Cardiovascular and heart failure safety profile of vildagliptin: a meta-analysis of 17 000 patients.

AIMS: To report the cardiovascular (CV) safety profile and heart failure (HF) risk of vildagliptin from a large pool of studies, including trials in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), such as those with congestive HF and/or moderate/severe renal impairment. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective meta-analysis of prospectively adjudicated CV events. Patient-level data were pooled from 40 double-blind, randomized controlled phase III and IV vildagliptin studies. The primary endpoint was occurrence of major adverse CV events (MACEs; myocardial infarction, stroke and CV death). Assessments of the individual MACE components and HF events (requiring hospitalization or new onset) were secondary endpoints. The risk ratio (RR) of vildagliptin (50 mg once- and twice-daily combined) versus comparators (placebo and all non-vildagliptin treatments) was calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) method. RESULTS: Of the 17 446 patients, 9599 received vildagliptin (9251.4 subject-years of exposure) and 7847 received comparators (7317.0 subject-years of exposure). The mean age of the patients was 57 years, body mass index 30.5 kg/m(2) (nearly 50% obese), glycated haemoglobin concentration 8.1% and T2DM duration 5.5 years. A MACE occurred in 83 (0.86%) vildagliptin-treated patients and 85 (1.20%) comparator-treated patients, with an M-H RR of 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-1.11]. Similar RRs were observed for the individual events. Confirmed HF events were reported in 41 (0.43%) vildagliptin-treated patients and 32 (0.45%) comparator-treated patients, with an M-H RR 1.08 (95% CI 0.68-1.70). CONCLUSIONS: This large meta-analysis indicates that vildagliptin is not associated with an increased risk of adjudicated MACEs relative to comparators. Moreover, this analysis did not find a significant increased risk of HF in vildagliptin-treated patients.

Study to determine the durability of glycaemic control with early treatment with a vildagliptin-metformin combination regimen vs. standard-of-care metformin monotherapy-the VERIFY trial: a randomized double-blind trial.

AIMS: Durability of good glycaemic control (HbA1c ) is of importance as it can be the foundation for delaying diabetic complications. It has been hypothesized that early initiation of treatment with the combination of oral anti-diabetes agents with complementary mechanisms of action can increase the durability of glycaemic control compared with metformin monotherapy followed by a stepwise addition of oral agents. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors are good candidates for early use as they are efficacious in combination with metformin, show weight neutrality and a low risk of hypoglycaemia. We aimed to test the hypothesis that early combined treatment of metformin and vildagliptin slows ß-cell deterioration as measured by HbA1c . METHODS: Approximately 2000 people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus who were drug-naive or who were treated with metformin for less than 1 month, and who have HbA1c of 48-58 mmol/mol (6.5-7.5%), will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio in VERIFY, a 5-year multinational, double-blind, parallel-group study designed to compare early initiation of a vildagliptin-metformin combination with standard-of-care initiation of metformin monotherapy, followed by the stepwise addition of vildagliptin when glycaemia deteriorates. Further deterioration will be treated with insulin. The primary analysis for treatment failure will be from a Cox proportional hazard regression model and the durability of glycaemic control will be evaluated by assessing treatment failure rate and the rate of loss in glycaemic control over time as co-primary endpoints. SUMMARY: VERIFY is the first study to investigate the long-term clinical benefits of early combination treatment vs. the standard-of-care metformin monotherapy with a second agent added by threshold criteria.

Efficacy and safety of vildagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with dual combination of metformin and sulphonylurea.

AIM: The broadly used combination of metformin and sulphonylurea (SU) often fails to bring patients to glycaemic goal. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of vildagliptin as add-on therapy to metformin plus glimepiride combination in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who had inadequate glycaemic control. METHODS: A multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled study randomized patients to receive treatment with vildagliptin 50 mg bid (n = 158) or placebo (n = 160) for 24 weeks. RESULTS: After 24 weeks, the adjusted mean change in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was -1.01% with vildagliptin (baseline 8.75%) and -0.25% with placebo (baseline 8.80%), with a between-treatment difference of -0.76% (p < 0.001). Significantly more patients on vildagliptin achieved the HbA1c target <7% (28.3% vs. 5.6%; p < 0.001). The difference in fasting plasma glucose reduction between vildagliptin and placebo was -1.13 mmol/l (p < 0.001). In subgroup of patients with baseline HbA1c ≤8%, vildagliptin reduced HbA1c by 0.74% from baseline 7.82% (between-treatment difference: -0.97%; p < 0.001) with significantly more patients achieving the HbA1c target <7% (38.6% vs. 13.9%; p = 0.014). Vildagliptin was well tolerated with low incidence of hypoglycaemia, slightly higher than with placebo (5.1% vs. 1.9%) and no clinically relevant weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: Vildagliptin significantly improved glycaemic control in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin plus glimepiride combination. The addition of vildagliptin was well tolerated with low risk of hypoglycaemia and weight gain. This makes vildagliptin an attractive treatment option for patients failing on metformin plus SU particularly in patients with baseline HbA1c ≤8%.

Effectiveness and tolerability of second-line therapy with vildagliptin vs. other oral agents in type 2 diabetes: a real-life worldwide observational study (EDGE).

AIM: Real-life studies are needed to confirm the clinical relevance of findings from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of vildagliptin add-on vs. other oral antihyperglycaemic drugs (OADs) added to OAD monotherapy in a real-life setting, and to explore the advantages and limitations of large-scale 'pragmatic' trials. METHODS: EDGE was a prospective, 1-year, worldwide, real-life observational study in which 2957 physicians reported on the effects of second-line OADs in 45,868 patients with T2DM not reaching glycaemic targets with monotherapy. Physicians could add any OAD, and patients entered either vildagliptin or (pooled) comparator cohort. The primary effectiveness and tolerability end-point (PEP) evaluated proportions of patients decreasing HbA(1c) > 0.3%, without hypoglycaemia, weight gain, peripheral oedema or gastrointestinal side effects. The most clinically relevant secondary end-point (SEP 3) was attainment of end-point HbA(1c) < 7% without hypoglycaemia or ≥ 3% increase in body weight. RESULTS: In this large group of T2DM patients, a second OAD was added at mean HbA(1c) of 8.2 ± 1.3%, with no baseline HbA(1c) difference between cohorts. Second-line OAD therapy attained the PEP in the majority of patients, with higher attainment in those prescribed a vildagliptin-based regimen. The adjusted odds ratio was 1.49 (95% CI: 1.42, 1.55; p < 0.001). In patients with baseline HbA(1c) ≥ 7%, SEP 3 was achieved by 35% of patients on a vildagliptin-based combination and by 23% of those receiving comparator combinations. The adjusted odds ratio was 1.96 (95% CI: 1.85, 2.07; p < 0.001). Safety events were reported infrequently and safety profiles of vildagliptin and other OADs were consistent with previous data. CONCLUSION: EDGE demonstrates that in a 'real-life' setting, vildagliptin as second OAD can lower HbA(1c) to target without well-recognised OAD side effects, more frequently than comparator OADs. In addition, EDGE illustrates that conducting large-scale, prospective, real-life studies poses challenges but yields valuable clinical information complementary to RCTs.

Improved glycaemic control with vildagliptin added to insulin, with or without metformin, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

AIM: The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of vildagliptin 50 mg bid as add-on therapy to insulin in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: This is a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group, clinical trial in T2DM patients inadequately controlled by stable insulin therapy, with or without metformin. Patients received treatment with vildagliptin 50 mg bid or placebo for 24 weeks. RESULTS: In all, 449 patients were randomized to vildagliptin (n = 228) or placebo (n = 221). After 24 weeks, the difference in adjusted mean change in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) between vildagliptin and placebo was -0.7 ± 0.1% (p < 0.001) in the overall study population, -0.6 ± 0.1% (p < 0.001) in the subgroup also receiving metformin and -0.8 ± 0.2% (p < 0.001) in the subgroup without metformin. Vildagliptin therapy was well tolerated and had a similarly low incidence of hypoglycaemia compared with placebo (8.4 vs. 7.2%, p = 0.66) in spite of improved glycaemic control, and was not associated with weight gain. (+0.1 vs. -0.4 kg). CONCLUSIONS: Vildagliptin 50 mg bid added to insulin significantly reduced HbA1c in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled by insulin, with or without metformin. Vildagliptin was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to placebo. These results were achieved without weight gain or an increase in hypoglycaemia incidence or severity in spite of improved glycaemic control.

Studies in rodents with the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor vildagliptin to evaluate possible drug-induced pancreatic histological changes that are predictive of pancreatitis and cancer development in man.

AIM: The present report summarizes rodent studies with vildagliptin, relevant to predicting pancreatitis or pancreatic cancer in man. METHODS: As part of the regulatory development program for vildagliptin, a rodent toxicity program included two 104-week rodent (mouse and rat) carcinogenicity studies that were conducted according to guidelines assigned in Food and Drug Administration's Draft Guidance for Industry. RESULTS: Vildagliptin exposure in animals was evaluated for its effects on endocrine and exocrine pancreas. Two-year carcinogenicity studies were conducted in rats at oral doses up to 900 mg/kg (approximately 200 times the human exposure at the maximum recommended dose) and in mice at oral doses up to 1000 mg/kg (up to 240 times the human exposure at the maximum recommended dose). The results from these studies show the expected preservation and growth of the endocrine ß-cells with no significant findings in the exocrine acinar pancreas. There was no evidence of inflammatory infiltrates characteristic of pancreatitis, no palpable mass detection based on gross examination or any microscopic findings indicative of pancreatic islet cell (endocrine), acinar cell (exocrine) or ductal (exocrine) neoplasia in rat or mouse. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of vildagliptin in 2-year preclinical carcinogenicity studies in both rats and mice indicates that while vildagliptin results in pharmacological benefits to the endocrine pancreas, this was not associated with any evidence of pancreatitis, pancreatic islet cell, acinar cell or ductal neoplasia. These data predict no increased risk of pancreatic cancer in man.

One-year safety, tolerability and efficacy of vildagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes and moderate or severe renal impairment.

AIM: Assess long-term safety and efficacy of the dipeptidlyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor vildagliptin in 369 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and moderate or severe renal impairment (RI). METHODS: Double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, 52-week clinical trial comparing safety and efficacy of vildagliptin (50 mg qd, n = 216) and placebo (n = 153) added to ongoing stable antihyperglycaemic treatment, in patients with T2DM and moderate or severe (glomerular filtration rate [GFR] ≥ 30 to <50 ml/min/1.73 m(2) and < 30 ml/min/1.73 m(2) ) RI. RESULTS: The study population comprised 122 and 89 patients with moderate RI and 94 and 64 patients with severe RI randomized to vildagliptin and placebo, respectively, with the majority of patients receiving background insulin therapy (72% and 82% for moderate and severe RI, respectively). After 1 year, the between-treatment difference in adjusted mean change in A1C was -0.4 ± 0.2% (p = 0.005) in moderate RI (baseline = 7.8%) and -0.7 ± 0.2% (p < 0.0001) in severe RI (baseline = 7.6%). In patients with moderate RI, similar proportions of patients experienced any adverse event (AE) (84 vs. 85%), any serious adverse event (SAE) (21 vs. 19%), any AE leading to discontinuation (5% vs. 6%) and death (1% vs. 0%) with vildagliptin and placebo, respectively. This was also true for patients with severe RI: AEs (85% vs. 88%), SAEs (25% vs. 25%), AEs leading to discontinuation (10% vs. 6%) and death (3% vs. 2%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T2DM and moderate or severe RI, vildagliptin added to ongoing antidiabetic therapy had a safety profile similar to placebo during 1-year observation. Furthermore, relative to placebo, a clinically significant decrease in A1C was maintained throughout 1-year treatment with vildagliptin.

Safety and efficacy of vildagliptin versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes and moderate or severe renal impairment: a prospective 24-week randomized placebo-controlled trial.

AIM: Assess safety/tolerability and efficacy of the DPP-4 inhibitor vildagliptin in 515 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and moderate or severe renal impairment (RI). METHODS: Double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, 24-week clinical trial assessing safety and efficacy of vildagliptin (50 mg qd) added to current antidiabetic therapy, in patients with T2DM and moderate or severe RI (GFR ≥ 30 to <50 or <30 ml/min/1.73 m(2) ). RESULTS: The study population comprised of 165 and 129 patients with moderate RI and 124 and 97 patients with severe RI randomized to vildagliptin and placebo, respectively, with most patients receiving background insulin therapy (68 and 81% for moderate and severe RI, respectively). After 24 weeks, the between-treatment difference in the adjusted mean change in A1C was -0.5 ± 0.1% (p < 0.0001) in moderate RI (baseline A1C = 7.9%) and -0.6 ± 0.1% (p < 0.0001) in severe RI (baseline A1C = 7.7%). In patients with moderate RI, similar proportions of those receiving vildagliptin or placebo experienced any AE (68 vs. 73%), any SAE (9 vs. 9%), any AE leading to discontinuation (3 vs. 5%) or death (1 vs. 1%). This was also true for patients with severe RI: AEs (73 vs. 74%), SAEs (19 vs. 21%), AEs leading to discontinuation (9 vs. 6%) and death (2 vs. 4%). CONCLUSIONS: In this 24-week study of 515 patients with T2DM and moderate or severe RI, vildagliptin added to ongoing antidiabetic therapy had a safety profile similar to placebo. Further, relative to placebo, vildagliptin elicited a statistically and clinically significant decrease in A1C in patients with moderate or severe RI.

Clinical experience with vildagliptin in the management of type 2 diabetes in a patient population ≥75 years: a pooled analysis from a database of clinical trials.

AIM: To report the experience with vildagliptin in a patient population with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) ≥75 years. METHODS: Efficacy data from seven monotherapy and three add-on therapy to metformin studies, respectively, of ≥24 weeks duration were pooled; effects of 24 weeks of treatment with vildagliptin (50 mg bid) in patients ≥75 years were assessed in these two pooled datasets. Safety data were pooled from 38 studies of ≥12 to ≥104 weeks duration; adverse events (AEs) profiles of vildagliptin (50 mg bid) were evaluated relative to a pool of comparators; 301 patients ≥75 years were analysed. Data in patients <75 years are provided as a reference. RESULTS: Mean age of the elderly population was 77 years. Changes in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) with vildagliptin in the patient group ≥75 years were -0.9% from a baseline of 8.3% in monotherapy (p < 0.0001) and -1.1% from a baseline of 8.5% in add-on therapy to metformin (p = 0.0004), and these reductions were similar to those seen in the younger patients. The corresponding weight changes in the elderly patients were -0.9 kg (p = 0.0277) and -0.2 kg [not significant (NS)], respectively, and no confirmed hypoglycaemic events, including no severe events, were reported. AEs, drug-related AEs, serious adverse events (SAEs) and deaths were reported with a lower frequency in older patients receiving vildagliptin than comparators [133.9 vs. 200.6, 14.5 vs. 21.8, 8.8 vs. 16.5 and 0.0 vs. 1.7 events per 100 subject year exposure (SYE), respectively], and the incidence of discontinuations due to AEs was similar in the two groups (7.2 vs. 7.5 events per 100 SYE, respectively). The safety profile of vildagliptin was overall similar in younger and older patients. CONCLUSIONS: Vildagliptin was effective and well-tolerated in type 2 diabetic patients ≥75 years (mean age 77 years).

Assessing the cardio-cerebrovascular safety of vildagliptin: meta-analysis of adjudicated events from a large Phase III type 2 diabetes population.

AIM: To assess the cardiovascular and cerebrovascular (CCV) safety of the dipeptidyl peptidase-IV inhibitor vildagliptin. METHODS: Data were pooled from 25 Phase III studies of vildagliptin, used either as monotherapy or combination therapy, with durations of 12 weeks to > or = 2 years. The safety of vildagliptin [50 mg qd (N = 1393) or 50 mg bid (N = 6116)] was assessed relative to a pool of all comparators [both placebo and active comparators (N = 6061)]. CCV events were adjudicated in a prospective, blinded fashion by an independent CCV adjudication committee. Meta-analysis of confirmed CCV events was performed with Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RRs); categories included in the composite endpoint were acute coronary syndrome, transient ischaemic attack (with imaging evidence of infarction), stroke and CCV death. Subgroup analyses by age (< and > or = 65 years), gender and cardiovascular (CV) risk status [high CV risk status defined as a previous history of events in the Standard MedDRA Queries of ischaemic heart disease, cardiac failure, ischaemic cerebrovascular conditions and/or embolic/thrombotic events, arterial) were also carried out. In addition, unadjusted and exposure-adjusted incidences are presented for both the composite endpoint and its components. RESULTS: Relative to all comparators, the RRs for the composite endpoint were < 1 for both vildagliptin 50 mg qd [RR = 0.88; 95% CI (0.37, 2.11)] and vildagliptin 50 mg bid [RR = 0.84; 95% CI (0.62, 1.14)]. The results were consistent across subgroups defined by age, gender and CV risk status, including the higher CV risk subgroups of elderly patients [RR for vildagliptin 50 mg bid vs. all comparators = 1.04; 95% CI (0.62, 1.73)], males [RR = 0.87; 95% CI (0.60, 1.24)] or patients with a high CV risk status [RR = 0.78; 95% CI (0.51, 1.19)]. The exposure-adjusted incidences of each component of the composite endpoint for vildagliptin 50 mg bid were also lower than or similar to those of all comparators. CONCLUSIONS: In a large meta-analysis, vildagliptin was not associated with an increased risk of adjudicated CCV events relative to all comparators in the broad population of type 2 diabetes including patients at increased risk of CCV events.

An assessment of adverse effects of vildagliptin versus comparators on the liver, the pancreas, the immune system, the skin and in patients with impaired renal function from a large pooled database of Phase II and III clinical trials.

AIM: To assess the safety of vildagliptin versus all comparators (ACs) with regard to organs, systems or tissues of particular interest in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and areas of potential concern with dipeptidyl peptidase-IV (DPP-4) inhibitors. METHODS: Data were pooled from 38 studies where vildagliptin was given for > or =12 to > 104 weeks in patients with T2DM. Absolute and exposure-adjusted incidence rates and Peto odds ratios (ORs) versus ACs with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: There were > 7000 subject-years of exposure (SYE) to vildagliptin 50 mg bid and > 6500 SYE to ACs. For mild hepatic enzyme elevations with and without elevated bilirubin levels, the ORs for vildagliptin 50 mg bid were 1.24 (95% CI: [0.80, 1.93]) and 1.19 (95% CI: [0.29, 4.90]), respectively. The exposure-adjusted incidences of markedly elevated hepatic enzymes and for enzyme elevations with bilirubin > or = 2x ULN with vildagliptin 50 mg bid were < or = those in the ACs group. For hepatic and pancreatitis-related AEs, the ORs for vildagliptin 50 mg bid were 0.87 (95% CI: [0.64, 1.19]) and 0.70 (95% CI: [0.26, 1.88]), respectively, and for any AE in the infections and infestations SOC, this was 1.04 (95% CI: [0.96, 1.13]). The incidences of skin-related AEs were low and the risk with vildagliptin 50 mg bid was not significantly different from ACs [(OR = 1.10 (95% CI: [0.80, 1.51])]. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analyses indicate that vildagliptin was not associated with increased risk of hepatic events or hepatic enzyme elevations indicative of drug-induced liver injury, pancreatitis, infections or skin-related toxicity.

Effect of oral postmenopausal hormone replacement on progression of atherosclerosis : a randomized, controlled trial.

-Postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is associated with low cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in epidemiological studies. Yet, no randomized trial has examined whether HRT is effective for prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) in women with increased risk. The objective of this study was to determine whether HRT can slow progression of atherosclerosis, measured as intima-media thickness (IMT) in carotid arteries. Carotid IMT is an appropriate intermediate end point to investigate clinically relevant effects on atherogenesis. This randomized, controlled, observer-blind, clinical, single-center trial enrolled 321 healthy postmenopausal women with increased IMT in >/=1 segment of the carotid arteries. For a period of 48 weeks, subjects received either 1 mg/d 17ss-estradiol continuously plus 0.025 mg gestodene for 12 days every month (standard-progestin group), or 1 mg 17ss-estradiol plus 0.025 mg gestodene for 12 days every third month (low-progestin group), or no HRT. Maximum IMT in 6 carotid artery segments (common, bifurcation, and internal, both sides) was measured by B-mode ultrasound before and after intervention. HRT did not slow IMT progression in carotid arteries. Mean maximum IMT in the carotid arteries increased by 0.02+/-0.05 mm in the no HRT group and by 0.03+/-0.05 and 0.03+/-0.05 mm, respectively, in the HRT groups (P:>0.2). HRT significantly decreased LDL cholesterol, fibrinogen, and follicle-stimulating hormone. In conclusion, 1 year of HRT was not effective in slowing progression of subclinical atherosclerosis in postmenopausal women at increased risk.

Impact of social support, cynical hostility and anger expression on progression of coronary atherosclerosis.

OBJECTIVES: This prospective cohort study of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) sought to determine the impact of social support, anger expression and cynical hostility on progression of coronary atherosclerosis as shown by angiography. BACKGROUND: Low social support, high levels of expressed anger and cynical hostility are correlated to increased CAD morbidity and mortality. However, the impact of these factors, alone or together, on progression of human coronary atherosclerosis is unknown. METHODS: Of 223 patients with CAD documented by standardized angiography at baseline, 162 had a second angiogram after two years. An expert panel who had no knowledge of the patients' characteristics evaluated the films pairwise to determine disease progression. At baseline, all patients were asked to answer three self-report questionnaires: questions concerning emotional social support, the State-Trait-Anger-Expression Inventory (STAXI) and the Cook-Medley cynical hostility scale. Each patient's clinical and laboratory status was followed. RESULTS: Questionnaires and angiographic follow-up data were available for 150 patients. Bivariate analysis of the psychological variables showed a higher risk of progression only for patients who scored high on STAXI anger-out or low on social support. In the multivariate analysis, when adjusting for confounding variables and examining the interaction between psychological variables, only patients with both high anger-out and low social support were at highly increased risk for progression (odds ratio 30, confidence interval [CI] 5.5 to 165.1; RR 3.19). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CAD and low emotional social support who express anger outwardly are at a highly increased risk of disease progression, independent of medication or other risk factors.

Hormone replacement therapy and distensibility of carotid arteries in postmenopausal women: a randomized, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The study objective was to clarify in a randomized, controlled, observer-blind trial whether hormone replacement therapy (HRT) improves elastic properties of the common carotid artery in women with signs of subclinical atherosclerosis, especially in subgroups with increased risk, and whether less progestin enhances the effect. BACKGROUND: Previous observational studies have yielded conflicting results on the influence of HRT on central arteries. Some studies reported improvement of distensibility by estrogen alone or in the subgroup of smokers. METHODS: A total of 321 postmenopausal women were randomized to 1 mg 17beta-estradiol plus 0.025 mg gestodene for 12 days every month (HRT 1), or 1 mg 17beta-estradiol plus 0.025 mg gestodene for 12 days every third month (HRT 2), or no-HRT, during 48 weeks. In 173 women, distensibility of the common carotid artery was determined before and after therapy by M-mode ultrasound and brachial blood pressure measurement. RESULTS: Change of distensibility was small and similar in the three treatment groups. In the subgroup of current smokers, HRT 2 (low progestin) increased distensibility by 32% (HRT 2: 8.2+/-11.7; HRT 1:0.6+/-6.0; no HRT: -1.8+/-6.8 x 10(-3)/kPa, p = 0.025 for no-HRT vs. HRT 2). In the subgroups with elevated blood pressure, high low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, or high age, no effect of HRT was detected. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized intervention study demonstrates that long-term HRT with estrogen and progestin does not substantially influence distensibility of central arteries. Yet, in currently smoking postmenopausal women, HRT with low progestin seems to improve distensibility; this merits further study in a specifically designed trial.

Bone sialoprotein is a specific biochemical marker of bone metabolism in postmenopausal women: a randomized 1-year study.

Accelerated bone remodeling after the menopause is associated with increased bone loss that can be abolished using hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Biochemical markers of bone metabolism are known to correlate closely with changes in bone histomorphometry and osteodensitometry. Bone sialoprotein (BSP), a major constituent of bone matrix, is almost exclusively found in mineralized tissues and therefore considered a potential marker of bone metabolism. In 82 postmenopausal women, randomly allocated to either low-dose sequential HRT or no HRT, serum BSP was measured and compared with established specific biochemical markers of bone resorption [urinary deoxypyridinoline (DPD), pyridinoline (PYD) and amino-terminal telopeptide (NTx)] and markers of bone formation [serum osteocalcin (Oc) and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (bALP)]. Longitudinal analysis showed a marked response of BSP levels following commencement of HRT, resulting in a 52% reduction after 12 months compared with initial values. The changes of BSP levels over time were at least as strong as in conventional markers of bone formation and resorption and paralleled their changes. A moderate to close correlation was found between BSP and both markers of bone resorption (r = 0.57 for NTx; r = 0.38 for DPD) and formation (r = 0.55 for Oc; r = 0.39 for bALP; p < 0.0001, respectively). Our data demonstrate a cause and effect relationship between commencement of HRT and a change in serum BSP. In conclusion, serum BSP circumvents some of the limitations of urinary measurements and appears valuable for the quantitative monitoring of the skeletal response to HRT in healthy postmenopausal women.

The effect of dietary omega-3 fatty acids on coronary atherosclerosis. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiologic studies, studies of mechanisms of action, and many animal studies indicate that dietary intake of omega-3 fatty acids has antiatherosclerotic potential. Few trials in humans have examined this potential. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of dietary intake of omega-3 fatty acids on the course of coronary artery atherosclerosis in humans. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinically controlled trial. SETTING: University preventive cardiology unit. PATIENTS: 223 patients with angiographically proven coronary artery disease. INTERVENTION: Fish oil concentrate (55% eicosapentaenoic and docosahexaenoic acids) or a placebo with a fatty acid composition resembling that of the average European diet, 6 g/d for 3 months and then 3 g/d for 21 months. MEASUREMENTS: The results of standardized coronary angiography, done before and after 2 years of treatment, were evaluated by an expert panel (primary end point) and by quantitative coronary angiography. Patients were followed for clinical and laboratory status. RESULTS: Pairs of angiograms (one taken at baseline and one taken at 2 years) were evaluated for 80 of 112 placebo recipients and 82 of 111 fish oil recipients. At the end of treatment, 48 coronary segments in the placebo group showed changes (36 showed mild progression, 5 showed moderate progression, and 7 showed mild regression) and 55 coronary segments in the fish oil group showed changes (35 showed mild progression, 4 showed moderate progression, 14 showed mild regression, and 2 showed moderate regression) (P = 0.041). Loss in minimal luminal diameter, as assessed by quantitative coronary angiography, was somewhat less in the fish oil group (P > 0.1). Fish oil recipients had fewer cardiovascular events (P = 0.10); other clinical variables did not differ between the study groups. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels tended to be greater in the fish oil group. CONCLUSION: Dietary intake of omega-3 fatty acids modestly mitigates the course of coronary atherosclerosis in humans.

Short term effects of omega-3 fatty acids on the radial artery of patients with coronary artery disease.

Long-term dietary omega-3 fatty acids improve coronary endothelial function in CAD patients, heart transplant recipients and diabetics. This study assessed whether short term omega-3 fatty acids affect radial artery function in CAD patients. A high resolution A-mode echotracking device (NIUS 02) was used to measure continuously, radial artery internal diameter at rest, during flow mediated vasodilation (FMD), during cold pressure test (CPT), and after sublingual glyceryl trinitrate (GTN). We studied 18 male CAD patients in a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled design. Between pre- and post-intervention measurements 24 h apart, nine subjects received 18 g fish oil concentrate (6.4 g eicosapentaenoic acid and 3.9 g docosahexaenoic acid) and nine subjects 18 g placebo. In the placebo group correlation between both baseline diameters was 0.98; P < 0.001. Pre-intervention FMD was 7.5+/-5.6%, CPT mediated vasoconstriction was 3.8+/-2.5%, and GTN induced vasodilation was 15.7+/-9.8%. Vascular responses post-intervention showed no significant difference to pre intervention, there was no significant difference between both treatment groups. The radial artery does not seem to be an immediate target for vasodilatory actions of omega-3 fatty acids.