Liraglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular effect of liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, when added to standard care in patients with type 2 diabetes, remains unknown. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk to receive liraglutide or placebo. The primary composite outcome in the time-to-event analysis was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The primary hypothesis was that liraglutide would be noninferior to placebo with regard to the primary outcome, with a margin of 1.30 for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio. No adjustments for multiplicity were performed for the prespecified exploratory outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 9340 patients underwent randomization. The median follow-up was 3.8 years. The primary outcome occurred in significantly fewer patients in the liraglutide group (608 of 4668 patients [13.0%]) than in the placebo group (694 of 4672 [14.9%]) (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 0.97; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.01 for superiority). Fewer patients died from cardiovascular causes in the liraglutide group (219 patients [4.7%]) than in the placebo group (278 [6.0%]) (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.93; P=0.007). The rate of death from any cause was lower in the liraglutide group (381 patients [8.2%]) than in the placebo group (447 [9.6%]) (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.97; P=0.02). The rates of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure were nonsignificantly lower in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group. The most common adverse events leading to the discontinuation of liraglutide were gastrointestinal events. The incidence of pancreatitis was nonsignificantly lower in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In the time-to-event analysis, the rate of the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus was lower with liraglutide than with placebo. (Funded by Novo Nordisk and the National Institutes of Health; LEADER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01179048.).

Design of the liraglutide effect and action in diabetes: evaluation of cardiovascular outcome results (LEADER) trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a multisystem disorder associated with a nearly twofold excess risk for a broad range of adverse cardiovascular outcomes including coronary heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular death. Liraglutide is a human glucagon-like peptide receptor analog approved for use in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). STUDY DESIGN: To formally assess the cardiovascular safety of liraglutide, the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of cardiovascular outcome Results (LEADER) trial was commenced in 2010. LEADER is a phase 3B, multicenter, international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial with long-term follow-up. Patients with T2DM at high risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) who were either drug naive or treated with oral antihyperglycemic agents or selected insulin regimens (human NPH, long-acting analog, or premixed) alone or in combination with oral antihyperglycemics were eligible for inclusion. Randomized patients are being followed for up to 5 years. The primary end point is the time from randomization to a composite outcome consisting of the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. CONCLUSIONS: LEADER commenced in September 2010, and enrollment concluded in April 2012. There were 9,340 patients enrolled at 410 sites in 32 countries. The mean age of patients was 64.3 ± 7.2 years, 64.3% were men, and mean body mass index was 32.5 ± 6.3 kg/m2. There were 7,592 (81.3%) patients with prior CVD and 1,748 (18.7%) who were high risk but without prior CVD. It is expected that LEADER will provide conclusive data regarding the cardiovascular safety of liraglutide relative to the current standard of usual care for a global population of patients with T2DM.

Multicenter approach to recurrent acute and chronic pancreatitis in the United States: the North American Pancreatitis Study 2 (NAPS2).

BACKGROUND: Recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP) and chronic pancreatitis (CP) are complex syndromes associated with numerous etiologies, clinical variables and complications. We developed the North American Pancreatitis Study 2 (NAPS2) to be sufficiently powered to understand the complex environmental, metabolic and genetic mechanisms underlying RAP and CP. METHODS: Between August 2000 and September 2006, a consortium of 20 expert academic and private sites prospectively ascertained 1,000 human subjects with RAP or CP, plus 695 controls (spouse, family, friend or unrelated). Standardized questionnaires were completed by both the physicians and study subjects and blood was drawn for genomic DNA and biomarker studies. All data were double-entered into a database and systematically reviewed to minimize errors and include missing data. RESULTS: A total of 1,000 subjects (460 RAP, 540 CP) and 695 controls who completed consent forms and questionnaires and donated blood samples comprised the final dataset. Data were organized according to diagnosis, supporting documentation, etiological classification, clinical signs and symptoms (including pain patterns and duration, and quality of life), past medical history, family history, environmental exposures (including alcohol and tobacco use), medication use and therapeutic interventions. Upon achieving the target enrollment, data were organized and classified to facilitate future analysis. The approaches, rationale and datasets are described, along with final demographic results. CONCLUSION: The NAPS2 consortium has successfully completed a prospective ascertainment of 1,000 subjects with RAP and CP from the USA. These data will be useful in elucidating the environmental, metabolic and genetic conditions, and to investigate the complex interactions that underlie RAP and CP.

Impact of Liraglutide on Amylase, Lipase, and Acute Pancreatitis in Participants With Overweight/Obesity and Normoglycemia, Prediabetes, or Type 2 Diabetes: Secondary Analyses of Pooled Data From the SCALE Clinical Development Program.

OBJECTIVE: To describe amylase/lipase activity levels and events of acute pancreatitis (AP) in the SCALE (Satiety and Clinical Adiposity-Liraglutide Evidence in individuals with and without diabetes) weight-management trials. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Secondary analyses were performed on pooled data from four trials (N = 5,358 with BMI ≥30, or 27 to <30 kg/m2 with ≥1 comorbidity). Of these, 1,723 had normoglycemia, 2,789 had prediabetes, and 846 had type 2 diabetes. Participants were randomized to liraglutide 3.0 mg (n = 3,302), liraglutide 1.8 mg (n = 211, only type 2 diabetes), or placebo (n = 1,845). Relationships between baseline characteristics and amylase/lipase activity at baseline and during treatment were investigated. RESULTS: Over 56 weeks, liraglutide 3.0 mg versus placebo was associated with increases in mean levels of 7% (amylase) and 31% (lipase), respectively. Similar changes in amylase/lipase levels were observed with liraglutide 1.8 mg. More participants receiving liraglutide 3.0 mg versus placebo experienced amylase (9.4% vs. 5.9%) and lipase (43.5% vs. 15.1%) elevations greater than or equal to the upper limit of normal (ULN); few had elevations ≥3 × ULN for amylase (<0.1% with liraglutide 3.0 mg or placebo) or lipase (2.9% vs. 1.5%, respectively). After liraglutide discontinuation, enzymes returned to baseline levels. Thirteen participants developed AP: 12 on (n = 9, 0.3%) or after (n = 3, 0.1%) liraglutide 3.0 mg treatment and one (0.1%) with placebo. A total of 6/13 participants with AP (5/12 liraglutide; 1 placebo) had gallstone disease evident at AP onset. Amylase/lipase elevations either 1 × ULN or ≥3 × ULN before AP onset had very low positive predictive value for AP (<1%). CONCLUSIONS: Liraglutide resulted in dose-independent, reversible increases in amylase/lipase activity, unrelated to baseline characteristics, not predicting AP onset. Gallstones possibly contributed to 50% of AP cases. Data provide no basis for amylase/lipase level monitoring in liraglutide treatment except in suspected AP.

Amylase, Lipase, and Acute Pancreatitis in People With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Liraglutide: Results From the LEADER Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate serum amylase and lipase levels and the rate of acute pancreatitis in patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk randomized to liraglutide or placebo and observed for 3.5-5.0 years. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 9,340 patients with type 2 diabetes were randomized to either liraglutide or placebo (median observation time 3.84 years). Fasting serum lipase and amylase were monitored. Acute pancreatitis was adjudicated in a blinded manner. RESULTS: Compared with the placebo group, liraglutide-treated patients had increases in serum lipase and amylase of 28.0% and 7.0%, respectively. Levels were increased at 6 months and then remained stable. During the study, 18 (0.4% [1.1 events/1,000 patient-years of observation] [PYO]) liraglutide-treated and 23 (0.5% [1.7 events/1,000 PYO]) placebo patients had acute pancreatitis confirmed by adjudication. Most acute pancreatitis cases occurred ≥12 months after randomization. Liraglutide-treated patients with prior history of pancreatitis (n = 147) were not more likely to develop acute pancreatitis than similar patients in the placebo group (n = 120). Elevations of amylase and lipase levels did not predict future risk of acute pancreatitis (positive predictive value <1.0%) in patients treated with liraglutide. CONCLUSIONS: In a population with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, there were numerically fewer events of acute pancreatitis among liraglutide-treated patients (regardless of previous history of pancreatitis) compared with the placebo group. Liraglutide was associated with increases in serum lipase and amylase, which were not predictive of an event of subsequent acute pancreatitis.

Is there a link between liraglutide and pancreatitis? A post hoc review of pooled and patient-level data from completed liraglutide type 2 diabetes clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: To report the incidence of pancreatitis in type 2 diabetes trials of liraglutide and details of all pancreatitis cases. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data from Novo Nordisk-sponsored trials with liraglutide (phase 2 and 3; NN2211 identifiers) completed by 19 April 2013 were pooled. All pancreatitis cases were reviewed. RESULTS: Total exposure to liraglutide and active comparators was 5,021 and 1,354 patient-years, respectively (n = 6,345 and 1,846, respectively). Eight cases of acute pancreatitis (AP) with liraglutide and one with any comparator (glimepiride) were found. The incidence of AP was 1.6 cases/1,000 patient-years exposure (PYE) for liraglutide vs. 0.7 cases/1,000 PYE for total active comparators. One of the eight AP cases reported with liraglutide did not meet diagnostic criteria for AP. In six of these eight cases, recognized risk factors for AP were present and/or the onset of AP occurred >6 months after liraglutide initiation. All patients were receiving multiple medications. Four cases of chronic pancreatitis (CP) with liraglutide and none with comparators were found. One of these four cases fulfilled diagnostic criteria for CP; these criteria were not met or information was missing in the remaining three. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the small number of cases observed, the incidences of reported AP and CP were numerically greater with liraglutide than with comparators. Not all cases fulfilled diagnostic criteria, and confounding variables were present in 75% of the AP cases with liraglutide therapy, precluding firm conclusions.

LEADER 3--lipase and amylase activity in subjects with type 2 diabetes: baseline data from over 9000 subjects in the LEADER Trial.

OBJECTIVES: This report from the LEADER (Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results) trial describes baseline lipase and amylase activity in type 2 diabetic subjects without acute pancreatitis symptoms before randomization to the glucagonlike peptide analog liraglutide or placebo. METHODS: The LEADER is an international randomized placebo-controlled trial evaluating the cardiovascular safety of liraglutide in 9340 type 2 diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk. Fasting lipase and amylase activity was assessed at baseline, before receiving liraglutide or placebo, using a commercial assay (Roche) with upper limit of normal values of 63 U/L for lipase and 100 U/L for amylase. RESULTS: Either or both enzymes were above the upper limit of normal in 22.7% of subjects; 16.6% (n = 1540) had an elevated lipase level (including 1.2% >3-fold elevated), and 11.8% (n = 1094) had an elevated amylase level (including 0.2% >3-fold elevated). In multivariable regression models, severely reduced kidney function was associated with the largest effect on increasing activity of both. However, even among subjects with normal kidney function, 12.2% and 7.7% had elevated lipase and amylase levels. CONCLUSIONS: In this large study of type 2 diabetic patients, nearly 25% had elevated lipase or amylase levels without symptoms of acute pancreatitis. The clinician must take these data into account when evaluating abdominal symptoms in type 2 diabetic patients.

Controversies in clinical pancreatology: should the sphincter of Oddi be measured in patients with idiopathic recurrent acute pancreatitis, and should sphincterotomy be performed if the pressure is high?

The risk benefit ratio of measuring the sphincter of Oddi pressure and performing sphincterotomy in patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis with high sphincter pressures has not been assessed. Few healthy controls have had sphincter measurements so that the definition of an abnormal sphincter remains understudied. The procedures involved have significant risks and the benefits are hard to measure considering the variable natural history of this disorder. No prospective, randomized investigations have been performed to evaluate efficacy of these invasive procedures. It is the author's opinion that until appropriate studies prove efficacy that these interventions be considered experimental.