Search

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is) and metformin are the most frequently prescribed first-line drugs for Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We investigated the risk of cardiovascular events by second-line treatment type in these patients. Patients with T2D, prescribed either metformin or DPP4i as a first-line drug, were identified in claims data from Japanese acute care hospitals. The primary and secondary outcomes were cumulative risks of MI or stroke and of death, respectively, from second-line treatment initiation. Patients prescribed first-line metformin or DPP4i was 16,736 and 74,464, respectively. In patients receiving first-line DPP4i, the death incidence was lower in those receiving second-line metformin than in those receiving second-line sulfonylurea (p < 0.001), whereas the primary outcome was not significantly different. No significant differences were observed for either outcome when DPP4is and metformin were used as first- and second-line drugs or vice versa. Metformin was suggested to have larger effect to reduce death than sulfonylurea in patients receiving first-line DPP4i. The order of first- and second-line for the DPP4i and metformin combination did not affect the outcomes. Given the nature of the study design, certain limitations, including potential under-adjustment for confounders, should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Saxagliptin is an effective and selective dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor. This study was designed to determine possible protective effects of saxagliptin against damage caused by renal ischaemia/reperfusion (I/R) in rats. In this study, 40 rats were divided into 4 groups (n = 10 for each). Group 1 (Control), Group 2 (I/R) in both kidneys ischaemia of 45 min was performed, and then reperfusion was applied for 24 h. Saxagliptin (Group 3: 2 mg/kg and Group 4: 10 mg/kg) was administered by oral gavage to the animals in treatment groups, before the I/R. Saxagliptin decreased the markers (BUN, Cre, NGAL, KIM-1 and IL-18) of acute renal damage in blood and kidney tissue. Saxagliptin provided increase in antioxidant enzyme levels and decrease in MDA and apoptosis. Histological results showed that the administration of saxagliptin exhibited a protective effect against renal damage caused by I/R. These results indicates that saxagliptin provide protection against kidney injury caused by I/R. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor is a class of oral antihyperglycemic agents and therapeutic approach for type 2 diabetes. Cetagliptin is a novel oral and selective DPP-4 inhibitor and developed as a promising candidate for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. This study aimed to evaluate the metabolism and excretion of cetagliptin in Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats, and to detect and identify metabolites of cetagliptin. The SD rats were administered with a single oral dose of 6 mg/kg with approximately 100 µCi of [14C] cetagliptin. The mean total recovery of radioactivity was 90.20% within 168h in SD rats excreta. Cetagliptin was the major radioactive component in SD rats plasma, urine and eliminated primarily by faecal excretion. The recovery of cetagliptin in urine and feces was 25.15% and 13.85% of the dose, respectively. Cetagliptin was well absorbed after oral administration in SD rats based on the total recovery of radioactivity in BDC SD rats bile and urine. Six major metabolites were observed and identified in SD rats, comprising 0.20 to 4.53% of total plasma AUC. These major metabolites were the hydroxylated, N-sulphate and N-carbamoyl glucuronic acid conjugates of the cetagliptin, two metabolites formed by glucuronide of a hydroxylated metabolite. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is) exert their effects via the incretin system, which augments glucose-dependent insulin secretion in response to nutrient intake (the 'incretin effect'). Both classes are well-established pharmacologic options for the management of glycemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) after failure of first-line metformin; however, they have inherent differences in their mechanisms of action that are reflected in their clinical safety and efficacy profiles. GLP-1RAs have high glycemic efficacy and are associated with weight loss and, in some cases, cardioprotective effects, with a side-effect profile of predominantly transient gastrointestinal adverse events. Most GLP-1RAs are administered as subcutaneous injection, although an oral formulation of one GLP-1RA, semaglutide, has recently become available. DPP4is provide moderate glycemic control, are weight-neutral, and do not offer any cardiovascular benefits, but are generally well tolerated. DPP4is are all administered orally. This narrative review aims to provide guidance for a primary care audience on the similarities and differences between GLP-1RA and DPP4i therapies, with a focus on their mechanism of action, clinical safety, efficacy, and real-world effectiveness. The role of incretin-based therapies in the T2D treatment paradigm, including key considerations for guiding treatment decisions, will also be discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We purpose to confirm the effect of teneligliptin (Tenelia), a selective dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor, on glycemic control and non-glucose risk factors for macroangiopathy, including blood pressure, lipid metabolism, and body weight. Methods: In a prospective, multicenter, open-label, observational study, teneligliptin (20 mg/day) was administered to type 2 diabetic patients with poor glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 6.5% to <10%) at our hospitals. The safety of teneligliptin and its impact on blood glucose, blood pressure, and the lipid profile were assessed after administration for 3 and 6 months. Results: One hundred and sixty-two patients were enrolled between February 2014 and August 2015. HbA1c was 7.6% at baseline and showed significant reduction to 7.1% after 3 months of treatment and to 6.9% after 6 months (both p < 0.01). Patients with poorly controlled hypertension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] ≥130 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure [DBP] ≥80 mmHg) at study initiation were extracted to investigate the effect of teneligliptin on blood pressure. SBP showed a significant decrease from 141.2 ± 9.8 mmHg at baseline to 131.1 ± 14.3 mmHg after 3 months and 133.9 ± 11.5 mmHg after 6 months (both p < 0.001). DBP also decreased significantly from 85.8 ± 5.7 mmHg at baseline to 78.4 ± 10.0 mmHg after 3 months and 79.7 ± 10.1 mmHg after 6 months (both p < 0.001). Adverse events were pruritus in four patients, and cerebral infarction was reported as a cerebrovascular event in one patient. Conclusions: Teneligliptin therapy was safe and improved glycemic control irrespective of baseline HbA1c. Blood pressure was also improved in patients with concomitant hypertension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To explore persistence and adherence with once-daily, twice-daily, or once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes.Methods: This retrospective, longitudinal, observational cohort study used data from the Japanese nationwide hospital-based Medical Data Vision (MDV) administrative claims database. Data were collected for patients given a new DPP-4i prescription between May 2015 and June 2017 with 1-year follow-up until May 2018. Treatment persistence was defined as the total duration of continuous prescription. Adherence to treatment was measured as the proportion of days covered (PDC).Results: A total of 598,419 patients with a prescription for DPP-4i treatment were identified in the MDV database. Of the 39,826 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 82.4% were receiving once-daily DPP-4i, 15.6% twice-daily DPP-4i, and 2.0% once-weekly DPP-4i. Twelve-month persistence rates with once-daily regimens were 66.3% versus 64.7% with twice-daily (p = .1187), and versus 38.8% with once-weekly, regimens (p < .0001) in the overall population (including untreated [UT] and previously treated [PT] patients); 62.8% with once-daily versus 58.3% with twice-daily (p = .0309), and versus 12.3% with once-weekly regimens (p < .0001) in the UT cohort; and 68.6% with once-daily versus 67.9% with twice-daily (p = .5471), and versus 49.1% with once-weekly regimens (p < .0001) in the PT cohort. In the overall population, 97.8% of patients had a mean PDC of 0.97 with once- and twice-daily, and 65.8% of patients had a mean PDC of 0.74 with once-weekly, DPP-4i regimens.Conclusions: Overall, persistence at 12 months was highest in patients receiving once-daily DPP-4i regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is a cutaneous autoimmune blistering disorder. Recently, it has been reported that dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) is associated with the development of BP (DPP4i-BP). Patients with DPP4i-BP have autoantibodies (autoAbs) preferentially targeting full-length BP180, but not the BP180NC16a domain. In this report, we described a case of anti-BP230 antibody (Ab)-positive BP receiving DPP4i. A 78-year-old male with a medical history of type 2 diabetes receiving vildagliptin at 100 mg daily for 38 months was referred to our hospital with itching blisters on his body and extremities. Skin biopsy showed subepidermal bulla with eosinophil infiltration. Direct immunofluorescence staining revealed a linear staining pattern with complement C3 and IgG at the subepidermal basement membrane zone. By laboratory testing, autoAbs against BP180NC16a and full-length BP180 were negative by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA); however, anti-BP230 Abs were positive by ELISA (index: 123.91). His HLA genotype was DQB1*04:01 and 05:01. Based on these results, we diagnosed the patient with anti-BP230 Abs-positive BP associated with DPP4i. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case of DPP4i-BP with only anti-BP230 Abs. Further accumulation of DPP4i-BP cases is needed to clarify the relationship between overall features of DPP4i-BP and anti-BP230 Abs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare healthcare costs of adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) after initiation of saxagliptin or linagliptin, two antidiabetic medications in the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor medication class.Methods: Patients with T2D who were at least 18 years old and initiated saxagliptin or linagliptin (index date) between 1 June 2011 and 30 June 2014 were identified in the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases. All-cause healthcare costs and diabetes-related costs (T2D diagnosis on a medical claim and/or an antidiabetic medication claim) were measured in the 1 year follow-up period. Saxagliptin and linagliptin initiators were matched using propensity score methods. Cost ratios (CRs) and predicted costs were estimated from generalized linear models and recycled predictions.Results: There were 34,560 saxagliptin initiators and 18,175 linagliptin initiators identified (mean ages 57 and 59; 55% and 56% male, respectively). Before matching, saxagliptin initiators had significantly lower all-cause total healthcare costs than linagliptin initiators (mean = $15,335 [SD $28,923] vs. mean = $20,069 [SD $48,541], p < .001) and significantly lower diabetes-related total healthcare costs (mean = $6109 [SD $13,851] vs. mean = $7393 [SD $26,041], p < .001). In matched analyses (n = 16,069 per cohort), saxagliptin initiators had lower all-cause follow-up costs than linagliptin initiators (CR = 0.953, 95% CI = 0.932-0.974, p < .001; predicted costs = $17,211 vs. $18,068). There was no significant difference in diabetes-related total costs after matching; however, diabetes-related medical costs were significantly lower for saxagliptin initiators (CR = 0.959, 95% CI = 0.927-0.993, p = 0.017; predicted costs = $3989 vs. $4159).Conclusions: Adult patients with T2D initiating treatment with saxagliptin had lower total all-cause healthcare costs and diabetes-related medical costs over 1 year compared with patients initiating treatment with linagliptin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This article reviews evidence of the benefits and risk of antidiabetic agents in cardiovascular (CV) outcomes, with a focus on medications approved by the FDA since 2008.Study Selection: Peer-reviewed articles were identified from MEDLINE and Current Content databases (both 1966 to 1 October 2016) using the search terms insulin, metformin, rosiglitazone, pioglitazone, glyburide, glipizide, glimepiride, acarbose, miglitol, albiglutide, exenatide, liraglutide, lixisenatide, dulaglutide, pramlintide, meglitinide, alogliptin, linagliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, colesevalam, bromocriptine, mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure (HF), and stroke. Trials were included if they were randomized clinical trials evaluating adult patients (≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes; had a period of intervention and follow-up of ≥12 months; and assessed CV outcomes (CV death, fatal/non-fatal MI or HF) as endpoints. Twenty-three randomized trials were included. Antidiabetic agents: Of agents approved prior to 2008, metformin has not been associated with measurable harm in patients with diabetes in terms of mortality and CV events (and has a trend of benefit). Controversial results existed with the use of sulfonylureas and thiazolidinediones (TZDs) for CV outcomes. Among agents approved after 2008, liraglutide and empagliflozin have been shown to be superior to placebo in improving CV outcomes.Conclusions: The FDA regulatory mandate to demonstrate CV safety in order to approve new diabetes drugs led to an increase in the number of CV outcome trials. However, these trials have placebo-controlled, non-inferiority designs aiming to show absence of CV toxicity. More studies are needed to address other questions, including comparative effectiveness, and longer-term risk versus benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The GUARD study evaluated the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of vildagliptin treatment with or without metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in real-life settings. Here we present the results of the GUARD study for the patient subset from Egypt.Research Design and Methods: This was a 24 ± 6 weeks, prospective, non-interventional study that enrolled adult patients with T2DM receiving vildagliptin or vildagliptin + metformin combination therapy as per local prescribing information.Main Outcome Measures: The primary effectiveness endpoint was change in HbA1c levels from baseline to week 24 ± 6 endpoint. Safety was assessed by reporting of adverse events and serious adverse events (SAEs).Results: Of 2786 patients enrolled from Egypt, 655 received vildagliptin and 2131 received vildagliptin + metformin. Overall, at baseline, mean (± standard deviation [SD]) age was 49.5 ± 9.49 years, BMI was 31.5 ± 4.85 kg/m2, HbA1c was 8.4 ± 0.86%, and duration of T2DM was 2.3 ± 3.78 years. At week 24, significant reductions in mean (±SD) HbA1c were observed in the vildagliptin (-1.47 ± 0.79%) and vildagliptin + metformin (-1.62 ± 0.82%) groups (both p < 0.0001) from baseline HbA1c of 8.1% and 8.4%, respectively. At week 24, 67.5% patients in the vildagliptin group and 60.5% in the vildagliptin + metformin group achieved HbA1c ≤7.0%. Treatment with vildagliptin (± metformin) was well tolerated, with a low incidence of hypoglycemia in both groups (vildagliptin, 0.5%; vildagliptin + metformin, 0.6%). No SAEs or deaths were reported in the vildagliptin group; however, 0.2% of patients experienced SAEs and one death (accidental death) was reported in the vildagliptin + metformin group.Conclusion: In a real-world setting, vildagliptin, with or without metformin, resulted in significant reductions in HbA1c and was well tolerated in patients with T2DM from Egypt. Limitations of the study include non-randomization and the open-label, observational nature of the study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Management of cardiovascular (CV) risk is an essential aspect of diabetes care, and acceptable CV risk is a requirement for antidiabetes medications. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors effectively reduce glycated hemoglobin, with a low risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain. The purpose of this review is to discuss the use of DPP-4 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and CV disease or risk factors.Methods: A PubMed search (January 2013-June 2015) was conducted to identify prospective trials, meta-analyses, pooled analyses and cohort studies evaluating CV outcomes with DPP-4 inhibitors.Results: Meta-analyses, pooled analyses and retrospective cohort studies in patients with T2DM suggest no increased CV risk and possible CV benefit compared with some antidiabetes medications. The three published, long-term, prospective, randomized, double-blind CV outcomes trials in patients with CV disease or risk factors found no increased rate of major CV events in patients treated with alogliptin, saxagliptin or sitagliptin versus placebo as add-on to standard-of-care. However, the analysis of the components of the secondary end point of the saxagliptin study showed an increased number of hospitalizations for heart failure (HF) in treated patients versus placebo. A post hoc analysis of the alogliptin study showed no increase in HF hospitalization in treated patients with a history of HF versus placebo, but did show an increase in alogliptin-treated patients with no baseline HF history. Sitagliptin showed no increased risk for HF hospitalization versus placebo in the overall cohort. Two CV outcomes trials for linagliptin are ongoing.Conclusion: The majority of available data from CV outcomes trials suggest a neutral effect of DPP-4 inhibitors on major CV events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: There is no clear consensus regarding treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) that is inadequately controlled using dual combination therapy. Recommended agents for triple combination therapy should have complementary mechanisms of action with minimal risk of added side effects such as weight gain and hypoglycemia. We discuss considerations in selecting triple oral therapy regimens in patients with T2DM, and review clinical trial data regarding triple oral therapy using dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors.Methods: A search of the PubMed database was conducted to identify clinical trials of triple oral therapy incorporating a DPP-4 inhibitor (November 2013 to January 2015), using the following search terms: 'type 2 diabetes' AND 'alogliptin OR linagliptin OR saxagliptin OR sitagliptin OR vildagliptin' AND 'metformin'. Trials had to include adult patients with T2DM who received triple oral therapy with a DPP-4 inhibitor for ≥18 weeks. The bibliographies of retrieved articles were also searched to identify any other relevant trials.Results: A total of 17 clinical trials evaluating metformin and a DPP-4 inhibitor combined with a sulfonylurea (SU), thiazolidinedione (TZD), or sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor were identified and included in this review. Consistently, the addition of a DPP-4 inhibitor to metformin and SU, TZD, or SGLT2 inhibitor therapy improved glycemic measures, and these combinations were generally well tolerated. An increased incidence of hypoglycemia was reported for combinations that included an SU.Conclusions: Triple oral therapy that includes a DPP-4 inhibitor is a valid option for patients with T2DM not adequately controlled with dual combination therapy, and offers an alternative to insulin therapy. Triple oral therapy with a DPP-4 inhibitor, metformin, and a TZD or SGLT2 inhibitor should be considered when avoidance of hypoglycemia is a primary goal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To review the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of combination treatment regimens including a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor and/or sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: Clinical trials of combination therapies including a DPP-4 and/or SGLT2 inhibitor were identified through a PubMed database search. To be included, studies had to have a primary end point of change from baseline to >=24 weeks in glycated hemoglobin, include >=1 other oral antidiabetic drug (OAD), and have randomized more than 200 patients. Results were limited to medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration at the time of the search (March 2015). RESULTS: A total of 1534 articles for the DPP-4 inhibitor class and 434 articles for the SGLT2 inhibitor class were retrieved from PubMed. Of these, 33 articles from the DPP-4 inhibitor class and 24 articles from the SGLT2 inhibitor class were included for review. In each study, the addition of a DPP-4 or SGLT2 inhibitor as a second or third agent resulted in improved glycemic control versus comparator arms. Reductions in weight or lack of weight gain were consistently observed, as were low rates of hypoglycemic events, particularly when the combination regimen also included metformin. Overall, the pattern of adverse events observed in combination treatment groups was consistent with the known effects of the individual agents. CONCLUSION: Combination treatment with a DPP-4 and/or SGLT2 inhibitor is an efficacious option for patients with T2DM starting pharmacological therapy, or for patients who have received treatment but require additional glycemic control. Study findings indicate that the underlying mechanisms of action of DPP-4 inhibitors and SGLT2 inhibitors complement a variety of OADs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses emergence of single-pill combinations of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor linagliptin with the sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin as an option to the treatment of type II diabetes mellitus. It analyzed publications from the medical database PubMed and abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes 2012-2014. It concludes the promising prospects of single-pill.

Linagliptin is a pharmacologically unique, orally active, once-daily dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor indicated for the treatment of hyperglycemia in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Compared with other dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, linagliptin has a favorable pharmacokinetic profile with a primarily nonrenal route of elimination that avoids the need for dose adjustment in patients with renal impairment. When administered as monotherapy or in combination with other antihyperglycemic drugs, linagliptin treatment leads to clinically meaningful reductions in glycated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose and postprandial plasma glucose levels. In addition, pancreatic Î2-cell function is enhanced. Linagliptin treatment is well tolerated, with weight-neutral effects and no increased risk of hypoglycemia. Of note, linagliptin treatment was associated with a significantly reduced risk of cardiovascular events in clinical trials of ≤2 years, although this finding remains to be confirmed in larger and longer clinical outcomes studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been concern as to whether dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors can be used safely in patients with relatively good glycemic control. This study, approved by the institutional review board of Hanzoumon Diabetes City Atlas Clinic, examined whether DPP-4 inhibitor sitagliptin could safely achieve good glycemic control without severe hypoglycemia by employing the 'added food' concept. The subjects were 60 patients (46 men and 14 women) with type 2 diabetes who started sitagliptin therapy during a 1-month period from December 15, 2009 to January 15, 2010. They were recommended to have added food between meals to prevent hypoglycemia, while maintaining the same daily calorie intake. HbA1c decreased from 7.1 ± 1.2% to 6.5 ± 0.6% after 6 months of sitagliptin treatment ( p < 0.001). In patients with a baseline HbA1c <7%, it decreased from 6.5 ± 0.3% to 6.1 ± 0.4% ( p < 0.001). Systolic blood pressure was significantly reduced from 127.7 ± 17.0 to 122.7 ± 17.9 mmHg in the patients with a baseline HbA1c < 7% ( p = 0.018). However, body weight increased by approximately 900 g and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol decreased significantly from 1.57 ± 0.46 to 1.43 ± 0.35 mmol/L ( p < 0.01) in the patients concomitantly receiving sulfonylureas with sitagliptin. Excellent glycemic control was achieved by sitagliptin treatment together with the added food concept. However, combined use of sitagliptin with sulfonylureas requires attention to weight gain and the lipid profile. Further clinical studies will elucidate whether sitagliptin can decrease cardiovascular events as well as normalizing blood glucose and lowering the blood pressure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors are a class of oral antidiabetic drugs that improve glycemic control without causing weight gain or increasing hypoglycemic risk in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). The efficacy and tolerability of saxagliptin, a once-daily DPP-4 inhibitor, administered as monotherapy, as add-on therapy to metformin, a sulfonylurea, or a thiazolidinedione, and as initial combination therapy with metformin, was demonstrated in pivotal 24-week clinical trials. Additional information about the clinical profile of saxagliptin was recently obtained from extension studies, head-to-head clinical trials, and post-hoc analyses. In extension studies, the efficacy and tolerability of add-on saxagliptin and initial saxagliptin-plus-metformin therapy were maintained for up to 102 weeks. Saxagliptin plus metformin was shown to be non-inferior to glipizide plus metformin in lowering glycated hemoglobin from base-line, with reduced body-weight and lower hypoglycemic risk. Post-hoc analyses indicate that the clinical benefits of saxagliptin extend across demographic subgroups and special populations. A meta-analysis found no evidence for increased cardiovascular risk in T2DM patients exposed to saxagliptin for > 1 year. On the basis of this clinical profile, saxagliptin is an attractive option for initial and add-on therapy for T2DM patients with inadequate glycemic control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In clinical trials, the degree of glucose lowering with sitagliptin has been correlated with the magnitude of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibition over 24 h. Previous studies evaluating sitagliptin doses ranging from 25 to 200 mg/day demonstrated that the daily dose of 100 mg provided maximal glucose-lowering efficacy for this compound in patients with type 2 diabetes. However, sitagliptin 200 mg once daily provided numerically greater percent plasma DPP-4 inhibition compared with 100 mg once daily. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether sitagliptin 200 mg once daily provides greater improvement in glycemic efficacy as assessed by weighted mean glucose (WMG) over 24 h relative to sitagliptin 100 mg once daily and to relate the percent DPP-4 inhibition achieved with these doses to any between-treatment differences in glycemic efficacy. In a double-blind crossover study, patients with type 2 diabetes (fasting plasma glucose [FPG] 130–250 mg/dL) were randomized to one of six treatment sequences over three treatment periods (placebo, sitagliptin 100 mg once daily, or sitagliptin 200 mg once daily). Each of the treatment periods was 7 days in duration, with 28-day washout periods between treatments. After each treatment period, patients underwent blood sampling at various time points over 24 h to determine 24-h WMG. Plasma DPP-4 activity was assessed at trough, 24 h following dosing on day 7; percent DPP-4 inhibition was corrected for sample assay dilution. The 103 randomized patients had a baseline mean FPG of 172 mg/dL. Following a planned interim analysis, the study was stopped because the 24-h WMG values were not different between the sitagliptin doses. Furthermore, a significant carryover effect across periods was observed for FPG; thus, efficacy results from period 1 are presented herein. The 24-h WMG values were significantly (p < 0.01) lower with sitagliptin relative to placebo, but the difference between sitagliptin doses was not significant (p = 0.365). Corrected percent plasma DPP-4 inhibition at trough was not significantly (p = 0.791) different with sitagliptin 200 mg (LS mean [95% CI] 96.9% [90.0, 100.0]) compared with sitagliptin 100 mg (95.6% [88.4, 100.0]). The early termination and the carryover effect described above are limitations to this study. Across sitagliptin doses in this study, the similarity of the 24-h WMG concentrations and the similarity of the corrected DPP-4 inhibition values support prior findings that the maximal glucose-lowering efficacy of sitagliptin is achieved with once-daily dosing of 100 mg. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00541229 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-daily saxagliptin monotherapy in treatment-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and inadequate glycemic control. Research design and methods: This study included a main treatment cohort (MTC) with 401 patients (HbA1c ≥ 7% and ≤10%) randomized and treated with oral saxagliptin 2.5, 5, or 10 mg once daily or placebo for 24 weeks and a separate open-label cohort (OLC) with 66 patients (HbA1c > 10% and ≤12%) who received saxagliptin 10 mg once daily for 24 weeks. Primary endpoint was HbA1c change from baseline to week 24. Secondary endpoints included change from baseline to week 24 in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), proportion of patients achieving HbA1c < 7%, and changes in postprandial glucose area-under-the-curve (PPG-AUC). Efficacy analyses for continuous variables were performed using an ANCOVA model with last-observation-carried-forward methodology. Results: In the MTC, saxagliptin demonstrated statistically significant decreases in adjusted mean HbA1c changes from baseline (mean, 7.9%) to week 24 (−0.43%, −0.46%, −0.54%) for saxagliptin 2.5, 5, and 10 mg, respectively, vs. +0.19% for placebo (all p < 0.0001). Adjusted mean FPG was significantly reduced from baseline (−15, −9, −17 mg/dL) for saxagliptin 2.5, 5, and 10 mg, respectively, vs. +6 mg/dL for placebo (p = 0.0002, p = 0.0074, p < 0.0001, respectively). More saxagliptin-treated patients achieved HbA1c < 7% at week 24 (35% [p = NS], 38% [p = 0.0443], 41% [p = 0.0133]) for saxagliptin 2.5, 5, and 10 mg, respectively, than placebo (24%). PPG-AUC was reduced for saxagliptin 2.5, 5, and 10 mg (−6868, −6896, −8084 mg·min/dL, respectively) vs. placebo (−647 mg·min/dL) with statistical significance demonstrated for saxagliptin 5 mg (p = 0.0002) and 10 mg (p < 0.0001). HbA1c, FPG, and PPG-AUC reductions were also observed in the OLC at 24 weeks. In the MTC, adverse event frequency was similar across all study arms. No cases of confirmed hypoglycemia (symptoms, with fingerstick glucose ≤50 mg/dL) were observed in either cohort. Saxagliptin was not associated with weight gain. Study limitations included the lack of a control group for the OLC and the use of prespecified rescue criteria, which limited the exposure time during which patients could remain on their originally randomized medication without the introduction of additional antihyperglycemic rescue treatment. Conclusions: Once-daily saxagliptin monotherapy for 24 weeks was generally well tolerated and demonstrated clinically meaningful reductions in key parameters of glycemic control vs. placebo. Trial Registration: Clinical Trials NCT00121641 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of alogliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by therapy with a thiazolidinedione (TZD). Research design and methods: In a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study, 493 patients 18–80 years old with inadequate glycemic control after stabilization (i.e., glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.0–10.0%) despite ongoing treatment with a TZD were randomly assigned (2:2:1) to treatment with pioglitazone plus alogliptin 12.5 mg, alogliptin 25 mg or placebo once daily. Concomitant therapy with metformin or sulfonylurea at prestudy doses was permitted. Main outcome measures: The primary efficacy endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to Week 26. Secondary endpoints included changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and body weight, and incidences of marked hyperglycemia (FPG ≥ 200 mg/dL [11.10 mmol/L]) and rescue for hyperglycemia. Results: Least squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c was significantly (p < 0.001) greater for alogliptin 12.5 mg (−0.66%) or 25 mg (−0.80%) than for placebo (−0.19%). A significantly (p ≤ 0.016) larger proportion of patients achieved HbA1c ≤ 7% with alogliptin 12.5 mg (44.2%) or 25 mg (49.2%) than with placebo (34.0%). LS mean decreases in FPG were significantly (p = 0.003) greater with alogliptin 12.5 mg (−19.7 mg/dL [−1.09 mmol/L]) or 25 mg (−19.9 mg/dL [−1.10 mmol/L]) than with placebo (−5.7 mg/dL [−0.32 mmol/L]). The percentage of patients with marked hyperglycemia was significantly (p < 0.001) lower for alogliptin (≤25.0%) than placebo (44.3%). The incidences of overall adverse events and hypoglycemia were similar across treatment groups, but cardiac events occurred more often with active treatment than placebo. Conclusions: Addition of alogliptin to pioglitazone therapy significantly improved glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes and was generally well tolerated. The study did not evaluate the effect of combination therapy on long-term clinical outcomes and safety. Clinical trial registration: NCT00286494, clinicaltrials.gov. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]