Switching from Conventional Fibrates to Pemafibrate Has Beneficial Effects on the Renal Function of Diabetic Subjects with Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGRUOUND: Fibrates have renal toxicity limiting their use in subjects with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, pemafibrate has fewer toxic effects on renal function. In the present analysis, we evaluated the effects of pemafibrate on the renal function of diabetic subjects with or without CKD in a real-world clinical setting. METHODS: We performed a sub-analysis of data collected during a multi-center, prospective, observational study of the effects of pemafibrate on lipid metabolism in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus complicated by hypertriglyceridemia (the PARM-T2D study). The participants were allocated to add pemafibrate to their existing regimen (ADD-ON), switch from their existing fibrate to pemafibrate (SWITCH), or continue conventional therapy (CTRL). The changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) over 52 weeks were compared among these groups as well as among subgroups created according to CKD status. RESULTS: Data for 520 participants (ADD-ON, n=166; SWITCH, n=96; CTRL, n=258) were analyzed. Of them, 56.7% had CKD. The eGFR increased only in the SWITCH group, and this trend was also present in the CKD subgroup (P<0.001). On the other hand, eGFR was not affected by switching in participants with severe renal dysfunction (G3b or G4) and/or macroalbuminuria. Multivariate analysis showed that being older and a switch from fenofibrate were associated with elevation in eGFR (both P<0.05). CONCLUSION: A switch to pemafibrate may be associated with an elevation in eGFR, but to a lesser extent in patients with poor renal function.

Favorable Effect of Pemafibrate on Insulin Resistance and ß-Cell Function in Subjects with Type 2 Diabetes and Hypertriglyceridemia: A Subanalysis of the PARM-T2D Study.

Pemafibrate, a novel selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor modulator, has beneficial effects on lipid metabolism. However, its effects on glucose metabolism in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) remain to be fully clarified. This was a subanalysis of the PARM-T2D study, a multicenter prospective observational study on the use of pemafibrate versus conventional therapy for 52 weeks in subjects with T2DM complicated with hypertriglyceridemia. The subanalysis included participants who did not change their treatment for diabetes and did not receive insulin or insulin secretagogues during the study period. Changes in glucose metabolism markers, including homeostatic model assessment (HOMA2) scores and disposition index, were assessed. A total of 279 participants (141 in the pemafibrate group; 138 in the control group) met the criteria for the subanalysis. There were no significant changes in HbA1c during the 52-week study period in both groups. However, the pemafibrate group showed significant improvements versus the control group for insulin resistance assessed by HOMA2-R (-0.15 versus 0.08; estimated treatment difference -0.23 (95% confidence interval -0.44, -0.02); p = 0.03) and maintenance of ß-cell function assessed by disposition index (0.015 versus -0.023; estimated treatment difference 0.037 (95% confidence interval 0.005, 0.069); p = 0.02). Correlation analyses showed that improvements in HOMA2-R and disposition index were significantly associated with improvements in lipid abnormalities and γ-glutamyl transpeptidase. In conclusion, pemafibrate reduced insulin resistance and maintained ß-cell function in subjects with T2DM and hypertriglyceridemia, presumably by improving lipid profiles and lipid-related hepatocyte stress.

Preferable effects of pemafibrate on liver function and fibrosis in subjects with type 2 diabetes complicated with liver damage.

BACKGROUND: Pemafibrate has been reported to ameliorate lipid profiles and liver dysfunction. However, which patients derive benefit from the hepatoprotective effects of pemafibrate is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a sub-analysis of the PARM-T2D study where subjects with type 2 diabetes complicated by hypertriglyceridemia were prospectively treated with pemafibrate or conventional therapies for 52 weeks. From the original cohort, subjects who had metabolic-associated fatty liver disease without changing their treatment regimens for comorbidities were analyzed. Eligible subjects (n = 293) (average age 61.2 ± 11.7 years, 37.5% female) treated with pemafibrate (pemafibrate, n = 152) or controls who did not change their treatment regimens (controls, n = 141) were divided into three groups based on their alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels: ALT ≤ upper normal limit (UNL) (pemafibrate, n = 65; controls, n = 50), UNL < ALT ≤ 2×UNL (pemafibrate, n = 58; controls, n = 54), and 2×UNL < ALT (pemafibrate, n = 29; controls, n = 27). RESULTS: Pemafibrate treatment significantly ameliorated ALT levels (from 29 to 22 U/L, p < 0.001 by Wilcoxon's signed-rank test) in the total cohort and subjects with high ALT levels (2×ULN < ALT), and improved liver fibrosis as assessed by the Fibrosis-4 index (mean change - 0.05 (95% confidence interval: -0.22 to - 0.02), p < 0.05 versus baseline by the Mann-Whitney U-test and p < 0.05 versus the ALT ≤ UNL group by the Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Dunn's post-hoc analysis). CONCLUSIONS: The hepatoprotective effects of pemafibrate were dominant in subjects with type 2 diabetes complicated with liver dysfunction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Center Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000037385).

Effects of pemafibrate on lipid metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertriglyceridemia: A multi-center prospective observational study, the PARM-T2D study.

AIMS: Pemafibrate, a novel selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor modulator, was shown to ameliorate lipid abnormalities in a phase III clinical trial of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, its efficacy has not been demonstrated in real-world clinical practice in patients with T2DM. METHODS: We performed a multi-center prospective observational study of the use of pemafibrate in patients with T2DM and hypertriglyceridemia versus conventional therapy, with or without a fibrate. The primary outcomes were the changes from baseline in fasting serum triglyceride (TG) and high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) concentrations at week 52. RESULTS: We recruited 650 patients, and data from 504 (252 per group) were analyzed after propensity score matching. In the pemafibrate group, both TG and HDL-C showed significant improvements (p < 0.001), and several indices reflecting TG-rich lipoproteins, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol particle size, and liver enzyme elevations were significantly ameliorated compared with the control group, but there was no difference in glycemic control markers. One of the key secondary endpoints showed that switching from conventional fibrates to pemafibrate improved eGFR but increased uric acid concentration. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T2DM, pemafibrate has superior effects on lipid profile as well as liver and renal dysfunction to conventional fibrates.