Zibotentan in combination with dapagliflozin compared with dapagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease (ZENITH-CKD): a multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, phase 2b, clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with chronic kidney disease, SGLT2 inhibitors and endothelin A receptor antagonists (ERAs) can reduce albuminuria and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) decline. We assessed the albuminuria-lowering efficacy and safety of the ERA zibotentan combined with the SGLT2 inhibitor dapagliflozin. METHODS: ZENITH-CKD was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial, done in 170 clinical practice sites in 18 countries. Adults (≥18 to ≤90 years) with an estimated GFR (eGFR) of 20 mL/min per 1·73 m2 or greater and a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) of 150-5000 mg/g were randomly assigned (2:1:2) to 12 weeks of daily treatment with zibotentan 1·5 mg plus dapagliflozin 10 mg, zibotentan 0·25 mg plus dapagliflozin 10 mg, or dapagliflozin 10 mg plus placebo, as adjunct to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers if tolerated. The primary endpoint was a change from baseline in log-transformed UACR (zibotentan 1·5 mg plus dapagliflozin vs dapagliflozin plus placebo) at week 12. Fluid retention was an event of special interest, defined as an increase in bodyweight of at least 3% (at least 2·5% must have been from total body water) from baseline or an increase of at least 100% in B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and either a BNP concentration greater than 200 pg/mL if without atrial fibrillation or BNP greater than 400 pg/mL if with atrial fibrillation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04724837, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between April 28, 2021, and Jan 17, 2023, we assessed 1492 participants for eligibility. For the main analysis, we randomly assigned 449 (30%) participants, 447 (99%) of whom (mean age 62·8 years [SD 12·1], 138 [31%] female, 309 [69%] male, 305 [68%] White, mean eGFR 46·7 mL/min per 1·73 m2 [SD 22·4], and median UACR 565·5 mg/g [IQR 243·0-1212·6]) received treatment with zibotentan 1·5 mg plus dapagliflozin (n=179 [40%]), zibotentan 0·25 mg plus dapagliflozin (n=91 [20%]), or dapagliflozin plus placebo (n=177 [40%]). Zibotentan 1·5 mg plus dapagliflozin and zibotentan 0·25 mg plus dapagliflozin reduced UACR versus dapagliflozin plus placebo throughout the treatment period of the study. At week 12, the difference in UACR versus dapagliflozin plus placebo was -33·7% (90% CI -42·5 to -23·5; p<0·0001) for zibotentan 1·5 mg plus dapagliflozin and -27·0% (90% CI -38·4 to -13·6; p=0·0022) for zibotentan 0·25 mg plus dapagliflozin. Fluid-retention events were observed in 33 (18%) of 179 participants in the zibotentan 1·5 mg plus dapagliflozin group, eight (9%) of 91 in the zibotentan 0·25 mg plus dapagliflozin group, and 14 (8%) of 177 in the dapagliflozin plus placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Zibotentan combined with dapagliflozin reduced albuminuria with an acceptable tolerability and safety profile and is an option to reduce chronic kidney disease progression in patients already receiving currently recommended therapy. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Targeting the endothelium by combining endothelin-1 antagonism and SGLT-2 inhibition: better together?

Endothelin A and B receptors, together with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) channels are important targets in improving endothelial function and intervention with inhibitors has been the subject of multiple mechanistic and clinical outcome trials over recent years. Notable successes include the treatment of pulmonary hypertension with endothelin receptor antagonists, and the treatment of heart failure and chronic kidney disease with SGLT-2 inhibitors. With distinct and complementary mechanisms, in this review, we explore the logic of combination therapy for a number of diseases which have endothelial dysfunction at their heart.

Dual glucagon-like peptide-1 and glucagon receptor agonism reduces energy intake in type 2 diabetes with obesity.

AIMS: To establish which components of energy balance mediate the clinically significant weight loss demonstrated with use of cotadutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1)/glucagon receptor dual agonist, in early-phase studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a phase 2a, single-centre, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in overweight and obese adults with type 2 diabetes. Following a 16-day single-blind placebo run-in, participants were randomized 2:1 to double-blind 42-day subcutaneous treatment with cotadutide (100-300 µg daily) or placebo. The primary outcome was percentage weight change. Secondary outcomes included change in energy intake (EI) and energy expenditure (EE). RESULTS: A total of 12 participants (63%) in the cotadutide group and seven (78%) in the placebo group completed the study. The mean (90% confidence interval [CI]) weight change was -4.0% (-4.9%, -3.1%) and -1.4% (-2.7%, -0.1%) for the cotadutide and placebo groups, respectively (p = 0.011). EI was lower with cotadutide versus placebo (-41.3% [-66.7, -15.9]; p = 0.011). Difference in EE (per kJ/kg lean body mass) for cotadutide versus placebo was 1.0% (90% CI -8.4, 10.4; p = 0.784), assessed by doubly labelled water, and -6.5% (90% CI -9.3, -3.7; p < 0.001), assessed by indirect calorimetry. CONCLUSION: Weight loss with cotadutide is primarily driven by reduced EI, with relatively small compensatory changes in EE.

Incretins (GLP-1 receptor agonists and dual/triple agonists) and the liver.

The principle pathological drivers of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) are obesity and associated insulin resistance, rendering them key therapeutic targets. As glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have been licensed for the treatment of diabetes and obesity, they were one of the first drug types to be evaluated in patients with MASH, and successful phase IIa and IIb studies have resulted in progression to phase III clinical trials. Alongside GLP-1RAs, newer combinations with glucagon agonists and/or glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) agonists have been explored in related patient groups, with evidence of improvements in weight, insulin resistance and non-invasive liver parameters. Whether GLP-1RAs have direct, independent effects on MASH or whether they impact on pathophysiology through improvements in weight, insulin resistance and glycaemic control remains a matter of debate. Combinations are being explored, although the potential improvement in efficacy will need to be weighed against the cumulative side-effect burden, potential drug-drug interactions and costs. There is also uncertainty regarding the optimal ratio of glucagon and GIP agonism to GLP-1 agonism in combination agents, and as to whether GIP agonism or antagonism is the optimal approach. Finally, there are also multiple hypothetical permutations combining gut hormone agonists with other emerging assets in the field. Given that the likely dominant mode of action of gut hormone agonists is upstream on weight, initial combinations might focus on agents which have been shown to have a more direct effect on fibrosis, which would include FGF21 and pan-PPAR agonists.

Totality of evidence of the effectiveness of repurposed therapies for COVID-19: Can we use real-world studies alongside randomized controlled trials?

Rapid and robust strategies to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of novel and existing pharmacotherapeutic interventions (repurposed treatments) in future pandemics are required. Observational "real-world studies" (RWS) can report more quickly than randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and would have value were they to yield reliable results. Both RCTs and RWS were deployed during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Comparing results between them offers a unique opportunity to determine the potential value and contribution of each. A learning review of these parallel evidence channels in COVID-19, based on quantitative modeling, can help improve speed and reliability in the evaluation of repurposed therapeutics in a future pandemic. Analysis of all-cause mortality data from 249 observational RWS and RCTs across eight treatment regimens for COVID-19 showed that RWS yield more heterogeneous results, and generally overestimate the effect size subsequently seen in RCTs. This is explained in part by a few study factors: the presence of RWS that are imbalanced for age, gender, and disease severity, and those reporting mortality at 2 weeks or less. Smaller studies of either type contributed negligibly. Analysis of evidence generated sequentially during the pandemic indicated that larger RCTs drive our ability to make conclusive decisions regarding clinical benefit of each treatment, with limited inference drawn from RWS. These results suggest that when evaluating therapies in future pandemics, (1) large RCTs, especially platform studies, be deployed early; (2) any RWS should be large and should have adequate matching of known confounders and long follow-up; (3) reporting standards and data standards for primary endpoints, explanatory factors, and key subgroups should be improved; in addition, (4) appropriate incentives should be in place to enable access to patient-level data; and (5) an overall aggregate view of all available results should be available at any given time.

The new rosiglitazone story: its place today in type 2 diabetes management.

ADOPT suggests that rosiglitazone, ahead of traditional therapies, can meet patient needs with respect to long-term glycaemic control, yet the recent safety debate, stimulated by retrospective meta-analysis, has seriously affected physician confidence to use it. Other recent evidence, including from a number of long-term outcome studies, does not confirm or exclude a cardiovascular risk signal for rosiglitazone, and evaluation of this data has led EMEA to support continued use of rosiglitazone, albeit with a recommendation not to use in patients with a previous cardiovascular history. Where does this leave us? Rosiglitazone remains the only oral blood glucose lowering agent to have demonstrated nearly 5 years of blood glucose control. Patients earlier in their disease, free of known cardiovascular disease, are just the patients to benefit most from long term glucose target achievement.

Specific associations of insulin resistance with impaired health-related quality of life in the Hertfordshire Cohort Study.

Insulin resistance is a metabolic abnormality that underlies Type 2 diabetes, the metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular disease, but it may also be associated with more global health deficits. This study assessed associations of insulin resistance with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in different domains of physical and mental health in a large elderly population study. Cross-sectional data of 1212 participants from the Hertfordshire Cohort Study were analysed. Insulin resistance was assessed by the homeostatic model assessment (HOMA-IR), and HRQoL was measured using the SF-36 health survey. Poor HRQoL was defined by a score lower than the sex-specific 10th percentile of each scale, and logistic regressions yielded odds ratios in relation to the HOMA-IR scores. Subsequent analyses adjusted for the influence of age, smoking, alcohol consumption, social class, BMI, coronary heart disease and depression. Results showed an increase in poor HRQoL with an increase in HOMA-IR scores for physical functioning (OR = 2.29; CI: 1.67-3.13), vitality (OR = 1.45; CI: 1.05-2.00), and general health (OR = 1.62; CI: 1.19-2.21). In men, but not in women, associations with physical functioning were independent of confounding variables. The results indicate that insulin resistance is associated with poor HRQoL in domains of physical health, but not in domains of mental health.