Glycaemic control efficacy of switching from dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors to oral semaglutide in subjects with type 2 diabetes: A multicentre, prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel-group comparison study (SWITCH-SEMA 2 study).

AIM: To assess whether oral semaglutide provides better glycaemic control, compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) continuation, in people with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, prospective, randomized, parallel-group comparison study, participants receiving DPP-4is were either switched to oral semaglutide (3-14 mg/day) or continued on DPP-4is. The primary endpoint was the change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) over 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints included changes in metabolic parameters and biomarkers, along with the occurrence of adverse events. Factors associated with HbA1c improvement were also explored. RESULTS: In total, 174 eligible participants were enrolled; 17 dropped out of the study. Consequently, 82 participants in the DPP-4i group and 75 participants in the semaglutide group completed the study and were included in the analysis. Improvement in HbA1c at week 24 was significantly greater when switching to semaglutide compared with DPP-4i continuation [-0.65 (95% confidence interval: -0.79, -0.51) vs. +0.05 (95% confidence interval: -0.07, 0.16) (p < .001)]. Body weight, lipid profiles and liver enzymes were significantly improved in the semaglutide group than in the DPP-4i continuation group. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that baseline HbA1c and homeostasis model assessment 2-R were independently associated with HbA1c improvement after switching to semaglutide. Seven participants in the semaglutide group discontinued medication because of gastrointestinal symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Although the potential for gastrointestinal symptoms should be carefully considered, switching from DPP-4is to oral semaglutide may be beneficial for glycaemic control and metabolic abnormalities in people with higher HbA1c and insulin resistance.

Effects of DPP-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, SGLT-2 inhibitors and sulphonylureas on mortality, cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes: A network meta-analyses-driven approach.

AIMS: The aim of our meta-analyses was to compare the effects of glucose-lowering drugs on mortality, cardiovascular and renal endpoints for a range of type 2 diabetes (T2D) subgroups defined by their specific cardiovascular risk profile. METHODS: Meta-analyses comparing drugs within the classes of GLP-1RAs and SGLT-2 inhibitors were performed and compared to sulphonylureas and DPP-4 inhibitors with available cardiovascular outcome trials. The comparison between the different classes of glucose-lowering drugs included analyses of T2D populations with low risk and high risk for cardiovascular disease including populations with established cardiovascular disease and/or kidney disease. Outcomes included mortality, major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE), hospitalisation for heart failure (HHF) and a composite renal endpoint as applied in the underlying clinical trials. RESULTS: SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1RAs showed beneficial effects on mortality and MACE compared to the classes of DPP-4 inhibitors and sulphonylureas. SGLT-2 inhibitors were shown to be the most effective treatment in terms of HHF and kidney disease. Metformin was used as background therapy for the vast majority of participants in all included studies. Overall, the absolute effects of SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1RAs on these important outcomes were evident for patients with established or at high risk for cardiovascular disease but limited for the low-risk subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from our analyses substantiate the relevance of treatment with SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1RAs as an add-on to metformin in patients with T2D and a high risk for cardiovascular disease, and furthermore, support the recommendation for SGLT-2 inhibitor treatment in patients with T2D and heart failure or established kidney disease.

Empagliflozin versus sitagliptin for ameliorating intrahepatic lipid content and tissue-specific insulin sensitivity in patients with early-stage type 2 diabetes with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A prospective randomized study.

AIM: To compare the effects of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors on ectopic fat accumulation and tissue-specific insulin sensitivity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized controlled trial enrolled 44 patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). They were randomly assigned to receive either empagliflozin 10 mg/day or sitagliptin 100 mg/day for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in intrahepatic lipid content (IHL) measured using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1 H-MRS). The secondary endpoints included intramuscular and extramuscular lipid content seen in 1 H-MRS, body composition seen through dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and tissue-specific insulin sensitivity shown through hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic clamp using stable isotopic glucose. Liver biopsy samples were pathologically evaluated at baseline. RESULTS: At baseline, the mean duration of diabetes, HbA1c level and IHL were 3.7 years, 7.2% and 20.9%, respectively. The median NAFLD activity score was 3.0. IHL was significantly more decreased in the empagliflozin group than that in the sitagliptin group (between-group difference was -5.2% ± 1.1% and -1.9% ± 1.2%, respectively, (95% confidence interval); -3.3 (-6.5, -0.1), P = .044). However, there were no significant between-group differences in the change of insulin sensitivity in the liver, muscle or adipose tissues. Interestingly, hepatic insulin sensitivity was significantly increased only in the empagliflozin group and was significantly negatively associated with the change in IHL. CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin significantly improves hepatic steatosis compared with sitagliptin, and this may protect against subsequent hepatic insulin resistance. Early administration of SGLT2 inhibitors is preferable for T2D patients with NAFLD.

Postprandial glucose-lowering effects by sago (Metroxylon sagu Rottb.) resistant starch in spontaneously type 2 diabetes, Goto-Kakizaki rat.

Introduction: The beneficial effects of resistant starch (RS) consumption on health in terms of reducing postprandial hyperglycaemia are evident. However, the potential of local Sarawak sago RS in regulating glucose has not been extensively studied. Objectives: This study aims to identify glucose-lowering effects of Sarawak sago RS, namely native (RS2) and chemically modified (RS4). Methodology: An oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed before and after 1 month treatment with sago RS2 and RS4 in spontaneously type 2 diabetes (T2D), Goto-Kakizaki (GK) rat. The mechanisms involved were further explored by screening the in vitro inhibitory activities of α-glucosidase and dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-IV. Histopathology examination for pancreas, kidney and liver tissues was done in response to sago RS intake using haematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining. Results and discussion: The incremental area under the curve (iAUC) for blood glucose in RS-treated groups was decreased and significant in RS2-treated group (p < 0.05). Improved iAUC for insulin and higher glucagon-like peptide (GLP-1) levels were observed in all RS-treated groups (p < 0.05). Both sago RS may have potential roles in regulating glucose via α- glucosidase and DPP-IV inhibitory activities by reducing intestinal glucose absorption. For histopathology, although insignificant, sago RS2 and RS4 attenuated lesion scores of pancreatic tissue whereas the liver and kidney tissues significantly showed lesser lesion scores compared to the control diabetic group suggesting the potential of RS in reducing cell degeneration. Conclusion: Findings of this study indicates that RS2 showed greater glucose-lowering effect when compared to RS4, thus the therapeutic potential in the T2D management should be further explored.

Integration of Deep Learning and Sequential Metabolism to Rapidly Screen Dipeptidyl Peptidase (DPP)-IV Inhibitors from Gardenia jasminoides Ellis.

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) possesses unique advantages in the management of blood glucose and lipids. However, there is still a significant gap in the exploration of its pharmacologically active components. Integrated strategies encompassing deep-learning prediction models and active validation based on absorbable ingredients can greatly improve the identification rate and screening efficiency in TCM. In this study, the affinity prediction of 11,549 compounds from the traditional Chinese medicine system's pharmacology database (TCMSP) with dipeptidyl peptidase-IV (DPP-IV) based on a deep-learning model was firstly conducted. With the results, Gardenia jasminoides Ellis (GJE), a food medicine with homologous properties, was selected as a model drug. The absorbed components of GJE were subsequently identified through in vivo intestinal perfusion and oral administration. As a result, a total of 38 prototypical absorbed components of GJE were identified. These components were analyzed to determine their absorption patterns after intestinal, hepatic, and systemic metabolism. Virtual docking and DPP-IV enzyme activity experiments were further conducted to validate the inhibitory effects and potential binding sites of the common constituents of deep learning and sequential metabolism. The results showed a significant DPP-IV inhibitory activity (IC50 53 ± 0.63 µg/mL) of the iridoid glycosides' potent fractions, which is a novel finding. Genipin 1-gentiobioside was screened as a promising new DPP-IV inhibitor in GJE. These findings highlight the potential of this innovative approach for the rapid screening of active ingredients in TCM and provide insights into the molecular mechanisms underlying the anti-diabetic activity of GJE.

Efficacy and safety of alogliptin versus acarbose in Chinese type 2 diabetes patients with high cardiovascular risk or coronary heart disease treated with aspirin and inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy or drug-naive: A multicentre, randomized, open-label, prospective study (ACADEMIC).

AIMS: To demonstrate the noninferiority of alogliptin to acarbose, in terms of antidiabetic efficacy, in Chinese people with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D) and high cardiovascular risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ACADEMIC (NCT03794336) was a randomized, open-label, phase IV study conducted at 46 sites in China. Antidiabetic treatment-naive or metformin-treated adults with uncontrolled T2D (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 58.0-97.0 mmol/mol) were randomized 2:1 to alogliptin 25 mg once daily or acarbose 100 mg three times daily for 16 weeks. All participants had a documented history of coronary heart disease or high cardiovascular risk at screening and received aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) 100 mg daily throughout the trial. The primary endpoints were change in HbA1c versus baseline, and the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs). Safety and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 1088 participants were randomized. Alogliptin was noninferior to acarbose for the change in Week-16 HbA1c (least-squares mean change [standard error] -11.9 [0.4] vs. -11.4 [0.5] mmol/mol, respectively; difference between arms -0.5 [0.7] mmol/mol; 95% confidence interval -1.9 to 0.8 mmol/mol), and was associated with a lower incidence of gastrointestinal AEs (8.9% vs. 33.6%, respectively; P < 0.0001). More alogliptin than acarbose recipients achieved HbA1c <53.0 mmol/mol without gastrointestinal AEs (48.0% vs. 32.7%; P < 0.0001). Discontinuations due to treatment-related AEs were less frequent with alogliptin than acarbose (0.3% vs. 2.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Glycaemic control was comparable between alogliptin and acarbose, but the gastrointestinal tolerability of alogliptin was better. More patients achieved target HbA1c without gastrointestinal AEs with alogliptin, suggesting that this agent may be preferred in clinical practice.

DPP-IV Inhibitory Peptides GPF, IGL, and GGGW Obtained from Chicken Blood Hydrolysates.

Blood is a meat by-product rich in proteins with properties that can be improved after hydrolysis, making it a sustainable alternative for use in the generation of bioactive peptides. The objective of this study was to identify dipeptidyl peptidase IV (DPP-IV) inhibitory peptides obtained from different chicken blood hydrolysates prepared using combinations of four different enzymes. Best results were observed for AP (2% Alcalase + 5% Protana Prime) and APP (2% Alcalase + 5% Protana Prime + 3% Protana UBoost) hydrolysates obtaining inhibition values of 60.55 and 53.61%, respectively, assayed at a concentration of 10 mg/mL. Free amino acids were determined to establish the impact of exopeptidase activity in the samples. A total of 79 and 12 sequences of peptides were identified by liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry in tandem (LC-MS/MS) in AP and APP samples, respectively. Nine of the identified peptides were established as potential DPP-IV inhibitory using in silico approaches and later synthesized for confirmation. Thus, peptides GPF, IGL, and GGGW showed good DPP-IV inhibitory activity with IC50 values of 0.94, 2.22, and 2.73 mM, respectively. This study confirmed the potential of peptides obtained from chicken blood hydrolysates to be used as DPP-IV inhibitors and, therefore, in the control or modulation of type 2 diabetes.

Lower cardiorenal risk with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes without cardiovascular and renal diseases: A large multinational observational study.

AIMS: We compared the new use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4i) and the risk of cardiorenal disease, heart failure (HF) or chronic kidney disease (CKD), in patients with type 2 diabetes without a history of prevalent cardiovascular and renal disease, defined as cardiovascular and renal disease (CVRD) free, managed in routine clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this observational cohort study, patients were identified from electronic health records from England, Germany, Japan, Norway, South Korea and Sweden, during 2012-2018. In total, 1 006 577 CVRD-free new users of SGLT2i or DPP4i were propensity score matched 1:1. Unadjusted Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for outcomes: cardiorenal disease, HF, CKD, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the treatment groups (n = 105 130 in each group) with total follow-up of 187 955 patient years. Patients had a mean age of 56 years, 43% were women and they were indexed between 2013 and 2018. The most commonly used agents were dapagliflozin (91.7% of exposure time) and sitagliptin/linagliptin (55.0%), in the SGLT2i and DPP4i, groups, respectively. SGLT2i was associated with lower risk of cardiorenal disease, HF, CKD, all-cause and cardiovascular mortality; HR (95% confidence interval), 0.56 (0.42-0.74), 0.71 (0.59-0.86), 0.44 (0.28-0.69), 0.67 (0.59-0.77), and 0.61 (0.44-0.85), respectively. No differences were observed for stroke [0.87 (0.69-1.09)] and MI [0.94 (0.80-1.11)]. CONCLUSION: In this multinational observational study, SGLT2i was associated with a lower risk of HF and CKD versus DPP4i in patients with type 2 diabetes otherwise free from both cardiovascular and renal disease.

A dipyrrole derivative from Aloe vera inhibits an anti-diabetic drug target Dipeptidyl Peptidase (DPP)-IV in vitro.

Aloe vera, a succulent herb, has a long history of use in traditional medicine, including diabetes. Earlier studies from our laboratory demonstrated that the Aloe vera extract has the ability to inhibit the diabetic drug target dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP) IV in vitro. This current study focuses on the isolation of small water soluble active molecule(s) involved in DPP-IV inhibition from Aloe vera extract, and further to characterize its structure and to elucidate the mode of inhibition of the DPP-IV enzyme. Aloe vera gel ethanolic extract was subjected to preparative reverse-phase high-pressure liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC), LH-20 Sephadex gel filtration chromatography, followed by analytical RP-HPLC, to isolate the active molecule involved in DPP-IV inhibition. Based on the spectroscopic studies, the structure of the isolated DPP-IV inhibitor was predicted to be 3, 6-dioxo-3, 3a, 6, 6 a-tetrahydropyrrolo [3, 4-c] pyrrole-1, 4-dicarboxamide with the chemical formula C8H6N4O4, having the molecular weight of 225.175 Da. This molecule inhibited the DPP-IV enzyme in a noncompetitive manner with an IC50 value of 8.59 ± 2.61 µM, with a Ki of 4.7 ± 0.038 µM. Thus, the mechanism of DPP-IV inhibition and the inhibitory constants were determined. The results of our studies suggested that the inhibition of the DPP-IV enzyme as one of the pathways by which the Aloe vera extract may restore the pancreatic islets cell mass in diabetic animal model.

Glycaemic efficacy and safety of linagliptin compared to a basal-bolus insulin regimen in patients with type 2 diabetes undergoing non-cardiac surgery: A multicentre randomized clinical trial.

AIMS: The use of incretin-based therapy, rather than or complementary to, insulin therapy is an active area of research in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We determined the glycaemic efficacy and safety of linagliptin compared to a basal-bolus insulin regimen in hospitalized surgical patients with T2D. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective open-label multicentre study randomized T2D patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery with admission blood glucose (BG) of 7.8 to 22.2 mmol/L who were under treatment with diet, oral agents or total insulin dose (TDD) ≤ 0.5 units/kg/day to either linagliptin (n = 128) daily or basal-bolus (n = 122) with glargine once daily and rapid-acting insulin before meals. Both groups received supplemental insulin for BG > 7.8 mmol/L. The primary endpoint was difference in mean daily BG between groups. RESULTS: Mean daily BG was higher in the linagliptin group compared to the basal-bolus group (9.5 ± 2.6 vs 8.8 ± 2.3 mmol/L/dL, P = 0.03) with a mean daily BG difference of 0.6 mmol/L (95% confidence interval 0.04, 1.2). In patients with randomization BG < 11.1 mmol/L (63% of cohort), mean daily BG was similar in the linagliptin and basal-bolus groups (8.9 ± 2.3 vs 8.7 ± 2.3 mmol/L, P = 0.43); however, patients with BG ≥ 11.1 mmol/L who were treated with linagliptin had higher BG compared to the basal-bolus group (10.9 ± 2.6 vs 9.2 ± 2.2 mmol/L, P < 0.001). Linagliptin resulted in fewer hypoglycaemic events (1.6% vs 11%, P = 0.001; 86% relative risk reduction), with similar supplemental insulin and fewer daily insulin injections (2.0 ± 3.3 vs 3.1 ± 3.3, P < 0.001) compared to the basal-bolus group. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with T2D undergoing non-cardiac surgery who presented with mild to moderate hyperglycaemia (BG < 11.1 mmol/L), daily linagliptin is a safe and effective alternative to multi-dose insulin therapy, resulting in similar glucose control with lower hypoglycaemia.

Study design choices for evaluating the comparative safety of diabetes medications: An evaluation of pioglitazone use and risk of bladder cancer in older US adults with type-2 diabetes.

AIM: The aim of the study was to empirically demonstrate the effect of varying study designs when evaluating the safety of pioglitazone in treating bladder cancer. METHODS: We identified Medicare beneficiaries above 65 years of age with diabetes between 2008 and 2015 and with classified exposure (at least two claims within 180 days) to glucose-lowering drugs (GLD), pioglitazone or another drug. The effects of varying the following study design parameters on bladder cancer risk were assessed: use of a new vs existing drug, choice of referent (all non-users and users of GLDs, non-insulin GLDs and DPP-4s) and whether or not censoring accounted for treatment change. We used the Cox proportional hazards model to obtain adjusted HRs and 95% CIs. RESULTS: We included 1,510,212 patients classified as pioglitazone users (N = 135,188) or non-users (N = 1,375,024). Users had more diabetic complications than non-users, but fewer than insulin users. The HR ranged from 1.10 (1.01-1.20) to 1.13 (0.99-1.29) when censoring ignored treatment change, suggesting a weak association or none between pioglitazone and bladder cancer, probably under-estimating risk. However, the HR was 1.20 (1.01-1.42) when cohorts were restricted to new users, censored upon treatment change, and when DPP-4 was used as the referent, suggesting an increased risk of bladder cancer associated with pioglitazone. CONCLUSIONS: The continued demand for new GLDs indicates the need for more robust observational methods to improve the value of generating real-world evidence in equipping clinicians to make informed prescribing decisions. Although there is no one-size-fits-all approach, we recommend active comparator new user study designs that compare therapeutically equivalent drugs and account for treatment changes during follow-up to present the least biased comparative safety estimates.

Comparative effect of saxagliptin and glimepiride with a composite endpoint of adequate glycaemic control without hypoglycaemia and without weight gain in patients uncontrolled with metformin therapy: Results from the SPECIFY study, a 48-week, multi-centre, randomized, controlled trial.

AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of saxagliptin and glimepiride in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients who are inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this 48-week, multi-centre, open-label, randomized, parallel trial (NCT02280486, clinicaltrials.gov), a total of 388 T2D patients were randomized 1:1 to saxagliptin or glimepiride groups. The primary endpoint was achievement of HbA1c <7.0%, without hypoglycaemia, defined as blood glucose <3.9 mmol/L and weight gain <3.0% after 48 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Over 48 weeks, a greater proportion of patients achieved the primary endpoint with saxagliptin compared with glimepiride (43.3% vs 31.3%; odds ratio, 1.38, 95% CI, 1.05-1.82; P = 0.019), especially among patients with baseline HbA1c <8.0%, duration <5 years or baseline BMI ≥25 kg/m2 . Mean reduction in HbA1c was similar in the two treatment groups at Week 48 (-0.94% with saxagliptin vs -0.98% with glimepiride; P = 0.439). Bodyweight decreased with saxagliptin, but increased with glimepiride over the treatment period, and the treatment difference was -1.6 kg (P < 0.001) at Week 48. The proportion of patients experiencing hypoglycaemia was much lower with saxagliptin vs glimepiride (3.1% vs 12.8%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that, compared to glimepiride, saxagliptin more effectively achieves a composite endpoint of adequate glycaemic control without hypoglycaemia and without weight gain in T2D patients who are inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy, especially in overweight patients with moderate hyperglycaemia and a relatively short duration of diabetes.

Sustained 52-week efficacy and safety of triple therapy with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus dual therapy with sitagliptin added to metformin in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of an intensification strategy of early triple combination therapy with dapagliflozin (DAPA) plus saxagliptin (SAXA) to a dual therapy strategy with sitagliptin (SITA) in patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled with metformin (MET) monotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multinational, active-controlled, parallel-group phase 3b trial randomized 461 patients, at least 18 years of age, with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 8%-10.5% (64-91 mmol/mol), to either DAPA plus SAXA or SITA, added to MET, for a 26-week double-blind treatment period and an extension of a 26-week blinded treatment period. RESULTS: Mean (± SD) baseline HbA1c was 8.8% ± 0.9% (73.0 ± 9.3 mmol/mol). DAPA plus SAXA (n = 232) provided a greater reduction from baseline in HbA1c at Weeks 26 and 52 compared with SITA (n = 229) (adjusted mean ± SE change, Week 26: -1.41 ± 0.07% vs -1.07 ± 0.07% [-15.4 ± 0.8 mmol/mol vs 11.7 ± 0.8 mmol/mol]; P = 0.0008; Week 52: -1.29 ± 0.08% vs -0.81 ± 0.09% [14.1 ± 0.9 mmol/mol vs 8.9 ± 1.0 mmol/mol]). The between-group difference in adjusted mean (95% CI) change from baseline in HbA1c increased from -0.34 (-0.54, -0.14) at Week 26 to -0.48 (-0.71, -0.25) at Week 52. DAPA plus SAXA was generally well tolerated and the incidence of adverse events was similar in both treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Early intensification to triple therapy with DAPA plus SAXA results in better, more durable glycaemic control than addition of SITA only (dual therapy) in patients with high HbA1c levels who are uncontrolled with MET monotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination therapy with gemigliptin (50 mg) and rosuvastatin compared with monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidaemia (BALANCE): A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, controlled, phase 3 trial.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of gemigliptin and rosuvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidaemia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 33 hospitals in Korea participated in this randomized, double-blind trial of diabetic patients with dyslipidaemia. A total of 290 participants were randomly assigned at a 1:1:1 ratio to receive an FDC of gemigliptin (50 mg) and rosuvastatin (20 mg) (GEMI/ROSU FDC group), gemigliptin (50 mg) (GEMI group) or rosuvastatin (20 mg) (ROSU group). Rosuvastatin was up-titrated from 5 to 20 mg/d throughout the study period. Primary efficacy measures were changes in HbA1c and LDL-C from baseline to Week 24 between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups and between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups, respectively. Secondary efficacy measures were changes in HbA1c and LDL-C between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups and between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups, respectively. RESULTS: After 24 weeks of treatment, a significant reduction in HbA1c from baseline was noted in the GEMI/ROSU FDC group (-0.81% of LS mean; P < 0.0001 vs ROSU group), in addition to a significant reduction in LDL-C concentration (-51.9% of LS mean percentage changes, P < 0.0001 vs GEMI group). HbA1c was significantly reduced from baseline in both the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups, but the reduction in HbA1c was significantly greater in the GEMI group than in the GEMI/ROSU FDC group, despite receiving the same dose of gemigliptin. The decrease in LDL-C over time was similar between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups. There were no significant differences in adverse events among the groups. CONCLUSION: The FDC of gemigliptin and rosuvastatin is safe and is effective in reducing both blood glucose and LDL-C levels; thus, it could be a good therapeutic choice for type 2 diabetic patients with dyslipidaemia.

Comparative safety of pioglitazone versus clinically meaningful treatment alternatives concerning the risk of bladder cancer in older US adults with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To compare bladder cancer incidence between patients initiating pioglitazone treatment and patients initiating treatment with dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors [DPP-4s] or sulfonylureas. METHODS: We identified Medicare beneficiaries aged >65 years who initiated treatment with pioglitazone (N = 38 700), DPP-4s (N = 82 552) or sulfonylureas (N = 126 104) between 2007 and 2014 after at least 6 months without prescriptions for these drug classes. Patients were followed from second prescription until bladder cancer outcome (2 claims within 60 days) using a 6-month induction/latency period, censoring for treatment change, death or end of 2014. We used propensity score-weighted Cox proportional-hazards models to obtain adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and their 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Overall mean age of participants was 75 years and 41% were men. Over a median of 1.2 treatment years, 727 beneficiaries developed bladder cancer. Pioglitazone initiators had an increased incidence of bladder cancer (308 vs 204 [DPP-4s] or 231 [sulfonylureas] per 100 000 person-years; aHR, 1.57 [1.23-2.00] vs DPP-4s and 1.32 [1.02-1.70] vs sulfonylureas). The increased risk emerged within the first 2 years of treatment (aHR, 1.63 [1.22-2.17] vs DPP-4s and 1.32 [0.98-1.78] vs sulfonylureas). If treatment was discontinued within the first 2 years, the risk after 2 years post initiation was attenuated (aHR, 0.89 [0.61-1.28]) compared with patients treated for more than 2 years (aHR, 1.45 [0.93-2.26]) both vs DPP-4s. Findings were consistent across secondary and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Pioglitazone was associated with an elevated risk of bladder cancer compared with DPP-4s and sulfonylureas. The elevated risk emerged within the first 2 years of treatment and was attenuated after discontinuing. Pioglitazone's relative effectiveness should be weighed against a small absolute increase in risk of bladder cancer.

A 52-week extension study of switching from gemigliptin vs sitagliptin to gemigliptin only as add-on therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled with metformin alone.

We investigated the long-term efficacy and safety of gemigliptin and the efficacy and safety of gemigliptin treatment after once-daily treatment with sitagliptin 100 mg, in patients with type 2 diabetes. This was a 28-week extension of a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel study of gemigliptin or sitagliptin added to ongoing metformin therapy. After randomization to sitagliptin 100 mg qd (S), gemigliptin 25 mg bid (G1) or gemigliptin 50 mg qd (G2) and after completing 24 weeks of treatment, 118 patients switched from gemigliptin 25 mg bid to 50 mg qd (G1/G2), 111 patients continued gemigliptin 50 mg qd (G2/G2) and 106 patients switched from sitagliptin 100 mg qd to gemigliptin 50 mg qd (S/G2). All 3 treatments reduced glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) (S/G2,-0.99% [95% CI -1.25%, -0.73%]; G1/G2, -1.11% [95% CI -1.33%, -0.89%]; G2/G2, -1.06% [95% CI -1.28%, -0.85%]). The percentage of patients achieving HbA1c < 6.5% was 27.6% in the G1/G2 group at both Week 24 and Week 52, and ranged from 27.3% to 32.7% in the G2/G2 group (difference in proportions, 5% [95% CI -6%, 17%]), while it increased from 6.8% to 27.3% from Week 24 to Week 52 in the S/G2 group (difference in proportions, 20% [95% CI 7%, 34%]). Addition of gemigliptin 50 mg qd to metformin was shown to be efficacious for 52 weeks. Switching from sitagliptin 100 mg to gemigliptin 50 mg showed consistent glyacemic control over the previous treatment.

Efficacy and safety of the addition of ertugliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with metformin and sitagliptin: The VERTIS SITA2 placebo-controlled randomized study.

AIMS: To assess ertugliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled by metformin and sitagliptin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this double-blind randomized study (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02036515), patients (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.0% to 10.5% [53-91 mmol/mol] receiving metformin ≥1500 mg/d and sitagliptin 100 mg/d; estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2 ) were randomized to ertugliflozin 5 mg once-daily, 15 mg once-daily or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c at Week 26; treatment was continued until Week 52. RESULTS: A total of 464 patients were randomized (mean baseline HbA1c, 8.0% [64.3 mmol/mol]; eGFR, 87.9 mL/min/1.73 m2 ). After 26 weeks, placebo-adjusted least squares (LS) mean changes in HbA1c from baseline were -0.7% (-7.5 mmol/mol) and -0.8% (-8.3 mmol/mol) for ertugliflozin 5 and 15 mg, respectively (both P < .001); 17.0%, 32.1% and 39.9% of patients receiving placebo, ertugliflozin 5 mg or ertugliflozin 15 mg, respectively, had HbA1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol). Significant reductions in fasting plasma glucose, body weight (BW) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) were observed with ertugliflozin relative to placebo. The positive effects of ertugliflozin on glycaemic control, BW and SBP were maintained through Week 52. A higher incidence of genital mycotic infections was observed in male and female patients receiving ertugliflozin (3.7%-14.1%) vs placebo (0%-1.9%) through Week 52. The incidence of urinary tract infections, symptomatic hypoglycaemia and hypovolaemia adverse events were not meaningfully different across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ertugliflozin added to metformin and sitagliptin was well-tolerated, and provided clinically meaningful, durable glycaemic control, BW and SBP reductions vs placebo over 52 weeks.

Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin or dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus glimepiride as add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin and dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin vs glimepiride as add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This 52-week, multicentre, double-blind, active-controlled study (NCT02471404) randomized (1:1:1) patients (n = 939; HbA1c 7.5%-10.5%) on metformin monotherapy (≥1500 mg/day) to add-on dapagliflozin 10 mg, dapagliflozin 10 mg plus saxagliptin 5 mg, or glimepiride 1 to 6 mg (titrated). The primary efficacy end point was change in HbA1c from baseline to Week 52. RESULTS: Baseline mean age, diabetes duration and HbA1c were 58.4 years, 7.0 years and 8.3%, respectively. Adjusted mean HbA1c change from baseline was -1.20% with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin and -0.82% with dapagliflozin, vs -0.99% with glimepiride (mean dose at Week 52, 4.6 mg). Changes in body weight (-3.2 kg and -3.5 kg vs +1.8 kg) and systolic blood pressure (SBP; -6.4 mm Hg and -5.6 mm Hg vs -1.6 mm Hg) were significantly greater with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin and dapagliflozin than with glimepiride. FPG decreased significantly with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin compared with glimepiride (-2.1 mmol/L vs -1.5 mmol/L) and was similar with dapagliflozin (-1.6 mmol/L) compared with glimepiride. Confirmed incidence of hypoglycaemia was lower with dapagliflozin regimens than with glimepiride (0 and 1 vs 13 patients) and fewer patients required rescue. Genital infections were more frequent with dapagliflozin; other AE profiles were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin, saxagliptin and metformin improved glycaemic control compared with glimepiride plus metformin; add-on of dapagliflozin alone showed efficacy similar to that of glimepiride. Both dapagliflozin regimens decreased body weight and SBP, with a lower incidence of hypoglycaemia compared with glimepiride.

Comparative efficacy and safety of gemigliptin versus linagliptin in type 2 diabetes patients with renal impairment: A 40-week extension of the GUARD randomized study.

AIMS: The long-term safety and efficacy of gemigliptin was evaluated in the present extension study after a 12-week study during a 40-week follow-up period. METHODS: The main study was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, phase IIIb study in which 50 mg of gemigliptin (N = 66) or placebo (N = 66) was administered to patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and moderate or severe renal impairment over a 12-week period. Patients with a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level of 7% to 11% and an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 15 to 59 mL/min/1.73 m2 were enrolled in the main study. After 12 weeks, patients in the gemigliptin group continued to receive gemigliptin (N = 50), whereas patients in the placebo group were transitioned from placebo to linagliptin (N = 52). Each group received the indicated treatment over the subsequent 40-week period. A total of 102 patients consented to participate in the extension study, and 79 patients ultimately completed the study. RESULTS: The HbA1c levels of both groups were significantly reduced at week 52 compared with baseline. Specifically, the adjusted mean change ± standard error in HbA1c level in the gemigliptin and placebo/linagliptin groups was 1.00% ± 0.21% and 0.65% ± 0.22% lower at week 52 than at baseline (P < .001 and P = .003), respectively. No significant difference in the change in HbA1c level was found between the 2 groups (P = .148). Trends in fasting plasma glucose, fructosamine and glycated albumin levels in the 2 groups were similar to trends in HbA1c levels. The eGFR of both groups was also significantly lower at week 52 than at baseline, and no significant difference in change in eGFR was found between the 2 groups. In contrast, both drugs had little effect on urinary albumin excretion, although both drugs significantly reduced the urinary type IV collagen level. The overall rates of adverse events were similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Gemigliptin and linagliptin did not differ with respect to safety and efficacy in patients with T2DM and renal impairment. The 2 drugs had similar glucose-lowering effects, and the changes in eGFR and albuminuria were also similar. Additionally, the risk of side effects, including hypoglycaemia, was similar between the 2 groups.

What have we learnt from "real world" data, observational studies and meta-analyses.

The incretin therapies glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) and dipeptidyl peptidase-IV (DPP-IV) inhibitors are now well-established as second and third-line therapies and in combination with insulin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Over the last decade, there is accumulating evidence of their efficacy and safety from both large multicentre randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies. Cardiovascular outcome trials have confirmed that several of these agents are also non-inferior to placebo with the GLP-1 RA liraglutide and semaglutide recently found to be superior in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events. Observational studies and post-marketing surveillance provide real world evidence of safety and effectiveness of these agents and have provided reassurance that signals for pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer seen in clinical trials are not of major concern in large patient populations. Well-designed real world studies complement RCTs and systematic reviews but appropriate data and methodologies, which are constantly improving, are necessary to answer appropriate clinical questions relating to the use of incretin therapies.