Search

AIMS: This study compared the effects of pioglitazone and gliclazide on metabolic control in drug-naive patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: A total of 1270 patients with Type 2 diabetes were randomized in a parallel-group, double-dummy, double-blind study. Patients with poorly controlled Type 2 diabetes (HbA1c 7.5-11%), despite dietary advice, received either pioglitazone up to 45 mg once daily or gliclazide up to 160 mg two times daily. Primary efficacy endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to the end of the study. Secondary efficacy endpoints included change in fasting plasma glucose, fasting plasma insulin and plasma lipids. At selected centres, oral glucose tolerance tests were performed and C-peptide and pro-insulin levels were measured. RESULTS: Mean HbA1c values decreased by the same amount in the two treatment groups from baseline to week 52 [pioglitazone: -1.4%; gliclazide: -1.4%; (90% CI: -0.18 to 0.02)]. A significantly greater mean reduction in fasting plasma glucose was observed in the pioglitazone group (2.4 mmol/l) than in the gliclazide group [2.0 mmol/l; treatment difference -0.4 mmol/l in favour of pioglitazone; P = 0.002; (95% CI: -0.7 to -0.1)]. Improvements in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and total cholesterol/HDL-C were greater with pioglitazone than with gliclazide (P < 0.001). The frequencies of adverse events were comparable between the two treatment groups, but more hypoglycaemic events were reported for gliclazide, whereas twice as many patients reported oedema with pioglitazone than with gliclazide. CONCLUSIONS: Pioglitazone monotherapy was equivalent to gliclazide in reducing HbA1c, with specific differences between treatments in terms of mechanism of action, plasma lipids and adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Insulin resistance is common in Type 2 diabetes which, in turn, is associated with a markedly increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Whether insulin sensitivity measured after diagnosis of diabetes is associated with incident cardiovascular disease was evaluated in this prospective study.Methods Three thousand five hundred and eighty-two subjects with newly diagnosed diabetes, recruited to the UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS), free of cardiovascular disease, and with complete information on insulin sensitivity and potential confounders, were followed prospectively to the first occurrence of (i) fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction, MI (ii) fatal or non-fatal stroke, and (iii) coronary heart disease, CHD (fatal or non-fatal MI, sudden death or ischaemic heart disease). Insulin sensitivity was measured by Homeostatic Model Assessment (HOMA).Results Insulin sensitivity as measured by HOMA was not associated with subsequent MI, stroke, or CHD in univariate or multivariate models controlling for age, sex, ethnicity, HbA1c, body mass index, plasma triglycerides, cholesterol and smoking. The hazard ratio associated with a doubling of insulin sensitivity with fatal or non-fatal MI in a multivariate model was 0.92 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.80-1.05). These results were not changed by the exclusion of overweight patients randomized to metformin.Discussion Estimation of insulin sensitivity provides no additional useful information with respect to the risk of the first occurrence of cardiovascular disease in patients with newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes. Among patients with Type 2 diabetes, insulin resistance is not a risk factor for cardiovascular disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports on semi-structured interviews with 114 Pakistani nurses. This sample comes from a larger long-term study examining the impact of advanced training in Canada on the lives and careers of nurses and lady health visitors from Pakistan. The data reported here were drawn from the first interview with all nurses, and focuses on how and why they chose a career in nursing. Demographically, the respondents (Rs) were more urban and more highly educated than the average Pakistani woman. Compared to the national population, Ismailis and Christians were over-represented and non-Ismaili Muslims under-represented in our sample. Although these ratios are also true of Pakistan's nursing population, the bias has been exaggerated by the convenience nature of our sample drawn primarily from the Aga Khan University Medical Centre. Most Rs found out about nursing through a relative or friend who was also a nurse. Eighty per cent of Rs (n = 92) reported having made the decision to pursue nursing by themselves, illustrating the increasing ability of women to control their own lives in this traditionally patriarchal society. 'Professionalism' was the predominant reason why Rs (or others) decided on nursing, followed by 'Altruism'. These findings are compared to other studies on the career choice of nurses done in non-Islamic societies. Over 90% of Rs reported receiving support from at least one friend or relative for their decision to enter nursing. Nonetheless, over half (58%) also reported that someone, most often a male relative, had opposed their career choice. Our results are discussed in terms of the status of women and nursing in Pakistan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To explore whether the beneficial cardiovascular (CV) effect of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors is consistent with or without concurrent use of CV medications in patients with type 2 diabetes, heart failure (HF) or chronic kidney disease., Methods: We searched Medline and Embase up to September 2022 for CV outcomes trials. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular (CV) death or hospitalization for HF. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of CV death, hospitalization for HF, death from any cause, major adverse CV events or renal events, volume depletion and hyperkalaemia. We pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and risk ratios alongside 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: We included 12 trials comprising 83 804 patients. SGLT-2 inhibitors reduced the risk of CV death or hospitalization for HF regardless of background use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEIs/ARBs), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), b-blockers, diuretics, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), or triple combination therapy of either an ACEI/ARB plus b-blocker plus MRA, or an ARNI plus b-blocker plus MRA (HRs ranged from 0.61 to 0.83; P > .1 for each subgroup interaction). Similarly, no subgroup differences were evident for most analyses for the secondary outcomes of CV death, hospitalization for HF, all-cause mortality, major adverse CV or renal events, hyperkalaemia and volume depletion rate., Conclusions: The benefit of SGLT-2 inhibitors seems to be additive to background use of CV medications in a broad population of patients. These findings should be interpreted as hypothesis generating because most of the subgroups analysed were not prespecified., (© 2023 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To assess the efficacy and safety of sotagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes., Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and grey literature sources up to August 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared sotagliflozin with placebo or other antidiabetic agents in patients with type 2 diabetes. Our primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline. We additionally assessed three secondary efficacy and 15 safety outcomes. We synthesized data using weighted mean differences (WMDs) and odds ratios (ORs), along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: We included 11 RCTs comprising 16 411 subjects in the meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, sotagliflozin reduced HbA1c (WMD -0.42%, 95% CI -0.56 to -0.29), body weight (WMD -1.33 kg, 95% CI -1.57 to -1.09), and systolic blood pressure (WMD -2.44 mmHg, 95% CI -2.81 to -2.07). No difference was evident against other active comparators. Sotagliflozin reduced myocardial infarction (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.97) and heart failure (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.79) compared with placebo, and had a neutral effect on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and stroke. Treatment with sotagliflozin was safe regarding the incidence of serious adverse events, hypoglycaemia, and diabetic ketoacidosis. Nevertheless, it was associated with an increased incidence of diarrhoea, genital infections, and volume depletion events., Conclusions: Sotagliflozin reduces blood glucose, body weight, and systolic blood pressure, and demonstrates a beneficial effect on heart failure and myocardial infarction. Its overall safety profile is comparable with other sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To determine the reasons for hospitalizations in the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) programme and the effects of the sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor canagliflozin on hospitalization., Materials and Methods: A secondary analysis was performed on the CANVAS programme that included 10 142 participants with type 2 diabetes randomized to canagliflozin or placebo. The primary outcome was the rate of total (first plus all recurrent) all-cause hospitalizations (ACH). Secondary outcomes were total hospitalizations categorized by the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities hierarchy at the system organ class level, reported by investigators at each centre. Outcomes were assessed using negative binomial models., Results: Of the 7115 hospitalizations reported, the most common reasons were cardiac disorders (23.7%), infections and infestations (15.0%), and nervous system disorders (9.0%). The rate of total ACH was lower in the canagliflozin group (n = 5795) compared with the placebo group (n = 4347): 197.9 versus 215.8 participants per 1000 patient-years, respectively (rate ratio [RR] 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86, 0.98). Canagliflozin reduced the rate of total hospitalizations because of cardiac disorders (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.75, 0.88). There was no significant difference between the canagliflozin and placebo groups in the rates of total hospitalizations because of infections and infestations (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.86, 1.02) or nervous system disorders (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.88, 1.05)., Conclusions: In the CANVAS programme, the most common reasons for hospitalization were cardiac disorders, infections and infestations, and nervous system disorders. Canagliflozin, compared with placebo, reduced the rate of total ACH., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the efficacy and safety of the novel, ultra-rapid-acting insulins aspart and lispro in adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Our primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline. We additionally assessed eight efficacy and six safety endpoints. We calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes, alongside 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We additionally assessed statistical heterogeneity among studies with the I 2 statistic, considering values greater than 60% as indicative of substantial heterogeneity. Nine studies comprising 5931 patients were included in the systematic review; eight active-controlled studies could be synthesized in terms of a meta-analysis. Treatment with ultra-rapid-acting insulins had a similar effect on change in HbA1c compared with rapid-acting insulins (WMD -0.02%, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.05, I 2  = 61% for patients with type 1 diabetes and -0.02%, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.04, I 2  = 19% for patients with type 2 diabetes). Similarly, no difference was evident in terms of change in fasting plasma glucose, self-measured plasma glucose, body weight, basal or bolus insulin dose, incidence of serious adverse events and hypoglycaemia. Compared with rapid-acting insulins, ultra-rapid-acting insulins reduced 1- and 2-hour postprandial glucose (PPG) increment based on a liquid meal test, both in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes (WMD -0.94 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.72, I 2  = 0% and -0.56 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.32, I 2  = 0%, respectively, for change in 1-hour PPG increment). In conclusion, ultra-rapid-acting insulins were as efficacious and safe as rapid-acting insulins, showing a favourable effect solely on PPG control., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To compare the effects of glucose-lowering drugs on body weight and blood pressure in adults with type 2 diabetes., Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and grey literature sources until 29 September 2020 for randomized controlled trials of at least 24 weeks' duration assessing the effects of glucose-lowering drugs on body weight and blood pressure in adults with type 2 diabetes. We performed frequentist network meta-analyses and calculated weighted mean differences and 95% confidence intervals combining trial arms of different approved doses of a given intervention into a single group. We evaluated the confidence in pooled estimates using the CINeMA (Confidence In Network Meta-Analysis) framework., Results: In total, 424 trials (276 336 patients) assessing 21 antidiabetic medications from nine drug classes were included. Subcutaneous semaglutide was the most efficacious in reducing body weight followed by oral semaglutide, exenatide twice-daily, liraglutide, and the sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors empagliflozin, canagliflozin, dapagliflozin and ertugliflozin. The same agents also conferred the greatest reductions in systolic blood pressure. Metformin had a modest effect in reducing body weight and systolic blood pressure. Diastolic blood pressure was reduced with the SGLT-2 inhibitors pioglitazone, exenatide twice-daily and semaglutide. In subgroup analyses of trials with over 52 weeks' duration, semaglutide and SGLT-2 inhibitors reduced both body weight and systolic blood pressure., Conclusions: Semaglutide and SGLT-2 inhibitors conferred reductions both in body weight and blood pressure that were sustainable for over 1 year of treatment. These agents may be preferable treatment options for patients with type 2 diabetes who are overweight/obese and/or hypertensive., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To assess the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering drugs used as an adjunct to insulin therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes., Methods: We searched Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to 24 January 2020 for randomized controlled trials. Our primary outcome was change in HbA1c. We additionally assessed eight efficacy and six safety secondary endpoints. We performed random effects frequentist network meta-analysis to estimate mean differences (MDs) and odds ratios (ORs), alongside 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed risk of bias and evaluated confidence in the evidence for the primary outcome., Results: We included 58 trials comprising 13 216 participants. Overall, sodium-glucose co-transporter (SGLT) inhibitors, liraglutide, glibenclamide, acarbose and metformin reduced HbA1c compared with placebo (MDs ranging from -0.46% [95% CI -0.64% to -0.29%] for empagliflozin to -0.20% [-0.35% to -0.06%] for metformin). SGLT inhibitors, exenatide daily, liraglutide and metformin reduced body weight and total daily insulin dose, while liraglutide and SGLT inhibitors reduced blood pressure. Diabetic ketoacidosis and genital infections were more frequent with SGLT inhibitors, while exenatide, liraglutide, pramlintide and metformin increased the incidence of nausea. No drug increased the incidence of severe hypoglycaemia. Confidence in evidence was mainly moderate to very low., Conclusions: Specific drugs may improve glycaemic control and reduce body weight, blood pressure and total daily insulin dose in patients with type 1 diabetes. However, low quality of evidence and an increased risk of diabetic ketoacidosis, genital infections or gastrointestinal adverse events should be taken into consideration by healthcare providers and patients. Future long-term trials are needed to clarify their benefit-to-risk profile and elucidate their role in clinical practice., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

We analysed glycaemic durability (sustained glycaemic control) with early combination therapy (metformin plus vildagliptin) versus metformin monotherapy, among patients with type 2 diabetes diagnosed before (young-onset [YOD]) and after (late-onset [LOD]) the age of 40 years, enrolled in the VERIFY trial. The primary endpoint was time to initial treatment failure (TF), defined as HbA1c of 7.0% or higher at two consecutive scheduled visits after randomization. The time to secondary TF was assessed when both groups were receiving and failing on the combination. A total of 186 (9.3%) patients had YOD and 1815 (90.7%) had LOD with a mean age difference of 20.4 years. Compared with metformin monotherapy, early combination reduced the risk of time to initial TF for both YOD (48%, P < .0006) and LOD (46%, P < .0001). With early combination, risk for time to secondary TF was reduced by 48% (P < .0035) in YOD and 24% (P < .0009) in LOD. Both treatment approaches were well tolerated with no unexpected safety concerns. In treatment-naïve patients with YOD (HbA1c 6.5%-7.5%), an early combination strategy improved attainment of the glycaemic target with durability and delayed treatment escalation compared with initial metformin monotherapy., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

This study compared initiation of insulin and other antihyperglycaemic agents (AHAs) with canagliflozin versus placebo for participants with type 2 diabetes and a history/high risk of cardiovascular disease in the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program. After 1 year, fewer participants treated with canagliflozin versus placebo initiated any AHA (7% vs. 16%), insulin (3% vs. 9%) or any non-insulin AHA (5% vs. 12%) (P < .001 for all); overall AHA initiation rates increased over time but were consistently lower with canagliflozin compared with placebo. During the study, the likelihood of initiating insulin was 2.7 times lower for participants treated with canagliflozin compared with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.37; 95% CI: 0.31, 0.43; P < .001). The time difference between 10% of patients in the canagliflozin and placebo groups being initiated on insulin from the beginning of the trial was about 2 years. Time to initiation of other AHAs, including metformin, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sulphonylureas, was also delayed for canagliflozin versus placebo (P < .001 for each). Compared with placebo, canagliflozin delayed the need for initiation of other AHAs and delayed time to insulin therapy, an outcome that is important to many people with diabetes., (© 2020 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: Sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce several cardiovascular risk factors, including plasma glucose, blood pressure, albuminuria and body weight. Long-term treatment lowers risks of cardiovascular and renal events. The objective of this post hoc analysis was to determine the effects of canagliflozin treatment versus placebo on clinical outcomes in relation to body mass index (BMI)., Materials and Methods: The CANVAS Program randomized 10 142 participants with type 2 diabetes to canagliflozin or placebo. These analyses tested the consistency of canagliflozin treatment effects across BMI levels for cardiovascular, renal, safety and body weight outcomes in three groups defined by baseline BMI: <25, 25-<30 and ≥30 kg/m 2 ., Results: In total, 10 128 participants with baseline BMI measurements were included. There were 966 participants with BMI <25 kg/m 2 , 3153 with BMI 25-<30 kg/m 2 and 6009 with BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 . Mean percent body weight reduction with canagliflozin compared with placebo was greater at 12 months [-2.77%  (95% confidence interval (CI): -2.95, -2.59)] than at 3 months [-1.72%  (95% CI: -1.83, -1.62)]. The hazard ratios (HRs) for canagliflozin compared with placebo control for the composite outcome of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke were 1.03 (95% CI: 0.66, 1.59) in participants with BMI <25 kg/m 2 , 0.97 (0.76, 1.23) with BMI 25-<30 kg/m 2 and 0.79 (0.67, 0.93) with BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 (P for heterogeneity = 0.55). The effects of canagliflozin on each component of the composite were also similar across BMI subgroups, as were effects on heart failure and renal outcomes (P for heterogeneity ≥0.19). The effects on safety outcomes were also broadly similar., Conclusions: Canagliflozin improved cardiovascular and renal outcomes consistently across patients with a broad range of BMI levels., (© 2019 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To assess the efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide, a novel glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, for patients with type 2 diabetes., Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and grey literature sources up to July 1, 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral semaglutide with placebo or other antidiabetic agents. The primary outcome was change from baseline in HbA1c. Secondary outcomes included change from baseline in body weight and blood pressure, cardiovascular endpoints, severe hypoglycaemia, gastrointestinal adverse events and diabetic retinopathy. We synthesized results using weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: We included 11 RCTs with 9890 patients in the systematic review. Compared with placebo, oral semaglutide reduced HbA1c and body weight (WMD -0.89%, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.71 and - 2.99 kg, 95% CI -3.69 to -2.30, respectively). Oral semaglutide was also superior to other active comparators (including liraglutide, empagliflozin and sitaglipitin) in terms of lowering HbA1c (WMD -0.35%, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.26) and reduction of body weight (WMD -1.48 kg, 95% CI -2.28 to -0.67), and had a favourable effect on systolic blood pressure. Compared with placebo, oral semaglutide reduced all-cause mortality (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.92) and cardiovascular mortality (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.98), and had a neutral effect on myocardial infarction, stroke, severe hypoglycaemia and diabetic retinopathy. However, treatment with oral semaglutide increased the incidence of nausea, vomiting and diarrhea, while events of acute pancreatitis were rare., Conclusions: Oral semaglutide can effectively and safely reduce blood glucose, body weight and systolic blood pressure. Nevertheless, it is associated with increased incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events. Further research is needed to clarify its long-term safety and comparative effectiveness against other antidiabetic agents., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: To ensure the integrity of the planned analyses and maximize the clinical utility of the VERIFY study results by describing the detailed concepts behind its statistical analysis plan (SAP) before completion of data collection and study database lock. The SAP will be adhered to for the final primary data analysis of the VERIFY trial., Materials and Methods: Vildagliptin efficacy in combination with metformin for early treatment of T2DM (VERIFY) is an ongoing, multicentre, randomized controlled trial aiming to demonstrate the clinical benefits of glycaemic durability and glucose control achieved with an early combination therapy in newly-diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients., Results: The SAP was initially designed at the study protocol conception phase and later modified, as reported here, in collaboration between the steering committee members, statisticians, and the VERIFY study leadership team. All authors were blinded to treatment allocation. An independent statistician has additionally retrieved and presented unblinded data to the independent data safety monitoring committee. An overview of the trial design with a focus on describing the fine-tuning of the analysis plan for the primary efficacy endpoint, risk of initial treatment failure, and secondary, exploratory and pre-specified subgroup analyses is provided here., Conclusion: According to optimal trial practice, the details of the statistical analysis and data-handling plan prior to locking the database are reported here. The SAP accords with high-quality standards of internal validity to minimize analysis bias and will enhance the utility of the reported results for improved outcomes in the management of T2DM., (© 2019 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Worsening of diabetic retinopathy (DR) is associated with the initiation of effective treatment of glycaemia in some patients with diabetes. It has been associated with risk factors such as poor blood-glucose control and hypertension, and it manifests prior to the long-term benefits of optimizing glycaemic control. The majority of evidence supports an association of large and rapid reductions in blood-glucose levels with early worsening of DR. Despite a general awareness of early worsening within the diabetes community, mechanisms to explain the phenomenon remain speculative. We provide an overview of early worsening of DR and its pathophysiology based on current data. We describe the phenomenon in various settings, including in patients receiving insulin- or non-insulin-based treatments, in those undergoing bariatric surgery, and in pregnant women. We discuss various mechanisms and theories that have been suggested to explain this paradoxical phenomenon, and we summarize the implications of these in clinical practice., (© 2018 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the effect of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) on microvascular endpoints in adult patients with type 2 diabetes. We included 60 studies with 60 077 patients. GLP-1 RAs marginally reduced urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio compared with placebo or other antidiabetic agents (weighted mean difference - 2.55 mg/g; 95% confidence interval [CI] -4.37 to -0.73 and -5.52; -10.89 to -0.16, respectively) and had no clinically relevant effect on change in estimated glomerular filtration rate. Treatment with GLP-1 RAs did not increase incidence of diabetic retinopathy, macular oedema, retinal detachment and retinal haemorrhage, irrespective of comparator. Nevertheless, incidence of vitreous haemorrhage was higher in subjects treated with GLP-1 RAs compared with placebo (odds ratios 1.93; 95% CI 1.09 to 3.42). In conclusion, GLP-1 RAs are safe regarding nephropathy- and retinopathy-related outcomes. Caution may be warranted for incidence of vitreous haemorrhage. The low overall quality of evidence highlights the need for consistent assessment and reporting of microvascular endpoints in future trials., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: To assess the efficacy and safety of semaglutide, a recently approved glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) for type 2 diabetes., Materials and Methods: We searched major electronic databases and grey literature sources for randomized controlled trials comparing semaglutide with placebo or other antidiabetic agents. Primary outcome was change from baseline in HbA1c. Secondary endpoints included change from baseline in body weight, blood pressure, heart rate and incidence of hypoglycaemia, gastrointestinal adverse effects, pancreatitis and diabetic retinopathy., Results: A total of 6 placebo-controlled and 7 active-controlled studies with subcutaneous semaglutide were included. We identified only 1 trial with oral semaglutide. Compared with placebo, subcutaneous semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg reduced HbA1c by 1.01% (95% CI, 0.56-1.47) and 1.38% (1.05-1.70), respectively. Both doses demonstrated superior glycaemic efficacy compared to other antidiabetic agents, including sitagliptin, exenatide, liraglutide, dulaglutide and insulin glargine. Semaglutide also had a beneficial effect on body weight (mean difference vs placebo -4.11 kg, 95% CI -4.85 to -3.37 for semaglutide 1 mg) and systolic blood pressure. We did not observe increased hypoglycaemia rates with semaglutide; nevertheless, we noted an increased incidence of nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea. Cases of pancreatitis were infrequent and the odds ratio for diabetic retinopathy compared with placebo was 1.32 (95% CI, 0.98-1.77)., Conclusions: Semaglutide is a potent once-weekly GLP-1 RA, significantly reducing HbA1c, body weight and systolic blood pressure. However, it is associated with increased incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events. Results for pancreatitis and retinopathy require further assessment in post-approval pharmacovigilance studies., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Two large cardiovascular outcome trials of canagliflozin, comprising the CANVAS Program, will complete in early 2017: the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) and the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study-Renal (CANVAS-R). Accruing data for the sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor class has identified questions and opportunities that were not apparent when the trials were designed. Accordingly, a series of modifications have been made to the planned analyses. These updates will ensure that the data from the CANVAS Program will maximize advances in scientific knowledge and patient care. The specification of the analysis strategy prior to knowledge of the trial results, their design by the independent scientific trial Steering Committee, the detailed a priori definition of the analysis plans, and the external review provided by the US Food and Drug Administration all provide maximally efficient and robust utilization of the data. The CANVAS Program should significantly advance our understanding of the effects of canagliflozin, and the broader SGLT2 inhibitor class, on a range of important efficacy and safety outcomes., (© 2017 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: The primary aim of the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study-Renal (CANVAS-R) is to determine whether the favourable effects of inhibition of the sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) on blood glucose, blood pressure and body weight are accompanied by protection against adverse renal outcomes., Materials and Methods: CANVAS-R is a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with type 2 diabetes with a history or high risk of cardiovascular events. Patients were randomly assigned to once-daily placebo or canagliflozin 100 mg (with optional uptitration to 300 mg) for a planned average of 2.5 years of follow-up. The primary outcome is kidney disease progression, defined by class change in albuminuria. The two secondary outcomes are the composite of hospitalized heart failure or cardiovascular death, and cardiovascular death alone. Effects on end-stage renal disease and a range of other outcomes will also be explored., Results: A total of 5812 participants were recruited at 422 sites in 24 countries between January 2014 and May 2015. The mean baseline age was 64 years, mean duration of diabetes was 14 years, mean glycated haemoglobin level was 8.3% and mean body mass index was 32 kg/m 2 . Of these participants, 37% were women, 71% had a history of cardiovascular disease, 22.3% had microalbuminuria and 8.7% had macroalbuminuria. The mean baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate was 76 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . The study will have at least 90% power ( P = .05) to detect a 22% or greater reduction in the risk of progression of albuminuria., Conclusions: The trial should define the potential renoprotective effect of canagliflozin and will provide additional important new data about its effects on vascular outcomes, death and kidney failure., (© 2017 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: To formulate a combined cardiovascular risk score in diabetes that could be useful both to physicians and healthcare funders., Methods: Data were derived from the Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation Observational (ADVANCE-ON) study, a randomized controlled trial (mean duration 5 years) with a post-randomization follow-up (mean 4.9 years), that included 11 140 high-risk patients with diabetes. The outcome analysed was the occurrence of either fatal or non-fatal macrovascular or renal disease. A Cox regression model was used to determine weightings in the risk score. The resultant score was recalibrated to each of three major global regions, as covered by the ADVANCE-ON study., Results: Over a median of 9.9 years, 1145 patients experienced at least one component of the combined outcome event. The resultant score, the AD-ON risk score, incorporated 13 demographic or clinical variables. Its discrimination was modest [c-statistic = 0.668 (95% confidence interval 0.651, 0.685)] but its calibration was excellent (predicted and observed risks coincided well, within disparate global regions). In terms of the integrated discrimination improvement index, its performance was marginally superior, over a 10-year risk horizon, to existing risk scores in clinical use, from a restricted version of the same data, for macrovascular and renal disease separately., Conclusions: The AD-ON risk score has advantages over the existing vascular risk scores in diabetes that used data from the original ADVANCE trial, which treat macrovascular and renal diseases separately. These advantages include its simplicity of use and global application., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: To assess the efficacy and safety of canagliflozin, a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, in patients with type 2 diabetes enrolled in the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) who were on an incretin mimetic [dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor or glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist]., Methods: CANVAS is a double-blind, placebo-controlled study that randomized participants to canagliflozin 100 or 300 mg or placebo added to routine therapy. The present post hoc analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of canagliflozin 100 and 300 mg compared with placebo in subsets of patients from CANVAS who were taking background DPP-4 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists with or without other antihyperglycaemic agents at week 18., Results: Of the 4330 patients in CANVAS, 316 were taking DPP-4 inhibitors and 95 were taking GLP-1 receptor agonists. At 18 weeks, canagliflozin 100 and 300 mg provided larger placebo-subtracted reductions in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients taking DPP-4 inhibitors [-0.56% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.77, -0.35), and -0.75% (95% CI: -0.95, -0.54), respectively] and GLP-1 receptor agonists [-1.00% (95% CI: -1.35, -0.65), and -1.06% (95% CI: -1.43, -0.69), respectively]. Body weight and blood pressure (BP) reductions were seen with canagliflozin versus placebo in both subsets. Higher incidences of genital mycotic infections and osmotic diuresis-related adverse events (AEs) were seen with canagliflozin compared with placebo. The incidence of hypoglycaemia was numerically higher with canagliflozin versus placebo; nearly all events occurred in patients on background insulin or insulin secretagogues., Conclusions: In patients on background incretin mimetics, canagliflozin improved HbA1c, body weight and BP, with an increased incidence of AEs related to SGLT2 inhibition., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To assess the efficacy and safety of recently approved once-weekly glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in patients with type 2 diabetes., Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing any GLP-1 RA licensed for once-weekly dosing (albiglutide, dulaglutide or exenatide extended release) with placebo or other antidiabetic agents. We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and grey literature for articles published up to December 2014 and extracted data in duplicate., Results: In our systematic review we included 33 trials with a total of 16 003 participants. Compared with placebo the change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration was -0.66% [six studies; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.14 to -0.19; I(2)  = 88%] with albiglutide, and -1.18% (seven studies; 95% CI -1.34 to -1.02; I(2)  = 65%) with dulaglutide. Based on data from placebo-controlled trials, we did not detect statistically significant weight-sparing benefits for albiglutide or dulaglutide. Compared with other antidiabetic agents, once-weekly GLP-1 RAs outperformed sitagliptin, daily exenatide and insulin glargine in terms of HbA1c-lowering (mean differences -0.40%; 95% CI -0.66 to -0.14; I(2)  = 85%, -0.44%; 95% CI -0.58 to -0.29; I(2)  = 40% and -0.28; 95% CI -0.45 to -0.10; I(2)  = 81%, respectively). The main adverse effects of treatment included gastrointestinal and injection site reactions., Conclusions: Given their dosing scheme and overall efficacy and safety profile, once-weekly GLP-1 RAs are a convenient therapeutic option for use as add-on to metformin., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: To investigate efficacy and safety of dual therapy with liraglutide and metformin in comparison to glimepiride and metformin, and metformin monotherapy over 2 years in patients with type 2 diabetes., Methods: In the 26-week the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes (LEAD)-2 core trial, patients (n = 1091) were randomized (2 : 2 : 2 : 1: 2) to liraglutide (0.6, 1.2 or 1.8 mg once-daily), placebo or glimepiride; all with metformin. Patients were enrolled if they were 18-80 years old with HbA1c 7.0-11.0% (previous monotherapy ≥3 months), or 7.0-10.0% (previous combination therapy ≥3 months), and body mass index ≤40 kg/m(2) . Patients completing the 26-week double-blinded phase could enter an 18-month open-label extension., Results: HbA1c decreased significantly with liraglutide (0.4% with 0.6 mg, 0.6% with 1.2 and 1.8 mg) versus 0.3% increase with metformin monotherapy (p < 0.0001). HbA1c decrease with liraglutide was non-inferior versus 0.5% decrease with glimepiride. Liraglutide groups experienced significant weight loss (2.1, 3.0 and 2.9 kg with 0.6, 1.2 and 1.8 mg, respectively) compared to weight gain (0.7 kg) with glimepiride (p < 0.0001). Weight loss with liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg was significantly greater than with metformin monotherapy (1.8 kg; p = 0.0185 and p = 0.0378 for 1.2 and 1.8 mg, respectively). The occurrence of minor hypoglycaemia was <5.0% in all liraglutide groups, significantly less than with glimepiride (24.0%; p < 0.0001). Liraglutide was well tolerated overall: gastrointestinal events were more common than with glimepiride or metformin monotherapy, but occurrence decreased with time., Conclusions: Liraglutide provided sustained glycaemic control over 2 years comparable to that provided by glimepiride. Liraglutide was well tolerated, and was associated with weight loss and a low rate of hypoglycaemia., (© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Aim: To show that vildagliptin added to metformin is non-inferior to glimepiride in reducing HbA1c levels from baseline over 2 years., Methods: A randomized, double-blind, active-comparator study of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled (HbA1c 6.5-8.5%) by metformin monotherapy. Patients received vildagliptin (50 mg twice daily) or glimepiride (up to 6 mg/day) added to metformin., Results: In all, 3118 patients were randomized (vildagliptin, n = 1562; glimepiride, n = 1556). From similar baseline values (7.3%), after 2 years adjusted mean (s.e.) change in HbA1c was comparable between vildagliptin and glimepiride treatment: -0.1% (0.0%) and -0.1% (0.0%), respectively. The primary objective of non-inferiority was met. A similar proportion of patients reached HbA1c <7% (36.9 and 38.3%, respectively), but with vildagliptin more patients reached this target without hypoglycaemia (36.0% vs. 28.8%; p = 0.004). The initial response (IR) was sustained for a mean (s.d.) of 309 (244) days with vildagliptin versus 270 (223) days for glimepiride (p < 0.001) (IR = nadir HbA1c where change from baseline > or =0.5% or HbA1c < or =6.5% within the first six months of treatment. After IR was detected, sustained response = time between nadir and an increase of >0.3% above IR). Independent of disease duration, age was a predictor of effect sustainability. Fewer patients experienced hypoglycaemia with vildagliptin (2.3% vs. 18.2% with glimepiride) with a 14-fold difference in the number of hypoglycaemic events (59 vs. 838). Vildagliptin had a beneficial effect on body weight [mean (s.e.) change from baseline -0.3 (0.1) kg; between-group difference -1.5 kg; p < 0.001]. Overall, both treatments were well tolerated and displayed similar safety profiles., Conclusions: Vildagliptin add-on has similar efficacy to glimepiride after 2 years' treatment, with markedly reduced hypoglycaemia risk and no weight gain.

Aim: The effect on body composition of liraglutide, a once-daily human glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue, as monotherapy or added to metformin was examined in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D)., Methods: These were randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trials of 26 [Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes-2 (LEAD-2)] and 52 weeks (LEAD-3). Patients with T2D, aged 18-80 years, body mass index (BMI) < or =40 kg/m(2) (LEAD-2), < or =45 kg/m(2) (LEAD-3) and HbA1c 7.0-11.0% were included. Patients were randomized to liraglutide 1.8, 1.2 or 0.6 mg/day, placebo or glimepiride 4 mg/day, all combined with metformin 1.5-2 g/day in LEAD-2 and to liraglutide 1.8, 1.2 or glimepiride 8 mg/day in LEAD-3. LEAD-2/3: total lean body tissue, fat tissue and fat percentage were measured. LEAD-2: adipose tissue area and hepatic steatosis were assessed., Results: LEAD-2: fat percentage with liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg/metformin was significantly reduced vs. glimepiride/metformin (p < 0.05) but not vs. placebo. Visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue areas were reduced from baseline in all liraglutide/metformin arms. Except with liraglutide 0.6 mg/metformin, reductions were significantly different vs. changes seen with glimepiride (p < 0.05) but not with placebo. Liver-to-spleen attenuation ratio increased with liraglutide 1.8 mg/metformin possibly indicating reduced hepatic steatosis. LEAD-3: reductions in fat mass and fat percentage with liraglutide monotherapy were significantly different vs. increases with glimepiride (p < 0.01)., Conclusion: Liraglutide (monotherapy or added to metformin) significantly reduced fat mass and fat percentage vs. glimepiride in patients with T2D.

Background: This 52-week, randomized, double-blind study compared the efficacy and safety of metformin plus pioglitazone with the established combination of metformin plus gliclazide in type 2 diabetes mellitus., Methods: Patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (HbA1c > or = 7.5% to < or =11.0%) received either pioglitazone 15 mg o.d. (titrated up to 45 mg; n = 317) or gliclazide 80 mg o.d. (titrated up to 320 mg; n = 313) and metformin at the pre-study dose. HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), insulin, lipids and the urinary albumin/creatinine ratio were measured., Results: There were no significant differences in HbA1c (1% decrease in both groups) and FPG between groups. There was a decrease in fasting insulin in the pioglitazone group compared to an increase in the gliclazide group (p < 0.001). There were significantly greater improvements in triglycerides and HDL-cholesterol in the metformin plus pioglitazone group compared to the metformin plus gliclazide group (p < 0.001). Mean LDL-cholesterol decreased with metformin plus gliclazide and increased with metformin plus pioglitazone (p < 0.001); however, this increase was considerably less marked than that in HDL-cholesterol. The mean urinary albumin/creatinine ratio was reduced by 10% in the metformin plus pioglitazone group compared to an increase of 6% in the metformin plus gliclazide group (p = 0.027). The incidence of adverse events was comparable between groups and both combinations were well tolerated., Conclusions: Compared to the established combination of metformin plus gliclazide, this study indicates potential benefits of addition of pioglitazone to metformin in terms of improvements in microalbuminuria and specific abnormalities associated with diabetic dyslipidemia., (Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Differences between studies in rates of severe hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetic cohorts are common and poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to assess the frequency of severe hypoglycaemia in unselected patients treated in different secondary care centres and to evaluate the influence of risk markers, clinical setting and selection., Methods: Cross-sectional Danish-British multicentre survey of 1076 consecutive adult patients with clinical type 1 diabetes who completed a detailed questionnaire on hypoglycaemia and related issues. Key variable was the self-reported rate of severe hypoglycaemia during the preceding year., Results: The overall rate of severe hypoglycaemia in the preceding year was 1.3 episodes/patient-year and episodes were reported by 36.7% of subjects. The distribution was highly skewed with 5% of subjects accounting for 54% of all episodes. There were no significant differences between countries or centres. Reduced hypoglycaemia awareness, peripheral neuropathy and smoking were the only significant risk markers of severe hypoglycaemia in a stepwise multivariate analysis. In a subgroup selected to be similar to the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) cohort, the rate of severe hypoglycaemia was 0.35 episodes/patient-year and only retinopathy was a significant risk marker together with state of awareness., Conclusion: Severe hypoglycaemia remains a significant clinical problem in type 1 diabetes. The rate of severe hypoglycaemia and the influence of risk markers are very sensitive to selection and differences in rates between centres or studies seem to disappear after correction for differences in clinical characteristics. Smoking is a novel overall risk marker of severe hypoglycaemia., (Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)