Design and baseline characteristics of the finerenone in reducing cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in diabetic kidney disease trial

Background: Among people with diabetes, those with kidney disease have exceptionally high rates of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality and progression of their underlying kidney disease. Finerenone is a novel, nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist that has shown to reduce albuminuria in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) while revealing only a low risk of hyperkalemia. However, the effect of finerenone on CV and renal outcomes has not yet been investigated in long-term trials. Patients and Methods: The Finerenone in Reducing CV Mortality and Morbidity in Diabetic Kidney Disease (FIGARO-DKD) trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of finerenone compared to placebo at reducing clinically important CV and renal outcomes in T2D patients with CKD. FIGARO-DKD is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, event-driven trial running in 47 countries with an expected duration of approximately 6 years. FIGARO-DKD randomized 7,437 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate >= 25 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio >= 30 to <= 5,000 mg/g). The study has at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in the risk of the primary outcome (overall two-sided significance level alpha = 0.05), the composite of time to first occurrence of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. Conclusions: FIGARO-DKD will determine whether an optimally treated cohort of T2D patients with CKD at high risk of CV and renal events will experience cardiorenal benefits with the addition of finerenone to their treatment regimen. Trial Registration: EudraCT number: 2015-000950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02545049

Sildenafil citrate for treatment of erectile dysfunction in men with type 1 diabetes - Results of a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE - In the 5-10% of diabetic men with type I diabetes, erectile dysfunction (ED) may be a particularly common and unwanted complication. This is the first study focusing exclusively on the effects of sildenafil in men with type 1 diabetes and ED

Modulation of insulin dose titration using a hypoglycaemia-sensitive algorithm: insulin glargine versus neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes

To examine whether insulin glargine can lead to better control of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) than that achieved by neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, using a protocol designed to limit nocturnal hypoglycaemia.status: publishe

Diabetic dyslipidaemia in Asian populations in the Western Pacific Region: What we know and don't know

10.1016/j.diabres.2011.05.034Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice9411-13DRCP

Afes a.S.-o.n.e.: Asean survey of needs in endocrinology in the time of the covid-19 pandemic

10.15605/jafes.035.01.10Journal of the ASEAN Federation of Endocrine Societies351May-1

Oral Semaglutide Versus Empagliflozin in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Uncontrolled on Metformin: The PIONEER 2 Trial

OBJECTIVE Efficacy and safety of the glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) analog oral semaglutide and the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin were compared in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on metformin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Patients were randomized to once-daily open-label treatment with oral semaglutide 14 mg (n = 412) or empagliflozin 25 mg (n = 410) in a 52-week trial. Key end points were change from baseline to week 26 in HbA(1c) (primary) and body weight (confirmatory secondary). Two estimands addressed efficacy-related questions: treatment policy (regardless of trial product discontinuation or rescue medication) and trial product (on trial product without rescue medication) in all randomized patients. RESULTS Four hundred (97.1%) patients in the oral semaglutide group and 387 (94.4%) in the empagliflozin group completed the trial. Oral semaglutide provided superior reductions in HbA(1c) versus empagliflozin at week 26 (treatment policy -1.3% vs. -0.9% [-14 vs. -9 mmol/mol], estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0.4% [95% CI -0.6, -0.3] [-5 mmol/mol (-6, -3)]; P &lt; 0.0001). The treatment difference in HbA(1c) significantly favored oral semaglutide at week 26 for the trial product estimand (-1.4% vs. -0.9% [-15 vs. -9 mmol/mol], ETD -0.5% [95% CI -0.7, -0.4] [-6 mmol/mol (-7, -5)]; P &lt; 0.0001) and at week 52 for both estimands (P &lt; 0.0001). Superior weight loss was not confirmed at week 26 (treatment policy), but oral semaglutide was significantly better than empagliflozin at week 52 (trial product -4.7 vs. -3.8 kg; P = 0.0114). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common with oral semaglutide. CONCLUSIONS Oral semaglutide was superior to empagliflozin in reducing HbA(1c) but not body weight at 26 weeks in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on metformin. At week 52, HbA(1c) and body weight (trial product estimand) were significantly reduced versus empagliflozin. Oral semaglutide was well tolerated within the established safety profile of GLP-1 receptor agonists