Metabolic Control of Longevity.

Several metabolic alterations accumulate over time along with a reduction in biological fitness, suggesting the existence of a "metabolic clock" that controls aging. Multiple inborn defects in metabolic circuitries accelerate aging, whereas genetic loci linked to exceptional longevity influence metabolism. Each of the nine hallmarks of aging is connected to undesirable metabolic alterations. The main features of the "westernized" lifestyle, including hypercaloric nutrition and sedentariness, can accelerate aging as they have detrimental metabolic consequences. Conversely, lifespan-extending maneuvers including caloric restriction impose beneficial pleiotropic effects on metabolism. The introduction of strategies that promote metabolic fitness may extend healthspan in humans.

GDF15 mediates the effects of metformin on body weight and energy balance.

Metformin, the world's most prescribed anti-diabetic drug, is also effective in preventing type 2 diabetes in people at high risk1,2. More than 60% of this effect is attributable to the ability of metformin to lower body weight in a sustained manner3. The molecular mechanisms by which metformin lowers body weight are unknown. Here we show-in two independent randomized controlled clinical trials-that metformin increases circulating levels of the peptide hormone growth/differentiation factor 15 (GDF15), which has been shown to reduce food intake and lower body weight through a brain-stem-restricted receptor. In wild-type mice, oral metformin increased circulating GDF15, with GDF15 expression increasing predominantly in the distal intestine and the kidney. Metformin prevented weight gain in response to a high-fat diet in wild-type mice but not in mice lacking GDF15 or its receptor GDNF family receptor α-like (GFRAL). In obese mice on a high-fat diet, the effects of metformin to reduce body weight were reversed by a GFRAL-antagonist antibody. Metformin had effects on both energy intake and energy expenditure that were dependent on GDF15, but retained its ability to lower circulating glucose levels in the absence of GDF15 activity. In summary, metformin elevates circulating levels of GDF15, which is necessary to obtain its beneficial effects on energy balance and body weight, major contributors to its action as a chemopreventive agent.

Impact of the timing of metformin administration on glycaemic and glucagon-like peptide-1 responses to intraduodenal glucose infusion in type 2 diabetes: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, crossover study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Metformin lowers postprandial glycaemic excursions in individuals with type 2 diabetes by modulating gastrointestinal function, including the stimulation of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1). The impact of varying the timing of metformin administration on postprandial glucose metabolism is poorly defined. We evaluated the effects of metformin, administered at different intervals before an intraduodenal glucose infusion, on the subsequent glycaemic, insulinaemic and GLP-1 responses in metformin-treated type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Sixteen participants with type 2 diabetes that was relatively well-controlled by metformin monotherapy were studied on four separate days in a crossover design. On each day, participants were randomised to receive a bolus infusion of metformin (1000 mg in 50 ml 0.9% saline) via a nasoduodenal catheter at t = -60, -30 or 0 min (and saline at the other timepoints) or saline at all timepoints (control), followed by an intraduodenal glucose infusion of 12.56 kJ/min (3 kcal/min) at t = 0-60 min. The treatments were blinded to both participants and investigators involved in the study procedures. Plasma glucose, insulin and total GLP-1 levels were measured every 30 min between t = -60 min and t = 120 min. RESULTS: There was a treatment-by-time interaction for metformin in reducing plasma glucose levels and increasing plasma GLP-1 and insulin levels (p<0.05 for each). The reduction in plasma glucose levels was greater when metformin was administered at t = -60 or -30 min vs t = 0 min (p<0.05 for each), and the increases in plasma GLP-1 levels were evident only when metformin was administered at t = -60 or -30 min (p<0.05 for each). Although metformin did not influence insulin sensitivity, it enhanced glucose-induced insulin secretion (p<0.05), and the increases in plasma insulin levels were comparable on the 3 days when metformin was given. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In well-controlled metformin-treated type 2 diabetes, glucose-lowering by metformin is greater when it is given before, rather than with, enteral glucose, and this is associated with a greater GLP-1 response. These observations suggest that administration of metformin before meals may optimise its effect in improving postprandial glycaemic control. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.anzctr.org.au ACTRN12621000878875 FUNDING: The study was not funded by a specific research grant.

Efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide vs sitagliptin in a predominantly Chinese population with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with metformin: PIONEER 12, a double-blind, Phase IIIa, randomised trial.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide vs sitagliptin in a predominantly Chinese population with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin treatment. METHODS: The Peptide Innovation for Early Diabetes Treatment (PIONEER) 12 trial was a randomised, double-dummy, active-controlled, parallel-group, Phase IIIa trial conducted over 26 weeks at 90 sites across the China region (including mainland China, Taiwan and Hong Kong) and five other countries. Adults aged ≥18 years (≥20 years in Taiwan) with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, HbA1c between 53 and 91 mmol/mol (inclusive) and treated with a stable daily dose of metformin were eligible for inclusion. Participants were randomised (1:1:1:1) using a web-based randomisation system to either once-daily oral semaglutide (3 mg, 7 mg or 14 mg) or once-daily oral sitagliptin 100 mg. Treatment allocation was masked to both participants and investigators. Randomisation was stratified according to whether participants were from the China region or elsewhere. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26. The confirmatory secondary endpoint was change in body weight (kg) from baseline to week 26. All randomised participants were included in the full analysis set (FAS). All participants exposed to at least one dose of trial product were included in the safety analysis (SAS). RESULTS: Of 1839 participants screened, 1441 were randomly assigned to oral semaglutide 3 mg (n=361), 7 mg (n=360), 14 mg (n=361) or sitagliptin 100 mg (n=359) and included in the FAS. A total of 1438 participants were included in the SAS. In total, 75.2% of participants were from the China region. A total of 1372 (95.2%) participants completed the trial and 130 participants prematurely discontinued treatment (8.3%, 8.6% and 15.0% for oral semaglutide 3 mg, 7 mg and 14 mg, respectively; 4.2% for sitagliptin 100 mg). Significantly greater reductions in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 were reported for all doses of oral semaglutide vs sitagliptin 100 mg. For oral semaglutide 3 mg, 7 mg and 14 mg vs sitagliptin 100 mg, the estimated treatment differences (ETDs [95% CI]) were -2 (-4, -1) mmol/mol, -8 (-9, -6) mmol/mol and -11 (-12, -9) mmol/mol, respectively. The corresponding ETDs (95% CI) in percentage points vs sitagliptin 100 mg were -0.2 (-0.3, -0.1), -0.7 (-0.8, -0.6) and -1.0 (-1.1, -0.8), respectively. Reductions in body weight were significantly greater for all doses of oral semaglutide vs sitagliptin 100 mg (ETD [95% CI] -0.9 [-1.4, -0.4] kg, -2.3 [-2.8, -1.8] kg and -3.3 [-3.8, -2.8] kg for 3 mg, 7 mg and 14 mg, respectively). In the subpopulation of participants from the China region (75.2% of trial participants), reductions in HbA1c and body weight from baseline to week 26 were similar to those seen in the overall population. The most frequent adverse events in the semaglutide treatment arms were gastrointestinal, although these were mostly transient and mild/moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Significantly greater reductions in both HbA1c and body weight over 26 weeks were seen with oral semaglutide 3 mg, 7 mg and 14 mg than with sitagliptin 100 mg in a predominantly Chinese population with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin treatment. Oral semaglutide was generally well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with that seen in the global PIONEER trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04017832. FUNDING: This trial was funded by Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.

Gout risk in adults with pre-diabetes initiating metformin.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the strong association between gout and pre-diabetes, the role of metformin in gout among individuals with pre-diabetes remains uncertain. We compared the incidence rates of gout in adults with pre-diabetes starting metformin with those not using antidiabetic treatments. METHODS: We conducted a new-user, propensity score-matched cohort study using electronic health records from an academic health system (2007-2022). Pre-diabetes was defined based on haemoglobin A1c levels. Metformin users were identified and followed from the first metformin prescription date. Non-users of antidiabetic medications were matched to metformin users based on propensity score and the start of follow-up. The primary outcome was incident gout. Cox proportional hazards models estimated the HR for metformin. Linear regression analyses assessed the association between metformin use and changes in serum urate (SU) or C-reactive protein (CRP). RESULTS: We identified 25 064 individuals with pre-diabetes and propensity score-matched 1154 metformin initiators to 13 877 non-users. Baseline characteristics were well balanced (all standardised mean differences <0.1). The median follow-up was 3.9 years. The incidence rate of gout per 1000 person-years was lower in metformin users 7.1 (95% CI 5.1 to 10) compared with non-users 9.5 (95% CI 8.8 to 10.2). Metformin initiation was associated with a reduced relative risk of gout (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.96). No relationship was found between metformin and changes in SU or CRP. CONCLUSIONS: Metformin use was associated with a reduced risk of gout among adults with pre-diabetes, suggesting that metformin may be important in lowering gout risk in individuals with pre-diabetes.

Association between Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and the Risk of Glaucoma in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes.

PURPOSE: To examine the association between glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) use and the development of glaucoma in individuals with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Nationwide, nested case-control study. PARTICIPANTS: From a nationwide cohort of 264 708 individuals, we identified 1737 incident glaucoma cases and matched them to 8685 glaucoma-free controls, all aged more than 21 years and treated with metformin and a second-line antihyperglycemic drug formulation, with no history of glaucoma, eye trauma, or eye surgery. METHODS: Cases were incidence-density-matched to 5 controls by birth year, sex, and date of second-line treatment initiation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Conditional logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for glaucoma, defined by first-time diagnosis, first-time use of glaucoma-specific medication, or first-time glaucoma-specific surgical intervention. RESULTS: Compared with the reference group, who received treatments other than GLP-1RA, individuals who were exposed to GLP-1RA treatment exhibited a lower risk of incident glaucoma (HR, 0.81; CI, 0.70-0.94; P = 0.006). Prolonged treatment extending beyond 3 years lowered the risk even further (HR, 0.71; CI, 0.55-0.91; P = 0.007). Treatment with GLP-1RA for 0 to 1 year (HR, 0.89; CI, 0.70-1.14; P = 0.35) and 1 to 3 years (HR, 0.85; CI, 0.67-1.06; P = 0.15) was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to GLP-1RA was associated with a lower risk of developing glaucoma compared with receiving other second-line antihyperglycemic medication. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Metformin in pregnancy and childhood neurodevelopmental outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the impact of maternal metformin use during pregnancy on offspring neurodevelopmental outcomes. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science (Core Collection) were searched from inception until July 1, 2023. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies of women who received treatment with metformin at any stage of pregnancy for any indication with neurodevelopmental data available for their offspring were included. Studies without a control group were excluded. Randomized controlled trials, case-control, cohort, and cross-sectional studies were included in the review. METHODS: Studies were screened for inclusion and data were extracted independently by 2 reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for nonrandomized studies, and the Risk of Bias 2 tool for randomized trials. RESULTS: A total of 7 studies met the inclusion criteria, including a combined cohort of 14,042 children with 7641 children who were exposed and followed for up to 14 years of age. Metformin use during pregnancy was not associated with neurodevelopmental delay in infancy (relative risk, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-2.17; 3 studies; 9668 children) or at ages 3 to 5 years (relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.45; 2 studies; 6118 children). When compared with unexposed peers, metformin use during pregnancy was not associated with altered motor scores (mean difference, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, -1.15 to 1.74; 3 studies; 714 children) or cognitive scores (mean difference, -0.45; 95% confidence interval, -1.45 to 0.55; 4 studies; 734 children). Studies that were included were of high quality and deemed to be at low risk of bias. CONCLUSION: In utero exposure to metformin does not seem to be associated with adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes in children up to the age of 14 years. These findings provide reassurance to clinicians and pregnant women considering metformin use during pregnancy.

Advances in metformin-delivery systems for diabetes and obesity management.

Metformin is a medication that is commonly prescribed to manage type 2 diabetes. It has been used for more than 60 years and is highly effective in lowering blood glucose levels. Recent studies indicate that metformin may have additional medical benefits beyond treating diabetes, revealing its potential therapeutic uses. Oral medication is commonly used to administer metformin because of its convenience and cost-effectiveness. However, there are challenges in optimizing its effectiveness. Gastrointestinal side effects and limitations in bioavailability have led to the underutilization of metformin. Innovative drug-delivery systems such as fast-dissolving tablets, micro/nanoparticle formulations, hydrogel and microneedles have been explored to optimize metformin therapy. These strategies enhance metformin dosage, targeting, bioavailability and stability, and provide personalized treatment options for improved glucose homeostasis, antiobesity and metabolic health benefits. Developing new delivery systems for metformin shows potential for improving therapeutic outcomes, broadening its applications beyond diabetes management and addressing unmet medical needs in various clinical settings. However, it is important to improve drug-delivery systems, addressing issues such as complexity, cost, biocompatibility, stability during storage and transportation, loading capacity, required technologies and biomaterials, targeting precision and regulatory approval. Addressing these limitations is crucial for effective, safe and accessible drug delivery in clinical practice. In this review, recent advances in the development and application of metformin-delivery systems for diabetes and obesity are discussed.

Combination of retagliptin and henagliflozin as add-on therapy to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin: A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trial.

AIM: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of co-administering retagliptin and henagliflozin versus individual agents at corresponding doses in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were inadequately controlled with metformin. METHODS: This multicentre, phase 3 trial consisted of a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled period. Patients with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels between 7.5% and 10.5% were randomized to receive once-daily retagliptin 100 mg (R100; n = 155), henagliflozin 5 mg (H5; n = 156), henagliflozin 10 mg (H10; n = 156), co-administered R100/H5 (n = 155), or R100/H10 (n = 156). The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24. RESULTS: Based on the primary estimand, the least squares mean reductions in HbA1c at week 24 were significantly greater in the R100/H5 (-1.51%) and R100/H10 (-1.54%) groups compared with those receiving the corresponding doses of individual agents (-0.98% for R100, -0.86% for H5 and -0.95% for H10, respectively; p < .0001 for all pairwise comparisons). Achievement of HbA1c <7.0% at week 24 was observed in 27.1% of patients in the R100 group, 21.2% in the H5 group, 24.4% in the H10 group, 57.4% in the R100/H5 group and 56.4% in the R100/H10 group. Reductions in fasting plasma glucose and 2-h postprandial glucose were also more pronounced in the co-administration groups compared with the individual agents at corresponding doses. Decreases in body weight and systolic blood pressure were greater in the groups containing henagliflozin than in the R100 group. The incidence rates of adverse events were similar across all treatment groups, with no reported episodes of severe hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled by metformin monotherapy, the co-administration of retagliptin and henagliflozin yielded more effective glycaemic control through 24 weeks compared with the individual agents at their corresponding doses.

A 52-week efficacy and safety study of enavogliflozin versus dapagliflozin as an add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: ENHANCE-M extension study.

AIM: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of enavogliflozin 0.3 mg/day added to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After 24 weeks of a randomized, double-blind treatment period with enavogliflozin 0.3 mg/day (n = 101) or dapagliflozin 10 mg/day (n = 99) added to metformin, all patients received enavogliflozin 0.3 mg/day plus metformin for an additional 28 weeks during the open-label extension period. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients continued enavogliflozin (maintenance group), and 77 were switched from dapagliflozin to enavogliflozin (switch group). All adverse drug reactions (ADR) were mild in severity. In the maintenance group, ADRs (cystitis and vaginal infection) were reported in two patients (2.44%) during 52 weeks. In the switch group, ADR (hypoglycaemia) was reported in one patient (1.30%) during a 28-week open-label extension period. At week 52, glycated haemoglobin and fasting plasma glucose were significantly lower than at the baseline, by 0.85% and 29.08 mg/dl, respectively, in the maintenance group (p < .0001 for both), and by 0.81% and 32.77 mg/dl, respectively, in the switch group (p < .0001 for both). At week 52, 68.92% of patients from the maintenance group and 64.29% from the switch group achieved glycated haemoglobin <7%. A significant increase in the urine glucose-creatinine ratio was observed at week 52, by 58.81 g/g and 63.77 g/g in the maintenance and switch groups, respectively (p < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Enavogliflozin added to metformin was tolerated well for up to 52 weeks and provided continual glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus, along with a significant increase in the urine glucose-creatinine ratio.

Dual add-on therapy of gemigliptin and dapagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin alone: The SOLUTION 2 study.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemigliptin and dapagliflozin dual add-on therapy (GEMI + DAPA) to metformin in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients who had inadequate glycaemic control on metformin alone, compared with a single add-on of either gemigliptin (GEMI) or dapagliflozin (DAPA) to metformin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 study, 469 T2D patients treated with a stable dose of metformin for 8 weeks or longer were randomized to receive GEMI + DAPA (n = 157) and either GEMI (n = 156) or DAPA (n = 156). The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c levels from baseline at week 24. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics including body mass index and T2D duration were similar among groups. At week 24, the least square mean changes in HbA1c from baseline were -1.34% with GEMI + DAPA, -0.90% with GEMI (difference between GEMI + DAPA vs. GEMI -0.44% [95% confidence interval {CI}: -0.58% to -0.31%], P < .01) and -0.78% with DAPA (difference between GEMI + DAPA vs. DAPA -0.56% [95% CI: -0.69% to -0.42%], P < .01). Both upper CIs were less than 0, demonstrating the superiority of GEMI + DAPA for lowering HbA1c. The rates of responders achieving HbA1c less than 7% and less than 6.5% were greater with GEMI + DAPA (84.9%, 56.6%) than with GEMI (55.3%, 32.2%) and DAPA (49.3%, 15.3%). The incidence rate of adverse events was similar across groups, with low incidence rates of hypoglycaemia, urinary tract infection and genital infection. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the addition of GEMI + DAPA to metformin as triple combination therapy was effective, safe and well-tolerated, especially for T2D patients who experienced poor glycaemic control on metformin alone.

Efficacy and tolerability of initial triple combination therapy with metformin, dapagliflozin and saxagliptin compared with stepwise add-on therapy in drug-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes (TRIPLE-AXEL study): A multicentre, randomized, 104-week, open-label, active-controlled trial.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of an initial triple combination therapy (TCT) compared with conventional stepwise add-on therapy (SAT) in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicentre, randomized, 104-week, open-label trial randomized 105 patients with drug-naïve T2D (with HbA1c level ≥ 8.0%, < 11.0%) to the TCT (1000 mg of metformin, 10 mg of dapagliflozin and 5 mg of saxagliptin once daily) or SAT (initiated with metformin, followed by glimepiride and sitagliptin) groups. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who achieved an HbA1c level of less than 6.5% without hypoglycaemia, weight gain of 5% or higher, or discontinuation of drugs because of adverse events at week 104. RESULTS: HbA1c reduction from baseline at week 104 was similar between the groups (the least squares mean change was -2.56% in the TCT group vs. -2.75% in the SAT group). The primary outcome was achieved in 39.0% and 17.1% of the TCT and SAT groups, respectively, with a risk difference of 22.0 (95% confidence interval 3.0, 40.8; P = .027). HbA1c level less than 6.5% at week 104 was 46.3% in both the TCT and SAT groups, whereas the incidence of hypoglycaemia, weight gain, or discontinuation of drugs was 16.7% and 62.0% in the TCT and SAT groups, respectively (P < .001). TCT was well-tolerated and had fewer adverse events than SAT. CONCLUSIONS: Among newly diagnosed patients with T2D, initial TCT effectively lowered HbA1c levels with higher tolerability and safety than SAT for 104 weeks, suggesting a novel strategy for initial combination therapy in T2D patients.

Retagliptin as add-on therapy to metformin in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin: A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of retagliptin in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with metformin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicentre, phase 3 trial consisted of a 16-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled period, where patients with HbA1c levels between 7.5% and 11.0% were randomized to receive either once-daily (QD) retagliptin 100 mg (n = 87) or placebo (n = 87), both as an add-on to metformin. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline to week 16. RESULTS: At week 16, the least squares mean change in HbA1c from baseline, compared with placebo, was -0.82% (95% CI, -1.05% to -0.58%) for the retagliptin 100 mg QD group (P < .0001) per treatment policy estimand. Significantly higher proportions of patients in the retagliptin 100 mg QD group achieved HbA1c levels of less than 6.5% (11.5%) and less than 7.0% (26.4%) compared with those receiving placebo (0% and 4.6%; P = .0016 and P < .0001, respectively) at week 16. Retagliptin 100 mg QD also lowered fasting plasma glucose and 2-hour postprandial plasma glucose levels. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) during the treatment period was similar between the two groups. However, slightly higher proportions of increased lipase and increased amylase in the retagliptin 100 mg QD group were observed. No patients discontinued treatment permanently because of AEs, and no episodes of severe hypoglycaemia were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Retagliptin 100 mg QD as an add-on therapy to metformin offers a new therapeutic option for treating Chinese patients with T2D inadequately controlled by metformin alone, and is generally well tolerated.

Cofrogliptin once every 2 weeks as add-on therapy to metformin versus daily linagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes in China: A randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.

AIM: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of cofrogliptin, a novel dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor taken once every 2 weeks (Q2W), compared with linagliptin (taken daily) in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin in China. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this phase 3 randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicentre study, patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive cofrogliptin 10 mg Q2W, cofrogliptin 25 mg Q2W, or linagliptin 5 mg daily, all as an add-on treatment to metformin, for 24 weeks. Eligible patients could enter an open-label extension period and receive cofrogliptin 25 mg Q2W for an additional 28 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in glycated haemoglobin from baseline to 24 weeks, with a non-inferiority margin of 0.4% for cofrogliptin versus linagliptin treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 465 patients entered the 24-week treatment period (median age: 57.0 years). The least-squares mean (standard error) change in glycated haemoglobin from baseline to week 24 was -0.96 (0.063), -0.99 (0.064) and -1.07 (0.065) for the cofrogliptin 10 mg, cofrogliptin 25 mg and linagliptin 5 mg groups, respectively. The between-group difference met the predefined margin for non-inferiority of cofrogliptin (10 and 25 mg) versus linagliptin treatment. The incidence of common adverse events (≥5% patients) during the 24-week treatment period was similar between treatment groups. There were no serious hypoglycaemic events. CONCLUSION: In Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin, the glucose-lowering effect of cofrogliptin (Q2W) was non-inferior to linagliptin (daily), with a similar safety profile maintained over 52 weeks of treatment.

The efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi versus IDegAsp in Chinese people with type 2 diabetes suboptimally controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs: The Soli-D randomized controlled trial.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL plus lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) with premixed insulin, insulin degludec plus insulin aspart (IDegAsp), in Chinese people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) suboptimally controlled with oral antidiabetic drug(s) (OADs). METHODS: In Soli-D, a 24-week, multicentre, open-label, study, insulin-naïve adults were randomized 1:1 to once-daily injections of iGlarLixi (n = 291) or IDegAsp (n = 291), with continued metformin ± sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority in HbA1c change from baseline to week 24. Key secondary endpoints included superiority in HbA1c change and body weight (BW) change at week 24. Hypoglycaemia rates were also assessed. RESULTS: At week 24, iGlarLixi showed non-inferiority and superiority over IDegAsp in HbA1c reduction (least squares [LS] mean difference: -0.20 [95% confidence interval {CI}: -0.33, -0.07]; P < .001 for non-inferiority; [97.5% CI: -0.35, -0.05]; P = .003 for superiority). iGlarLixi decreased BW and IDegAsp increased BW from baseline to week 24, with a statistically significant LS mean difference of -1.49 kg in favour of iGlarLixi (97.5% CI: -2.32, -0.66; P < .001). Event rates (per person-year) for American Diabetes Association (ADA) Level 1, 2 or 3 hypoglycaemia were lower for iGlarLixi (1.90) versus IDegAsp (2.72) (relative risk: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.52, 0.98). No ADA Level 3 hypoglycaemia or unexpected safety findings were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In Chinese people with T2D suboptimally controlled with OADs, once-daily iGlarLixi provided better glycaemic control with BW benefit and lower hypoglycaemia event rates versus IDegAsp.

Long-term combination therapy with metformin and oxymetholone in a Fanconi anemia mouse model.

Fanconi anemia (FA) is a disease caused by defective deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) repair that manifests as bone marrow failure, cancer predisposition, and developmental defects. We previously reported that monotherapy with either metformin (MET) or oxymetholone (OXM) improved peripheral blood (PB) counts and the number and functionality of bone marrow hematopoietic stem progenitor cells (HSPCs) number in Fancd2-/- mice. To evaluate whether the combination treatment of these drugs has a synergistic effect to prevent bone marrow failure in FA, we treated cohorts of Fancd2-/- mice and wildtype controls with either MET alone, OXM alone, MET+OXM, or placebo diet from age 3 weeks to 18 months. The OXM treated animals showed modest improvements in blood parameters including platelet count (p = .01) and hemoglobin levels (p < .05). In addition, the percentage of quiescent hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) (LSK [Lin-Sca+c-Kit+]) was significantly increased (p = .001) by long-term treatment with MET alone. The combination of metformin and oxymetholone did not result in a significant synergistic effect in any hematopoietic parameter. Gene expression analysis of liver tissue from these animals showed that some of the expression changes caused by Fancd2 deletion were partially normalized by metformin treatment. Importantly, no adverse effects of the individual or combination therapies were observed, despite the long-term administration. We conclude that androgen therapy is not a contraindication to concurrent metformin administration in clinical trials. HIGHLIGHTS: Long-term coadministration of metformin in combination with oxymetholone is well tolerated by Fancd2-/- mice. Hematopoietic stem cell quiescence in mutant mice was enhanced by treatment with metformin alone. Metformin treatment caused a partial normalization of gene expression in the livers of mutant mice.

Understanding adefovir pharmacokinetics as a component of a transporter phenotyping cocktail.

PURPOSE: Adefovir (as dipivoxil) was selected as a probe drug in a previous transporter cocktail phenotyping study to assess renal organic anion transporter 1 (OAT1), with renal clearance (CLR) as the primary parameter describing renal elimination. An approximately 20% higher systemic exposure of adefovir was observed when combined with other cocktail components (metformin, sitagliptin, pitavastatin, and digoxin) compared to sole administration. The present evaluation applied a population pharmacokinetic (popPK) modeling approach to describe adefovir pharmacokinetics as a cocktail component in more detail. METHODS: Data from 24 healthy subjects were reanalyzed. After establishing a base model, covariate effects, including the impact of co-administered drugs, were assessed using forward inclusion then backward elimination. RESULTS: A one-compartment model with first-order absorption (including lag time) and a combination of nonlinear renal and linear nonrenal elimination best described the data. A significantly higher apparent bioavailability (73.6% vs. 59.0%) and a lower apparent absorption rate constant (2.29 h-1 vs. 5.18 h-1) were identified in the combined period compared to the sole administration period, while no difference was seen in renal elimination. The population estimate for the Michaelis-Menten constant (Km) of the nonlinear renal elimination was 170 nmol/L, exceeding the observed range of adefovir plasma maximum concentration, while the maximum rate (Vmax) of nonlinear renal elimination was 2.40 µmol/h at the median absolute estimated glomerular filtration rate of 105 mL/min. CONCLUSION: The popPK modeling approach indicated that the co-administration primarily affected the apparent absorption and/or prodrug conversion of adefovir dipivoxil, resulting in the minor drug-drug interaction observed for adefovir as a victim. However, renal elimination remained unaffected. The high Km value suggests that assessing renal OAT1 activity by CLR has no relevant misspecification error with the cocktail doses used.

Risk of acute pancreatitis among new users of empagliflozin compared to sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes: A post-authorization safety study.

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the potential risk of acute pancreatitis with empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) newly initiating empagliflozin. METHODS: Data from two large US claims databases were analyzed in an observational study of patients with T2D receiving metformin who were newly prescribed empagliflozin versus sulfonylurea (SU). Because dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists have been associated with the risk of acute pancreatitis in some studies, patients on these agents were excluded. Using pooled analyses of data from the two databases (2014-2021), patients initiating empagliflozin were matched 1:1 within database to patients initiating SU using propensity scores (PS) that incorporated relevant demographic and clinical characteristics. Prespecified sensitivity analyses were performed for design parameters. RESULTS: The analyses identified 72 661 new users of empagliflozin and 422 018 new users of SUs, with both patient groups on concurrent metformin therapy. Baseline characteristics within treatment groups appeared to be similar across the 72 621 matched pairs. After mean follow-up of ~6 months, incidence rates of acute pancreatitis in the pooled matched cohort were 10.30 (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.29-11.39) events per 1000 patient-years (PY) for empagliflozin and 11.65 (95% CI 10.59-12.77) events per 1000 PY for SUs. On a background of metformin, patients newly initiating empagliflozin did not have an increased risk of acute pancreatitis compared with those initiating an SU (pooled PS matched hazard ratio 0.88 [0.76-1.02]) across 75621.42 PY of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this voluntary post-approval safety study provide additional evidence that the use of empagliflozin for the treatment of T2D is not associated with an increased risk of acute pancreatitis.

Renoprotective effect of a novel combination of 6-gingerol and metformin in high-fat diet/streptozotocin-induced diabetic nephropathy in rats via targeting miRNA-146a, miRNA-223, TLR4/TRAF6/NLRP3 inflammasome pathway and HIF-1α.

BACKGROUND: MiRNA-146a and miRNA-223 are key epigenetic regulators of toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4)/tumor necrosis factor-receptor-associated factor 6 (TRAF6)/NOD-like receptor family pyrin domain-containing 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome pathway, which is involved in diabetic nephropathy (DN) pathogenesis. The currently available oral anti-diabetic treatments have been insufficient to halt DN development and progression. Therefore, this work aimed to assess the renoprotective effect of the natural compound 6-gingerol (GR) either alone or in combination with metformin (MET) in high-fat diet/streptozotocin-induced DN in rats. The proposed molecular mechanisms were also investigated. METHODS: Oral gavage of 6-gingerol (100 mg/kg) and metformin (300 mg/kg) were administered to rats daily for eight weeks. MiRNA-146a, miRNA-223, TLR4, TRAF6, nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB) (p65), NLRP3, caspase-1, and hypoxia-inducible factor-1 alpha (HIF-1α) mRNA expressions were measured using real-time PCR. ELISA was used to measure TLR4, TRAF6, NLRP3, caspase-1, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), and interleukin-1-beta (IL-1ß) renal tissue levels. Renal tissue histopathology and immunohistochemical examination of fibronectin and NF-κB (p65) were performed. RESULTS: 6-Gingerol treatment significantly reduced kidney tissue damage and fibrosis. 6-Gingerol up-regulated miRNA-146a and miRNA-223 and reduced TLR4, TRAF6, NF-κB (p65), NLRP3, caspase-1, TNF-α, IL-1ß, HIF-1α and fibronectin renal expressions. 6-Gingerol improved lipid profile and renal functions, attenuated renal hypertrophy, increased reduced glutathione, and decreased blood glucose and malondialdehyde levels. 6-Gingerol and metformin combination showed superior renoprotective effects than either alone. CONCLUSION: 6-Gingerol demonstrated a key protective role in DN by induction of miRNA-146a and miRNA-223 expression and inhibition of TLR4/TRAF6/NLRP3 inflammasome signaling. 6-Gingerol, a safe, affordable, and abundant natural compound, holds promise for use as an adjuvant therapy with metformin in diabetic patients to attenuate renal damage and stop the progression of DN.

Effect of metformin on gut microbiota imbalance in patients with T2DM, and the value of probiotic supplementation.

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of metformin on gut microbiota imbalance in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and the value of probiotic supplementation. METHODS: A total of 84 newly diagnosed T2DM patients were randomly divided into probiotics group, metformin group, and control group, with 28 patients in each group. The blood glucose control, islet function, gut microbiota, and inflammatory factors were compared between three groups. RESULTS: After 3 months of treatment, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2-h postprandial plasma glucose (2-h PG), and glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) were evidently decreased in both probiotics and metformin groups (P < 0.05) and were lower than that in the control group prior to treatment. Besides, FPG, 2-h PG, and HbA1c were lower in the metformin group than that in the control group. FPG, 2-h PG, and HbA1c were further lower in the probiotic group than in the metformin group (P < 0.05). Fasting insulin (FINS) and islet ß cell (HOMA-ß) -function were dramatically increased in the same group (P < 0.05), while insulin-resistant islet ß cells (HOMA-IR) were significantly lower in the same group (P < 0.05); FINS and HOMA-ß were significantly higher, while HOMA-IR was significantly lower (P < 0.05) in both groups than in the control group prior to treatment. HOMA-IR was also lower in the probiotic group than in the metformin group after treatment (P < 0.05); the number of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria increased (P < 0.05) in both probiotic and metformin groups than in the control group prior to treatment, and the number of Enterobacteriaceae and Enterococcus was lower in the control group prior to treatment (P < 0.05). In addition, the number of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria was higher and the number of enterobacteria and enterococci was lower in the probiotic group than that in the metformin group after treatment, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Lipopolysaccharide (LPS), interleukin 6 (IL-6), and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were lower in both probiotic and metformin groups (P < 0.05). The serum LPS, IL-6, and CRP levels were lower in both probiotic and metformin groups, compared to the control group prior to the treatment (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Metformin while treating T2DM assists in improving the imbalance of gut microbiota.