Efficacy and Safety of Relamorelin in Diabetics With Symptoms of Gastroparesis: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Gastroparesis is a complication of diabetes with few treatment options. Relamorelin (also referred to as RM-131) is a selective, prokinetic agonist of ghrelin. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of relamorelin on symptoms and gastric emptying (GE) in a 12-week, phase 2B study of diabetic patients with moderate to severe gastroparesis symptoms (DG). METHODS: We performed a study of 393 patients with DG (37.7% male; 9.9% with type 1 diabetes; median age, 58.2 years [range 20-76]; median body mass index, 31.4 kg/m2 [range, 18.2-60.1]; HbA1c level, 7.6%, [range, 5.2-11.0]). All participants had 13C-spirulina GE breath test T1/2 values of 79 minutes or more (with 89.8% delayed relative to 90th %ile of normal, 85.75 minutes), recent vomiting, and gastroparesis cardinal symptom index-daily diary scores of 2.6 or more. Patients were randomly assigned to groups given placebo (n=104) or relamorelin (10 µg [n=98], 30 µg [n=109], or 100 µg [n=82] twice daily) for 12 weeks, following a 2-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period. Patient-reported outcomes were determined from DG Symptom Severity daily e-diaries, in which patients recorded vomiting frequency and symptom scores (nausea, abdominal pain, postprandial fullness, and bloating) on a 0-10 scale. Endpoints were change from baseline in vomiting frequency, composite DG Symptom Severity score, GE, and safety. We performed longitudinal, mixed-effects model analysis using repeated measures, with baseline and baseline-by-week interaction values as covariates. RESULTS: Patients given relamorelin had a 75% reduction in vomiting frequency compared with baseline, but this difference was not significant compared with the placebo group. All 4 symptoms of DG (composite or individual symptoms) were significantly reduced over the 12-week study period in all 3 relamorelin dose groups compared with the placebo group (all P < .05, based on longitudinal analysis over 12 weeks). Relamorelin significantly accelerated GE from baseline compared with placebo (by 12%, P < .05 for the 10 µg and 30 µg groups; P = .051 for the 100 µg group). Dose-related worsening of glycemic control was noted in 14.5% of patients who received relamorelin; some required insulin or other diabetes drug dosage adjustments. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2B randomized trial of patients with moderate to severe DG, relamorelin significantly reduced core symptoms of DG and overall composite score compared with placebo, accelerated GE, and was generally safe and well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02357420.

Independent data monitoring committees: preparing a path for the future.

Independent data monitoring committees (IDMCs) were introduced to monitor patient safety and study conduct in randomized clinical trials (RCTs), but certain challenges regarding the utilization of IDMCs have developed. First, the roles and responsibilities of IDMCs are expanding, perhaps due to increasing trial complexity and heterogeneity regarding medical, ethical, legal, regulatory, and financial issues. Second, no standard for IDMC operating procedures exists, and there is uncertainty about who should determine standards and whether standards should vary with trial size and design. Third, considerable variability in communication pathways exist across IDMC interfaces with regulatory agencies, academic coordinating centers, and sponsors. Finally, there has been a substantial increase in the number of RCTs using IDMCs, yet there is no set of qualifications to help guide the training and development of the next generation of IDMC members. Recently, an expert panel of representatives from government, industry, and academia assembled at the Duke Clinical Research Institute to address these challenges and to develop recommendations for the future utilization of IDMCs in RCTs.

Subcutaneous infusion of exenatide and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.

Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) injected periodically have been shown to not increase and, for some members of this class, decrease the risk of cardiovascular events. The cardiovascular safety of delivering a continuous subcutaneous infusion of the GLP-1RA exenatide (ITCA 650) is unknown. Here, we randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes with, or at risk for, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) to receive ITCA 650 or placebo to assess cardiovascular safety in a pre-approval trial ( NCT01455896 ). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or hospitalization for unstable angina. On the basis of 2008 guidance from the US Food and Drug Administration, a non-inferiority margin of 1.8 for the upper bound of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the hazard ratio (HR) was used. We randomized 4,156 patients (2,075 assigned to receive ITCA 650 and 2,081 assigned to receive placebo) who were followed for a median of 16 months. The primary outcome occurred in 4.6% (95/2,075) of patients in the ITCA 650 group and 3.8% (79/2,081) of patients in the placebo group, meeting the pre-specified non-inferiority criterion (HR = 1.21, 95% CI, 0.90-1.63, Pnon-inferiority = 0.004). Serious adverse events were similar between the two groups. Adverse events were more frequent in the ITCA 650 group (72%, 1,491/2,074) than in the placebo group (63.9%, 1,325/2,070), mainly due to an increase in gastrointestinal events and disorders while on ITCA 650. In patients with type 2 diabetes with, or at risk for, ASCVD, ITCA 650 was non-inferior to placebo. A larger and longer-duration cardiovascular outcomes trial is needed to define more precisely the cardiovascular effects of ITCA 650 in this population.

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Diabetic Gastroparesis Symptom Severity Diary.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic gastroparesis (DG) is defined as delayed gastric emptying with associated gastrointestinal symptoms, without mechanical obstruction. Patient-reported symptoms are critical for diagnosis and evaluation of treatment benefit in DG. The Diabetic Gastroparesis Symptom Severity Diary (DGSSD), a new patient-reported outcome measure, was developed for use in clinical trials to support product approval and labeling claims for DG treatments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Initial DGSSD development was based on a review of the existing instruments and qualitative research (focus groups and cognitive debriefing interviews) in 41 patients with DG. Psychometric evaluations (individual items and composite scores) were conducted using data from Phase IIa and IIb relamorelin clinical trials. RESULTS: Qualitative research in patients with DG resulted in a six-item DGSSD, included in the Phase IIa trial, addressing symptom severity for nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, early satiety, and bloating, as well as vomiting frequency. An item addressing severity of postprandial fullness (PPF) was subsequently added based on regulatory advice and included in the Phase IIb trial. Measurement properties were generally strong for weekly averages of daily item and composite scores. Item-level intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.79 to 0.97 and correlations with other measures matched hypothesized patterns; the discriminating ability and responsiveness of the DGSSD were also supported. Multiple methods supported the computation of a composite score based on items addressing nausea, abdominal pain, bloating, and PPF severity. CONCLUSION: Qualitative and quantitative evidence support use of the DGSSD as a reliable and valid measure from which to derive endpoints to evaluate treatment benefit in future DG interventional trials.

Improvement of glycaemic and lipid profiles with muraglitazar plus metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: an active-control trial with glimepiride.

The efficacy and safety of muraglitazar versus glimepiride were evaluated in patients with type 2 diabetes. After open-label metformin monotherapy, 1,805 patients received randomised therapy with muraglitazar 2.5 mg or 5 mg or with glimepiride 1 mg in a double-blind 52-week study. The primary end point was change in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1C); secondary end points were changes in fasting lipid levels and glycaemic indices. At week 52, the reduction in HbA1C with muraglitazar 5 mg plus metformin was superior (p<0.0001) and with muraglitazar 2.5 mg it was non-inferior in comparison with glimepiride. At week 12, muraglitazar significantly decreased triglyceride levels (p<0.0001) and increased levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) (p<0.0001). Oedema, weight gain and heart failure were more evident with muraglitazar. Muraglitazar 5 mg plus metformin significantly improved HbA1C, triglyceride and HDL-C levels in patients with type 2 diabetes. Cardiovascular events were similar among groups (~2%), but there was an imbalance of total mortality in favour of glimepiride.

Treatment With a Ghrelin Agonist in Outpatient Women With Anorexia Nervosa: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of relamorelin-an agonist of the appetite-stimulating hormone ghrelin, which has effects on gastric emptying-on (1) weight gain and (2) gastric emptying in women with anorexia nervosa. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design, the effects of the ghrelin agonist relamorelin were studied in 22 outpatient women with anorexia nervosa, diagnosed using DSM-5 criteria. The study was conducted at the Massachusetts General Hospital Clinical Research Center between March 11, 2013, and February 26, 2015. Ten participants were randomly assigned to relamorelin 100 µg subcutaneously daily (mean ± SEM age: 28.9 ± 2.4 y), and 12 were randomly assigned to placebo (28.9 ± 1.9 y). We measured changes in weight and gastric emptying time using a gastric emptying breath test (GEBT) for relamorelin versus placebo after 4 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: At baseline, subjects did not differ in weight, plasma ghrelin levels, or gastric emptying time. Three subjects randomized to relamorelin stopped use of the study medication due to reported feelings of increased hunger. After 4 weeks, there was a trend toward an increase in weight in participants randomized to relamorelin (mean ± SEM change: 0.86 ± 0.40 kg) compared to placebo (0.04 ± 0.28 kg; P = .07), and gastric emptying time was significantly shorter in patients taking relamorelin (median [interquartile range]: 58.0 [51.0, 78.0] minutes) compared to placebo (85.0 [75.8,100.5] minutes; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with a ghrelin agonist in women with anorexia nervosa significantly decreases gastric emptying time, leads to a trend in weight gain after only 4 weeks, and is well-tolerated. Further study is necessary to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of a ghrelin agonist in the treatment of anorexia nervosa. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01642550.

Melanocortin 4 Receptor Pathway Dysfunction in Obesity: Patient Stratification Aimed at MC4R Agonist Treatment.

Context: The hypothalamic melanocortin 4 receptor (MC4R) pathway serves a critical role in regulating body weight. Loss of function (LoF) mutations in the MC4R pathway, including mutations in the pro-opiomelanocortin (POMC), prohormone convertase 1 (PCSK1), leptin receptor (LEPR), or MC4R genes, have been shown to cause early-onset severe obesity. Methods: Through a comprehensive epidemiological analysis of known and predicted LoF variants in the POMC, PCSK1, and LEPR genes, we sought to estimate the number of US individuals with biallelic MC4R pathway LoF variants. Results: We predict ~650 α-melanocyte-stimulating hormone (MSH)/POMC, 8500 PCSK1, and 3600 LEPR homozygous and compound heterozygous individuals in the United States, cumulatively enumerating >12,800 MC4R pathway-deficient obese patients. Few of these variants have been genetically diagnosed to date. These estimates increase when we include a small subset of less rare variants: ß-MSH/POMC,PCSK1 N221D, and a PCSK1 LoF variant (T640A). To further define the MC4R pathway and its potential impact on obesity, we tested associations between body mass index (BMI) and LoF mutation burden in the POMC, PCSK1, and LEPR genes in various populations. We show that the cumulative allele burden in individuals with two or more LoF alleles in one or more genes in the MC4R pathway are predisposed to a higher BMI than noncarriers or heterozygous LoF carriers with a defect in only one gene. Conclusions: Our analysis represents a genetically rationalized study of the hypothalamic MC4R pathway aimed at genetic patient stratification to determine which obese subpopulations should be studied to elucidate MC4R agonist (e.g., setmelanotide) treatment responsiveness.

MC4R agonism promotes durable weight loss in patients with leptin receptor deficiency.

Genetic defects underlying the melanocortin-4 receptor (MC4R) signaling pathway lead to severe obesity. Three severely obese LEPR-deficient individuals were administered the MC4R agonist setmelanotide, resulting in substantial and durable reductions in hyperphagia and body weight over an observation period of 45-61 weeks. Compared to formerly developed and tested MC4R agonists, setmelanotide has the unique capability of activating nuclear factor of activated T cell (NFAT) signaling and restoring function of this signaling pathway for selected MC4R variants. Our data demonstrate the potency of setmelanotide in treatment of individuals with diverse MC4R-related pathway deficiencies.

Improvement of glycemic control, triglycerides, and HDL cholesterol levels with muraglitazar, a dual (alpha/gamma) peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor activator, in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy: A double-blind, randomized, pioglitazone-comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the effects of muraglitazar, a dual (alpha/gamma) peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) activator within the new glitazar class, on hyperglycemia and lipid abnormalities. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial was performed in 1,159 patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin. Patients received once-daily doses of either 5 mg muraglitazar or 30 mg pioglitazone for a total of 24 weeks in addition to open-label metformin. Patients were continued in a double-blind fashion for an additional 26 weeks. RESULTS: Analyses were conducted at week 24 for HbA1c (A1C) and at week 12 for lipid parameters. Mean A1C at baseline was 8.12 and 8.13% in muraglitazar and pioglitazone groups, respectively. At week 24, muraglitazar reduced mean A1C to 6.98% (-1.14% from baseline), and pioglitazone reduced mean A1C to 7.28% (-0.85% from baseline; P < 0.0001, muraglitazar vs. pioglitazone). At week 12, muraglitazar and pioglitazone reduced mean plasma triglyceride (-28 vs. -14%), apolipoprotein B (-12 vs. -6%), and non-HDL cholesterol (-6 vs. -1%) and increased HDL cholesterol (19 vs. 14%), respectively (P < 0.0001 vs. pioglitazone for all comparisons). At week 24, weight gain (1.4 and 0.6 kg, respectively) and edema (9.2 and 7.2%, respectively) were observed in the muraglitazar and pioglitazone groups; at week 50, weight gain and edema were 2.5 and 1.5 kg, respectively, and 11.8 and 8.9%, respectively. At week 50, heart failure was reported in seven patients (five with muraglitazar and two with pioglitazone), and seven deaths occurred: three from sudden death, two from cerebrovascular accident, and one from pancreatic cancer in the muraglitazar group and one from perforated duodenal ulcer in the pioglitazone group. CONCLUSIONS: We found that 5 mg muraglitazar resulted in greater improvements in A1C and lipid parameters than a submaximal dose of 30 mg pioglitazone when added to metformin. Weight gain and edema were more common when muraglitazar was compared with a submaximal dose of pioglitazone.

The effects of HIV protease inhibitors atazanavir and lopinavir/ritonavir on insulin sensitivity in HIV-seronegative healthy adults.

BACKGROUND: Therapy with some HIV protease inhibitors (PI) contributes to insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes mellitus, by inhibition of insulin-sensitive glucose transporters. Atazanavir (ATV) is a new PI with substantially less in vitro effect on glucose transport than observed with other PI, including lopinavir (LPV) or ritonavir (RTV). METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, crossover study of the effect of 5 days of administering ATV, lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) or placebo on insulin-stimulated glucose disposal in 30 healthy HIV-negative subjects. Each subject was studied on two of three possible treatments with a wash-out period between treatments. RESULTS: The mean insulin-stimulated glucose disposal (mg/min per kg body weight) per unit insulin (microU/ml) (M/I) was 9.88, 9.80 and 7.52 for placebo, ATV and LPV/r, respectively (SEM, 0.84 for all). There was no significant difference between ATV and placebo. The M/I for LPV/r was 23% lower than that for ATV (P = 0.010) and 24% lower than that for placebo (P = 0.008). The mean glycogen storage rates were 3.85, 4.00 and 2.54 mg/min per kg for placebo, ATV and LPV/r, respectively (SEM, 0.39 for all). There was no significant difference between ATV and placebo. The glycogen storage rate for LPV/r was 36% lower than ATV (P = 0.003) and 34% lower than placebo (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: ATV given to healthy subjects for 5 days did not affect insulin sensitivity, while LPV/r induced insulin resistance. This observation is consistent with differential in vitro effects of these PI on glucose transport. Further data are needed to assess clinical implications for body composition.

Glycemic control with glyburide/metformin tablets in combination with rosiglitazone in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, double-blind trial.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and safety of adding rosiglitazone to an established regimen of glyburide/metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes who had not achieved adequate glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1C] levels >7.0% and < or =10.0%). METHODS: Following an open-label, lead-in phase to optimize the dosing of glyburide/metformin tablets, 365 patients randomly received additive therapy comprising rosiglitazone (4 mg once daily) or placebo for 24 weeks. Based on glycemic response, rosiglitazone dose was maintained or increased to 4 mg twice daily. Glyburide/metformin dose was maintained or reduced by 2.5/500 mg for symptomatic hypoglycemia. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1C level from baseline to week 24. The proportions of patients achieving HbA1C levels <7% and a fasting plasma glucose level <126 mg/dL were also assessed. RESULTS: After 24 weeks, therapy with glyburide/metformin plus rosiglitazone resulted in a greater reduction in HbA1C levels (-1.0%, P<0.001) compared with combination therapy that included placebo, and in a larger proportion of patients (42% vs. 14%) who attained levels <7%. The difference in fasting plasma glucose levels between groups was -48 mg/dL (P<0.001), favoring glyburide/metformin plus rosiglitazone. The adverse event profile in the rosiglitazone-treated group included mild-to-moderate edema (8%), hypoglycemia (22%), and weight gain of 3 kg. No patient experienced hypoglycemia requiring third-party assistance. CONCLUSION: In patients with inadequate glycemic control despite established glyburide/metformin therapy, the addition of rosiglitazone improves glycemic control, allowing more patients to achieve an HbA1C level <7% and perhaps delaying the need for insulin treatment.

Durability of efficacy and long-term safety profile of glyburide/metformin tablets in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: an open-label extension study.

BACKGROUND: Intensive glycemic control substantially reduces the microvascular and macrovascular complications of type 2 diabetes mellitus, although less than half of patients with diabetes achieve the target glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) value recommended by the American Diabetes Association. Because monotherapy with an oral agent does not address the multiple pathophysiologic defects of diabetes, use of combination therapy appears to be warranted. A previous 32-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial found that treatment with glyburide/metformin tablets was associated with greater reductions in HbA1c values compared with glyburide monotherapy, metformin monotherapy, and placebo. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the durability of efficacy and long-term safety profile of therapy with glyburide/metformin tablets over 52 weeks. METHODS: Patients enrolled in this open-label extension study were drawn from 3 groups: those who completed the 32-week double-blind study, those who were discontinued from the double-blind study, and those who were ineligible for the double-blind study and were enrolled directly in the open-label extension study. Patients with an HbA1c of < 9% received glyburide/metformin 1.25 mg/250 mg tablets BID, and those with an HbA1c of > or = 9% received glyburide/metformin 2.5 mg/500 mg tablets BID. Primary efficacy variables included changes from baseline in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and body weight at week 52. Safety was assessed based on adverse-event data and the results of physical examinations and laboratory tests. RESULTS: A total of 828 patients were enrolled in the study: 515 who completed the 32-week double-blind study, 138 who were discontinued from the double-blind study, and 175 who were directly enrolled. At week 52, the mean HbA1c value for the entire population had decreased from a baseline value of 8.73% to 7.04% (95% CI, -1.81 to -1.58). Patients who were enrolled directly had the poorest glycemic control at baseline and experienced the greatest reduction in HbA1c (-3.35%; 95% CI, -3.61 to -3.10). A reduction in mean FPG for the total population was observed as early as week 2, from 201 to 141 mg/dL (95% CI, -63.0 to -55.7). Symptoms of hypoglycemia occurred in 19.9% (165/828) of patients, although only one third of these patients had a documented finger-stick blood glucose value of > or = 50 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: In this 52-week, open-label extension study, glyburide/metformin tablets were well tolerated and effective in patients with type 2 diabetes. They provided rapid and sustainable reductions in HbA1c values and FPG concentrations.

Lipid effects of glyburide/metformin tablets in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with poor glycemic control and dyslipidemia in an open-label extension study.

BACKGROUND: Because both type 2 diabetes and elevated plasma lipid levels are important independent risk factors for cardiovascular disease and coronary heart disease, the choice of an antihyperglycemic agent for patients with type 2 diabetes--in whom abnormal plasma lipid levels are often seen-should take into account effects on lipids as well as on markers of glycemic control. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the effects on lipid levels of glyburide/metformin tablets in the treatment of type 2 diabetes, particularly in a group of patients who had poor glycemic control and dyslipidemia at baseline. METHODS: This 52-week, open-label study was an extension of a 32-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. The patient population was drawn from 3 groups: those who completed the double-blind study, those who were discontinued from the double-blind study, and those who were ineligible for the double-blind study based on predefined measures of glycemic control (screening fasting plasma glucose > 240 mg/dL and glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c] < or = 12%, or HbA1c 11%-12%) and were directly enrolled in the open-label extension study. Patients with an HbA1c of < 9% received glyburide/ metformin tablets 1.25 mg/250 mg BID; those with an HbA1c > or = 9% received glyburide/ metformin tablets 2.5 mg/500 mg BID. Changes in total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglyceride (TG) levels were assessed for 52 weeks. RESULTS: The study population included 828 patients: 515 who completed the double-blind study, 138 who were discontinued from the double-blind study, and 175 who were enrolled directly. Direct enrollees had poor glycemic control and dyslipidemia at baseline. Improvements in plasma lipid levels were seen as early as week 13. At week 52, the mean change in TC from baseline was -8.0 mg/dL for the total population (95% CI, -10.9 to -5.2; P < 0.05) and -23.2 mg/dL for direct enrollees (95% CI, -30.1 to -16.4; P < 0.05). The mean decrease in LDL-C from baseline for the total population was 2.86 mg/dL (95% CI, -5.3 to -0.4; P < 0.05), compared with a reduction of 13.3 mg/dL for direct enrollees (95% CI, -18.5 to -8.1; P < 0.05). Mean HDL-C levels were minimally affected. Mean TG levels decreased by 27.8 mg/dL for the entire population (95% CI, -42.9 to -12.8; P < 0.05) and by 99.7 mg/dL for direct enrollees (95% CI, -152.5 to -46.8; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In this open-label extension study, treatment with glyburide/ metformin tablets for type 2 diabetes had a durable, favorable effect on lipid levels, particularly in those with poor glycemic control and dyslipidemia at baseline.

A systematic assessment of cardiovascular outcomes in the saxagliptin drug development program for type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess the relative risk (RR) for cardiovascular (CV) events across all 8 randomized phase 2/3 trials evaluating saxagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Cardiovascular events (death, myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, revascularization procedures, and cardiac ischemia) were reported by investigators through standard adverse event reporting procedures and were systematically identified. Post hoc blinded adjudication of all deaths, MIs, and strokes was performed using prespecified endpoint definitions by an independent clinical events committee (CEC). RESULTS: A total of 4607 randomized and treated patients (n = 3356 treated with saxagliptin [2.5-100 mg/d]; n = 1251, comparator [n = 656, placebo; n = 328, metformin; n = 267, uptitrated glyburide]) were included. The median ages were 54 years (saxagliptin) and 55 years (comparator) (interquartile range, 47-61 each); 51% were female, 73% were white, 52% were hypertensive, 44% had hypercholesterolemia, 39% had a smoking history, 20% had a first-degree family member with premature coronary heart disease, and 12% had prior CV disease. Cardiovascular events were experienced by 61 patients (38 [1.1%], saxagliptin; 23 [1.8%], comparator), and CV death/MI/stroke events were reported by investigators in 41 patients: 23 (0.7%), saxagliptin; 18 (1.4%), comparator (relative risk, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44 [0.24-0.82]). The CEC reviewed 147 patients with potential CV events and identified a total of 40 patients with CV death/MI/stroke: 22 (0.7%), saxagliptin; 18 (1.4%), comparator (RR, 0.43 [0.23-0.80]). Component proportions for CV death, MI, and stroke were (saxagliptin vs comparator): 7 (0.2%) vs 10 (0.8%), 8 (0.2%) vs 8 (0.6%), and 11 (0.3%) vs 5 (0.4%), respectively. CONCLUSION: No increased risk of CV death/MI/stroke was observed in patients randomly assigned saxagliptin across a broad drug development program. Although this systematic overview has inherent and important limitations, the data support a potential reduction in CV events with saxagliptin. The hypothesis of CV protection with saxagliptin will be tested prospectively in a large randomized clinical outcome trial evaluating saxagliptin compared with standard of care in patients with type 2 diabetes at increased risk for CV events.

Coadministration of muraglitazar plus glyburide: improvement of glycaemic and lipid profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes.

In this trial we evaluated the efficacy and safety of muraglitazar, a dual (alpha/gamma) peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor activator, plus glyburide in patients with type 2 diabetes not controlled with sulphonylurea monotherapy. After 2 weeks of open-label glyburide (15 mg/day), 583 patients were randomised to additionally receive muraglitazar 2.5 mg, 5 mg, or placebo. End points included changes in HbA(1C) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) at weeks 24 and 102, and changes in lipid parameters at weeks 11/12 and 102.At week 24, mean changes from baseline in HbA(1C) and FPG were significantly greater with glyburide plus muraglitazar 2.5 mg or 5 mg than with glyburide plus placebo (p<0.0001). At week 11/12, triglyceride levels were significantly reduced with muraglitazar (p<0.0001). During the extension phase, muraglitazar demonstrated long-term glycaemic and lipid effects through week 102. Although generally well tolerated, muraglitazar was associated with higher rates of congestive heart failure, cardiovascular events, weight gain and oedema.

Efficacy and safety of muraglitazar: a double-blind, 24-week, dose-ranging study in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Muraglitazar is a dual (alpha/gamma) PPAR activator. Dual receptor activation may improve glycaemic and lipid profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.This randomised double-blind trial in 1,477 drug-naive patients with type 2 diabetes compared the efficacy and safety of muraglitazar (0.5, 1.5, 5, 10, and 20 mg) with pioglitazone (15 mg). Endpoints included changes in HbA(1C) and plasma lipids, last observation carried forward over 24 weeks. At week 24, mean changes from baseline in HbA(1C) ranged from -0.25% to -1.76% with muraglitazar (p

Sodium-glucose cotransport inhibition with dapagliflozin in type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Dapagliflozin, a novel inhibitor of renal sodium-glucose cotransporter 2, allows an insulin-independent approach to improve type 2 diabetes hyperglycemia. In this multiple-dose study we evaluated the safety and efficacy of dapagliflozin in type 2 diabetic patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Type 2 diabetic patients were randomly assigned to one of five dapagliflozin doses, metformin XR, or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary objective was to compare mean change from baseline in A1C. Other objectives included comparison of changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), weight, adverse events, and laboratory measurements. RESULTS: After 12 weeks, dapagliflozin induced moderate glucosuria (52-85 g urinary glucose/day) and demonstrated significant glycemic improvements versus placebo (DeltaA1C -0.55 to -0.90% and DeltaFPG -16 to -31 mg/dl). Weight loss change versus placebo was -1.3 to -2.0 kg. There was no change in renal function. Serum uric acid decreased, serum magnesium increased, serum phosphate increased at higher doses, and dose-related 24-h urine volume and hematocrit increased, all of small magnitude. Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar across all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin improved hyperglycemia and facilitates weight loss in type 2 diabetic patients by inducing controlled glucosuria with urinary loss of approximately 200-300 kcal/day. Dapagliflozin treatment demonstrated no persistent, clinically significant osmolarity, volume, or renal status changes.

A study of dapagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving high doses of insulin plus insulin sensitizers: applicability of a novel insulin-independent treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether dapagliflozin, which selectively inhibits renal glucose reabsorption, lowers hyperglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes that is poorly controlled with high insulin doses plus oral antidiabetic agents (OADs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, three-arm parallel-group, placebo-controlled, 26-center trial (U.S. and Canada). Based on data from an insulin dose-adjustment setting cohort (n = 4), patients in the treatment cohort (n = 71) were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to placebo, 10 mg dapagliflozin, or 20 mg dapagliflozin, plus OAD(s) and 50% of their daily insulin dose. The primary outcome was change from baseline in A1C at week 12 (dapagliflozin vs. placebo, last observation carried forward [LOCF]). RESULTS: At week 12 (LOCF), the 10- and 20-mg dapagliflozin groups demonstrated -0.70 and -0.78% mean differences in A1C change from baseline versus placebo. In both dapagliflozin groups, 65.2% of patients achieved a decrease from baseline in A1C > or =0.5% versus 15.8% in the placebo group. Mean changes from baseline in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) were +17.8, +2.4, and -9.6 mg/dl (placebo, 10 mg dapagliflozin, and 20 mg dapagliflozin, respectively). Postprandial glucose (PPG) reductions with dapagliflozin also showed dose dependence. Mean changes in total body weight were -1.9, -4.5, and -4.3 kg (placebo, 10 mg dapagliflozin, and 20 mg dapagliflozin). Overall, adverse events were balanced across all groups, although more genital infections occurred in the 20-mg dapagliflozin group than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving high insulin doses plus insulin sensitizers who had their baseline insulin reduced by 50%, dapagliflozin decreased A1C, produced better FPG and PPG levels, and lowered weight more than placebo.

Do we need to adjudicate major clinical events?

PURPOSE: The use of centralized systems to adjudicate clinical events is common in large clinical trials, in spite of relatively little published literature concerning the rationale and justification. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the reasons for central adjudication and to discuss whether trials could be simplified by limiting or streamlining the adjudication process. METHODS: We reviewed the literature concerning central adjudication and documented the experience of adjudication in several clinical trials. Since definitions for nonfatal events are generally heterogeneous and subjective, one reason for a central process of adjudication is to assist in assuring systematic application of the definition used in the trial. In open-label trials, assuring that the adjudication is done blinded to treatment assignment may provide protection against differential misclassification. Regulatory authorities, including the FDA, derive confidence in the validity of results when central adjudication is performed. The clinical community has become accustomed to a certain amount of adjudication and may criticize trials that lack adjudication. LIMITATIONS: It is difficult to document the value of adjudication in trials that have reported adjudicated and nonadjudicated event rates and related treatment effects. Making rationale decisions about when and how to adjudicate is hampered by the lack of published study of when and how central adjudication is helpful to improve the quality and validity of trials and at what cost. CONCLUSIONS: Adjudication has not been shown to improve the ability to determine treatment effects. Thus, adjudication may be overly complex and overused in many large simple trials. The appropriate role of central adjudication - which trials, which outcomes, what methods - deserves scrutiny and further study.