Increased circulating butyrate and ursodeoxycholate during probiotic intervention in humans with type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: An increasing body of evidence implicates the resident gut microbiota as playing a critical role in type 2 diabetes (T2D) pathogenesis. We previously reported significant improvement in postprandial glucose control in human participants with T2D following 12-week administration of a 5-strain novel probiotic formulation ('WBF-011') in a double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled setting (NCT03893422). While the clinical endpoints were encouraging, additional exploratory measurements were needed in order to link the motivating mechanistic hypothesis - increased short-chain fatty acids - with markers of disease. RESULTS: Here we report targeted and untargeted metabolomic measurements on fasting plasma (n = 104) collected at baseline and end of intervention. Butyrate and ursodeoxycholate increased among participants randomized to WBF-011, along with compelling trends between butyrate and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). In vitro monoculture experiments demonstrated that the formulation's C. butyricum strain efficiently synthesizes ursodeoxycholate from the primary bile acid chenodeoxycholate during butyrogenic growth. Untargeted metabolomics also revealed coordinated decreases in intermediates of fatty acid oxidation and bilirubin, potential secondary signatures for metabolic improvement. Finally, improvement in HbA1c was limited almost entirely to participants not using sulfonylurea drugs. We show that these drugs can inhibit growth of formulation strains in vitro. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first description of an increase in circulating butyrate or ursodeoxycholate following a probiotic intervention in humans with T2D, adding support for the possibility of a targeted microbiome-based approach to assist in the management of T2D. The efficient synthesis of UDCA by C. butyricum is also likely of interest to investigators of its use as a probiotic in other disease settings. The potential for inhibitory interaction between sulfonylurea drugs and gut microbiota should be considered carefully in the design of future studies.

Butyrate-producing human gut symbiont, Clostridium butyricum, and its role in health and disease.

Clostridium butyricum is a butyrate-producing human gut symbiont that has been safely used as a probiotic for decades. C. butyricum strains have been investigated for potential protective or ameliorative effects in a wide range of human diseases, including gut-acquired infection, intestinal injury, irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, neurodegenerative disease, metabolic disease, and colorectal cancer. In this review we summarize the studies on C. butyricum supplementation with special attention to proposed mechanisms for the associated health benefits and the supporting experimental evidence. These mechanisms center on molecular signals (especially butyrate) as well as immunological signals in the digestive system that cascade well beyond the gut to the liver, adipose tissue, brain, and more. The safety of probiotic C. butyricum strains appears well-established. We identify areas where additional human randomized controlled trials would provide valuable further data related to the strains' utility as an intervention.

Medical Food Assessment Using a Smartphone App With Continuous Glucose Monitoring Sensors: Proof-of-Concept Study.

BACKGROUND: Novel wearable biosensors, ubiquitous smartphone ownership, and telemedicine are converging to enable new paradigms of clinical research. A new generation of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices provides access to clinical-grade measurement of interstitial glucose levels. Adoption of these sensors has become widespread for the management of type 1 diabetes and is accelerating in type 2 diabetes. In parallel, individuals are adopting health-related smartphone-based apps to monitor and manage care. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a proof-of-concept study to investigate the potential of collecting robust, annotated, real-time clinical study measures of glucose levels without clinic visits. METHODS: Self-administered meal-tolerance tests were conducted to assess the impact of a proprietary synbiotic medical food on glucose control in a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2×2 cross-over pilot study (n=6). The primary endpoint was incremental glucose measured using Abbott Freestyle Libre CGM devices associated with a smartphone app that provided a visual diet log. RESULTS: All subjects completed the study and mastered CGM device usage. Over 40 days, 3000 data points on average per subject were collected across three sensors. No adverse events were recorded, and subjects reported general satisfaction with sensor management, the study product, and the smartphone app, with an average self-reported satisfaction score of 8.25/10. Despite a lack of sufficient power to achieve statistical significance, we demonstrated that we can detect meaningful changes in the postprandial glucose response in real-world settings, pointing to the merits of larger studies in the future. CONCLUSIONS: We have shown that CGM devices can provide a comprehensive picture of glucose control without clinic visits. CGM device usage in conjunction with our custom smartphone app can lower the participation burden for subjects while reducing study costs, and allows for robust integration of multiple valuable data types with glucose levels remotely. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04424888; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04424888.

Leucine and Sildenafil Combination Therapy Reduces Body Weight and Metformin Enhances the Effect at Low Dose: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the potential of activating the fuel-sensing enzymes Adenine monophosphate (AMP)-activated protein kinase and the deacetylase sirtuin1, to promote weight loss. We tested the efficacy of a fixed dose combination of the amino acid leucine and 2 well-characterized agents with established safety profiles to modulate energy metabolism and facilitate weight loss. STUDY QUESTION: Will a combination of l-leucine with low-dose metformin and sildenafil produce a novel synergistic interaction that reduces body weight? STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a 24-week randomized controlled trial evaluating the effect on weight loss of leucine 1.1 g and sildenafil 1.0 mg or 4.0 mg, with and without metformin 500 mg (Leu/Sil 1.0, Leu/Sil 4.0, Leu/Met/Sil 1.0, and Leu/Met/Sil 4.0 twice/day). We enrolled 267 participants who were 18-65 years of age without diabetes and with the body mass index (BMI) of 30-45 kg/m2. MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: The primary endpoint was percentage weight change after 24 weeks. Adverse events were evaluated. The primary analysis was performed using the perprotocol population analysis of covariance estimation. Subgroup analyses of patients residing above certain threshold limits at baseline and in populations at increased risk of obesity were assessed post-hoc as exploratory end points. RESULTS: Placebo-adjusted mean bodyweight reductions in the Leu/Met/Sil 1.0, Leu/Met/Sil 4.0, and Leu/Sil 4.0 groups were -1.99%, -1.69%, and -1.67% (P = 0.015, 0.035, and 0.036, respectively). The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal-related and occurred in the metformin-treated groups consistent with metformin treatment. In African Americans, Leu/Met/Sil 1.0 produced 5.4% mean weight loss. In participants with BMI <40 kg/m2 treated with Leu/Met/Sil 1.0, the weight loss increased to 2.84%, particularly in participants with baseline insulin ≥12mU/L (3.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Leu/Met/Sil 1.0 and 4.0 and Leu/Sil 4.0 reduced body weight, but Leu/Met/Sil 1.0 was associated with robust weight loss in African Americans, and individuals with BMI 30-39.9 kg/m2, especially participants with hyperinsulinemia.

Improvements to postprandial glucose control in subjects with type 2 diabetes: a multicenter, double blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial of a novel probiotic formulation.

INTRODUCTION: A growing body of evidence suggests that specific, naturally occurring gut bacteria are under-represented in the intestinal tracts of subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and that their functions, like gut barrier stability and butyrate production, are important to glucose and insulin homeostasis. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that enteral exposure to microbes with these proposed functions can safely improve clinical measures of glycemic control and thereby play a role in the overall dietary management of diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We evaluated whether a probiotic comprised of these anaerobic bacteria would enhance dietary management by (1) manufacturing two novel probiotic formulations containing three (WBF-010) or five (WBF-011) distinct strains in a Current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) facility, (2) establishing consistent live-cell concentrations, (3) confirming safety at target concentrations dispensed in both animal and human studies and (4) conducting a 12-week parallel, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept study in which subjects previously diagnosed with T2D (n=76) were randomly assigned to a two times a day regimen of placebo, WBF-010 or WBF-011. RESULTS: No safety or tolerability issues were observed. Compared with the placebo group, subjects administered WBF-011 (which contains inulin, Akkermansia muciniphila, Clostridium beijerinckii, Clostridium butyricum, Bifidobacterium infantis and Anaerobutyricum hallii) significantly improved in the primary outcome, glucose total area under the curve (AUC): -36.1 mg/dL/180 min, p=0.0500 and also improved in secondary outcomes, glycated hemoglobin (A1c): -0.6, glucose incremental-AUC: -28.6 mg/dL/180 min. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled trial to administer four of the five strains to human subjects with T2D. This proof-of-concept study (clinical trial number NCT03893422) shows that the intervention was safe and well tolerated and that supplementation with WBF-011 improves postprandial glucose control. The limited sample size and intersubject variability justifies future studies designed to confirm and expand on these observations.

Insulin sensitizer MSDC-0602K in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIb study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: MSDC-0602K is a novel insulin sensitizer designed to preferentially target the mitochondrial pyruvate carrier while minimizing direct binding to the transcriptional factor PPARγ. Herein, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of MSDC-0602K in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. METHODS: Patients with biopsy-confirmed NASH and fibrosis (F1-F3) were randomized to daily oral placebo, or 1 of 3 MSDC-0602K doses in a 52-week double-blind study. The primary efficacy endpoint was hepatic histological improvement of ≥2 points in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease activity score (NAS) with a ≥1-point reduction in either ballooning or lobular inflammation and no increase in fibrosis stage at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included NAS improvement without worsening fibrosis, NASH resolution, and fibrosis reduction. Exploratory endpoints included changes in insulin sensitivity, liver injury and liver fibrosis markers. RESULTS: Patients were randomly assigned to placebo (n = 94), or 62.5 mg (n = 99), 125 mg (n = 98), or 250 mg (n = 101) of MSDC-0602K. At baseline, glycated hemoglobin was 6.4 ±â€¯1.0%, 61.5% of patients had fibrosis F2/F3 and the average NAS was 5.3. The primary endpoint was reached in 29.7%, 29.8%, 32.9% and 39.5% of patients in the placebo, 62.5 mg, 125 mg and 250 mg dose arms, respectively, with adjusted odds ratios relative to placebo of 0.89 (95% CI 0.44-1.81), 1.22 (95% CI 0.60-2.48), and 1.64 (95% CI 0.83-3.27). The 2 highest doses of MSDC-0602K led to significant reductions in glucose, glycated hemoglobin, insulin, liver enzymes and NAS compared to placebo. The incidence of hypoglycemia and PPARγ-agonist-associated events such as edema and fractures were similar in the placebo and MSDC-0602K groups. CONCLUSIONS: MSDC-0602K did not demonstrate statistically significant effects on primary and secondary liver histology endpoints. However, effects on non-invasive measures of liver cell injury and glucose metabolism support further exploration of MSDC-0602K's safety and potential efficacy in patients with type 2 diabetes and liver injury. [ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02784444]. LAY SUMMARY: First-generation insulin sensitizers are used to treat type 2 diabetes, but are associated with side effects including edema, bone fractures, and hypoglycemia. MSDC-0602K is a second-generation insulin sensitizer designed to reduce these side effects. We hypothesized that insulin sensitization could improve non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. In the current study of patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, MSDC-0602K did not demonstrate significant effects on liver histology with the biopsy techniques used. However, useful information was gained for the design of future studies and MSDC-0602K significantly decreased fasting glucose, insulin, glycated hemoglobin, and markers of liver injury without dose-limiting side effects.

Association of Insulin Dose, Cardiometabolic Risk Factors, and Cardiovascular Disease in Type 1 Diabetes During 30 Years of Follow-up in the DCCT/EDIC Study.

OBJECTIVE: The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) study demonstrated the beneficial effects of intensive therapy on atherosclerosis and clinical cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes. The current analyses evaluated the relationship between longitudinal changes in insulin dose and CVD risk factors and outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 1,441 participants were randomly assigned to intensive or conventional diabetes therapy during the DCCT. After an average of 6.5 years of follow-up, 96% of the surviving cohort enrolled in the EDIC observational study, which included annual visits with detailed medical history, physical examination, and laboratory testing. CVD events were adjudicated by a review committee. Generalized linear mixed models and Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess the association between insulin dose and cardiometabolic risk factors and CVD risk, respectively, over a total of 30 years. RESULTS: Higher insulin doses were significantly associated with a less favorable cardiometabolic risk profile (higher BMI, pulse rate, and triglycerides and lower HDL cholesterol) with the exception of lower diastolic blood pressure and lower LDL cholesterol. In a minimally adjusted model, a 0.1 unit/kg body wt/day increase in insulin dose was associated with a 6% increased risk of any CVD (95% CI 3, 9). However, the association with insulin dose was no longer significant after adjustment for other CVD risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: During DCCT/EDIC, higher insulin doses were associated with adverse trends in several cardiometabolic risk factors, even after multivariable adjustment, but not with incident CVD outcomes.

Randomized Controlled Trial of a Leucine-Metformin-Sildenafil Combination (NS-0200) on Weight and Metabolic Parameters.

OBJECTIVE: Leucine was previously demonstrated to allosterically activate mammalian sirtuin 1 and synergize with other sirtuin 1/AMP-activated protein kinase/nitric oxide pathway activators to modulate energy metabolism. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of a triple combination of leucine, metformin, and sildenafil (NS-0200) on body weight and obesity comorbidities in a phase 2 randomized trial. METHODS: A total of 91 subjects with obesity were randomized to placebo, low dose (1.1 g leucine/0.5 g metformin/0.5 mg sildenafil), or high dose (1.1 g leucine/0.5 g metformin/1.0 mg sildenafil) twice daily for 16 weeks. Seventy subjects completed the trial and met all a priori compliance criteria. Hypertensive (n = 35) and hypertriglyceridemic (n = 22) subcohorts were also analyzed. RESULTS: NS-0200 dose-responsively reduced weight; high dose reduced weight by 2.4 and 5.0 kg in the full and high-triglyceride cohorts, respectively (P < 0.0001). High-dose NS-0200 treatment also decreased blood pressure (-5.5 mm Hg diastolic pressure; P = 0.011), with greater effects among hypertensive subjects. NS-0200 also significantly reduced triglycerides and hemoglobin A1c. Significant improvement in ≥ 2 comorbidities was exhibited by 54% of subjects in the high-dose arm versus 5% of placebo subjects (P = 0.0009). Treatment-emergent adverse events did not significantly differ among groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data support further study of NS-0200 as a therapy for obesity and associated comorbidities.

Safety and tolerability of exenatide once weekly in patients with type 2 diabetes: an integrated analysis of 4,328 patients.

BACKGROUND: Exenatide once weekly (QW) is a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Safety and tolerability are key considerations in treatment selection. This analysis examines the safety and tolerability profile of exenatide QW, other approved GLP-1RAs (exenatide twice daily and liraglutide once daily), and a pooled population of commonly used non-GLP-1RA treatments. METHODS: Intent-to-treat populations from eight randomized Phase III trials with 24-week and 30-week comparator-controlled periods were analyzed. Data were pooled for exenatide QW, exenatide twice daily, and non-GLP-1RA comparator groups; comparisons between exenatide QW and liraglutide were analyzed separately to better match study groups. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events with 95% confidence intervals and exposure-adjusted incidence were calculated. Duration and recurrence were analyzed for gastrointestinal adverse events and adverse events of special interest. RESULTS: Incidences of serious adverse events did not differ between treatments. Discontinuations due to adverse events occurred numerically less frequently with exenatide QW than with other GLP-1RAs but numerically more frequently than with non-GLP-1RA comparators. The most frequent adverse events in the GLP-1RA groups were gastrointestinal and generally mild, with decreasing incidence over time. Gastrointestinal adverse event incidences appeared lower with exenatide QW versus other GLP-1RAs and greater than with non-GLP-1RA comparators. Injection site-related adverse events seemed highest with exenatide QW, but generally did not lead to withdrawal and abated over time. Hypoglycemia was infrequent overall, but occurred numerically more frequently in the non-GLP-1RA comparator group and increased with concomitant sulfonylurea use. Pancreatitis, thyroid cancer, renal failure, and gallbladder disease were rarely reported. CONCLUSION: The overall safety and tolerability profile of exenatide QW was similar to that of other GLP-1RAs, with improved gastrointestinal tolerability. The safety and tolerability profile of exenatide QW compared with non-GLP-1RA comparators was similar overall, with the exception of a lower incidence of hypoglycemia and anticipated differences in gastrointestinal and injection site-related adverse events.

Evaluating the role of epigenetic histone modifications in the metabolic memory of type 1 diabetes.

We assessed whether epigenetic histone posttranslational modifications are associated with the prolonged beneficial effects (metabolic memory) of intensive versus conventional therapy during the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) on the progression of microvascular outcomes in the long-term Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study. We performed chromatin immunoprecipitation linked to promoter tiling arrays to profile H3 lysine-9 acetylation (H3K9Ac), H3 lysine-4 trimethylation (H3K4Me3), and H3K9Me2 in blood monocytes and lymphocytes obtained from 30 DCCT conventional treatment group subjects (case subjects: mean DCCT HbA1c level >9.1% [76 mmol/mol] and progression of retinopathy or nephropathy by EDIC year 10 of follow-up) versus 30 DCCT intensive treatment subjects (control subjects: mean DCCT HbA1c level <7.3% [56 mmol/mol] and without progression of retinopathy or nephropathy). Monocytes from case subjects had statistically greater numbers of promoter regions with enrichment in H3K9Ac (active chromatin mark) compared with control subjects (P = 0.0096). Among the patients in the two groups combined, monocyte H3K9Ac was significantly associated with the mean HbA1c level during the DCCT and EDIC (each P < 2.2E-16). Of note, the top 38 case hyperacetylated promoters (P < 0.05) included >15 genes related to the nuclear factor-κB inflammatory pathway and were enriched in genes related to diabetes complications. These results suggest an association between HbA1c level and H3K9Ac, and a possible epigenetic explanation for metabolic memory in humans.

In silico design of optimal ratio for co-administration of pramlintide and insulin in type 1 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The ability to simulate in silico experiments is crucial for fast and cost-effective preliminary studies prior to clinical trials. We present an in silico approach to the design of optimal pramlintide-to-insulin (P/I) ratios, using our computer simulator of the human metabolic system, with a population of virtual adult type 1 diabetes mellitus patients and with individual parameters modified to account for the dynamic effects of pramlintide. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A model of pramlintide action on gastric emptying was built using data of 15 type 1 diabetes mellitus subjects studied twice with a standardized dual-tracer meal on placebo and pramlintide, which was incorporated in our type 1 diabetes simulator. Extensive in silico experiments on 100 virtual subjects were performed to optimize the co-administration of pramlintide and insulin prior to its submission to clinical trials; several P/I ratios were tested in terms of efficacy, in attenuating postprandial hyperglycemia, and in hypoglycemia safety. RESULTS: In silico experiments estimated the optimal P/I ratio to be 9 µg of pramlintide per unit (U) of insulin. Additional simulations narrowing the investigated range indicated that P/I ratios of 8 and 10 µg/U would achieve similar performance. Moreover, simulation results suggested that in clinical trials, insulin boluses should be reduced by approximately 21% at a P/I ratio of 9 µg/U to account for the effects of pramlintide and avoid postprandial hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: We can assert that a valid simulation model of pramlintide action was developed, leading to in silico estimation of optimal pramlintide:insulin co-administration ratio. Clinical trials will confirm (or adjust) this initial estimation.

Pramlintide improved measures of glycemic control and body weight in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus undergoing continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of the addition of pramlintide to continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of 2 studies: a 29-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (referred to as RCT) (pramlintide, n = 82; placebo, n = 73) and an open-ended, multicenter, open-label, single-arm, observational study (referred to as clinical practice trial) (n = 150), which assessed the addition of pramlintide to CSII therapy in patients with T1DM. Pramlintide was initiated at 15 µg and titrated to 30 or 60 µg with major meals. The mealtime insulin dose was reduced by 30% to 50% at initiation, and then adjusted to optimize glycemic control. Endpoints at 29 weeks (RCT) and 6 months (clinical practice trial) included change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level, insulin dose, body weight, pre- and postprandial blood glucose level, and tolerability and safety. RESULTS: In both studies, mean baseline age was approximately 42 years, duration of diabetes was 20 to 24 years, and HbA1c level was approximately 8%. Pramlintide reduced blood glucose excursions and improved the percentage of recorded postprandial blood glucose levels < 180 mg/dL. Mean (± standard deviation) reduction in HbA1c level in the clinical practice trial was -0.3% ± 0.1% (P < 0.0001), and in the RCT was similar between pramlintide- and placebo-treated patients (-0.4% ± 0.1% and -0.3% ± 0.1%, respectively). Glycemic improvements were accomplished, with reductions in mealtime insulin doses (RCT: pramlintide, -23.8% ± 5.2%; placebo, -3.2% ± 4.1%; P < 0.0005; clinical practice trial: -27.5% ± 2.9%; P < 0.0001) and body weight (RCT: pramlintide, -2.2 kg ± 0.5 kg; placebo, +1.4 kg ± 0.3 kg; P < 0.0001; clinical practice trial: -3.2 kg ± 0.4 kg; P < 0.0001). Short-lived nausea, primarily mild to moderate in intensity, was the most common adverse event associated with pramlintide therapy. Severe hypoglycemic events occurred at a rate of 0.56 and 0.34 events per patient-year in pramlintide- and placebo-treated patients, respectively, in the RCT, and at a rate of 0.12 events per patient-year in the clinical practice trial. CONCLUSION: Addition of pramlintide to CSII therapy was safe and effective in patients with T1DM. Pramlintide should be considered for patients who are not able to optimize glycemic control with CSII therapy alone, particularly those with difficulty controlling postprandial blood glucose levels and/or body weight. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00042458, NCT00108004.

Pramlintide improved glycemic control and reduced weight in patients with type 2 diabetes using basal insulin.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of pramlintide in patients with type 2 diabetes suboptimally controlled with basal insulin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a 16-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 212 patients using insulin glargine with or without oral antidiabetes agents (OAs) were randomized to addition of pramlintide (60 or 120 microg b.i.d./t.i.d.) or placebo. Insulin glargine was adjusted to target a fasting plasma glucose concentration of 70-100 mg/dl. One coprimary end point was the change in A1C at week 16. The other coprimary end point was a composite measure of overall diabetes control comprising A1C < or = 7.0% or reduction > or = 0.5%, mean daily postprandial glucose (PPG) increments < or = 40 mg/dl, no increase in body weight, and no severe hypoglycemia. Patients meeting all four conditions at week 16 achieved this end point. RESULTS: More pramlintide- than placebo-treated patients achieved the composite end point (25 vs. 7%; P < 0.001). Reductions (means +/- SE) in A1C (-0.70 +/- 0.11% vs. -0.36 +/- 0.08%; P < 0.05) and PPG increments (-24.4 +/- 3.6 mg/dl vs. -0.4 +/- 3.0 mg/dl; P < 0.0001) were greater in pramlintide- versus placebo-treated patients, respectively. Glycemic improvements were accompanied by progressive weight loss with pramlintide and weight gain with placebo (-1.6 +/- 0.3 kg vs. +0.7 +/- 0.3 kg; P < 0.0001). No treatment-related severe hypoglycemia occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Pramlintide improved multiple glycemic parameters and reduced weight with no increase in hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes who were not achieving glycemic targets with basal insulin with or without OAs.

Effect of adjunctive pramlintide treatment on treatment satisfaction in patients with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of adjunctive pramlintide treatment on treatment satisfaction in patients with type 1 diabetes treated with intensive insulin regimens. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Intensively treated (multiple daily injection [MDI] or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII] pump therapy) patients with type 1 diabetes completed a study-specific treatment satisfaction questionnaire following 29 weeks of either placebo (n = 136) or pramlintide (n = 130) treatment in a double-blind, noninferiority pramlintide dose titration trial. End points included patient reported outcomes, their relationship to insulin treatment regimen, A1C, weight, and insulin use. RESULTS: Pramlintide-treated patients reported greater treatment satisfaction in most questionnaire responses. Treatment satisfaction was similar for pramlintide-treated patients regardless of intensive insulin regimens (MDI versus CSII). Mean A1C was reduced to a similar degree in both pramlintide- (-0.39 +/- 0.07%) and placebo-treated (-0.45 +/- 0.07%) patients. However, pramlintide treatment was associated with reductions in mean body weight (-1.50 +/- 0.33 kg; P < 0.0001) and mealtime insulin use (-19.05 +/- 5.17%; P < 0.005) over 29 weeks, while placebo treatment resulted in weight gain (1.28 +/- 0.25 kg) and a smaller reduction in mealtime insulin use (-2.20 +/- 3.33%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar reductions in A1C, pramlintide treatment resulted in greater treatment satisfaction compared with placebo treatment. This was independent of insulin delivery method.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial assessing pramlintide treatment in the setting of intensive insulin therapy in type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess safety, efficacy, and tolerability of pramlintide dose escalation with proactive mealtime insulin reduction, followed by insulin optimization, in patients with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This 29-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study randomized 296 patients to pramlintide or placebo as an adjunct to insulin. During initiation, pramlintide was escalated from 15 to 60 microg/meal (15-microg increments) with recommended reductions (30-50%) in mealtime insulin. Insulin was subsequently adjusted to optimize glycemic control. End points included safety and change in HbA1c (A1C), postprandial glucose, insulin, weight, and tolerability. RESULTS: Baseline A1C was 8.1% for both groups and at week 29 had decreased comparably (pramlintide -0.5% [95% CI -0.61 to -0.33]; placebo -0.5% [-0.63 to -0.35]). Pramlintide treatment significantly reduced postprandial glucose excursions (incremental area under the curve [AUC](0-3h): pramlintide -175 +/- 40, placebo -64 +/- 38 mg x h(-1) x dl(-1); P < 0.0005) and weight (pramlintide -1.3 +/- 0.30, placebo +1.2 +/- 0.30 kg; P < 0.0001). At week 29, insulin dose decreased by 28 and 4% in pramlintide- and placebo-treated groups, respectively. Nausea, reported by 63 and 36% of patients in pramlintide and placebo groups (P < 0.01), respectively, was predominately mild to moderate in intensity. Severe hypoglycemia rates were low in both groups (pramlintide 0.57 +/- 0.09, placebo 0.30 +/- 0.06 event rate/patient-year; P < 0.05), with increased rates observed in patients remaining at 30 microg pramlintide. CONCLUSIONS: Pramlintide dose escalation with reduced mealtime insulin was effective during therapy initiation in patients with type 1 diabetes. While both groups experienced equivalent A1C reductions relative to placebo, pramlintide-treated patients experienced reductions in postprandial glucose excursions and weight, not achievable with insulin therapy alone.

Metabolic effects of the incretin mimetic exenatide in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Interventional studies have demonstrated the impact of hyperglycemia on the development of vascular complications associated with type 2 diabetes, which underscores the importance of safely lowering glucose to as near-normal as possible. Among the current challenges to reducing the risk of vascular disease associated with diabetes is the management of body weight in a predominantly overweight patient population, and in which weight gain is likely with many current therapies. Exenatide is the first in a new class of agents termed incretin mimetics, which replicate several glucoregulatory effects of the endogenous incretin hormone, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1). Currently approved in the US as an injectable adjunct to metformin and/or sulfonylurea therapy, exenatide improves glycemic control through multiple mechanisms of action including: glucose-dependent enhancement of insulin secretion that potentially reduces the risk of hypoglycemia compared with insulin secretagogues; restoration of first-phase insulin secretion typically deficient in patients with type 2 diabetes; suppression of inappropriately elevated glucagon secretion to reduce postprandial hepatic output; and slowing the rate of gastric emptying to regulate glucose appearance into the circulation. Clinical trials in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with subcutaneous exenatide twice daily demonstrated sustained improvements in glycemic control, evidenced by reductions in postprandial and fasting glycemia and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) levels. Notably, improvements in glycemic control with exenatide were coupled with progressive reductions in body weight, which represents a distinct therapeutic benefit for patients with type 2 diabetes. Acute effects of exenatide on beta-cell responsiveness along with significant reductions in body weight in patients with type 2 diabetes may have a positive impact on disease progression and potentially decrease the risk of associated long-term complications.

Properties of pramlintide and insulin upon mixing.

PURPOSE: The pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of pramlintide and various insulin formulations in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM) when given as separate injections or mixed in the same syringe before injection were studied. METHODS: In two randomized, open-label, placebo-controlled, five-period-crossover studies, patients with type 1 DM received preprandial injections of pramlintide, short-acting insulin, and long-acting insulin administered either by separate injections or after mixing in various combinations. Serum free insulin and plasma glucose concentrations were measured for 10 hours and plasma pramlintide concentrations for 5 hours after injection. RESULTS: Blood samples were collected from a total of 51 patients. All treatments involving mixtures were comparable to separate injections with respect to the area under the concentration-versus-time curve (AUC) and the maximum concentration (Cmax) of serum free insulin. There were some minor differences in the AUC and Cmax of pramlintide. No injection-site reactions or other unexpected adverse events were observed. CONCLUSION: Mixing pramlintide with short- or long-acting insulin in the same syringe before subcutaneous injection did not affect the pharmacodynamics of glucose or the pharmacokinetics of insulin or pramlintide in a clinically significant manner.

Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of exenatide in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

PURPOSE: The pharmacology and tolerability of exenatide in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were studied. METHODS: Two randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled studies were conducted. Treatment with oral antidiabetic agents was stopped 14 days before study initiation. In the first study (study A), eight subjects received placebo, 0.1-, 0.2-, 0.3-, and either 0.4-microg/kg exenatide or placebo five minutes before a meal combined with liquid acetaminophen (to assess the rate of gastric emptying) on days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9. In the second study (study B), subjects received a single s.c. dose of exenatide or placebo on consecutive days. Part 1 of study B used exenatide doses of 0.01 and 0.1 microg/ kg; 0.02-, 0.05-, and 0.1-microg/kg doses were given in part 2. After an overnight fast, the study drug was injected 15 minutes before a meal (part 1) and before a meal and acetaminophen (part 2). Parts 1 and 2 of study B enrolled six and eight patients, respectively. RESULTS: In both studies, plasma exenatide pharmacokinetic profiles appeared dose proportional. Exenatide doses of 0.02-0.2 microg/kg dose-dependently lowered postprandial glucose excursions. Exenatide suppressed postprandial plasma glucagon and slowed gastric emptying. There were no serious adverse events and no patient withdrawals related to treatment. Nausea and vomiting were the most common adverse events and were mild to moderate in severity at doses ranging from 0.02 to 0.2 microg/kg. CONCLUSION: Administration of preprandial exenatide by s.c. injection resulted in dose-proportional exenatide pharmacokinetics and antidiabetic pharmacodynamic activity. At doses ranging from 0.02 to 0.2 microg/kg, exenatide dose-dependently reduced postprandial plasma glucose excursion by insulinotropism, suppression of plasma glucagon, and slowing of gastric emptying.