Search

Abstract Glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor (GLP‐1R) agonists induce weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), but the underlying mechanism is unclear. Recently, the mechanism by which metformin induces weight loss could be explained by an increase in growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF15), which suppresses appetite. Therefore, we aimed to investigate whether the GLP‐1R agonist liraglutide modifies plasma GDF15 levels in patients with T2DM. GDF15 levels were measured in plasma samples obtained from Dutch Europids and Dutch South Asians with T2DM before and after 26 weeks of treatment with daily liraglutide (n = 44) or placebo (n = 50) added to standard care. At baseline, circulating GDF15 levels did not differ between South Asians and Europids with T2DM. Treatment with liraglutide, compared to placebo, decreased body weight, but did not modify plasma GDF15 levels in all patients, or when data were split by ethnicity. Also, the change in plasma GDF15 levels after treatment with liraglutide did not correlate with changes in body weight or HbA1c levels. In addition, the dose of metformin used did not correlate with baseline plasma GDF15 levels. Compared to placebo, liraglutide treatment for 26 weeks does not modify plasma GDF15 levels in Dutch Europid or South Asian patients with T2DM. Thus, the weight loss induced by liraglutide is likely explained by other mechanisms beyond the GDF15 pathway. Highlights What is the central question of this study? Growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF15) suppresses appetite and is increased by metformin: does the GLP‐1R agonist liraglutide modify plasma GDF15 levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)? What is the main finding and its importance? Plasma GDF15 levels did not differ between South Asians and Europids with T2DM and were not modified by 26 weeks of liraglutide in either ethnicity. Moreover, there was no correlation between the changes in plasma GDF15 levels and dosage of metformin administered, changes in body weight or HbA1c levels. The appetite‐suppressing effect of liraglutide is likely exerted via pathways other than GDF15.

Abstract Background Liraglutide is an antidiabetic agent with cardioprotective effect. The purpose of this study is to test efficacy of liraglutide to improve diabetic cardiomyopathy in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2) without cardiovascular disease. Methods Patients with DM2 were randomly assigned to receive liraglutide 1.8 mg/day or placebo in this double-blind trial of 26 weeks. Primary outcome measures were LV diastolic function (early (E) and late (A) transmitral peak flow rate, E/A ratio, early deceleration peak (Edec), early peak mitral annular septal tissue velocity (Ea) and estimated LV filling pressure (E/Ea), and systolic function (stroke volume, ejection fraction, cardiac output, cardiac index and peak ejection rate) assessed with CMR. Intention-to-treat analysis of between-group differences was performed using ANCOVA. Mean estimated treatment differences (95% confidence intervals) are reported. Results 23 patients were randomized to liraglutide and 26 to placebo. As compared with placebo, liraglutide significantly reduced E (− 56 mL/s (− 91 to − 21)), E/A ratio (− 0.17 (− 0.27 to − 0.06)), Edec (− 0.9 mL/s2 * 10−3 (− 1.3 to − 0.2)) and E/Ea (− 1.8 (− 3.0 to − 0.6)), without affecting A (3 mL/s (− 35 to 41)) and Ea (0.4 cm/s (− 0.9 to 1.4)). Liraglutide reduced stroke volume (− 9 mL (− 16 to − 2)) and ejection fraction (− 3% (− 6 to − 0.1)), but did not change cardiac output (− 0.4 L/min (− 0.9 to 0.2)), cardiac index (− 0.1 L/min/m2 (− 0.4 to 0.1)) and peak ejection rate (− 46 mL/s (− 95 to 3)). Conclusions Liraglutide reduced early LV diastolic filling and LV filling pressure, thereby unloading the left ventricle. LV systolic function reduced and remained within normal range. Future studies are needed to investigate if liraglutide-induced left ventricular unloading slows progression of diabetic cardiomyopathy into symptomatic stages. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01761318.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported an error in Fig. 3. The bars in the upper right panel that represent heart rate in placebo treated patients is not correct.