The efficacy of niacin supplementation in type 2 diabetes patients: Study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

Background:Dyslipidemia is a main risk factor of cardiovascular disease in the diabetic patients. Niacin was found acutely to decrease the plasma concentration of free fatty acids by inhibiting their mobilization from adipose tissue. This present study is a double blinded, randomized, and prospective trial to determine the effect of niacin during dyslipidemia in type 2 diabetic patients.Methods:This randomized controlled, double-blinded, single center trial is carried out according to the principles of Declaration of Helsinki. This present study was approved in institutional review committee of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University. All the patients received the informed consent. Diabetic patients were randomized (1:1) to receive 3-month treatment with extended-release niacin or matching placebo. The major outcome of our present study was the change in the level of HbA1c from the baseline to week 12. Secondary outcome measures contained the levels of fasting blood glucose, the concentrations of serum transaminase, the other laboratory variables, and self-reported adverse events. The P < .05 was regarded as statistically significant.Results:We assumed that adding the niacin to the medication in patients with type 2 diabetes would reduce dyslipidemia and achieve target lipid levels.Trial registration:This study protocol was registered in Research Registry (researchregistry5925).     

Pleiotropic effects of liraglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes and moderate renal impairment: Individual effects of treatment

Liraglutide has pleiotropic effects favouring cardiovascular and renal risks. We investigated individual responses to liraglutide in six cardio-renal risk factors to examine whether responses in one risk factor are associated with changes in other risk factors (cross-dependency). We performed secondary analysis of the LIRA-RENAL trial (n = 279) in type 2 diabetes. HbA1c, body weight, systolic blood pressure (SBP)_, low density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were measured at baseline and after 26 weeks of liraglutide/placebo treatment: “Good responders” had a change within the best quartile. In the liraglutide-treated group, good HbA1c responders showed similar changes in other risk factors analysed to low responders (P ≥ 0.17). Good body weight responders had a larger reduction in HbA1c than low body weight responders (−1.6 ± 0.94 vs. –1.0 ± 0.82%; P = 0.003), but similar changes in the other risk factors (P ≥ 0.11). Good and low responders in SBP, UACR, LDL-cholesterol or eGFR showed similar changes in other risk factors (P ≥ 0.07). Treatment response to liraglutide is largely individual; aside from an association between body weight and HbA1c reduction, there are no obvious cross-dependencies in risk factor response.     

Effects of liraglutide versus sitagliptin on circulating cardiovascular biomarkers,including circulating progenitor cells,in individuals with type 2 diabetes and obesity: Analyses from the LYDIA trial

The mechanisms behind the beneficial cardiovascular effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is) remain largely unknown, despite both targeting the incretin pathway to improve glycaemic control. In these prespecified secondary analyses of the LYDIA trial, we examined the impact of the GLP-1RA liraglutide (1.8 mg once-daily) and the DPP4i sitagliptin (100 mg once-daily) on circulating cardiovascular biomarkers associated with atherosclerotic risk, including circulating progenitor cells (CPCs). LYDIA was a 26-week, randomized, active-comparator trial in 61 adults with type 2 diabetes and obesity (mean ± SD: age 43.8 ± 6.5 years, body mass index 35.3 ± 6.4 kg/m², HbA1c 7.5% ± 0.83% [58.5 ± 9.1 mmol/mol]). Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and stromal cell-derived factor-1-alpha (SDF-1ɑ), both of which are implicated in endothelial function, were higher at 26 weeks with liraglutide therapy compared with sitagliptin (mean between-group difference [95% CI]: 77.03 [18.29, 135.77] pg/mL, p = .010; and 996.25 [818.85, 1173.64] pg/mL, p < .001, respectively). There were no between-group differences in CPCs, nitric oxide, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, tumour necrosis factor alpha and advanced glycation end-products. These analyses suggest a favourable impact of liraglutide on VEGF and SDF-1ɑ levels compared with sitagliptin. These factors may therefore be implicated in the differential cardiovascular effects observed between these agents in large cardiovascular outcome trials. However, these are secondary analyses from a previous trial and thus hypothesis-generating. Purposive trials are required to examine these findings further.     

The effect of web-based educational intervention on psychological status and blood glucose in newly diagnosed patients with diabetes type 2 in rural China: A protocol for randomized trial

Background:No studies were located which used a web-based educational intervention to improve the knowledge about newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Therefore, the primary objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of web-based educational intervention on psychological outcomes and glycemic control in newly diagnosed T2DM in rural China.Methods:This work is a part of a comprehensive research project to assess and provide educational intervention that potentially improve psychological status and blood glucose among patients with T2DM. Eligibility criteria for the study includes newly diagnosed with T2DM, adult patients (age ≥30 years) regardless of gender; speak and understand Chinese languages; having no significant comorbidity; being not involved in any trial/study related to diabetes during last 3 months and able to attend regular visits. Eligible participants were divided into 2 groups according to completely randomized design: education group and control group. The outcomes included fasting blood glucose level, EQ-5D-3L questionnaire, Self-rating Anxiety Scale, and Self-rating Depression Scale.Results:This protocol will provide a reliable theoretical basis for the following research.Conclusion:The sample came from a single health centre. Therefore, the results can not be generalized for the entire population.Trial registration:This study protocol was registered in Research Registry (researchregistry6511).     

Safety and efficacy of once‐weekly semaglutide vs additional oral antidiabetic drugs in Japanese people with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes: A randomized trial

Aim

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of once‐weekly subcutaneous semaglutide as monotherapy or combined with an oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) vs an additional OAD added to background therapy in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled on diet/exercise or OAD monotherapy.

Methods

In this phase III, open‐label trial, adults with T2D were randomized 2:2:1 to semaglutide 0.5 mg or 1.0 mg, or one additional OAD (a dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitor, biguanide, sulphonylurea, glinide, α‐glucosidase inhibitor or thiazolidinedione) with a different mode of action from that of background therapy. The primary endpoint was number of adverse events (AEs) after 56 weeks.

Results

Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment arms (601 randomized). More AEs were reported in the semaglutide 0.5 mg (86.2%) and 1.0 mg (88.0%) groups than in the additional OAD group (71.7%). These were typically mild/moderate. Gastrointestinal AEs were most frequent with semaglutide, which diminished over time. The mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration (baseline 8.1%) was significantly reduced with semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg vs additional OAD (1.7% and 2.0% vs 0.7%, respectively; estimated treatment difference [ETD] vs additional OAD ?1.08% and ?1.37%, both P < .0001). Body weight (baseline 71.5 kg) was reduced by 1.4 kg and 3.2 kg with semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg, vs a 0.4‐kg increase with additional OAD (ETD ?1.84 kg and ?3.59 kg; both P < .0001). For semaglutide‐treated participants, >80% achieved an HbA1c concentration <7.0% (Japanese Diabetes Society target).

Conclusions

Semaglutide was well tolerated, with no new safety issues identified. Semaglutide treatment significantly reduced HbA1c and body weight vs additional OAD treatment in Japanese people with T2D.