps involved in the development of these pathological pathways and the factors involved in the regulation of these limiting steps. Additionally, therapeutic options with demonstrated or postulated effects on DCM are described.

Diabetic cardiomyopathy: ongoing controversies in 2012

Diabetic cardiomyopathy is a controversial clinical entity that in its initial state is usually characterized by left ventricular diastolic dysfunction in patients with diabetes mellitus that cannot be explained by coronary artery disease, hypertension, or any other known cardiac disease. It was reported in up to 52-60% of well-controlled type-II diabetic subjects, but more recent studies, using standardized tissue Doppler criteria and more strict patient selection, revealed a much lower prevalence. The pathological substrate is myocardial damage, left ventricular hypertrophy, interstitial fibrosis, structural and functional changes of the small coronary vessels, metabolic disturbance, and autonomic cardiac neuropathy. Hyperglycemia causes myocardial necrosis and fibrosis, as well as the increase of myocardial free radicals and oxidants, which decrease nitric oxide levels, worsen the endothelial function, and induce myocardial inflammation. Insulin resistance with hyperinsulinemia and decreased insulin sensitivity may also contribute to the left ventricular hypertrophy. Clinical manifestations of diabetic cardiomyopathy may include dyspnea, arrhythmias, atypical chest pain, and dizziness. Currently, there is no specific treatment of diabetic cardiomyopathy that targets its pathophysiological substrate, but various therapeutic options are discussed that include improving diabetic control with both diet and drugs (metformin and thiazolidinediones), the use of ACE inhibitors, beta blockers, and calcium channel blockers. Daily physical activity and a reduction in body mass index may improve glucose homeostasis by reducing the glucose/insulin ratio and the increase of both insulin sensitivity and glucose oxidation by the skeletal and cardiac muscles.

Carbohydrate metabolism parameters in angina patients treated with metoprolol and its combination with trimetazidine

Aim. To study the effects of a β-adrenoblocker (β-AB) metoprolol (Mp) and its combination with trimetazidine (Tmd) on glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity in patients with angina pectoris. Material and methods. In total, 28 men aged 46-68 years, with Functional Class (FC) II-III stable angina, positive exercise stress test (EST), and no prior β-AB therapy were examined. Individual Mp doses were selected based on the paired EST results. For one month, the Mp dose of 50 or 100 mg/d was administered twice a day; for the next month, participants received Mp and Tmd (70 mg/d). A standard glucose tolerance test (GTT) was performed at baseline and at the end of one-month periods of Mp or Mp + Tmd treatment. Carbohydrate metabolism disturbances were diagnosed according to the WHO criteria (1999). Insulin resistance (IR) was assessed by HOMA2-IR parameter, and tissue insulin sensitivity by ISI0,120 parameter. Results. After one month of Mp treatment, a decrease in fasting glucose levels was observed (p=0,025). At the same time, the GTT results demonstrated increased glucose levels 2 hours after glucose load, compared to baseline (p=0,049). Tissue insulin sensitivity (ISI0,120) showed some reduction (p=0,14), while the number of patients with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) increased from 4 to 8 (p=0,006). The levels of fasting and post-load glycemia after one month of the combination therapy with Mp and Tmd were similar to those after the Mp treatment. Insulin levels at 2 hours after glucose load were higher than those observed after the Mp therapy (p=0,045). Compared to baseline, HOMA2-IR values increased, and IDI0,120 values decreased (p=0,036). The IDI0,120 dynamics suggested a reduction in insulin sensitivity for both treatment regimens. IGT was registered in 10 patients. Conclusion. In angina patients, impaired glucose control was observed as early as 1 month after the start of Mp treatment. This early impairment could be diagnosed by GTT. Although the combination therapy with Mp and Tmd did not prevent this impairment, but provided a greater antiischemic effect and, therefore, was clinically appropriate

Beta blocker use in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus and systolic heart failure does not worsen glycaemic control

Background

The prognostic benefits of beta-blockers (BB) in patients with systolic heart failure (SHF) are known but despite this, in patients with diabetes they are underutilized. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of beta-blockers (BB) on glycaemic control in patients with Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM) and systolic heart failure (SHF) stratified to beta-1 selective (Bisoprolol) vs. nonselective BB (Carvedilol).

Methods

This observational, cohort study was conducted in patients with T2DM and SHF attending an Australian tertiary teaching hospital's heart failure services. The primary endpoint was glycaemic control measured by glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at initiation and top dose of BB. Secondary endpoints included microalbuminuria, changes in lipid profile and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).

Results

125 patients were assessed. Both groups were well matched for gender, NYHA class and use of guideline validated heart failure and diabetic medications. The mean treatment duration was 1.9 ± 1.1 years with carvedilol and 1.4 ± 1.0 years with bisoprolol (p = ns). The carvedilol group achieved a reduction in HbA1c (7.8 ± 0.21% to 7.3 ± 0.17%, p = 0.02) whereas the bisoprolol group showed no change in HbA1c (7.0 ± 0.20% to 6.9 ± 0.23%, p = 0.92). There was no significant difference in the change in HbA1c from baseline to peak BB dose in the carvedilol group compared to the bisoprolol group. There was a similar deterioration in eGFR, but no significant changes in lipid profile or microalbuminuria in both groups (p = ns).

Conclusion

BB use did not worsen glycaemic control, lipid profile or albuminuria status in subjects with SHF and T2DM. Carvedilol significantly improved glycemic control in subjects with SHF and T2DM and this improvement was non significantly better than that obtained with bisoprolol. BB's should not be withheld from patients with T2DM and SHF.

Diabetic cardiomyopathy

Individuals with diabetes are at a significantly greater risk of developing cardioymyopathy and heart failure despite adjusting for concomitant risks such as coronary artery disease or hypertension. This has led to the increased recognition of a distinct disease process termed as "diabetic cardiomyopathy." In this article, we perform an extensive review of the pathogenesis and treatment of this disease. From a clinical perspective, physicians should be aware of this entity, and early screening should be considered because physical evidence of early diabetic cardiomyopathy could be difficult to detect. Early detection of the disease should prompt intensification of glycemic control, concomitant risk factors, use of pharmacologic agents such as β-blockers and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system antagosists. From a research perspective, more studies on myocardial tissue from diabetic patients are needed. Clinical trials to evaluate the development of diabetic cardiomyopathy and fibrosis in early stages of the disease, as well as clinical trials of pharmacologic intervention in patients specifically with diabetic cardiomyopathy, need to be conducted.

Personalized vascular medicine: individualizing drug therapy

Personalized medicine refers to the application of an individual's biological fingerprint - the comprehensive dataset of unique biological information - to optimize medical care. While the principle itself is straightforward, its implementation remains challenging. Advances in pharmacogenomics as well as functional assays of vascular biology now permit improved characterization of an individual's response to medical therapy for vascular disease. This review describes novel strategies designed to permit tailoring of four major pharmacotherapeutic drug classes within vascular medicine: antiplatelet therapy, antihypertensive therapy, lipid-lowering therapy, and antithrombotic therapy. Translation to routine clinical practice awaits the results of ongoing randomized clinical trials comparing personalized approaches with standard of care management.

Inflammation and therapy for hypertension

It is currently accepted that hypertension, atherosclerosis, and diabetes are disorders with subtle or overt activation of inflammatory mediators. Therefore, it has become increasingly important to ascertain whether current antihypertensive drug families have proinflammatory or anti-inflammatory actions that modify the outcomes of their hemodynamic effects on blood pressure. We review the current state of knowledge about the effects of the major classes of available antihypertensive agents on inflammation and speculate on the possible contribution of these effects to observations in clinical trials. We suggest that a strategy of drug development specifically addressing inflammation in hypertension may provide increased benefit in terms of target organ damage, and we describe some examples of these promising developments.

Diabetes and obesity: therapeutic targeting and risk reduction - a complex interplay

Obesity is a major risk factor for the development of diabetes and predisposes individuals to hypertension and dyslipidaemia. Together these pathologies increase the risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD), the major cause of morbidity and mortality in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Worsening trends in obesity and T2DM raise a serious conundrum, namely, how to control blood glucose, blood pressure, and lipids when many antidiabetic agents cause weight gain and thereby exacerbate other cardiovascular risk factors associated with T2DM. Further, evidence suggests that some established antihypertensive agents may worsen glucose intolerance. Many patients who are obese, hypertensive, and/or hyperlipidaemic fail to achieve blood pressure, lipid and glycaemic goals, and this failure may in part be explained by physician reluctance to utilize complex combination regimens for fear of off-target effects. Thus, a clear need exists for clinicians to understand the risks and benefits of different pharmacologic, and indeed non-pharmacologic, options in order to maximize treatment outcomes. While intensive lifestyle modification remains an elusive gold standard, newer diabetes targets, including the incretin axis, may offer greater cardiovascular risk reduction than other antidiabetes therapies, although definitive clinical trial data are needed. The glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists exenatide and liraglutide and the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors sitagliptin and vildagliptin effectively lower HbA1c; exenatide and liraglutide reduce weight and blood pressure and improve lipid profiles. Sitagliptin and vildagliptin are weight neutral but also appear to improve lipid profiles. Integration of incretin therapies into the therapeutic armamentarium is a promising approach to improving outcomes in T2DM, and perhaps even in reducing complications of T2DM, such as co-morbid hypertension and dyslipidaemia. Additional long-term studies, including CVD end-point studies, will be necessary to determine the appropriate places for incretin-based therapies in treatment algorithms.

Current pharmacotherapeutic concepts for the treatment of cardiovascular disease in diabetics

With the growing worldwide obesity epidemic, obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension leading to premature cardiovascular events, are increasingly prevalent. Diabetes mellitus is a significant public health concern and more aggressive management of the condition and its complications, particularly cardiovascular disease, is warranted. Endothelial cell dysfunction is now known to be present at the earliest stages of metabolic syndrome, and insulin resistance and may precede the clinical diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus by several years. The current focus on endothelial cell function as a potential target of pharmacotherapy in the management of cardiovascular disease in diabetics seems warranted, though not all drugs currently prescribed target endothelial cell function equally. In this review, we consider the six classes of drugs currently prescribed for the treatment of hypertension as they impact endothelial cell function and advocate for the development of novel drugs that can repair the endothelium and enhance nitric oxide availability thus preventing future cardiovascular events.

Interaction of beta-blockers with the renal uptake transporter OCT2

AIM

The uptake of drugs from the blood into the renal tubular cells is a key determinant for renal secretion and may influence their systemic plasma concentrations and extrarenal effects. Metformin, used for treatment of type 2 diabetes, is taken up into renal tubular cells by the organic cation transporter 2 (OCT2). Because many patients with type 2 diabetes receiving metformin are concomitantly treated with beta-blockers, we tested whether beta-blockers can inhibit OCT2-mediated drug transport.

METHOD

Using Madin-Darby canine kidney II cells stably expressing the uptake transporter OCT2, we analysed whether the beta-blockers bisoprolol, carvedilol, metoprolol and propranolol inhibit the transport of OCT2 substrates 1-methyl-4-phenylpyridinium (MPP(+)) and metformin.

RESULTS

Neither bisoprolol nor metoprolol significantly inhibited the uptake of MPP(+), whereas a significant inhibition was observed for carvedilol und propranolol (half maximal inhibitory concentration IC(50): 26.3 and 67.5 microM) respectively. Moreover, all beta-blockers significantly inhibited OCT2-mediated metformin uptake (IC(50) for bisoprolol: 2.4 microM, IC(50) for carvedilol: 2.3 microM, IC(50) for metoprolol: 50.2 microM and IC(50) for propranolol: 8.3 microM).

CONCLUSION

These in vitro results demonstrate that alterations of uptake transporter function by beta-blockers have to be considered as potential mechanisms underlying drug-drug interactions in the kidney.

Treatment of diabetic hypertension

Insulin resistance and hyperglycaemia combine to make hypertension more prevalent in the type 2 diabetic patient. Blood pressure goals below those for the non-diabetic subject have been shown to be more effective in lowering mortality and cardiovascular events in the diabetic patient. To achieve these goals in most cases, three to five antihypertensives from different therapeutic groups need to be utilized. Suppression of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin 2 receptor blockers or a renin inhibitor should be the primary therapy. A second goal should be suppression of the sympathetic nervous system utilizing a beta-blocker that does not increase insulin resistance. The addition of a diuretic, calcium channel blocker or a vasodilator to suppressors of the RAS and sympathetic nervous system aid in achieving hypertensive goals in the diabetic patient. Achieving hypertensive goals with suppression of the RAS and sympathetic nervous system should result in a decrease in mortality and cardiovascular events in the diabetic hypertensive patient. In this review article, the benefits and disadvantages of the different antihypertensive therapies in the diabetic patient are discussed.

Comparison of carvedilol and metoprolol on serum lipid concentration in diabetic hypertensive patients

CONTEXT

Vasoconstricting beta-blocker use is associated with a reduction in HDL cholesterol, higher triglyceride, total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol levels, whereas carvedilol, a vasodilating beta-blocker, has not been associated with these effects.

OBJECTIVE

To compare in a randomized, double-blind study, the effects of the beta 1-blocker metoprolol tartrate with the combined alpha 1, beta-blocker carvedilol on serum lipid concentrations.

METHODS

A prospective randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial compared the effects of carvedilol and metoprolol on total cholesterol, triglycerides, calculated LDL, HDL and non-HDL cholesterol levels at baseline and after 5 months of therapy as a secondary objective in the Glycemic Effects in Diabetes Mellitus: Carvedilol-Metoprolol Comparison in Hypertensive (GEMINI) study. In this study, 1235 participants with type 2 diabetes and hypertension who were receiving renin-angiotensin system blockers were randomized either to carvedilol, receiving 6.25-25 mg twice daily, or to metoprolol tartrate, receiving 50-200 mg twice daily. If needed, hydrochlorothiazide and a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker were added to achieve blood pressure goals.

RESULTS

In the metoprolol tartrate group, triglycerides and non-HDL cholesterol increased and both the LDL and the HDL cholesterol levels decreased. In the carvedilol group, total LDL and HDL cholesterol decreased, non-HDL cholesterol was unchanged and triglycerides increased. Comparing the carvedilol and metoprolol tartrate groups, there was no statistically significant difference in LDL and HDL cholesterol levels, but there was a significantly greater decreases with carvedilol in total cholesterol [-2.9%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.60 to -1.15, p < 0.001], triglycerides (-9.8%, 95% CI -13.7, -5.75%, p < 0.001) and non-HDL cholesterol (-4.03%, 95% CI -6.3 to -1.8, p < 0.0006). At the end of the study, significantly more participants in the metoprolol tartrate group had had initiation of statin therapy or the statin dose increased than those in the carvedilol group (11 vs. 32%, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 2 diabetes currently receiving a renin-angiotensin blocker, compared with metoprolol tartrate, the addition of carvedilol for blood pressure control resulted in a significant decrease in triglyceride, total cholesterol and non-HDL cholesterol levels. The use of metoprolol resulted in a significantly greater rate of initiation of statin therapy or an increase in the dose of existing statin therapy when compared with carvedilol utilization.