Effects of semaglutide on risk of cardiovascular events across a continuum of cardiovascular risk: combined post hoc analysis of the SUSTAIN and PIONEER trials

Different formulations of semaglutide and oxidative stress in subjects with type 2 diabetes and MASLD: an open-label, real-life study

AIM

Semaglutide exerts metabolic effects and cardiovascular protection in type 2 diabetes (T2D), also acting on hepatic steatosis and inflammation. No data are, so far, available on the effect of semaglutide on oxidative stress, neither a comparison of injective (InjS) and oral (OrS) formulations has been performed in subjects with T2D and liver steatosis.

METHODS

In a real-life, open label, prospective study we compared standard doses of InjS and OrS in targeting liver inflammation and fibrosis and systemic markers of inflammation and oxidative stress by consecutively prescribing InjS or OrS formulation in a 2:1 ratio to sixty T2D + MASLD subjects (T0), observing them for 6 months (T1). Anthropometry, biochemistry and transient elastography (TE) data were collected; hormones, inflammatory cytokines and peroxidation products were measured.

RESULTS

At baseline, InjS and OrS subjects were similar, except for waist circumference, liver enzymes and Controlled Attenuation Parameter (CAP), a measure of liver steatosis (InjS > OrS, all p < 0.05). Differences emerged in T0-T1 variation between the formulations in HbA1c, lipid profile, blood pressure. CAP significantly decreased only in InjS. GLP-1 quite similarly increased; insulin, glucagon and GIP did not vary. InjS and OrS did not modify TNFα, IL-10 (an anti-inflammatory cytokine) and MCP-1, while IL-18 was reduced only by InjS. When exploring oxidative stress, AGEs were unaffected, Thiobarbituric acid reactive substances decreased in InjS, 4-Hydroxynonenal was reduced in OrS.

CONCLUSION

In T2D + MASLD subjects, InjS, better than OrS, improves metabolic control; a significant reduction of IL-18 by InjS, and a mild anti-oxidative effect of both formulations are reported for the first time.

Pancreatitis Risk Associated with GLP-1 Receptor Agonists, Considered as a Single Class, in a Comorbidity-Free Subgroup of Type 2 Diabetes Patients in the United States: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Introduction: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are commonly prescribed for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, the potential connection between GLP-1 RAs and the risk of pancreatitis presents a complex and nuanced issue. Although these drugs are effective in improving blood sugar control and cardiovascular health, their association with pancreatitis remains an area of concern. Our study aims to evaluate the association between the use of GLP-1 RAs, considered as a single class, and the risk of pancreatitis in a comorbidity-free subgroup of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the United States. Methods: Data were retrieved from the TriNetX research database using the US Collaborative Network, which included information from 61 healthcare organizations within the U.S. Patients diagnosed with T2DM were categorized into two cohorts: one consisting of the patients prescribed with GLP-1 RAs and the other comprising patients who did not receive GLP-1 RAs. Of this class of medications, the agents analyzed were dulaglutide, lixisenatide, exenatide, liraglutide, and semaglutide. Using a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) model, we matched patients of both cohorts based on baseline demographics, comorbidities (hypertensive disorders, ischemic heart disease, gallstones, annular pancreas, alcohol use disorders, hypertriglyceridemia, hypercalcemia, cystic fibrosis, and cannabis use), medications known to cause drug-related pancreatitis, and laboratory values. Results: Of 969,240 patients with T2DM, 9.7% (93,608) were on GLP-1 RA, and 90.3% (875,632) were not. After PSM, the sample included 81,872 patients in each cohort. The risk of pancreatitis between the two groups was not statistically different between the two cohorts at 6 months at (0.1% vs. 0.1%, p = 0.04), and remained without significant increase with time; at 1 year (0.1% vs. 0.2%, p = 0.02), 3 years (0.2% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.001), and 5 years (0.3% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001). The lifetime risk of developing pancreatitis in patients on GLP-1 RA was lower (0.3% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In our comorbidity-free U.S.-based population with T2DM, the use of GLP-1 RAs did not increase their risk of pancreatitis. Their use was associated with a lower lifetime risk of pancreatitis.

Unveiling the Potential Role of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonists in Offering Protection of the Cardiovascular, Renal, and Neural Systems: An Updated Narrative Review

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists have drawn a lot of interest lately for their therapeutic advantages over controlling blood sugar levels in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This review aims to provide an overview of the research that has been done on the neuroprotective, renoprotective, and cardioprotective effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists. Studies suggest that these medicines could provide protective benefits beyond glucose regulation, possibly reducing the risks of cardiovascular and renal issues; mechanisms underlying these advantages are still not fully understood. The review emphasizes how crucial it is to conduct more studies to determine the clinical significance and underlying mechanisms of these protective benefits. Improved knowledge of GLP-1 receptor agonists may result in T2DM treatment plans that improve neurological, cardiovascular, and renal function in addition to blood sugar control. Therefore, further research is necessary to fully understand the potential of GLP-1 receptor agonists in providing comprehensive protection against complications related to T2DM.

The effect of Mycobacterium tuberculosis treatment on thrombelastography-assessed haemostasis: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Tuberculosis disease (TB) and tuberculosis infection (TBI) have been associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease which may be connected to infection-related haemostatic changes. It is unknown if treatment of Mycobacterium tuberculosis influences haemostasis. Here, we assessed if TB or TBI treatment affects thrombelastography (TEG)-assessed haemostasis.

METHODS

Individuals with TB or TBI were included from a TB outpatient clinic in Copenhagen, Denmark. Patients treated with antithrombotic medication or systemic immunosuppressants were excluded. TEG analysis was performed before and after TB/TBI treatment using the TEG®6s analyser to provide data on the reaction time of clot initiation (R) (min), the speed of clot formation (K) (min) and clot build-up (Angle) (°), maximum clot strength (MA) (mm), and clot breakdown/fibrinolysis (LY30) (%). Differences in TEG were assessed using paired t tests.

RESULTS

We included eleven individuals with TB with median [interquartile range] [IQR] age 52 (Liu et al. in Medicine (United States) 95, 2016) years and mean (standard deviation) (SD) body mass index (BMI) 24.7 (6.3) kg/m2 as well as 15 individuals with TBI with median [IQR] age 49 (Wells et al. in Am J Respir Crit Care Med 204:583, 2021) years and BMI 26.0 (3.2) kg/m2. Treatment reduced MA for both TB (64.0 (6.3) vs. 57.9 (5.2) mm, p = 0.016) and TBI (61.3 (4.1) vs. 58.6 (5.0) mm, p = 0.023) whereas R, K, Angle and LY30 were unaffected.

CONCLUSION

TEG analysis showed that treatments of TB and TBI were associated with reduced MA which may indicate the existence of cardiovascular benefits from therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov 05 April 2021 with registration number NCT04830462.

GLP-1 receptor agonists and myocardial metabolism in atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia. Many medical conditions, including hypertension, diabetes, obesity, sleep apnea, and heart failure (HF), increase the risk for AF. Cardiomyocytes have unique metabolic characteristics to maintain adenosine triphosphate production. Significant changes occur in myocardial metabolism in AF. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have been used to control blood glucose fluctuations and weight in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and obesity. GLP-1RAs have also been shown to reduce oxidative stress, inflammation, autonomic nervous system modulation, and mitochondrial function. This article reviews the changes in metabolic characteristics in cardiomyocytes in AF. Although the clinical trial outcomes are unsatisfactory, the findings demonstrate that GLP-1 RAs can improve myocardial metabolism in the presence of various risk factors, lowering the incidence of AF.

De-Intensification from Basal-Bolus Insulin Therapy to Liraglutide in Type 2 Diabetes: Predictive Value of Mean Glycaemia during Fasting Test

BACKGROUND

Successful conversion from insulin therapy to glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) with basal insulin in well-controlled patients has already been demonstrated. However, the data concerning individuals with poor glycaemic control are scarce. The aim of this work was to assess the success rate of insulin therapy to liraglutide transition in poorly controlled diabetes in a real-world clinical setting and to define predictors of success. We are the first to present the method of a fasting test as a way to identify the patients at higher risk of failure after treatment de-intensification.

METHODS

The retrospective observational study analyzed data of 62 poorly controlled obese diabetic patients on high-dose insulin therapy, who were subjected to a 72 h fasting test during hospitalization and subsequently switched to liraglutide ± basal insulin therapy. During the fasting, all antidiabetic treatment was discontinued. Patients were classified as responders if they remained on GLP-1RA treatment after 12 months. Non-responders restarted the basal-bolus insulin (BBI) regimen. Development of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight in both groups, alongside with parameters associated with the higher risk of return to the BBI regimen, were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 71% of patients were switched successfully (=responders). Responders had more significant improvement in HbA1c (-6.4 ± 19.7 vs. -3.4 ± 22.9 mmol/mol) and weight loss (-4.6 ± 7.1 vs. -2.5 ± 4.0). Statistically significant difference between groups was found in initial HbA1c (75.6 ± 17.9 vs. 90.5 ± 23.6; p = 0.04), total daily dose of insulin (67.6 ± 36.4 vs. 90.8 ± 32.4; p = 0.02), and mean glycaemia during the fasting test (6.9 ± 1.7 vs. 8.6 ± 2.2 mmol/L; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that therapy de-intensification in poorly controlled patients with a BBI regimen is possible. Higher baseline HbA1c, total daily insulin dose, and mean glucose during fasting test are negative predictive factors of successful therapy de-escalation.

Comparative analysis of physicochemical properties, bioequivalence, safety and tolerability of the first domestic semaglutide

Semaglutide is a representative of analogues of the incretin hormone human glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and is currently used in Russia for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM; in monotherapy and in combination therapy), including patients with obesity and overweight.

The aimof the work was to conduct a comparative assessment of the physicochemical properties, a biological activity, bioequivalence and safety, including tolerability and immunogenicity, of the drug Quincent® (semaglutide, 1.34 mg/ml, a solution for a subcutaneous administration, Promomed Rus LLC, Russia) and the drug Ozempic® (semaglutide, 1.34 mg/ml, a solution for a subcutaneous administration, Novo Nordisk A/S, Denmark) when administered to healthy volunteers.

Materials and methods.To assess the degree of similarity of the study drug Quincenta®(semaglutide, 1.34 mg/ml, a solution for a subcutaneous administration, Promomed Rus LLC, Russia) with a chemically synthesized active substance to the original (reference) drug Ozempic® (semaglutide, 1.34 mg/ml, a solution for a subcutaneous administration, Novo Nordisk A/S, Denmark), a comparative study of physicochemical properties and a biological activity was carried out. To assess the bioequivalence of the study drug and the reference drug, an open randomized parallel comparative study with the participation of healthy volunteers (n=54), 54 participants of which had been included in the population, was conducted. The volunteers were randomized into 2 groups in a 1:1 ratio, and received a single dose subcutaneously either of the study drug (domestic semaglutide at a dose of 0.5 mg) or the reference drug (foreign semaglutide at a dose of 0.5 mg). The mode of administration was in the morning on an empty stomach. A semaglutide concentration was determined in serum samples using a previously validated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) method. A quantitative determination of antibodies to semaglutide in the human serum by ELISA was carried out with a microplate photometer using ready-made kits pre-validated by the manufacturer. The conclusion about the bioequivalence of the compared drugs was made using an approach based on the assessment of 90% confidence intervals for the ratios of the geometric mean values of the parameters Cmax, AUC(0–t)of semaglutide in the measurement original units.

Results.The results of the comparative analysis of the study drug and the reference drug demonstrate the comparability of their physicochemical properties and biological activity. The results of the clinical study demonstrated the bioequivalence of the test drug and the reference drug. Thus, the pharmacokinetic parameters of the drugs were comparable to each other: the Cmaxvalue for the study drug was 42.088±8.827 ng/ml, for the reference drug Ozempic® it was 42.2556±7.84. Herewith, the half-life for the study drug and the reference drug was 168.39±39.47 and 157.99±28.57 hours, respectively. The resulting 90% confidence intervals for the ratio of the Cmaxand AUC0–tvalues of the study drug and the reference drug were 90.89–109.15 and 91.66–111.27%, respectively. The tolerability of the drugs in the volunteers was notified as good. No adverse events were recorded during the study. No serious adverse events were reported throughout the study. According to the results of the immunogenicity analysis, no antibodies to Russian-made semaglutide were detected in the blood serum of the volunteers, which indicated the lack of Results. The results of a comparative analysis of the study drug and the reference drug demonstrate the comparability of physicochemical properties and biological activity. The results of the clinical study demonstrated the bioequivalence of the study drug and the reference drug. Thus, the pharmacokinetic parameters of the drugs were comparable to each other: the Cmaxvalue for the study drug was 42.088±8.827 ng/ml, for the reference drug Ozempic® this figure was 42.2556±7.84. At the same time, the half-life for the study drug and the reference drug was 168.39±39.47 and 157.99±28.57 hours, respectively. The resulting 90% confidence intervals for the ratio of the Cmaxand AUC0–tvalues of the study drug and the reference drug were 90.89–109.15 and 91.66–111.27%, respectively. Tolerability of the drugs in volunteers was noted as good. No adverse events were recorded during the study. No serious adverse events were reported throughout the study. According to the results of the immunogenicity analysis, no antibodies to Russian-made semaglutide were detected in the blood serum of the volunteers, which indicated the lack of the drug immunogenicity.

Conclusion.In the course of the study, the comparability of the physicochemical properties and biological activity of the studied Russian drug with the chemically synthesized active substance Quincenta® to the reference drug Ozempic® was confirmed: the activity range of the studied drugs was within 80–120% in relation to the standard sample of semaglutide. The bioequivalence and a similar safety profile, including the immunogenicity and tolerability of the Russian drug Quincenta® (semaglutide 1.34 mg/ml, Promomed Rus LLC, Russia) were shown in comparison with the foreign drug Ozempic® (semaglutide 1.34 mg/ml, Novo Nordisk A/C, Denmark).

Efficacy and tolerability of the Subcutaneous Semaglutide for type 2 Diabetes patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To update and assess the efficacy and tolerability of once weekly subcutaneous semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, Clinical trial, Springer, OVID, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang Data and China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP) were searched from inception to January 18, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing subcutaneous semaglutide with placebo or any other antidiabetic agent in adults with T2D were eligible. The risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined to synthesize the results.

RESULTS

A total of 17 trials enrolling 14,940 T2D patients were included. For efficacy, compared with placebo, semaglutide exhibited beneficial effects on glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) control [MD -0.97%, 95% CI (-1.33, -0.62), I2 = 91%; MD -1.36%, 95% CI (-1.59, -1.13), I2 = 84%, semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg, respectively], body weight reduction, blood pressure control. At the same time, subcutaneous semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg reduced HbA1c by 0.56% (95% CI 0.32 to 0.80) and 0.63% (95% CI 0.35 to 0.91) compared to other glucose-lowering agents. For tolerability, semaglutide did not increase the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs), severe or blood glucose (BG) confirmed hypoglycaemia, acute pancreatitis and diabetic retinopathy compared to placebo or active comparators, but did increase the risk of nausea, diarrhea and vomiting.

CONCLUSIONS

Semaglutide has a better effect on glycaemic control and weight loss than other therapies. Nevertheless, semaglutide was associated with increased incidence of gastrointestinal-related disorders. Further large, multicenter randomized controlled clinical trials are still needed to obtain more robust evidence to better guide clinical treatment decisions.

Treatment effect heterogeneity following type 2 diabetes treatment with GLP1-receptor agonists and SGLT2-inhibitors: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

A precision medicine approach in type 2 diabetes requires the identification of clinical and biological features that are reproducibly associated with differences in clinical outcomes with specific anti-hyperglycaemic therapies. Robust evidence of such treatment effect heterogeneity could support more individualized clinical decisions on optimal type 2 diabetes therapy.

METHODS

We performed a pre-registered systematic review of meta-analysis studies, randomized control trials, and observational studies evaluating clinical and biological features associated with heterogenous treatment effects for SGLT2-inhibitor and GLP1-receptor agonist therapies, considering glycaemic, cardiovascular, and renal outcomes. After screening 5,686 studies, we included 101 studies of SGLT2-inhibitors and 75 studies of GLP1-receptor agonists in the final systematic review.

RESULTS

Here we show that the majority of included papers have methodological limitations precluding robust assessment of treatment effect heterogeneity. For SGLT2-inhibitors, multiple observational studies suggest lower renal function as a predictor of lesser glycaemic response, while markers of reduced insulin secretion predict lesser glycaemic response with GLP1-receptor agonists. For both therapies, multiple post-hoc analyses of randomized control trials (including trial meta-analysis) identify minimal clinically relevant treatment effect heterogeneity for cardiovascular and renal outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence on treatment effect heterogeneity for SGLT2-inhibitor and GLP1-receptor agonist therapies is limited, likely reflecting the methodological limitations of published studies. Robust and appropriately powered studies are required to understand type 2 diabetes treatment effect heterogeneity and evaluate the potential for precision medicine to inform future clinical care.

Oral semaglutide 50 mg taken once per day in adults with overweight or obesity (OASIS 1): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

We assessed the efficacy and safety of the oral glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue, semaglutide 50 mg, taken once per day versus placebo for the treatment of overweight or obesity in adults without type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3, superiority trial enrolled adults with a BMI of at least 30 kg/m2, or at least 27 kg/m2 with bodyweight-related complications and comorbidities, without type 2 diabetes. The trial was done at 50 outpatient clinics in nine countries across Asia, Europe, and North America. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) via an interactive web-response system to oral semaglutide escalated to 50 mg, or visually matching placebo, once per day for 68 weeks, plus lifestyle intervention. Group assignment was masked for participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes. Coprimary endpoints were the percentage change in bodyweight and whether participants reached a bodyweight reduction of at least 5% at week 68 for oral semaglutide 50 mg versus placebo, assessed regardless of treatment discontinuation or use of other bodyweight-lowering therapies (an intention-to-treat analysis). Safety was assessed in participants who received at least one dose of trial drug. This trial, registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05035095), is now complete.

FINDINGS

From Sept 13 to Nov 22, 2021, 709 participants were screened, of whom 667 were randomly assigned to oral semaglutide 50 mg (n=334) or placebo (n=333). The estimated mean bodyweight change from baseline to week 68 was -15·1% (SE 0·5) with oral semaglutide 50 mg versus -2·4% (0·5) with placebo (estimated treatment difference -12·7 percentage points, 95% CI -14·2 to -11·3; p<0·0001). More participants reached bodyweight reductions of at least 5% (269 [85%] of 317 vs 76 [26%] of 295; odds ratio [OR] 12·6, 95% CI 8·5 to 18·7; p<0·0001), 10% (220 [69%] vs 35 [12%]; OR 14·7, 9·6 to 22·6), 15% (170 [54%] vs 17 [6%]; OR 17·9, 10·4 to 30·7), and 20% (107 [34%] vs 8 [3%]; OR 18·5, 8·8 to 38·9) at week 68 with oral semaglutide 50 mg versus placebo. Adverse events were more frequent with oral semaglutide 50 mg (307 [92%] of 334) than with placebo (285 [86%] of 333). Gastrointestinal adverse events (mostly mild to moderate) were reported in 268 (80%) participants with oral semaglutide 50 mg and 154 (46%) with placebo.

INTERPRETATION

In adults with overweight or obesity without type 2 diabetes, oral semaglutide 50 mg once per day led to a superior and clinically meaningful decrease in bodyweight compared with placebo.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

Nationwide cardiovascular risk categorization: applying the European Society of Cardiology guidelines to the Swedish National Diabetes Register

AIMS

The 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines recommend that patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) with a very high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk receive cardiovascular (CV)-protective glucose-lowering medication (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists or sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors). This analysis compared previous prescribing practices with the ESC recommendations.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients in the Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR) with T2D, aged 18-90 years, not receiving CV-protective glucose-lowering medication in 2017 were identified, and the ESC criteria for very high CVD risk were applied. The composite outcome of major adverse CV events (MACEs; defined as CV death, non-fatal stroke or non-fatal myocardial infarction) during 2017 was calculated, and the number of MACE avoided with semaglutide, an example of a CV-protective glucose-lowering medication, was estimated for patients with a certain CV risk score. Of the 320 028 patients in the NDR with T2D who were not receiving CV-protective glucose-lowering medication, 129 512 patients had a very high CVD risk. Patients with a very high CVD risk had a high incidence of MACE (75.4 events/1000 person-years), which was higher in those with atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD) with and without elevated glycated haemoglobin (>9%; 136.5 and 90.8 events/1000 person-years, respectively). If patients with a very high CVD risk, according to the ESC, and ASCVD received semaglutide, 803 MACE may have been avoided in 2017.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis highlights differences between previous prescribing practices in Sweden and the 2021 ESC guidelines and offers strategies to prioritize CV-protective glucose-lowering medication for patients who would benefit most.

Precision medicine in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review of treatment effect heterogeneity for GLP1-receptor agonists and SGLT2-inhibitors

Background

A precision medicine approach in type 2 diabetes requires identification of clinical and biological features that are reproducibly associated with differences in clinical outcomes with specific anti-hyperglycaemic therapies. Robust evidence of such treatment effect heterogeneity could support more individualized clinical decisions on optimal type 2 diabetes therapy.

Methods

We performed a pre-registered systematic review of meta-analysis studies, randomized control trials, and observational studies evaluating clinical and biological features associated with heterogenous treatment effects for SGLT2-inhibitor and GLP1-receptor agonist therapies, considering glycaemic, cardiovascular, and renal outcomes.

Results

After screening 5,686 studies, we included 101 studies of SGLT2-inhibitors and 75 studies of GLP1-receptor agonists in the final systematic review. The majority of papers had methodological limitations precluding robust assessment of treatment effect heterogeneity. For glycaemic outcomes, most cohorts were observational, with multiple analyses identifying lower renal function as a predictor of lesser glycaemic response with SGLT2-inhibitors and markers of reduced insulin secretion as predictors of lesser response with GLP1-receptor agonists. For cardiovascular and renal outcomes, the majority of included studies were post-hoc analyses of randomized control trials (including meta-analysis studies) which identified limited clinically relevant treatment effect heterogeneity.

Conclusions

Current evidence on treatment effect heterogeneity for SGLT2-inhibitor and GLP1-receptor agonist therapies is limited, likely reflecting the methodological limitations of published studies. Robust and appropriately powered studies are required to understand type 2 diabetes treatment effect heterogeneity and evaluate the potential for precision medicine to inform future clinical care.

Plain language summary

This review identifies research that helps understand which clinical and biological factors that are associated with different outcomes for specific type 2 diabetes treatments. This information could help clinical providers and patients make better informed personalized decisions about type 2 diabetes treatments. We focused on two common type 2 diabetes treatments: SGLT2-inhibitors and GLP1-receptor agonists, and three outcomes: blood glucose control, heart disease, and kidney disease. We identified some potential factors that are likely to lessen blood glucose control including lower kidney function for SGLT2-inhibitors and lower insulin secretion for GLP1-receptor agonists. We did not identify clear factors that alter heart and renal disease outcomes for either treatment. Most of the studies had limitations, meaning more research is needed to fully understand the factors that influence treatment outcomes in type 2 diabetes.

Posing the rationale for synthetic lipoxin mimetics as an adjuvant treatment to gold standard atherosclerosis therapies

Atherosclerosis is a progressive, multifactorial inflammatory, and dyslipidaemic disease, responsible for the majority of cardiovascular diseases globally. The chronic inflammation is the main driver of the initiation and progression of such disease, as a result of an imbalanced lipid metabolism and an ineffective immune response to attenuate the inflammatory component. The importance of inflammation resolution is being increasingly recognised in atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. It has a complex mechanism consisting of multiple stages, including restoring an effective removal of apoptotic bodies (efferocytosis) and their degradation (effero-metabolism), a macrophage phenotype switching towards resolving phenotypes, and the promotion of tissue healing and regeneration. The low-grade inflammation associated with atherosclerosis development is a driving force in disease exacerbation, and hence inflammation resolution is a key area of research. In this review, we explore the complex disease pathogenesis and its many contributing factors to gain a greater understanding of the disease and identify the current and potential therapeutic targets. First-line treatments and their efficacy will also be discussed in detail, to highlight the emerging field of resolution pharmacology. Despite the great efforts made by current gold-standard treatments, such as lipid-lowering and glucose-lowering drugs, they remain ineffective at tackling residual inflammatory risk and residual cholesterol risk. Resolution pharmacology represents a new era of atherosclerosis therapy, as endogenous ligands associated with inflammation resolution are exploited for their pharmacological benefits in a more potent and longer-acting manner. Novel FPR2-agonists, such as synthetic lipoxin analogues, provide an exciting new approach to enhance the pro-resolving response of the immune system and subsequently end the pro-inflammatory response to allow for an anti-inflammatory and pro-resolving environment for tissue healing, regeneration, and return to homeostasis.

Safety and tolerability of semaglutide across the SUSTAIN and PIONEER phase IIIa clinical trial programmes

AIM

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists improve glycaemic control: some are now available as oral and subcutaneous formulations, and some have indications for reducing cardiovascular risk. The expanded scope for these therapies warrants comprehensive safety evaluations. We report the safety/tolerability of subcutaneous and oral semaglutide from the SUSTAIN and PIONEER clinical trial programmes, respectively.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adverse events (AEs) from 16 randomized placebo- or active-controlled phase IIIa trials in patients with type 2 diabetes (n = 11 159) including once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide (n = 3150; SUSTAIN trials) or once-daily oral semaglutide (n = 4116; PIONEER trials) were analysed. Data pools were analysed for each programme, with separate analyses of cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs; n = 6480).

RESULTS

In the phase IIIa pools, gastrointestinal disorders were reported in 41.9%/39.1% of patients with subcutaneous/oral semaglutide, respectively (most prevalent during initiation/escalation) versus 22.0%/24.8% with comparators. Rates of kidney disorders, acute pancreatitis, malignant neoplasms, hypoglycaemia, diabetic retinopathy, heart failure and other cardiovascular events were similar for semaglutide versus comparators. Cholelithiasis incidence was higher with subcutaneous and oral semaglutide versus placebo. Diabetic retinopathy incidence was higher with subcutaneous semaglutide versus placebo in SUSTAIN 6. Small pulse rate increases occurred with both formulations; there was no increased rate of arrhythmias. Fatal AE incidence was similar between semaglutide and comparators. Versus placebo, CVOTs showed a reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular events with subcutaneous semaglutide and non-inferiority criteria were met with oral semaglutide.

CONCLUSIONS

The most common AEs with semaglutide were gastrointestinal disorders, which decreased with continued therapy. These comprehensive safety/tolerability data may better inform patient selection and guidance in care.

Asian Best Practices for Care of Diabetes in Elderly (ABCDE)

The elderly population with diabetes is diverse with the majority experiencing a decline in physical and mental capabilities, impacting the entire diabetes management process. Therefore, a need for geriatric-specific guidelines, especially for the Asian population, was identified and subsequently developed by an expert panel across government and private institutions from several Asian countries. The panel considered clinical evidence (landmark trials, position papers, expert opinions), recommendations from several important societies along with their decades of clinical experience and expertise, while meticulously devising thorough geriatric-specific tailored management strategies. The creation of the ABCDE best practices document underscores and explores the gaps and challenges and determines optimal methods for diabetes management of the elderly population in the Asian region.

Oral versus subcutaneous semaglutide for prevention of major adverse cardiovascular events: cost per outcome analysis of SUSTAIN-6 and PIONEER-6

BACKGROUND

Semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1a), reduces the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). An oral version of semaglutide is now available, and patients may prefer it over the subcutaneous form. Our objective was to compare the value for money of the two modalities by assessing the cost needed to treat (CNT) to prevent MACE.

METHODS

The CNT to prevent MACE was figured by multiplying the one-year number needed to treat (NNT) with either oral or subcutaneous semaglutide by the annual cost of therapy. Efficacy estimates and the resulting NNT figures were extracted from the published results of the SUSTAIN-6 and the PIONEER-6 trials for the injectable and oral versions of semaglutide, respectively. Drug costs were estimated as 75% of the United States national average drug acquisition cost listing in June 2021. We performed a scenario analysis to mitigate the primary differences between the populations in the two trials. Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of price changes of the interventions.

RESULTS

The CNT to prevent one MACE with subcutaneous semaglutide in SUSTAIN-6 was $966,693 ($594,888-$5,035,302) compared to $948,689 ($463,465-∞) with oral semaglutide in PIONEER-6. The scenario analysis demonstrated a 17% lower CNT for oral semaglutide. The difference between CNTs was sensitive to price fluctuations of the two interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral and subcutaneous semaglutide prescribed to prevent MACE in patients with T2DM provide similar value for money. The choice between both therapies should be guided mainly by patient preferences.

The role of oral semaglutide in managing type 2 diabetes in Indian clinical settings: Addressing the unmet needs

AIMS

Despite their established benefits, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) remain underutilized for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management, which indicates that subcutaneous injection is an unfavorable mode of delivery from the patient's perspective. This review summarizes existing challenges related to medication adherence and the use of antihyperglycemia injectables, revisits the established safety and efficacy of oral semaglutide, and explores its features and considerations for use among the Indian T2DM population.

METHODS

We performed a literature search using MEDLINE and the National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry from July 1, 2016, to July 1, 2021, to identify publications on oral semaglutide approval, T2DM treatment guidelines, and clinical evidence for oral drug formulation.

RESULTS

Oral semaglutide is the first oral GLP-1 RA approved for T2DM patients based on phase 3, randomized PIONEER trials. The multitargeted action of this drug offers glycemic control, weight control, and cardiovascular, renal, and additional benefits, including patient convenience and enhanced medication adherence. In addition to achieving glycemic control, the cost of semaglutide is reported to be lower than other GLP-1 RA in the West, thus potentially mitigating the economic burden that appears to be high among the Indian population.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is no data available on oral semaglutide in Indian clinical settings. However, significant improvements in glycemic control, cardiac and renal benefits, as well as weight loss across clinical trials should encourage clinicians to prioritize oral semaglutide over other antidiabetic agents.

Semaglutide reduces cardiovascular events regardless of metformin use: a post hoc subgroup analysis of SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6

Background

Cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) are conducted on a background of standard of care including metformin. These analyses sought to determine whether the cardiovascular (CV) effects of semaglutide and other glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) vary according to baseline metformin use.

Methods

A post hoc analysis was conducted using pooled SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6 CVOT data in subjects with and without metformin use at baseline. Additionally, a trial-level meta-analysis was conducted using data from seven CVOTs with GLP-1RAs–SUSTAIN 6, PIONEER 6, HARMONY OUTCOMES, LEADER, REWIND, EXSCEL and AMPLITUDE-O–including adults with type 2 diabetes at high CV risk, and a primary endpoint of time to first major adverse CV event (MACE).

Results

In the post hoc analysis, the no-metformin subgroup was older, with a higher body mass index, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate and higher CV risk at baseline vs the metformin subgroup. Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for the reduction in risk of MACE with semaglutide vs placebo in the metformin and no-metformin subgroups were 0.70 (0.55;0.89) and 0.86 (0.60;1.22), respectively. No significant interaction between the treatment effect on MACE and metformin subgroup was observed. Findings for other CV endpoints were similar. In the meta-analysis, treatment effect (GLP-1RA vs placebo) on CV outcomes was no different with vs without baseline metformin (overall ratio between the hazard ratios for metformin vs no-metformin 1.09 [0.96;1.22]).

Conclusion

These findings indicate that the CV outcomes for semaglutide were similar regardless of baseline metformin use, which may also apply to all GLP-1RAs.

Trial registration SUSTAIN 6 (NCT01720446), PIONEER 6 (NCT02692716).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12933-022-01489-6.

Semaglutide: a game changer for metabolic diseases?

Semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) molecule approved for the treatment of both type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity. Semaglutide has a greater impact on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction, compared to other GLP-1 RAs, and is the first molecule of this class available in oral formulation for T2D therapy, representing a useful option for subjects and physicians less prone to start an injective drug. Interestingly, due to its remarkable effects on weight reduction, higher than other GLP-1 RAs and very close to bariatric surgery, semaglutide is designated to change the approach to obesity therapy also in the subject not affected by diabetes. In addition to these favorable features, semaglutide, similarly to other GLP-1 RAs, offers beneficial effects on cardio-vascular (CV), renal, and liver protection, making this molecule an advantageous choice in the therapeutic management of “diabesity” (coexistence of both diabetes and obesity) and its co-morbidity.

Risk Factors Analysis and Management of Cardiometabolic-Based Chronic Disease in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

The epidemic of obesity or adiposity-based chronic diseases presents a significant challenge with the rising prevalence of morbidities and mortality due to atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD), especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). The underlying pathophysiology of metabolic inflexibility is a common thread linking insulin resistance to cardiometabolic-based chronic disease (CMBCD), including dysglycemia, hypertension, and dyslipidemia progressing to downstream ASCVD events. The complex CMBCD paradigm in the LMIC population within the socio-economic and cultural context highlights considerable heterogeneity of disease predisposition, clinical patterns, and socio-medical needs. This review intends to summarize the current knowledge of CMBCD. We describe recently established or emerging trends for managing risk factors, assessment tools for evaluating ASCVD risk, and various pharmacological and non-pharmacological measures particularly relevant for LMICs. A CMBCD model positions insulin resistance and β-cell dysfunction at the summit of the disease spectrum may improve outcomes at a lower cost in LMICs. Despite identifying multiple pathophysiologic disturbances constituting CMBCD, a large percentage of the patient at risk for ASCVD remains undefined. Targeting dysglycemia, dyslipidemia, and hypertension using antihypertensive, statins, anti-glycemic, and antiplatelet agents has reduced the incidence of ASCVD. Thus, primordial prevention targeting pathophysiological changes that cause abnormalities in adiposity and primary prevention by detecting and managing risk factors remains the foundation for CMBCD management. Therefore, targeting pathways that address mitochondrial dysfunction would exert a beneficial effect on metabolic inflexibility that may potentially correct insulin resistance, β cell dysfunction and, consequently, would be therapeutically effective across the entire continuum of CMBCD.

Oral GLP-1 analogue: perspectives and impact on atherosclerosis in type 2 diabetic patients

Cardiovascular events related to atherosclerosis are responsible for high morbidity and mortality among patients with type 2 diabetes. Improvement in care, especially in early stages, is crucial. Oral semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, controls blood glucose and results in significant body weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes. Beyond these well-known effects, an interesting aspect of this drug is its antiatherogenic activity, which should be further explored in clinical practice. This paper reviews the evidence related to oral semaglutide decreasing cardiovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes, focusing on the drug's antiatherosclerotic properties. The glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue restores endothelial dysfunction, induces vasodilatation, and reduces plasma lipids. Oral semaglutide showed cardiovascular safety profile, with significant reduced risk of death from cardiovascular events. Based on current data, clinicians should consider oral semaglutide for type 2 diabetes management.

The dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist tirzepatide: a novel cardiometabolic therapeutic prospect

Incretin hormones are peptides released in the intestine in response to the presence of nutrients in its lumen. The main incretins are glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP). GLP-1 stimulates insulin secretion, inhibits glucagon secretion at pancreatic α cells and has also extrapancreatic influences as slowing of gastric emptying which increases the feeling of satiety. GIP is the main incretin hormone in healthy people, causative of most the incretin effects, but the insulin response after GIP secretion in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is strongly reduced. Therefore, in the past GIP has been considered an unappealing therapeutic target for T2DM. This conception has been changing during recent years, since it has been reported that resistance to GIP can be reversed and its effectiveness restored by improving glycemic control. This fact paved the way for the development of a GIP receptor agonist-based therapy for T2DM, looking also for the possibility of finding a combined GLP-1/GIP receptor agonist. In this framework, the novel dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist tirzepatide seems to be not just a new antidiabetic medication. Administered as a subcutaneous weekly injection, it is a manifold single pharmacological agent that has the ability to significantly lower glucose levels, as well as improve insulin sensitivity, reduce weight and amend dyslipidemia favorably modifying the lipid profile. Tirzepatide and additional dual GLP-1/GIP receptor agonists that could eventually be developed in the future seem to be a promising furthest advance for the management of several cardiometabolic settings. Obviously, it is too early to be overly hopeful since it is still necessary to determine the long-term effects of these compounds and properly verify the potential cardiovascular benefits. Anyway, we are currently facing a novel and very appealing therapeutic option.

Applying REWIND cardiovascular disease criteria to SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6: An exploratory analysis of cardiovascular outcomes with semaglutide

In the REWIND trial, dulaglutide reduced cardiovascular (CV) risk versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes in both the "established CV disease" (CVD) and "CV risk factor" subgroups. The SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6 trials of semaglutide used different criteria for established CVD from those used in REWIND. The present post hoc analysis assessed the effect of semaglutide on major adverse CV events (MACE) in a pooled population of SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6 patients, re-categorized into CV risk subgroups using the REWIND CVD criteria. In the pooled analysis (n = 6480), a lower percentage of patients were in the established CVD subgroup, when using the REWIND CVD criteria, compared with the original trial CVD criteria (66.5% vs. 83.8%, respectively). After re-categorization, the risk of MACE was significantly lower with semaglutide versus placebo in the established CVD subgroup (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59, 0.92) and nonsignificantly lower in the CV risk factor subgroup (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.55, 1.28) (P-interaction = 0.60). These results suggest that the CV effects of semaglutide may extend to patients with type 2 diabetes across the CV risk continuum.