The Identification of Zebrafish Mutants Showing Alterations in Senescence-Associated Biomarkers

There is an interesting overlap of function in a wide range of organisms between genes that modulate the stress responses and those that regulate aging phenotypes and, in some cases, lifespan. We have therefore screened mutagenized zebrafish embryos for the altered expression of a stress biomarker, senescence-associated β-galactosidase (SA-β-gal) in our current study. We validated the use of embryonic SA-β-gal production as a screening tool by analyzing a collection of retrovirus-insertional mutants. From a pool of 306 such mutants, we identified 11 candidates that showed higher embryonic SA-β-gal activity, two of which were selected for further study. One of these mutants is null for a homologue of Drosophila spinster, a gene known to regulate lifespan in flies, whereas the other harbors a mutation in a homologue of the human telomeric repeat binding factor 2 (terf2) gene, which plays roles in telomere protection and telomere-length regulation. Although the homozygous spinster and terf2 mutants are embryonic lethal, heterozygous adult fish are viable and show an accelerated appearance of aging symptoms including lipofuscin accumulation, which is another biomarker, and shorter lifespan. We next used the same SA-β-gal assay to screen chemically mutagenized zebrafish, each of which was heterozygous for lesions in multiple genes, under the sensitizing conditions of oxidative stress. We obtained eight additional mutants from this screen that, when bred to homozygosity, showed enhanced SA-β-gal activity even in the absence of stress, and further displayed embryonic neural and muscular degenerative phenotypes. Adult fish that are heterozygous for these mutations also showed the premature expression of aging biomarkers and the accelerated onset of aging phenotypes. Our current strategy of mutant screening for a senescence-associated biomarker in zebrafish embryos may thus prove to be a useful new tool for the genetic dissection of vertebrate stress response and senescence mechanisms

Efficacy and safety of a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira) compared with its components given alone: Results of a phase 3, open-label, randomised, 26-week, treat-to-target trial in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND: A fixed-ratio combination of the basal insulin analogue insulin degludec and the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue liraglutide has been developed as a once-daily injection for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. We aimed to compare combined insulin degludec-liraglutide (IDegLira) with its components given alone in insulin-naive patients. METHODS: In this phase 3, 26-week, open-label, randomised trial, adults with type 2 diabetes, HbA1c of 7-10% (inclusive), a BMI of 40 kg/m(2) or less, and treated with metformin with or without pioglitazone were randomly assigned (2:1:1) to daily injections of IDegLira, insulin degludec, or liraglutide (1\ub78 mg per day). IDegLira and insulin degludec were titrated to achieve a self-measured prebreakfast plasma glucose concentration of 4-5 mmol/L. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c after 26 weeks of treatment, and the main objective was to assess the non-inferiority of IDegLira to insulin degludec (with an upper 95% CI margin of 0\ub73%), and the superiority of IDegLira to liraglutide (with a lower 95% CI margin of 0%). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01336023. FINDINGS: 1663 adults (mean age 55 years [SD 10], HbA1c 8\ub73% [0\ub79], and BMI 31\ub72 kg/m(2) [4\ub78]) were randomly assigned, 834 to IDegLira, 414 to insulin degludec, and 415 to liraglutide. After 26 weeks, mean HbA1c had decreased by 1\ub79% (SD 1\ub71) to 6\ub74% (1\ub70) with IDegLira, by 1\ub74% (1\ub70) to 6\ub79% (1\ub71) with insulin degludec, and by 1\ub73% (1\ub71) to 7\ub70% (1\ub72) with liraglutide. IDegLira was non-inferior to insulin degludec (estimated treatment difference -0\ub747%, 95% CI -0\ub758 to -0\ub736, p<0\ub70001) and superior to liraglutide (-0\ub764%, -0\ub775 to -0\ub753, p<0\ub70001). IDegLira was generally well tolerated; fewer participants in the IDegLira group than in the liraglutide group reported gastrointestinal adverse events (nausea 8\ub78 vs 19\ub77%), although the insulin degludec group had the fewest participants with gastrointestinal adverse events (nausea 3\ub76%). We noted no clinically relevant differences between treatments with respect to standard safety assessments, and the safety profile of IDegLira reflected those of its component parts. The number of confirmed hypoglycaemic events per patient year was 1\ub78 for IDegLira, 0\ub72 for liraglutide, and 2\ub76 for insulin degludec. Serious adverse events occurred in 19 (2%) of 825 patients in the IDegLira group, eight (2%) of 412 in the insulin degludec group, and 14 (3%) of 412 in the liraglutide group. INTERPRETATION: IDegLira combines the clinical advantages of basal insulin and GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment, resulting in improved glycaemic control compared with its components given alone