Effect of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors on the Risk of Bone Fractures in a Korean Population

Targeting osteoclast-derived DPP4 alleviates inflammation-mediated ectopic bone formation in ankylosing spondylitis

BACKGROUND

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by ectopic bone formation. The anti-inflammatory function of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitor has been reported in bone metabolism, but its utility in AS has not previously been investigated.

METHODS

We assessed DPP4 level in serum, synovial fluid, and facet joint tissue of AS patients. Additionally, we investigated the effect of a DPP4 inhibitor in an experimental AS model using curdlan-injected SKG mice. Following curdlan injection, SKG mice were orally administered a DPP4 inhibitor three times per week for 5 weeks and observed clinical arthritis scores, and analyzed by micro-CT. Furthermore, osteoclast precursor cells (OPCs) from curdlan-injected SKG mice were treated with DPP4 inhibitor and evaluated the inhibitory effects of this treatment in vitro.

RESULTS

Soluble DPP4 level was elevated in the serum and synovial fluid of patients with AS compared to those in the control group. Expression of DPP4 increased gradually during human osteoclastogenesis and was high in mature osteoclasts. Oral administration of a DPP4 inhibitor resulted in a decrease in thickness of the hind paw, clinical arthritis scores, and enthesitis at the ankle in curdlan-injected SKG mice compared to the vehicle group. Micro-CT data revealed a significant reduction in inflammation-induced low bone density in the DPP4 inhibitor group. Moreover, treatment with a DPP4 inhibitor significantly reduced osteoclast differentiation of OPC in addition to decreasing expression of osteoclast differentiation markers.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that inhibiting DPP4 may have a therapeutic effect on inflammation-mediated ectopic bone formation in AS patients.

Risk of bone fracture by using dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a network meta-analysis of population-based cohort studies

Background

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is linked to a heightened likelihood of experiencing fractures. It is crucial to ascertain whether medications used to lower blood sugar levels can elevate the risk of fractures. We aimed to investigate and compare the effects of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA), Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors (DPP-4i), and Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors (SGLT-2i) on the fracture risk in patients with T2D in the real world.

Methods

A network meta-analysis conducted an inclusive literature search in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to select appropriate population-based cohort studies that investigated the risk of bone fractures of (GLP-1RA), (DPP-4i) or (SGLT-2i) in the real world. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed using R software to investigate the risk of total fractures as a primary outcome among patients who used (GLP-1RAs), (SGLT-2i) or (DPP-4i) versus each other or other glucose-lowering medications (GLMs). The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were summarized overall network and for each pairwise direct and indirect comparison. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) with the P-scores was calculated for each treatment in the network meta-analysis to detect their cumulative ranking probabilities in lowering the risk of total fractures.

Results

In our NMA, we identified a set of 13 population-based cohort studies comprising a total of 1,064,952 patients. The risk of fracture was identified with the follow-up duration for each class. We found a significant decrease in the fracture risk by about 87% associated with patients who used SGLT2 inhibitors in combination with other glucose-lowering medications, followed by SGLT2 inhibitors alone by about 67%, then GLP-1 receptor agonists by about 60%, and at last DPP-4 inhibitors by about 55%.

Conclusion

Our study's collective findings suggest a significant association of the low risk of fracture with the use of SGLT2i with other GLMs combination, SGLT2i alone, GLP-1RA, and DPP-4i, respectively. This population-based analysis offers the best available evidence and might be helpful for clinicians in the decision of the most suitable T2DM treatment strategies, especially for elderly type 2 diabetic patients, as they may be safe in terms of fracture.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42023448720.

The multiple actions of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) and its pharmacological inhibition on bone metabolism: a review

BACKGROUND

Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) plays a crucial role in breaking down various substrates. It also has effects on the insulin signaling pathway, contributing to insulin resistance, and involvement in inflammatory processes like obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Emerging effects of DPP-4 on bone metabolism include an inverse relationship between DPP-4 activity levels and bone mineral density, along with an increased risk of fractures.

MAIN BODY

The influence of DPP-4 on bone metabolism occurs through two axes. The entero-endocrine-osseous axis involves gastrointestinal substrates for DPP-4, including glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptides 1 (GLP-1) and 2 (GLP-2). Studies suggest that supraphysiological doses of exogenous GLP-2 has a significant inhibitory effect on bone resorption, however the specific mechanism by which GLP-2 influences bone metabolism remains unknown. Of these, GIP stands out for its role in bone formation. Other gastrointestinal DPP-4 substrates are pancreatic peptide YY and neuropeptide Y-both bind to the same receptors and appear to increase bone resorption and decrease bone formation. Adipokines (e.g., leptin and adiponectin) are regulated by DPP-4 and may influence bone remodeling and energy metabolism in a paracrine manner. The pancreatic-endocrine-osseous axis involves a potential link between DPP-4, bone, and energy metabolism through the receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa B ligand (RANKL), which induces DPP-4 expression in osteoclasts, leading to decreased GLP-1 levels and increased blood glucose levels. Inhibitors of DPP-4 participate in the pancreatic-endocrine-osseous axis by increasing endogenous GLP-1. In addition to their glycemic effects, DPP-4 inhibitors have the potential to decrease bone resorption, increase bone formation, and reduce the incidence of osteoporosis and fractures. Still, many questions on the interactions between DPP-4 and bone remain unanswered, particularly regarding the effects of DPP-4 inhibition on the skeleton of older individuals.

CONCLUSION

The elucidation of the intricate interactions and impact of DPP-4 on bone is paramount for a proper understanding of the body's mechanisms in regulating bone homeostasis and responses to internal stimuli. This understanding bears significant implications in the investigation of conditions like osteoporosis, in which disruptions to these signaling pathways occur. Further research is essential to uncover the full extent of DPP-4's effects on bone metabolism and energy regulation, paving the way for novel therapeutic interventions targeting these pathways, particularly in older individuals.

The association between anti-diabetic agents and osteoporosis, sarcopenia, and osteosarcopenia among Iranian older adults; Bushehr Elderly Health (BEH) program

PURPOSE

Various risk factors are mentioned for osteoporosis, sarcopenia, and osteosarcopenia. Our aim is to assess the impacts of anti-diabetic drugs on these disorders.

METHODS

To perform this study, the participants' data was extracted from the Bushehr Elderly Health (BEH) program in Iran. Afterward, the data were categorized into three subgroups: osteoporosis, sarcopenia, and osteosarcopenia, based on WHO and European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP-2) working group definitions. Demographic characteristics, anthropometric measures, past medical history, and current medications were recorded. Pearson chi-squared and simple/multiple logistic regression using Python (3.11.4) and R (4.3.1) programming software assessed the association between anti-diabetic agents and these bone disorders.

RESULTS

Out of 1995 participants, 820, 848, and 404 had osteoporosis, sarcopenia, or osteosarcopenia, respectively. Among all types of anti-diabetic drugs, a significant protective association between osteoporosis and consumption of second-generation sulfonylureas was found; Adjusted Odd Ratio (AOR) = 0.65 ([95% CI: 0.45-0.94], p-value = 0.023). No associations were found between sarcopenia and consumption of anti-diabetic agents. A significant association was observed between using Meglitinides and the risk of osteosarcopenia; AOR = 4.98 ([95% CI: 1.5-16.55], p-value = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, a protective association between consumption of second-generation sulfonylureas and osteoporosis was found. Moreover, a positive association was found between the consumption of meglitinides and osteosarcopenia. However, to support these findings, further studies are recommended.

Effects of Incretin Therapy on Skeletal Health in Type 2 Diabetes-A Systematic Review

Diabetes poses a significant risk to bone health, with Type 1 diabetes (T1D) having a more detrimental impact than Type 2 diabetes (T2D). The group of hormones known as incretins, which includes gastric inhibitory peptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), play a role in regulating bowel function and insulin secretion during feeding. GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are emerging as the primary treatment choice in T2D, particularly when atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is present. Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4is), although less potent than GLP-1 RAs, can also be used. Additionally, GLP-1 RAs, either alone or in combination with GIP, may be employed to address overweight and obesity. Since feeding influences bone turnover, a relationship has been established between incretins and bone health. To explore this relationship, we conducted a systematic literature review following the PRISMA guidelines. While some studies on cells and animals have suggested positive effects of incretins on bone cells, turnover, and bone density, human studies have yielded either no or limited and conflicting results regarding their impact on bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk. The effect on fracture risk may vary depending on the choice of comparison drug and the duration of follow-up, which was often limited in several studies. Nevertheless, GLP-1 RAs may hold promise for people with T2D who have multiple fracture risk factors and poor metabolic control. Furthermore, a potential new area of interest is the use of GLP-1 RAs in fracture prevention among overweight and obese people. Based on this systematic review, existing evidence remains insufficient to support a positive or a superior effect on bone health to reduce fracture risk in people with T2D. © 2023 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

To do one and to get more: Part I. Diabetes and bone

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), is a chronic metabolic disease, characterized by the presence of hyperglycemia and insulin resistance. The key treatment strategies for T2DM include modification of lifestyle, medications, and continuous glucose monitoring. DM patients often have DM-associated morbidities and comorbidities; however, disorders of musculoskeletal system are often neglected, compared to other major systems in DM patients. Based on sharing similar pathophysiology of DM and osteoporosis, it is supposed that the use of antidiabetic agents (ADAs) may not only provide the lowering glucose level effect and the maintenance of the sugar homeostasis to directly delay the tissue damage secondary to hyperglycemia but also offer the benefits, such as the prevention of developing osteoporosis and fractures. Based on the current review, evidence shows the positive correlation between DM and osteoporosis or fracture, but the effectiveness of using ADA in the prevention of osteoporosis and subsequent reduction of fracture seems to be inconclusive. Although the benefits of ADA on bone health are uncertain, the potential value of "To do one and to get more" therapeutic strategy should be always persuaded. At least, one of the key treatment strategies as an establishment of healthy lifestyle may work, because it improves the status of insulin resistance and subsequently helps DM control, prevents the DM-related micro- and macrovascular injury, and possibly strengthens the general performance of musculoskeletal system. With stronger musculoskeletal system support, the risk of "fall" may be decreased, because it is associated with fracture. Although the ADA available in the market does not satisfy the policy of "To do one and to get more" yet, we are looking forward to seeing the continuously advanced technology of drug development on diabetic control, and hope to see their extra-sugar-lowering effects.

Treatment of Diabetes and Osteoporosis—A Reciprocal Risk?

Diabetes mellitus is a metabolic and systematic disorder that requires individualized therapy. The disease leads to various consequences, resulting in the destruction of tissues and organs. The aforementioned outcomes also include bone mineral disorders, caused by medications as well as diet therapy and physical activity. Some drugs may have a beneficial effect on both bone mineral density and the risk of fractures. Nevertheless, the impact of other medications remains unknown. Focusing on pharmacotherapy in diabetes may prevent bone mineral disorders and influence both the treatment and quality of life in patients suffering from diabetes mellitus. On the other hand, anti-osteoporosis drugs, such as antiresorptive or anabolic drugs, as well as drugs with a mixed mechanism of action, may affect carbohydrate metabolism, particularly in patients with diabetes. Therefore, the treatment of diabetes as well as osteoporosis prevention are vital for this group of patients.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors do not increase the risk of fractures in real-world clinical practice in Korea: A national observational cohort study

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to determine whether sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) were related to increased fracture risk in adults with type 2 diabetes compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between May 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018, we conducted a new-user cohort study using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. Propensity score matching was performed on 478,826 new users of an SGLT2 inhibitor or DPP-4 inhibitor. After propensity score matching on > 80 covariates, 84,460 individuals were initiated on SGLT2i or DPP-4i, with 42,230 individuals in each treatment group. The time to first fracture event was compared between the SGLT2i and DPP-4i groups using Cox proportional hazard models, and the results are reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for fracture occurrence. Subgroup analyses investigated fractures between treatment groups according to baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

Individuals who were started on SGLT2i were not linked with increased fracture risk in both as-treated (AT) and intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses (AT: HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.92-1.04; ITT: HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-1.00). We identified no significant interaction between the individuals' age, sex, fracture history, or thiazolidinedione usage in any subgroup analyses, indicating that none of these variables appeared to be impact modifiers in the connection between SGLT2i and fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found no increase in the risk of fracture among individuals treated with SGLT2i in a real-world clinical setting for type 2 diabetes.

The risk of major osteoporotic fractures with GLP-1 receptor agonists when compared to DPP-4 inhibitors: A Danish nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) is associated with an increased fracture risk. There is little evidence for the effects of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) on fracture risk in T2D. We aimed to investigate the risk of major osteoporotic fractures (MOF) for treatment with GLP-1RA compared to dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) as add-on therapies to metformin.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study using Danish national health registries. Diagnoses were obtained from discharge diagnosis codes (ICD-10 and ICD-8-system) from the Danish National Patient Registry, and all redeemed drug prescriptions were obtained from the Danish National Prescription Registry (ATC classification system). Subjects treated with metformin in combination with either GLP-1RA or DPP-4i were enrolled from 2007 to 2018. Subjects were propensity-score matched 1:1 based on age, sex, and index date. MOF were defined as hip, vertebral, humerus, or forearm fractures. A Cox proportional hazards model was utilized to estimate hazard rate ratios (HR) for MOF, and survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. In addition, Aalen's Additive Hazards model was applied to examine additive rather than relative hazard effects while allowing time-varying effects.

RESULTS

In total, 42,816 individuals treated with either combination were identified and included. After matching, 32,266 individuals were included in the main analysis (16,133 in each group). Median follow-up times were 642 days and 529 days in the GLP-1RA and DPP-4i group, respectively. We found a crude HR of 0.89 [0.76-1.05] for MOF with GLP-1RA compared to DPP-4i. In the fully adjusted model, we obtained an unaltered HR of 0.86 [0.73-1.03]. For the case of hip fracture, we found a crude HR of 0.68 [0.49-0.96] and a similar adjusted HR. Fracture risk was lower in the GLP-1RA group when examining higher daily doses of the medications, when allowing follow-up to continue after medication change, and when examining hip fractures, specifically. Additional subgroup- and sensitivity analyses yielded results similar to the main analysis.

CONCLUSION

In our primary analysis, we did not observe a significantly different risk of MOF between treatment with GLP-1RA and DPP-4i. We conclude that GLP-1RA are safe in terms of fracture.

Effect of dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors, thiazolidinedione, and sulfonylurea on osteoporosis in patients with type 2 diabetes: population-based cohort study

The population-based cohort study used the Korean National Health Insurance claims database to evaluate the effect of anti-diabetic drugs on osteoporosis. The use of DPP-IV inhibitors does not increase the risk of osteoporosis compared with the use of sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, while a weak association was found between thiazolidinediones and increased risk of osteoporosis.

PURPOSE

The current study aimed to evaluate the effect of dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors (DPP-IVi), thiazolidinedione (TZD), and sulfonylurea (SU) on osteoporosis in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A population-based cohort study was conducted in the Republic of Korea using the Korean National Health Insurance claims database. Data from 2012 to 2017 for patients of 50-99 years of age who were prescribed DPP-IVi, TZD, or SU during 2013-2015 were extracted from the database. Based on pre-defined criteria, a total of 381,404 patients were analyzed after inverse probability of treatment weighting. The association between the study drugs and osteoporosis was estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Data of 220,166 patients who were prescribed DPP-IVi, 18,630 who were prescribed TZD, and 142,608 patients who were prescribed SU were set.

RESULTS

In the multivariate-adjusted analysis, the hazard ratio (HR) of osteoporosis in the DPP-IVi group was not significantly different from that of the SU group (HR: 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-1.00), whereas the HR of osteoporosis in the TZD group was higher (HR: 1.13; 95% CI 1.06-1.20). In the subgroup analysis, the HRs of osteoporosis were higher with pioglitazone (HR: 1.14; 95% CI 1.06-1.23) in the TZD group and with glibenclamides (HR: 1.39; 95% CI 1.09-1.77) in the SU group, whereas drugs with lower HR in the DPP-IVi group were saxagliptin (HR: 0.93; 95% CI 0.87-0.99) and sitagliptin (HR: 0.93; 95% CI 0.89-0.97).

CONCLUSION

DPP-IV inhibitors do not increase the risk of osteoporosis compared with sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, while a weak association was found between thiazolidinediones and increased risk of osteoporosis.

Management of bone fragility in type 2 diabetes: Perspective from an interdisciplinary expert panel

AIM

Bone fragility is increasingly recognized as a relevant complication of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and diabetic patients with fragility fractures have higher mortality rates than non diabetic individuals or diabetic patients without fractures. However, current diagnostic approaches for fracture risk stratification, such as bone mineral density measurement or the use of risk assessment algorithms, largely underestimate fracture risk in T2D patients. A multidisciplinary expert panel was established in order to in order to formulate clinical consensus recommendations on bone health assessment and management of fracture risk in patients with T2D.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The following key questions were addressed: a) which are the risk factors for bone fragility in T2D?, b) which diagnostic procedures can be currently used to stratify fracture risk in T2D patients?, c) which are the effects of antidiabetic treatments on bone?, and d) how to prevent and treat bone fragility in T2D patients? Based on the available data members of this panel suggest that the stratification of fracture risk in patients with diabetes should firstly rely on the presence of a previous fragility fracture and on the individual risk profile, with the inclusion of T2D-specific risk factors (namely T2D duration above 10 yrs, presence of chronic T2D complications, use of insulin or thiazolidinediones and persistent HbA1c levels above 8% for at least 1 year). Two independent diagnostic approaches were then suggested in the presence or the absence of a prevalent fragility fracture, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical trials in T2D patients at risk for fragility fractures are needed to determine the efficacy and safety of available antiresorptive and anabolic agents in this specific setting.

Glucose-Lowering Drugs and Fracture Risk-a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with increased fracture risk. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the effects of different classes of glucose-lowering drugs on fracture risk in patients with type 2 DM. The heterogeneity of the included studies did not allow formal statistical analyses.

RECENT FINDINGS

Sixty studies were included in the review. Metformin, dipeptidylpeptidase-IV inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2-inhibitors do not appear to increase fracture risk. Results for insulin and sulphonylureas were more disparate, although there may be an increased fracture risk related to hypoglycemia and falls with these treatments. Glitazones were consistently associated with increased fracture risk in women, although the evidence was sparser in men. New glucose-lowering drugs are continuously being developed and better understanding of these is leading to changes in prescription patterns. Our findings warrant continued research on the effects of glucose-lowering drugs on fracture risk, elucidating the class-specific effects of these drugs.

Update on: effects of anti-diabetic drugs on bone metabolism

INTRODUCTION

Preclinical, clinical, and population-based studies have provided evidence that anti-diabetic drugs affect bone metabolism and may affect the risk of fracture in diabetic patients.

AREAS COVERED

An overview of the skeletal effects of anti-diabetic drugs used in type 2 diabetes is provided. Searches on AdisInsight, PubMed, and Medline databases were conducted up to 1^st July 2020. The latest evidence from randomized clinical trials and population-based studies on the skeletal safety of the most recent drugs (DPP-4i, GLP-1RA, and SGLT-2i) is provided.

EXPERT OPINION

Diabetic patients present with a higher risk of fracture for a given bone mineral density suggesting a role of bone quality in the etiology of diabetic fracture. Bone quality is difficult to assess in human clinical practice and the use of preclinical models provides valuable information on diabetic bone alterations. As several links have been established between bone and energy homeostasis, it is interesting to study the safety of anti-diabetic drugs on the skeleton. So far, evidence for the newest molecules suggests a neutral fracture risk, but further studies, especially in different types of patient populations (patients at risk or with history of cardiovascular disease, renal impairment, neuropathy) are required to fully appreciate this matter.