Controversy about the relative efficacy of dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors.

peer reviewe

Effects of oral semaglutide on cardiovascular outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and/or chronic kidney disease: Design and baseline characteristics of SOUL, a randomized trial

Aim: To describe the design of the SOUL trial (Semaglutide cardiOvascular oUtcomes triaL) and the baseline clinical data of its participants. Materials and methods: In SOUL, the effects of oral semaglutide, the first oral glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, on the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events in individuals with type 2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic CV disease (ASCVD) and/or chronic kidney disease (CKD) will be assessed. SOUL is a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled CV outcomes trial comparing oral semaglutide (14 mg once daily) with placebo, both in addition to standard of care, in individuals aged ≥50 years with type 2 diabetes and evidence of ASCVD (coronary artery disease [CAD], cerebrovascular disease, symptomatic peripheral arterial disease [PAD]) and/or CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2). The primary outcome is time from randomization to first occurrence of a major adverse CV event (MACE; a composite of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or nonfatal stroke). This event-driven trial will continue until 1225 first adjudication-confirmed MACEs have occurred. Enrolment has been completed. Results: Overall, 9650 participants were enrolled between June 17, 2019 and March 24, 2021 (men 71.1%, White ethnicity 68.9%, mean age 66.1 years, diabetes duration 15.4 years, body mass index 31.1 kg/m2, glycated haemoglobin 63.5 mmol/mol [8.0%]). The most frequently used antihyperglycaemic medications at baseline were metformin (75.7%), insulin and insulin analogues (50.5%), sulphonylureas (29.1%), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (26.7%) and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (23.0%). At randomization, 70.7% of participants had CAD, 42.3% had CKD, 21.1% had cerebrovascular disease and 15.7% had symptomatic PAD (categories not mutually exclusive). Prevalent heart failure was reported in 23.0% of participants. Conclusion: SOUL will provide evidence regarding the CV effects of oral semaglutide in individuals with type 2 diabetes and established ASCVD and/or CKD

Empagliflozin in Heart Failure With Predicted Preserved Versus Reduced Ejection Fraction: Data From the EMPA-REG OUTCOME Trial

Background: In the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial, ejection fraction (EF) data were not collected. In the subpopulation with heart failure (HF), we applied a new predictive model for EF to determine the effects of empagliflozin in HF with predicted reduced (HFrEF) vs preserved (HFpEF) EF vs no HF. / Methods and Results: We applied a validated EF predictive model based on patient baseline characteristics and treatments to categorize patients with HF as being likely to have HF with mid-range EF (HFmrEF)/HFrEF (EF <50%) or HFpEF (EF ≥50%). Cox regression was used to assess the effect of empagliflozin vs placebo on cardiovascular death/HF hospitalization (HHF), cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, and HHF in patients with predicted HFpEF, HFmrEF/HFrEF and no HF. Of 7001 EMPA-REG OUTCOME patients with data available for this analysis, 6314 (90%) had no history of HF. Of the 687 with history of HF, 479 (69.7%) were predicted to have HFmrEF/HFrEF and 208 (30.3%) to have HFpEF. Empagliflozin's treatment effect was consistent in predicted HFpEF, HFmrEF/HFrEF and no-HF for each outcome (HR [95% CI] for the primary outcome 0.60 [0.31–1.17], 0.79 [0.51–1.23], and 0.63 [0.50–0.78], respectively; P interaction = 0.62). / Conclusions: In EMPA-REG OUTCOME, one-third of the patients with HF had predicted HFpEF. The benefits of empagliflozin on HF and mortality outcomes were consistent in nonHF, predicted HFpEF and HFmrEF/HFrEF

Risk of acute kidney injury and survival in patients treated with Metformin:an observational cohort study

Background: Whether metformin precipitates lactic acidosis in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) remains under debate. We examined whether metformin use was associated with an increased risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) as a proxy for lactic acidosis and whether survival among those with AKI varied by metformin exposure. Methods: All individuals with type 2 diabetes and available prescribing data between 2004 and 2013 in Tayside, Scotland were included. The electronic health record for diabetes which includes issued prescriptions was linked to laboratory biochemistry, hospital admission, death register and Scottish Renal Registry data. AKI events were defined using the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria with a rise in serum creatinine of at least 26.5 μmol/l or a rise of greater than 150% from baseline for all hospital admissions. Cox Regression Analyses were used to examine whether person-time periods in which current metformin exposure occurred were associated with an increased rate of first AKI compared to unexposed periods. Cox regression was also used to compare 28 day survival rates following first AKI events in those exposed to metformin versus those not exposed. Results: Twenty-five thousand one-hundred fourty-eight patients were included with a total person-time of 126,904 person years. 4944 (19.7%) people had at least one episode of AKI during the study period. There were 32.4 cases of first AKI/1000pyrs in current metformin exposed person-time periods compared to 44.9 cases/1000pyrs in unexposed periods. After adjustment for age, sex, diabetes duration, calendar time, number of diabetes drugs and baseline renal function, current metformin use was not associated with AKI incidence, HR 0.94 (95% CI 0.87, 1.02, p = 0.15). Among those with incident AKI, being on metformin at admission was associated with a higher rate of survival at 28 days (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69, 0.94, p = 0.006) even after adjustment for age, sex, pre-admission eGFR, HbA1c and diabetes duration. Conclusions: Contrary to common perceptions, we found no evidence that metformin increases incidence of AKI and was associated with higher 28 day survival following incident AKI

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

Metformin treatment in diabetes and heart failure: when academic equipoise meets clinical reality

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Objective</p> <p>Metformin has had a 'black box' contraindication in diabetic patients with heart failure (HF), but many believe it to be the treatment of choice in this setting. Therefore, we attempted to conduct a pilot study to evaluate the feasibility of undertaking a large randomized controlled trial with clinical endpoints.</p> <p>Study Design</p> <p>The pilot study was a randomized double blinded placebo controlled trial. Patients with HF and type 2 diabetes were screened in hospitals and HF clinics in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada (population ~1 million). Major exclusion criteria included the current use of insulin or high dose metformin, decreased renal function, or a glycosylated hemoglobin <7%. Patients were to be randomized to 1500 mg of metformin daily or matching placebo and followed for 6 months for a variety of functional outcomes, as well as clinical events.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Fifty-eight patients were screened over a six month period and all were excluded. Because of futility with respect to enrollment, the pilot study was abandoned. The mean age of screened patients was 77 (SD 9) years and 57% were male. The main reasons for exclusion were: use of insulin therapy (n = 23; 40%), glycosylated hemoglobin <7% (n = 17; 29%) and current use of high dose metformin (n = 12; 21%). Overall, contraindicated metformin therapy was the most commonly prescribed oral antihyperglycemic agent (n = 27; 51%). On average, patients were receiving 1,706 mg (SD 488 mg) of metformin daily and 12 (44%) used only metformin.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Despite uncertainty in the scientific literature, there does not appear to be clinical uncertainty with regards to the safety or effectiveness of metformin in HF making a definitive randomized trial virtually impossible.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00325910</p