The acyclic CB1R inverse agonist taranabant mediates weight loss by increasing energy expenditure and decreasing caloric intake.

Cannabinoid 1 receptor (CB1R) inverse agonists are emerging as a potential obesity therapy. However, the physiological mechanisms by which these agents modulate human energy balance are incompletely elucidated. Here, we describe a comprehensive clinical research study of taranabant, a structurally novel acyclic CB1R inverse agonist. Positron emission tomography imaging using the selective CB1R tracer [(18)F]MK-9470 confirmed central nervous system receptor occupancy levels ( approximately 10%-40%) associated with energy balance/weight-loss effects in animals. In a 12-week weight-loss study, taranabant induced statistically significant weight loss compared to placebo in obese subjects over the entire range of evaluated doses (0.5, 2, 4, and 6 mg once per day) (p < 0.001). Taranabant treatment was associated with dose-related increased incidence of clinical adverse events, including mild to moderate gastrointestinal and psychiatric effects. Mechanism-of-action studies suggest that engagement of the CB1R by taranabant leads to weight loss by reducing food intake and increasing energy expenditure and fat oxidation.

Neuropeptide Y5 receptor antagonism does not induce clinically meaningful weight loss in overweight and obese adults.

Neuropeptide Y (NPY) is a potent orexigenic neuropeptide, and antagonism of NPY Y1 and NPY Y5 receptors (NPYxR) is considered a potentially important anti-obesity drug target. We tested the hypothesis that blockade of the NPY5R will lead to weight loss in humans using MK-0557, a potent, highly selective, orally active NPY5R antagonist. The initial series of experiments reported herein, including a multiple-dose positron-emission tomography study and a 12 week proof-of concept/dose-ranging study, suggested an optimal MK-0557 dose of 1 mg/day. The hypothesis was then tested in a 52 week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 1661 overweight and obese patients. Although statistically significant at 52 weeks, the magnitude of induced weight loss was not clinically meaningful. These observations provide the first clinical insight into the human NPY-energy homeostatic pathway and suggest that solely targeting the NPY5R in future drug development programs is unlikely to produce therapeutic efficacy.

Safety and tolerability of sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes: a pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sitagliptin, a highly selective dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, is the first in a new class of oral antihyperglycemic agents (AHAs) for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes. Type 2 diabetes is a life-long disease requiring chronic treatment and management. Therefore, robust assessment of the long-term safety and tolerability of newer therapeutic agents is of importance. The purpose of this analysis was to assess the safety and tolerability of sitagliptin by pooling 12 large, double-blind, Phase IIb and III studies up to 2 years in duration. METHODS: This analysis included 6139 patients with type 2 diabetes receiving either sitagliptin 100 mg/day (N = 3415) or a comparator agent (placebo or an active comparator) (N = 2724; non-exposed group). The 12 studies from which this pooled population was drawn represent the double-blind, randomized, Phase IIB and III studies that included patients treated with the clinical dose of sitagliptin (100 mg/day) for at least 18 weeks up to 2 years and that were available in a single safety database as of November 2007. These 12 studies assessed sitagliptin as monotherapy, initial combination therapy with metformin, or add-on combination therapy with other oral AHAs (metformin, pioglitazone, sulfonylurea, sulfonylurea + metformin, or metformin + rosiglitazone). Patients in the non-exposed group were taking placebo, pioglitazone, metformin, sulfonylurea, sulfonylurea + metformin, or metformin + rosiglitazone. This safety analysis used patient-level data from each study to evaluate clinical and laboratory adverse experiences. RESULTS: For clinical adverse experiences, the incidence rates of adverse experiences overall, serious adverse experiences, and discontinuations due to adverse experiences were similar in the sitagliptin and non-exposed groups. The incidence rates of specific adverse experiences were also generally similar in the two groups, with the exception of an increased incidence rate of hypoglycemia observed in the non-exposed group. The incidence rates of drug-related adverse experiences overall and discontinuations due to drug-related adverse experiences were higher in the non-exposed group, primarily due to the increased incidence rate of hypoglycemia in this group. For cardiac- and ischemia-related adverse experiences (including serious events), there were no meaningful between-group differences. No meaningful differences between groups in laboratory adverse experiences, either summary measures or specific adverse experiences, were observed. CONCLUSION: In patients with type 2 diabetes, sitagliptin 100 mg/day was well tolerated in clinical trials up to 2 years in duration.

Efficacy and safety of intranasal peptide YY3-36 for weight reduction in obese adults.

CONTEXT: The gastrointestinal peptide hormone, peptide YY(3-36) (PYY(3-36)), is implicated to be a postprandial satiety factor. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of intranasal PYY(3-36) to induce weight loss in obese patients. DESIGN: The study was designed as a randomized, 2-wk, single-blind placebo run-in followed by a 12-wk double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment period. SETTING: The study was set within a private and institutional practice. PATIENTS: A total of 133 obese patients (body mass index, 30-43 kg/m(2); age, 18-65 yr) participated in the study. INTERVENTION: Placebo or 200- or 600-microg PYY(3-36) was administered as an intranasal spray 20 min before breakfast, lunch, and dinner in conjunction with a hypocaloric diet and exercise. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Body weight was the main outcome measure. RESULTS: The number of patients completing 12 wk on the drug was 38 of 43 (88%), 31 of 44 (70%), and 12 of 46 (26%) for placebo, 200 microg three times a day (t.i.d.) and 600 microg t.i.d., respectively. In the 600 microg t.i.d. group, 27 of 46 (59%) patients discontinued due to nausea and vomiting. Among all randomized patients who took at least one drug dose and had a postbaseline measurement, the mean body weight change from baseline was -2.8, -3.7, and -1.4 kg for placebo, 200 and 600 microg, respectively. The least squares mean difference (95% confidence interval) between placebo and 200 microg was -0.9 (-2.6, 0.7) kg (P = 0.251). A difference of 2.11 kg was sought. No meaningful inference can be drawn from the few patients who completed the study on 600 microg. CONCLUSIONS: Intranasal PYY(3-36) as administered at these intervention doses and preprandial timing is not efficacious in inducing weight loss in obese patients after 12 wk of treatment.

Efficacy and safety of sitagliptin added to ongoing metformin and rosiglitazone combination therapy in a randomized placebo-controlled 54-week trial in patients with type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: New therapeutic approaches are needed to improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), a progressive disorder that often requires combination therapy. The present study assessed the efficacy and safety of sitagliptin as add-on therapy to metformin and rosiglitazone in patients with T2D. METHODS: The present study was a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled parallel-group 54-week study conducted at 41 sites across North and South America, Europe, and Asia in 278 patients with HbA1c ranging from ≥7.5% to ≤11.0% despite ongoing combination therapy with metformin (≥1500 mg/day) and rosiglitazone (≥4 mg/day). Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive sitagliptin 100 mg or placebo once daily. The main outcome measure was change from baseline in HbA1c at Week 18. RESULTS: Mean baseline HbA1c was 8.8%. The mean placebo-adjusted change from baseline in HbA1c with sitagliptin treatment was -0.7% (P < 0.001) at Week 18 and -0.8% (P < 0.001) at Week 54. There were also significant (P < 0.001) reductions in 2-h post-meal glucose and fasting plasma glucose compared with placebo at Weeks 18 and 54. Significantly higher proportions of sitagliptin- than placebo-treated patients had HbA1c<7.0% at Weeks 18 (22% vs 9%; P = 0.003) and 54 (26% vs 14%; P = 0.015). Changes in body weight and the rates of adverse events overall, hypoglycemia, and gastrointestinal adverse events were similar in the sitagliptin and placebo groups during the 54-week study. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T2D, the addition of sitagliptin for 54 weeks to ongoing therapy with metformin and rosiglitazone improved glycemic control and was generally well tolerated compared with placebo.

Sitagliptin added to treatment with ongoing pioglitazone for up to 52 weeks improves glycemic control in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes.

UNLABELLED: Aims/Introduction: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus often require treatment with more than one oral antihyperglycemic agent to achieve their glycemic goal. The present study was carried out to assess the efficacy and safety of sitagliptin as add-on therapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled (HbA1c ≥ 6.9% and <10.4%) on pioglitazone monotherapy (15-45 mg/day). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the initial 12-week, double-blind treatment period, patients were randomized (1:1) to sitagliptin 50 mg/day (n = 66) or placebo (n = 68), followed by a 40-week open-label treatment period in which all patients received sitagliptin 50 mg/day that could have been increased to 100 mg/day for patients meeting predefined glycemic parameters. RESULTS: After 12 weeks, mean changes from baseline in HbA1c (the primary end-point), fasting plasma glucose and 2-h post-meal glucose were -0.8%, -0.9 mmol/L and -2.7 mmol/L, respectively, in the sitagliptin group compared with placebo (all P < 0.001). The incidence of adverse experiences during the double-blind treatment period was similar in both treatment groups, and the incidences of hypoglycemia and gastrointestinal adverse experiences were low. In the open-label period, improvements in glycemic parameters with sitagliptin treatment were maintained and sitagliptin was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Sitagliptin as add-on therapy provided significant improvements in glycemic parameters and was well tolerated in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on pioglitazone monotherapy. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT00372060). (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040-1124.2011.00120.x, 2011).

Efficacy and tolerability of sitagliptin monotherapy in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Type 2 diabetes in the elderly is an important and insufficiently studied public health problem. This study evaluated sitagliptin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes aged ≥ 65 years. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study conducted at 52 sites in the United States. Patients were treated with once-daily sitagliptin (100 or 50 mg, depending on renal function) or placebo for 24 weeks. Key endpoints included change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)), 2-hour post-meal glucose (2-h PMG) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) at week 24, and average blood glucose on treatment days 3 and 7. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00305604. RESULTS: Among randomized patients (N = 206), mean age was 72 years and mean baseline HbA(1c) was 7.8%. At week 24, HbA(1c) decreased by 0.7%, 2-h PMG by 61 mg/dL, and FPG by 27 mg/dL in sitagliptin-treated patients compared with placebo (all p < 0.001). On day 3 of treatment, mean average blood glucose was decreased from baseline by 20.4 mg/dL in sitagliptin-treated patients compared with placebo (p < 0.001). In subgroups defined by baseline HbA(1c) <8.0% (n = 132), ≥ 8.0% to <9.0% (n = 42), and ≥ 9.0% (n = 18), the placebo-adjusted reductions in HbA(1c) with sitagliptin treatment were 0.5%, 0.9%, and 1.6%, respectively. Patients in the sitagliptin and placebo groups had similar rates of adverse events overall (46.1% and 52.9%, respectively); serious adverse events were reported in 6.9% and 13.5%, respectively. No adverse events of hypoglycemia were reported. Potential study limitations include a relatively small number of patients with more severe hyperglycemia (HbA(1c) ≥ 9.0%) and the exclusion of patients with severe renal insufficiency. CONCLUSION: In this study, sitagliptin treatment significantly and rapidly improved glycemic measures and was well tolerated in patients aged ≥ 65 years with type 2 diabetes.

A randomized trial of lifestyle modification and taranabant for maintaining weight loss achieved with a low-calorie diet.

Improving the maintenance of weight loss remains a critical challenge for obesity researchers. The present 1-year, randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of weight maintenance counseling combined with either placebo or the cannabinoid-1 receptor inverse agonist, taranabant, for sustaining prior weight loss achieved on a low-calorie diet (LCD). Seven hundred eighty-four individuals who had lost ≥ 6% of body weight during six initial weeks of treatment with an 800 kcal/day liquid LCD were randomly assigned to placebo or once-daily taranabant in doses of 0.5, 1, or 2 mg. All participants were provided monthly, on-site behavioral weight maintenance counseling, as well as monthly phone calls. The primary end point was change in body weight from randomization to week 52. The randomized participants lost an average of 9.6 kg (9.5% of initial weight) during the 6-week LCD. The model-adjusted mean change in body weight during the subsequent 1 year was +1.7 kg for placebo, compared with -0.1, -0.6, and -1.2 kg for the taranabant 0.5, 1, and 2 mg doses, respectively (all P values ≤ 0.007 vs. placebo). The incidences of psychiatric-related adverse events, including irritability, were higher for taranabant 1 and 2 mg vs. placebo (P ≤ 0.038). In addition to reporting data on the safety and efficacy of taranabant, this study provides a method for studying the combination of lifestyle modification and pharmacotherapy for weight maintenance after diet-induced weight loss.

Efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy with sitagliptin and metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: a 54-week study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the 54-week efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy with sitagliptin and metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycemic control (HbA(1c) 7.5-11%) on diet and exercise. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This was multinational study conducted at 140 clinical sites in 18 countries. Following an initial 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled period, patients entered a double-blind continuation period for an additional 30 weeks. Following the week 24 evaluation, patients remained on their previously assigned active, oral treatments: sitagliptin 50 mg b.i.d. + metformin 1000 mg b.i.d. (S100 + M2000), sitagliptin 50 mg b.i.d. + metformin 500 mg b.i.d. (S100 + M1000), metformin 1000 mg b.i.d. (M2000), metformin 500 mg b.i.d. (M1000), and sitagliptin 100 mg q.d. (S100). Patients initially randomized to placebo were switched to M2000 (designated PBO/M2000) at week 24. This report summarizes the overall safety and tolerability data for the 54-week study and presents efficacy results for patients randomized to continuous treatments who entered the 30-week continuation period. RESULTS: Of the 1091 randomized patients, 906 completed the 24-week placebo-controlled phase and 885 patients continued into the 30-week continuation period (S100 + M2000 n = 161, S100+M1000 n = 160, M2000 n = 153, M1000 n = 147, S100 n = 141, PBO/M2000 n = 123). At baseline, patients included in the efficacy analysis had mean age of 54 years, mean BMI of 32 kg/m(2), mean HbA(1c) of 8.7% (8.5-8.8% across groups), and mean duration of type 2 diabetes of 4 years. At week 54, in the all-patients-treated analysis of continuing patients, least-squares (LS) mean changes in HbA(1c) from baseline were -1.8% (S100 + M2000), -1.4% (S100 + M1000), -1.3% (M2000), -1.0% (M1000), and -0.8% (S100). The proportions of continuing patients with an HbA(1c) < 7% at week 54 were 67% (S100 + M2000), 48% (S100 + M1000), 44% (M2000), 25% (M1000), and 23% (S100). For the patients completing treatment through week 54, LS mean changes in HbA(1c) from baseline were -1.9% (S100 + M2000), -1.7% (S100 + M1000), -1.6% (M2000), -1.2% (M1000), and -1.4% (S100). Glycemic response was generally durable over time across treatments. All treatments improved measures of beta-cell function (e.g., HOMA-beta, proinsulin/insulin ratio). Mean body weight decreased from baseline in the combination and metformin monotherapy groups and was unchanged from baseline in the sitagliptin monotherapy group. The incidence of hypoglycemia was low (1-3%) across treatment groups. The incidence of gastrointestinal adverse experiences with the co-administration of sitagliptin and metformin was similar to that observed with metformin alone. LIMITATIONS: The patient population evaluated in the 54-week efficacy analysis was a population of patients who entered the continuation period without receiving glycemic rescue therapy in the 24-week placebo-controlled period. Because the baseline HbA(1c) inclusion criteria ranged from 7.5 to 11% and the glycemic rescue criterion was an HbA(1c) > 8% after week 24, there was a greater likelihood of glycemic rescue in the monotherapy groups; this led to more missing data in the continuation all-patients-treated population(CAPT) analysis and fewer patients contributing to the completers analysis in the monotherapy groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, initial treatment with sitagliptin, metformin, or the combination therapy of sitagliptin and metformin provided substantial and durable glycemic control, improved markers of beta-cell function, and was generally well-tolerated over 54 weeks in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Efficacy and safety of sitagliptin in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes in China, India, and Korea.

The efficacy and safety of sitagliptin as monotherapy were evaluated in Chinese, Indian, and Korean patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by diet and exercise. In a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 18-week trial, 530 patients with HbA(1c) >or=7.5% and

Efficacy and safety of sitagliptin added to ongoing metformin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sitagliptin as an add-on to metformin therapy in patients with moderately severe (hemoglobin A(1c) >or= 8.0% and or= 6 weeks of stable metformin monotherapy (>or= 1500 mg/day), patients were randomized to either the addition of sitagliptin 100 mg once daily or placebo to ongoing metformin for 30 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy endpoint was reduction in hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) measured after 18 weeks of sitagliptin treatment. Key secondary endpoints included reduction in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and 2-hour (2-h) postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) at 18 weeks, and HbA(1c) at 30 weeks. The proportion of patients meeting the goal of HbA(1c) < 7.0% was also analyzed. RESULTS: Sitagliptin significantly reduced HbA(1c), FPG, and 2-h PPG, compared with placebo (all p < 0.001). The net improvement in HbA(1c) was - 1.0% at both 18 and 30 weeks, and a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with sitagliptin achieved HbA(1c) < 7.0% by the end of the study (22.1% vs. 3.3%, p < 0.001). Sitagliptin was well-tolerated. Compared with placebo, sitagliptin had a neutral effect on body weight and did not significantly increase the risk of hypoglycemia or gastrointestinal adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of sitagliptin 100 mg once daily to ongoing metformin therapy was well-tolerated and resulted in significant glycemic improvement in patients with moderately severe T2DM who were treated for 30 weeks.

Effect of NPY5R antagonist MK-0557 on weight regain after very-low-calorie diet-induced weight loss.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether MK-0557, a highly selective, orally administered neuropeptide Y Y5 receptor antagonist, could limit weight regain after very-low-calorie diet (VLCD)-induced weight loss. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: We enrolled 502 patients 18 to 65 years of age with a BMI of 30 to 43 kg/m2. Patients were placed on a VLCD (800 kcal/d liquid diet) for 6 weeks. Patients who lost>or=6% of initial body weight (n=359) were randomized to 52 weeks of 1 mg/d MK-0557 or placebo and maintained on a hypocaloric diet (300 kcal below weight maintenance requirements). RESULTS: In randomized patients, the VLCD was associated with an average weight loss of 9.1 kg. After 12 weeks of double-blind treatment, weight began to gradually increase for both placebo- and MK-0557-treated patients. The mean weight change (95% confidence interval) from baseline at the end of the VLCD to Week 52 was +3.1 (2.1, 4.0) and +1.5 (0.5, 2.4) kg for patients treated with placebo and MK-0557, respectively. The difference of 1.6 kg between the two groups was significant (p=0.014). Secondary endpoints, such as blood pressure, lipid profile, insulin, and leptin, as well as waist circumference and quality-of-life measurements, did not show significant differences between MK-0557 and placebo treatments. DISCUSSION: Although the difference in weight regain between placebo- and MK-0557-treated patients was statistically significant, the magnitude of the effect was small and not clinically meaningful. Antagonism of the neuropeptide Y Y5 receptor is not an efficacious treatment strategy for reducing weight regain after VLCD.

NPY5R antagonism does not augment the weight loss efficacy of orlistat or sibutramine.

OBJECTIVE: Central counter-regulatory mechanisms, including those related to the orexigenic hormone neuropeptide Y (NPY), may limit the weight loss observed with conventional pharmacological monotherapy. This study evaluated whether blockade of the NPY Y5 receptor (NPY5R) with the selective antagonist MK-0557 potentiates sibutramine and orlistat weight loss effects. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Obese patients (497, BMI 30 to 43 kg/m2) were randomized to 1 of 5 treatment arms [placebo, n = 101; sibutramine 10 mg/d, n = 100; MK-0557 1 mg/d plus sibutramine 10 mg/d, n = 98; orlistat 120 mg TID, n = 99; MK-0557 1 mg/d plus orlistat 120 mg TID, n = 99] in conjunction with a hypocaloric diet for 24 weeks. The all-patients-treated population, imputing missing data using last observation carried forward, was used to assess weight loss from baseline. RESULTS: The study was completed by 71% of patients in placebo, 76% in sibutramine alone, 79% in MK-0557 + sibutramine, 69% in orlistat alone, and 76% in MK-0557 + orlistat groups. Least squares (LS) mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI)] in weight change from baseline between MK-0557 + sibutramine and sibutramine alone was -0.1 (-1.6, 1.4) kg (p = 0.892) and between MK-0557 + orlistat and orlistat alone was -0.9 (-2.4, 0.6) kg (p = 0.250). Sibutramine alone induced a LS mean weight loss of -5.9 (-6.9, -4.9) kg vs. -4.6 (-5.7, -3.6) kg for orlistat (p = 0.097). There were no serious drug-related adverse events and MK-0557 was well tolerated. DISCUSSION: Blockade of the NPY5R with the potent antagonist MK-0557 did not significantly increase the weight loss efficacy of either orlistat or sibutramine monotherapy.