Effect of sitagliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the long-term effect on cardiovascular events of adding sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, we assigned 14,671 patients to add either sitagliptin or placebo to their existing therapy. Open-label use of antihyperglycemic therapy was encouraged as required, aimed at reaching individually appropriate glycemic targets in all patients. To determine whether sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo, we used a relative risk of 1.3 as the marginal upper boundary. The primary cardiovascular outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 3.0 years, there was a small difference in glycated hemoglobin levels (least-squares mean difference for sitagliptin vs. placebo, -0.29 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.32 to -0.27). Overall, the primary outcome occurred in 839 patients in the sitagliptin group (11.4%; 4.06 per 100 person-years) and 851 patients in the placebo group (11.6%; 4.17 per 100 person-years). Sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.09; P<0.001). Rates of hospitalization for heart failure did not differ between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.20; P = 0.98). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of acute pancreatitis (P = 0.07) or pancreatic cancer (P = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease, adding sitagliptin to usual care did not appear to increase the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, hospitalization for heart failure, or other adverse events

Ghrelin Receptor (GHS-R1A) Antagonism Alters Preference for Ethanol and Sucrose in a Concentration-Dependent Manner in Prairie Voles

Ghrelin receptor (GHS-R1A) activity has been implicated in reward for preferred foods and drugs; however, a recent study in our laboratory indicated that GHS-R1A antagonism reduces early (after only four exposures) preference for 20% ethanol, but not 10% sucrose in prairie voles, a genetically diverse high alcohol-consuming species. The purpose of the present study was to determine if these effects of GHS-R1A antagonism depend on the concentration of the rewarding solution being consumed. We first characterized preference for varying concentrations of ethanol and sucrose. Two bottle tests of each ethanol concentration versus water indicated that 10% and 20% ethanol are less preferred than 3% ethanol, and a follow-up direct comparison of 10% vs. 20% showed that 10% was preferred over 20%. Direct two-bottle comparisons of 2% vs. 5%, 2% vs. 10%, and 5% vs. 10% sucrose showed that 10% sucrose was most preferred, and 2% sucrose was least preferred. The effects of JMV 2959, a GHS-R1A antagonist, on preference for each concentration of ethanol and sucrose were then tested. In a between groups design prairie voles were given four two-hour drinking sessions in which animals had access to ethanol (3, 10, or 20%) versus water, or sucrose (2, 5, or 10%) versus water every other day. Saline habituation injections were given 30min before the third drinking session. JMV 2959 (i.p.; 9mg/kg), a GHS-R1A antagonist, or saline was administered 30min before the fourth drinking session. JMV 2959 reduced preference for 20% ethanol and 2% sucrose, but had no significant effect on preference for the other ethanol and sucrose concentrations. These data identify constraints on the role of GHS-R1A in early preference for ethanol and sucrose, and the concentration-dependent effects suggest strong preference for a reward may limit the importance of GHS-R1A activity.Copyright 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

Suspected acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis as an outcome measure in clinical trials

Background: Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis has become an important outcome measure in clinical trials. This study aimed to explore the concept of suspected acute exacerbation as an outcome measure.Methods: Three investigators retrospectively reviewed subjects enrolled in the Sildenafil Trial of Exercise Performance in IPF who experienced a respiratory serious adverse event during the course of the study. Events were classified as definite acute exacerbation, suspected acute exacerbation, or other, according to established criteria.Results: Thirty-five events were identified. Four were classified as definite acute exacerbation, fourteen as suspected acute exacerbation, and seventeen as other. Definite and suspected acute exacerbations were clinically indistinguishable. Both were most common in the winter and spring months and were associated with a high risk of disease progression and short-term mortality.Conclusions: In this study one half of respiratory serious adverse events were attributed to definite or suspected acute exacerbations. Suspected acute exacerbations are clinically indistinguishable from definite acute exacerbations and represent clinically meaningful events. Clinical trialists should consider capturing both definite and suspected acute exacerbations as outcome measures. © 2013 Collard et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Suspected acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis as an outcome measure in clinical trials

Background: Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis has become an important outcome measure in clinical trials. This study aimed to explore the concept of suspected acute exacerbation as an outcome measure.Methods: Three investigators retrospectively reviewed subjects enrolled in the Sildenafil Trial of Exercise Performance in IPF who experienced a respiratory serious adverse event during the course of the study. Events were classified as definite acute exacerbation, suspected acute exacerbation, or other, according to established criteria.Results: Thirty-five events were identified. Four were classified as definite acute exacerbation, fourteen as suspected acute exacerbation, and seventeen as other. Definite and suspected acute exacerbations were clinically indistinguishable. Both were most common in the winter and spring months and were associated with a high risk of disease progression and short-term mortality.Conclusions: In this study one half of respiratory serious adverse events were attributed to definite or suspected acute exacerbations. Suspected acute exacerbations are clinically indistinguishable from definite acute exacerbations and represent clinically meaningful events. Clinical trialists should consider capturing both definite and suspected acute exacerbations as outcome measures. © 2013 Collard et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Albiglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (Harmony Outcomes): a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial

Background: Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists differ in chemical structure, duration of action, and in their effects on clinical outcomes. The cardiovascular effects of once-weekly albiglutide in type 2 diabetes are unknown. We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of albiglutide in preventing cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Methods: We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in 610 sites across 28 countries. We randomly assigned patients aged 40 years and older with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (at a 1:1 ratio) to groups that either received a subcutaneous injection of albiglutide (30–50 mg, based on glycaemic response and tolerability) or of a matched volume of placebo once a week, in addition to their standard care. Investigators used an interactive voice or web response system to obtain treatment assignment, and patients and all study investigators were masked to their treatment allocation. We hypothesised that albiglutide would be non-inferior to placebo for the primary outcome of the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, which was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. If non-inferiority was confirmed by an upper limit of the 95% CI for a hazard ratio of less than 1·30, closed testing for superiority was prespecified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02465515. Findings: Patients were screened between July 1, 2015, and Nov 24, 2016. 10 793 patients were screened and 9463 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to groups: 4731 patients were assigned to receive albiglutide and 4732 patients to receive placebo. On Nov 8, 2017, it was determined that 611 primary endpoints and a median follow-up of at least 1·5 years had accrued, and participants returned for a final visit and discontinuation from study treatment; the last patient visit was on March 12, 2018. These 9463 patients, the intention-to-treat population, were evaluated for a median duration of 1·6 years and were assessed for the primary outcome. The primary composite outcome occurred in 338 (7%) of 4731 patients at an incidence rate of 4·6 events per 100 person-years in the albiglutide group and in 428 (9%) of 4732 patients at an incidence rate of 5·9 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·78, 95% CI 0·68–0·90), which indicated that albiglutide was superior to placebo (p&lt;0·0001 for non-inferiority; p=0·0006 for superiority). The incidence of acute pancreatitis (ten patients in the albiglutide group and seven patients in the placebo group), pancreatic cancer (six patients in the albiglutide group and five patients in the placebo group), medullary thyroid carcinoma (zero patients in both groups), and other serious adverse events did not differ between the two groups. There were three (&lt;1%) deaths in the placebo group that were assessed by investigators, who were masked to study drug assignment, to be treatment-related and two (&lt;1%) deaths in the albiglutide group. Interpretation: In patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, albiglutide was superior to placebo with respect to major adverse cardiovascular events. Evidence-based glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists should therefore be considered as part of a comprehensive strategy to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline

Albiglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (Harmony Outcomes): a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial

Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists differ in chemical structure, duration of action, and in their effects on clinical outcomes. The cardiovascular effects of once-weekly albiglutide in type 2 diabetes are unknown. We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of albiglutide in preventing cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke

Effect of sitagliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND Data are lacking on the long-term effect on cardiovascular events of adding sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind study, we assigned 14,671 patients to add either sitagliptin or placebo to their existing therapy. Open-label use of antihyperglycemic therapy was encouraged as required, aimed at reaching individually appropriate glycemic targets in all patients. To determine whether sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo, we used a relative risk of 1.3 as the marginal upper boundary. The primary cardiovascular outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS During a median follow-up of 3.0 years, there was a small difference in glycated hemoglobin levels (least-squares mean difference for sitagliptin vs. placebo, 120.29 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 120.32 to 120.27). Overall, the primary outcome occurred in 839 patients in the sitagliptin group (11.4%; 4.06 per 100 person-years) and 851 patients in the placebo group (11.6%; 4.17 per 100 person-years). Sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.09; P<0.001). Rates of hospitalization for heart failure did not differ between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.20; P=0.98). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of acute pancreatitis (P=0.07) or pancreatic cancer (P=0.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease, adding sitagliptin to usual care did not appear to increase the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, hospitalization for heart failure, or other adverse events. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme; TECOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00790205.