Effects of liraglutide on cardiovascular risk biomarkers in patients with type 2 diabetes and albuminuria: A sub‐analysis of a randomized,placebo‐controlled,double‐blind,crossover trial

We assessed the effects of liraglutide treatment on five cardiovascular risk biomarkers, reflecting different pathophysiology: tumour necrosis factor (TNF)‐α; soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR); mid‐regional pro‐adrenomedullin (MR‐proADM); mid‐regional pro‐atrial natriuretic peptide (MR‐proANP); and copeptin, in people with type 2 diabetes with albuminuria. In a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, crossover trial we enrolled people with type 2 diabetes and persistent albuminuria (urinary albumin‐to‐creatinine ratio [UACR] >30 mg/g) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m². Participants received liraglutide (1.8 mg/d) and matched placebo for 12 weeks, in random order. The primary endpoint was change in albuminuria; this was a prespecified sub‐study. A total of 32 participants were randomized, of whom 27 completed the study. TNF‐α level was 12% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3; 20) lower after liraglutide treatment compared with placebo (P = .012); MR‐proADM level was 4% (95% CI 0; 8) lower after liraglutide treatment compared with placebo (P = .038), and MR‐proANP level was 13% (95% CI 4; 21) lower after liraglutide treatment compared with placebo (P = .006). In the present study, we showed anti‐inflammatory effects of liraglutide treatment, reflected in reductions in levels of TNF‐α and MR‐proADM, while the reduction in MR‐proANP levels may represent a clinically relevant benefit with regard to heart failure.     

Efficacy and safety of alirocumab in insulin‐treated individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk: The ODYSSEY DM‐INSULIN randomized trial

Aims

To investigate the efficacy and safety of alirocumab in participants with type 2 (T2D) or type 1 diabetes (T1D) treated with insulin who have elevated LDL cholesterol levels despite maximally tolerated statin therapy.

Methods

Participants at high cardiovascular risk with T2D (n = 441) or T1D (n = 76) and LDL cholesterol levels ≥1.8 mmol/L (≥70 mg/dL) were randomized 2:1 to alirocumab:placebo administered subcutaneously every 2 weeks, for 24 weeks' double‐blind treatment. Alirocumab‐treated participants received 75 mg every 2 weeks, with blinded dose increase to 150 mg every 2 weeks at week 12 if week 8 LDL cholesterol levels were ≥1.8 mmol/L. Primary endpoints were percentage change in calculated LDL cholesterol from baseline to week 24, and safety assessments.

Results

Alirocumab reduced LDL cholesterol from baseline to week 24 by a mean ± standard error of 49.0% ± 2.7% and 47.8% ± 6.5% vs placebo (both P < .0001) in participants with T2D and T1D, respectively. Significant reductions were observed in non‐HDL cholesterol (P < .0001), apolipoprotein B (P < .0001) and lipoprotein (a) (P ≤ .0039). At week 24, 76.4% and 70.2% of the alirocumab group achieved LDL cholesterol <1.8 mmol/L in the T2D and T1D populations (P < .0001), respectively. Glycated haemoglobin and fasting plasma glucose levels remained stable for the study duration. Treatment‐emergent adverse events were observed in 64.5% of alirocumab‐ vs 64.1% of placebo‐treated individuals (overall population).

Conclusions

Alirocumab produced significant LDL cholesterol reductions in participants with insulin‐treated diabetes regardless of diabetes type, and was generally well tolerated. Concomitant administration of alirocumab and insulin did not raise any safety concerns (NCT02585778).     

Liraglutide,a once‐daily human GLP‐1 analogue,improves pancreatic B‐cell function and arginine‐stimulated insulin secretion during hyperglycaemia in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus

Aims To assess the effect of liraglutide, a once‐daily human glucagon‐like peptide‐1 analogue on pancreatic B‐cell function. Methods Patients with Type 2 diabetes (n = 39) were randomized to treatment with 0.65, 1.25 or 1.9 mg/day liraglutide or placebo for 14 weeks. First‐ and second‐phase insulin release were measured by means of the insulin‐modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test. Arginine‐stimulated insulin secretion was measured during a hyperglycaemic clamp (20 mmol/l). Glucose effectiveness and insulin sensitivity were estimated by means of the insulin‐modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test. Results The two highest doses of liraglutide (1.25 and 1.9 mg/day) significantly increased first‐phase insulin secretion by 118 and 103%, respectively (P < 0.05). Second‐phase insulin secretion was significantly increased only in the 1.25 mg/day group vs. placebo. Arginine‐stimulated insulin secretion increased significantly at the two highest dose levels vs. placebo by 114 and 94%, respectively (P < 0.05). There was no significant treatment effect on glucose effectiveness or insulin sensitivity. Conclusions Fourteen weeks of treatment with liraglutide showed improvements in first‐ and second‐phase insulin secretion, together with improvements in arginine‐stimulated insulin secretion during hyperglycaemia.     

Effect of liraglutide on ectopic fat in polycystic ovary syndrome: A randomized clinical trial

Women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) were treated with the GLP‐1 receptor agonist liraglutide to investigate the effect on liver fat content, visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and the prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). In a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, randomized clinical trial 72 women with PCOS, with a BMI > 25 kg/m² and/or insulin resistance, were treated with liraglutide or received placebo 1.8 mg/d (2:1) for 26 weeks. Liver fat content was assessed by ¹ HMR spectroscopy, VAT by MRI, body composition by DXA, and glucose metabolism by oral glucose tolerance test. Compared with placebo, liraglutide treatment reduced body weight by 5.2 kg (5.6%), liver fat content by 44%, VAT by 18%, and the prevalence of NAFLD by two‐thirds (all P < .01). Sex‐hormone‐binding‐globulin (SHBG) levels increased by 19% (P = .03), and free testosterone decreased by 19% (P = .054). HbA1c, fasting glucose and leptin were reduced (all: P < .05), whereas measures of insulin resistance, adiponectin and glucagon did not change. In conclusion, 26 weeks of liraglutide treatment in PCOS resulted in significant reductions in liver fat content, VAT and the prevalence of NAFLD.     

Effects on repetitive 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure in subjects with type II diabetes randomized to liraglutide or glimepiride treatment both in combination with metformin: a randomized open parallel-group study

In this post hoc study, we aimed to investigate liraglutide treatment on repetitive 24-hour blood pressure (BP) in patients with type II diabetes. Sixty-two individuals with type II diabetes (45 males) were randomized to 1.8 mg liraglutide once daily or 4 mg glimepiride together with 1 g metformin twice daily. Ambulatory 24-hour systolic and diastolic blood pressure (sBP/dBP) was repetitively measured at baseline, 2 weeks, and 18 weeks. Outcomes were evaluated as treatment change from baseline, 2 weeks, and 18 weeks. Baseline clinical characteristics of liraglutide (n = 33) and glimepiride (n = 29) groups were well matched. No statistically significant difference in 24-hour sBP/dBP between three time periods and groups was observed. There was no treatment change for 24-hour sBP at week 2 or after week 18. There was a transient treatment change in 24-hour dBP in the liraglutide group at week 2 (3.2 ± 5.4 vs. ?1.2 ± 4.5 mm Hg, P < .01). A treatment change in 24-hour heart rate at week 2 (4.9 ± 6.8 vs. 1.0 ± 6.0 bpm, P = .03) and at week 18 (5.9 ± 7.8 vs. 0.2 ± 6.3 bpm, P < .01) was observed in the liraglutide group. In conclusion, liraglutide treatment did not lower BP. However, a small diurnal variation in dBP without affecting BP variability or nocturnal BP dipping was observed.     

Co-administration of liraglutide with insulin detemir demonstrates additive pharmacodynamic effects with no pharmacokinetic interaction

Aim: To compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) [area under the curve (AUC_{0–24 h}, C_max)] and pharmacodynamic (PD) (AUC_{GIR 0–24 h}, GIR_max) properties of single‐dose insulin detemir in the presence or absence of steady‐state liraglutide (1.8 mg dose) in subjects with type 2 diabetes to determine whether co‐administration affected the PK and PD profiles of either therapeutic agent. Methods: Following a 3‐week washout of oral antidiabetic agents (OADs) other than metformin, PK and PD assessments during three euglycaemia clamps were conducted: day 1 following a single dose of insulin detemir alone (0.5 U/kg), day 22 after 3 weeks of once‐daily liraglutide with weekly dose escalation to 1.8 mg daily, and day 36 after 2 weeks of steady‐state liraglutide maintenance at the 1.8 mg dose following co‐administration with a single dose of insulin detemir (0.5 U/kg). Results: The study population (N = 33; age 49.6 (±8.5) years) had diabetes for an average of 6.5 (±4.1) years, BMI 33 (±6.4) kg/m², FPG 9.7 (±1.6) mmol/l and HbA1c 8.3% (±0.9). PK: The PK profiles of insulin detemir were similar with and without steady‐state liraglutide. Liraglutide did not affect AUC or C_max of insulin detemir and vice versa. The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for ratios of insulin detemir AUC [1.03; CI (0.97, 1.09)] and C_max [1.05; CI (0.98, 1.13)] and liraglutide AUC [0.97; CI (0.87, 1.08)] and C_max [1.03, CI (0.93, 1.13)] were all within the no‐effect boundary (0.80, 1.25) (bioequivalence criterion). A stable mean insulin detemir concentration with and without liraglutide was maintained at the end of the 24‐h PK sampling period. PD: The sum of AUC_GIR for liraglutide (1982 mg/kg) and insulin detemir (1058 mg/kg) when given alone was similar to that obtained when the two were co‐administered (2947 mg/kg). No serious adverse events were reported and no adverse events led to study withdrawal. Conclusion: Co‐administration of liraglutide 1.8 mg at steady state and insulin detemir produces an additive glucose‐lowering effect without affecting the PK profile of either therapeutic agent suggesting that the addition of insulin detemir to patients treated with liraglutide will not require titration algorithms different from when insulin is added to OADs. The co‐administration of insulin detemir and liraglutide was well tolerated.     

Predictors and correlates of systolic blood pressure reduction with liraglutide treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes

Liraglutide is associated with blood pressure reduction in patients with type 2 diabetes. However, it is not known whether this blood pressure reduction can be predicted prior to treatment initiation, and to what extent it correlates with weight loss and with improved glycemic control during follow‐up. We analyzed data from a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial, in which 124 insulin‐treated patients with type 2 diabetes were randomized to liraglutide or placebo. We evaluated various baseline variables as potential predictors of systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction, and evaluated whether changes in SBP correlated with weight loss and with improved glycemic control. A greater reduction in SBP among liraglutide‐treated patients was predicted by higher baseline values of SBP (P < 0.0001) and diastolic blood pressure (P = 0.012), and by lower baseline values of mean glucose measured by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM; P = 0.044), and serum fasting C‐peptide (P = 0.015). The regression coefficients differed significantly between the liraglutide group and the placebo group only for diastolic blood pressure (P = 0.037) and mean CGM (P = 0.021). During the trial period, SBP reduction correlated directly with change in body weight and BMI, but not with change in HbA1c. We conclude that patients with lower mean CGM values at baseline responded to liraglutide with a larger reduction in SBP, and that improved HbA1c during follow‐up was not associated with reductions of SBP. Our data suggest that some patients with type 2 diabetes may benefit from liraglutide in terms of weight and SBP reduction.     

Prognostic significance of the renal resistive index in the primary prevention of type II diabetes

The renal resistive index has been demonstrated to predict the progression of renal disease and recurrence of major cardiac events in high‐risk cardiovascular patients, in addition to other comorbidities. We aimed to assess the prognostic significance of the renal resistive index in type 2 diabetic patients for primary prevention. From 2008 to 2011, patients with type 2 diabetes underwent cardiovascular evaluation, including renal resistive index assessment by renal Doppler ultrasound. The incidence of all‐cause death, cardiovascular events, dialysis requirement or a twofold increase in creatinine was recorded. Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan‐Meier method. Two hundred sixty‐six patients were included; 50% of the patients were men, an HbA1C level of 8.1 ± 1.7% (65 ± 13.6 mmol/mol) and a serum creatinine level of 8 [7‐9] mg/L. The mean 24‐hour systolic blood pressure, 24‐hour diastolic blood pressure, and 24‐hour pulse pressure were 133.4 ± 16.7, 76.5 ± 9.4, and 56.9 ± 12.4 mm Hg, respectively. The median renal resistive index was 0.7 [0.6‐0.7] with a threshold of 0.7 predictive of monitored events. After adjustment of the 24‐hour pulse pressure, age and 24‐hour heart rate, a renal resistive index ≥0.70 remained associated with all‐cause death (hazard ratio: 3.23 (1.16‐8.98); P = .025) and the composite endpoint of major clinical events (hazard ratio: 2.37 (1.34‐4.18); P = .003). An elevated renal resistive index with a threshold of 0.7 is an independent predictor of a first cardiovascular or renal event in type 2 diabetic patients. This simple index should be implemented in the multiparametric staging of diabetes.     

Effect of exercise combined with glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist treatment on cardiac function: A randomized double‐blind placebo‐controlled clinical trial

In patients with type 2 diabetes, both supervised exercise and treatment with the glucagon‐like peptide‐1 (GLP‐1) receptor agonist (GLP‐1RA) liraglutide may improve cardiac function. We evaluated cardiac function before and after 16 weeks of treatment with the GLP‐1RA liraglutide or placebo, combined with supervised exercise, in 33 dysregulated patients with type 2 diabetes on diet and/or metformin. Early diastolic myocardial tissue velocity was improved by exercise in the placebo group (mean ± standard deviation [s.d.] ?7.1 ± 1.6 to ?7.7 ± 1.8 cm/s, P = .01), but not in the liraglutide group (?7.1 ± 1.4 to ?7.0 ± 1.4 cm/s, P = .60; between groups, P = .02). Similarly, the mean ± s.d. ratio of early and atrial mitral annular tissue velocities improved in the placebo group (1.0 ± 0.4 to 1.2 ± 0.4, P = .003), but not in the liraglutide group (1.0 ± 0.3 to 1.0 ± 0.3, P = .87; between groups, P = .03). We found no significant differences in heart rate, left ventricular (LV) structure or function within or between the groups. In conclusion, the addition of liraglutide to exercise in sedentary patients with dysregulated type 2 diabetes may blunt the suggested beneficial effect of exercise on LV diastolic function.     

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.     

Achieving a clinically relevant composite outcome of an HbA1c of <7% without weight gain or hypoglycaemia in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of the liraglutide clinical trial programme

Aim: Effective type 2 diabetes management requires a multifactorial approach extending beyond glycaemic control. Clinical practice guidelines suggest targets for HbA1c, blood pressure and lipids, and emphasize weight reduction and avoiding hypoglycaemia. The phase 3 clinical trial programme for liraglutide, a human glucagon‐like peptide 1 analogue, showed significant improvements in HbA1c and weight with a low risk of hypoglycaemia compared to other diabetes therapies. In this context, we performed a meta‐analysis of data from these trials evaluating the proportion of patients achieving a clinically relevant composite measure of diabetes control consisting of an HbA1c <7% without weight gain or hypoglycaemia. Methods: A prespecified meta‐analysis was performed on 26‐week patient‐level data from seven trials (N = 4625) evaluating liraglutide with commonly used therapies for type 2 diabetes: glimepiride, rosiglitazone, glargine, exenatide, sitagliptin or placebo, adjusting for baseline HbA1c and weight, for a composite outcome of HbA1c <7.0%, no weight gain and no hypoglycaemic events. Results: At 26 weeks, 40% of the liraglutide 1.8 mg group, 32% of the liraglutide 1.2 mg group and 6–25% of comparators (6% rosiglitazone, 8% glimepiride, 15% glargine, 25% exenatide, 11% sitagliptin, 8% placebo) achieved this composite outcome. Odds ratios favoured liraglutide 1.8 mg by 2.0‐ to 10.5‐fold over comparators. Conclusions: As assessed by the composite outcome of HbA1c <7%, no hypoglycaemia and no weight gain, liraglutide was clearly superior to the other commonly used therapies. However, the long‐term clinical impact of this observation remains to be shown.     

The once‐daily human GLP‐1 analogue liraglutide impacts appetite and energy intake in patients with type 2 diabetes after short‐term treatment

The aim was to investigate effects of liraglutide on appetite and energy intake in a randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind, crossover study. Eighteen subjects with type 2 diabetes were assigned to treatment with once‐daily subcutaneous liraglutide (increasing by weekly 0.6 mg increments) or placebo for 3 weeks. Appetite ratings were assessed using visual analogue scales during a 5‐h meal test. Energy and macronutrient intake during the subsequent ad libitum lunch were also measured. After 3 weeks, mean postprandial and minimum hunger ratings were significantly lower with liraglutide 1.8 mg than placebo (p < 0.01), and the mean overall appetite score was significantly higher (p = 0.05), indicating reduced appetite. Liraglutide was associated with higher maximum fullness ratings (p = 0.001) and lower minimum ratings of prospective food consumption (p = 0.01). Mean estimated energy intake was 18% lower for liraglutide than placebo [estimated ratio 0.82 (95% CI 0.73;0.94); p = 0.004], but no significant differences in macronutrient distribution were noted. Findings suggest that reduced appetite and energy intake may contribute to liraglutide‐induced weight loss.     

Weekly glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist albiglutide as monotherapy improves glycemic parameters in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled study

Aims/Introduction

The present phase 3, randomized, double‐blind 24‐week study with extension to 1 year assessed the efficacy and safety of albiglutide compared with placebo in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled by diet and exercise with or without a single oral antidiabetic drug.

Materials and Methods

Patients received weekly albiglutide 30 mg (n = 160), albiglutide 50 mg (n = 150) or a placebo switched to albiglutide 30 mg after 24 weeks (n = 77). Open‐label daily liraglutide 0.9 mg (n = 103) was included as a reference. Oral antidiabetic drug use was discontinued before baseline. The primary end‐point was 24‐week change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Secondary end‐points included fasting plasma glucose, bodyweight and adverse events.

Results

At 24 weeks, mean HbA1c changes from baseline were ?1.10, ?1.30, and 0.25% for albiglutide 30, 50 mg and placebo, respectively (P vs placebo <0.0001 for both albiglutide doses), ?1.19% for liraglutide. Decreases in HbA1c with albiglutide were sustained through the study. Mean fasting plasma glucose decreased by ≥20 mg/dL, and the mean change in bodyweight was ≤0.5 kg through 1 year across groups. Most commonly reported adverse events were nasopharyngitis, constipation and nausea. The incidence of adverse events was higher in active treatment groups than in the placebo group. Few hypoglycemia events were reported; no patient withdrew as a result of hypoglycemia. No new safety signals were detected.

Conclusions

Albiglutide monotherapy achieved clinically significant decreases in HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose with good tolerability in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled by diet and exercise with or without a single oral antidiabetic drug.

     

The once‐daily human glucagon‐like peptide‐1 analog,liraglutide, improves β‐cell function in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes

Aims/Introduction: β‐cell function was evaluated by homeostasis model assessment of β‐cell function (HOMA‐B) index, proinsulin:insulin and proinsulin:C‐peptide ratios in adult, Japanese type 2 diabetes patients receiving liraglutide. Materials and Methods: Data from two randomized, controlled clinical trials (A and B) including 664 Japanese type 2 diabetes patients (mean values: glycated hemoglobin [HbA_1c] 8.61–9.32%; body mass index [BMI] 24.4–25.3 kg/m²) were analyzed. In two 24‐week trials, patients received liraglutide 0.9 mg (n = 268) or glibenclamide 2.5 mg (n = 132; trial A), or liraglutide 0.6, 0.9 mg (n = 176) or placebo (n = 88) added to previous sulfonylurea therapy (trial B). Results: Liraglutide was associated with improved glycemic control vs sulfonylurea monotherapy or placebo. In liraglutide‐treated groups in trials A and B, area under the curve (AUC) _{insulin 0–3 h} was improved (P < 0.001 for all) and the AUC_{insulin 0–3 h}:AUC_{glucose 0–3 h} ratio was increased (estimated treatment difference [liraglutide–comparator] 0.058 [0.036, 0.079]). HOMA‐B significantly increased with liraglutide relative to comparator in trial B (P < 0.05), but not in trial A. The reduction in fasting proinsulin:insulin ratio was 50% greater than in comparator groups. Conclusions: In Japanese type 2 diabetes patients, liraglutide was associated with effective glycemic control, restoration of prandial insulin response and indications of improved β‐cell function. This trial was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (trial A: no. NCT00393718/JapicCTI‐060328 and trial B: no. NCT00395746/JapicCTI‐060324). (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040‐1124.2012.00193.x, 2012)     

Chronic liraglutide therapy induces an enhanced endogenous glucagon‐like peptide‐1 secretory response in early type 2 diabetes

Sustained exogenous stimulation of a hormone‐specific receptor can affect endogenous hormonal regulation. In this context, little is known about the impact of chronic treatment with glucagon‐like peptide‐1 (GLP‐1) agonists on the endogenous GLP‐1 response. We therefore evaluated the impact of chronic liraglutide therapy on endogenous GLP‐1 and glucose‐dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) response to an oral glucose challenge. A total of 51 people with type 2 diabetes of 2.6 ± 1.9 years’ duration were randomized to daily subcutaneous liraglutide or placebo injection and followed for 48 weeks, with an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) every 12 weeks. GLP‐1 and GIP responses were assessed according to their respective area under the curve (AUC) from measurements taken at 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes during each OGTT. There were no differences in AUC_GIP between the groups. By contrast, although fasting GLP‐1 was unaffected, the liraglutide arm had ~2‐fold higher AUC_{GLP ‐1} at 12 weeks ( P < .001), 24 weeks ( P < .001), 36 weeks ( P = .03) and 48 weeks ( P = .03), as compared with placebo. Thus, chronic liraglutide therapy induces a previously unrecognized, robust and durable enhancement of the endogenous GLP‐1 response, highlighting the need for further study of the long‐term effects of incretin mimetics on L‐cell physiology.     

Improvement in glycated haemoglobin evaluated by baseline body mass index: a meta‐analysis of the liraglutide phase III clinical trial programme

In the liraglutide clinical trial programme, liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg were found to effectively lower glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). It is unknown whether baseline body mass index (BMI) is a predictor of change in HbA1c observed during a clinical trial with liraglutide or placebo treatment. The present meta‐analysis of patient‐level data, using pooled data from seven phase III trials [LEAD‐1–6 and the liraglutide versus sitagliptin trial (LIRA–DPP‐4)] for liraglutide 1.2, 1.8 mg and placebo (n = 3222), identified no significant correlation between baseline BMI (<20 kg/m² up to 45 kg/m²) and HbA1c reduction for placebo or liraglutide 1.2 mg, and a modest, clinically non‐relevant, association for liraglutide 1.8 mg [?0.010 (95% confidence interval ?0.020, ?0.001)], whereby a 10 kg/m² increase in baseline BMI corresponded to 0.10%‐point (1.1 mmol/mol) greater HbA1c reduction. In summary, reductions in HbA1c obtained during clinical trials with liraglutide or placebo treatment were independent of baseline BMI.     

The effect of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists liraglutide and semaglutide on cardiovascular and renal outcomes across baseline blood pressure categories: Analysis of the LEADER and SUSTAIN 6 trials

It is unknown if the cardioprotective and renal effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists are consistent across blood pressure (BP) categories in patients with type 2 diabetes and at high risk of cardiovascular events. Using data from the LEADER (9340 patients) and SUSTAIN 6 (3297 patients) trials, we evaluated post hoc the cardiorenal effect of liraglutide and semaglutide on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and nephropathy by baseline BP categories using a Cox proportional hazards model (treatment and subgroup as factors; adjusted for cardiorenal risk factors). Data from the two trials were analysed separately. In the LEADER and SUSTAIN 6 trials, the prevalence of stage 1 hypertension was 30% and 31%, respectively, and of stage 2 hypertension 41% and 43%, respectively. There was no statistical heterogeneity across the BP categories for the effects of liraglutide (P = .06 for MACE; P = .14 for nephropathy) or semaglutide (P = .40 for MACE; P = .27 for nephropathy) versus placebo. This implies that liraglutide and semaglutide may be beneficial for patients with type 2 diabetes, irrespective of their baseline BP.     

The effect of vitamin E on blood pressure in individuals with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: Oxidative stress has been suggested to play a role in the development of diabetes, hypertension and vascular dysfunction. Vitamin E, a major lipid-soluble dietary antioxidant, has two major dietary forms, alpha-tocopherol and gamma-tocopherol. The potential importance of gamma-tocopherol has largely been overlooked. Our aim was to investigate the effect of alpha-tocopherol and gamma-tocopherol supplementation on 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) and heart rate, vascular function and oxidative stress in individuals with type 2 diabetes. METHOD: Fifty-eight individuals with type 2 diabetes were randomized in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Participants were randomized to a daily dose of 500 mg/day RRR-alpha-tocopherol, 500 mg/day mixed tocopherols (60% gamma-tocopherol) or placebo for 6 weeks. Primary endpoints were 24-h ambulatory BP and heart rate, endothelium-dependent and independent vasodilation and plasma and urinary F2-isoprostanes. RESULTS: Treatment with alpha-tocopherol significantly increased systolic BP [7.0 (5.2, 8.8) mmHg, P < 0.0001], diastolic BP [5.3 (4.0, 6.5) mmHg, P < 0.0001], pulse pressure [1.8 (0.6, 3.0) mmHg, P < 0.005] and heart rate [2.0 (0.6, 3.3) bpm, P < 0.005] versus placebo. Treatment with mixed tocopherols significantly increased systolic BP [6.8 (4.9, 8.6) mmHg, P < 0.0001], diastolic BP [3.6 (2.3, 4.9) mmHg, P < 0.0001], pulse pressure [3.2 (2.0, 4.4) mmHg, P < 0.0001] and heart rate [1.8 (0.5, 3.2) bpm, P < 0.01] versus placebo. Treatment with alpha-tocopherol or mixed tocopherols significantly reduced plasma F2-isoprostanes versus placebo, but had no effect on urinary F2-isoprostanes. Endothelium-dependent and independent vasodilation was not affected by either treatment. CONCLUSION: In contrast to our initial hypothesis, treatment with either alpha- or mixed tocopherols significantly increased BP, pulse pressure and heart rate in individuals with type 2 diabetes.     

Effect of linagliptin monotherapy on glycaemic control and markers of β-cell function in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial

Aim: To assess the safety and efficacy of the potent and selective dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitor linagliptin 5 mg when given for 24 weeks to patients with type 2 diabetes who were either treatment‐naive or who had received one oral antidiabetes drug (OAD). Methods: This multicentre, randomized, parallel group, phase III study compared linagliptin treatment (5 mg once daily, n = 336) with placebo (n = 167) for 24 weeks in type 2 diabetes patients. Before randomization, patients pretreated with one OAD underwent a washout period of 6 weeks, which included a placebo run‐in period during the last 2 weeks. Patients previously untreated with an OAD underwent a 2‐week placebo run‐in period. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline after 24 weeks of treatment. Results: Linagliptin treatment resulted in a placebo‐corrected change in HbA1c from baseline of ?0.69% (p < 0.0001) at 24 weeks. In patients with baseline HbA1c ≥ 9.0%, the adjusted reduction in HbA1c was 1.01% (p < 0.0001). Patients treated with linagliptin were more likely to achieve a reduction in HbA1c of ≥0.5% at 24 weeks than those in the placebo arm (47.1 and 19.0%, respectively; odds ratio, OR = 4.2, p < 0.0001). Fasting plasma glucose improved by ?1.3 mmol/l (p < 0.0001) with linagliptin vs. placebo, and linagliptin produced an adjusted mean reduction from baseline after 24 weeks in 2‐h postprandial glucose of ?3.2 mmol/l (p < 0.0001). Statistically significant and relevant treatment differences were observed for proinsulin/insulin ratio (p = 0.025), Homeostasis Model Assessment‐%B (p = 0.049) and disposition index (p = 0.0005). There was no excess of hypoglycaemic episodes with linagliptin vs. placebo and no patient required third‐party intervention. Mild or moderate renal impairment did not influence the trough plasma levels of linagliptin. Conclusions: Monotherapy with linagliptin produced a significant, clinically meaningful and sustained improvement in glycaemic control, accompanied by enhanced parameters of β‐cell function. The safety profile of linagliptin was comparable with that of placebo.