Differential effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists on heart rate

Abstract While glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are known to increase heart rate (HR), it is insufficiently recognized that the extent varies greatly between the various agonists and is affected by the assessment methods employed. Here we review published data from 24-h time-averaged HR monitoring in healthy individuals and subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with either short-acting GLP-1 RAs, lixisenatide or exenatide, or long-acting GLP-1 RAs, exenatide LAR, liraglutide, albiglutide, or dulaglutide (N\ua0=\ua01112; active-treatment arms). HR effects observed in two independent head-to-head trials of lixisenatide and liraglutide (N\ua0=\ua0202; active-treatment arms) are also reviewed. Short-acting GLP-1 RAs, exenatide and lixisenatide, are associated with a transient (1\u201312\ua0h) mean placebo- and baseline-adjusted 24-h HR increase of 1\u20133\ua0beats per minute (bpm). Conversely, long-acting GLP-1 RAs are associated with more pronounced increases in mean 24-h HR; the highest seen with liraglutide and albiglutide at 6\u201310\ua0bpm compared with dulaglutide and exenatide LAR at 3\u20134\ua0bpm. For both liraglutide and dulaglutide, HR increases were recorded during both the day and at night. In two head-to-head comparisons, a small, transient mean increase in HR from baseline was observed with lixisenatide; liraglutide induced a substantially greater increase that remained significantly elevated over 24\ua0h. The underlying mechanism for increased HR remains to be elucidated; however, it could be related to a direct effect at the sinus node and/or stimulation of the sympathetic nervous system, with this effect related to the duration of action of the respective GLP-1 RAs. In conclusion, this review indicates that the effects on HR differ within the class of GLP-1 RAs: short-acting GLP-1 RAs are associated with a modest and transient HR increase before returning to baseline levels, while some long-acting GLP-1 RAs are associated with a more pronounced and sustained increase during the day and night. Findings from recently completed trials indicate that a GLP-1 RA-induced increase in HR, regardless of magnitude, does not present an increased cardiovascular risk for subjects with T2DM, although a pronounced increase in HR may be associated with adverse clinical outcomes in those with advanced heart failure

Safety and tolerability of sitagliptin in clinical studies: a pooled analysis of data from 10,246 patients with type 2 diabetes

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In a previous pooled analysis of 12 double-blind clinical studies that included data on 6,139 patients with type 2 diabetes, treatment with sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor, was shown to be generally well tolerated compared with treatment with control agents. As clinical development of sitagliptin continues, additional studies have been completed, and more patients have been exposed to sitagliptin. The purpose of the present analysis is to update the safety and tolerability assessment of sitagliptin by pooling data from 19 double-blind clinical studies.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The present analysis included data from 10,246 patients with type 2 diabetes who received either sitagliptin 100 mg/day (N = 5,429; sitagliptin group) or a comparator agent (placebo or an active comparator) (N = 4,817; non-exposed group). The 19 studies from which this pooled population was drawn represent the double-blind, randomized studies that included patients treated with the usual clinical dose of sitagliptin (100 mg/day) for between 12 weeks and 2 years and for which results were available as of July 2009. These 19 studies assessed sitagliptin taken as monotherapy, initial combination therapy with metformin or pioglitazone, or as add-on combination therapy with other antihyperglycemic agents (metformin, pioglitazone, a sulfonylurea ± metformin, insulin ± metformin, or rosiglitazone + metformin). Patients in the non-exposed group were taking placebo, metformin, pioglitazone, a sulfonylurea ± metformin, insulin ± metformin, or rosiglitazone + metformin. The analysis used patient-level data from each study to evaluate between-group differences in the exposure-adjusted incidence rates of adverse events.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Summary measures of overall adverse events were similar in the sitagliptin and non-exposed groups, except for an increased incidence of drug-related adverse events in the non-exposed group. Incidence rates of specific adverse events were also generally similar between the two groups, except for increased incidence rates of hypoglycemia, related to the greater use of a sulfonylurea, and diarrhea, related to the greater use of metformin, in the non-exposed group and constipation in the sitagliptin group. Treatment with sitagliptin was not associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In this updated pooled safety analysis of data from 10,246 patients with type 2 diabetes, sitagliptin 100 mg/day was generally well tolerated in clinical trials of up to 2 years in duration.</p

Italian guidelines for primary headaches: 2012 revised version

The first edition of the Italian diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines for primary headaches in adults was published in J Headache Pain 2(Suppl. 1):105–190 (2001). Ten years later, the guideline committee of the Italian Society for the Study of Headaches (SISC) decided it was time to update therapeutic guidelines. A literature search was carried out on Medline database, and all articles on primary headache treatments in English, German, French and Italian published from February 2001 to December 2011 were taken into account. Only randomized controlled trials (RCT) and meta-analyses were analysed for each drug. If RCT were lacking, open studies and case series were also examined. According to the previous edition, four levels of recommendation were defined on the basis of levels of evidence, scientific strength of evidence and clinical effectiveness. Recommendations for symptomatic and prophylactic treatment of migraine and cluster headache were therefore revised with respect to previous 2001 guidelines and a section was dedicated to non-pharmacological treatment. This article reports a summary of the revised version published in extenso in an Italian version