Empagliflozin as add-on to metformin in people with Type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of empagliflozin as add-on to metformin in people with Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Of 637 participants treated with empagliflozin 10 mg, empagliflozin 25 mg, or placebo once daily for 24 weeks, 463 (72.7%) were treated in a double-blind extension trial for ≥ 52 weeks. Prespecified exploratory endpoints included changes from baseline in HbA1c , weight and blood pressure at week 76. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, adjusted mean changes from baseline in HbA1c (overall baseline mean ± sd 63 ± 9 mmol/mol [7.9 ± 0.9%]) were -7 mmol/mol [(-0.6%) 95% CI -8, -5 mmol/mol (-0.8, -0.5%); P < 0.001] and -8 mmol/mol [(-0.7%) 95% CI -10, -6 mmol/mol (-0.9, -0.6%); P < 0.001], for empagliflozin 10 mg and 25 mg, respectively. Compared with placebo, adjusted mean changes from baseline in weight were -1.9 kg (95% CI -2.5, -1.3; P < 0.001) and -2.2 kg (95% CI -2.8, -1.6; P < 0.001) for empagliflozin 10 mg and 25 mg, respectively. Empagliflozin led to sustained reductions in systolic blood pressure vs. placebo. Adverse events were reported in 77.7, 80.2 and 72.0% of participants on placebo, empagliflozin 10 mg and empagliflozin 25 mg, respectively. Confirmed hypoglycaemic adverse events (glucose ≤ 3.9 mmol/l and/or event requiring assistance) were reported in 3.4, 4.1 and 4.2% of participants in these groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In people with Type 2 diabetes, empagliflozin 10 mg and 25 mg given as add-on to metformin for 76 weeks were well tolerated and led to sustained reductions in HbA1c , weight and systolic blood pressure.

Efficacy and safety of empagliflozin twice daily versus once daily in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin: a 16-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level ≥7 and ≤10% were randomized to receive empagliflozin 12.5 mg twice daily (n = 219), 25 mg once daily (n = 218), 5 mg twice daily (n = 219) or 10 mg once daily (n = 220), or placebo (n = 107) as add-on to stable-dose metformin immediate release (IR) twice daily for 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c at week 16. At week 16, change from baseline in HbA1c with empagliflozin twice daily was non-inferior to empagliflozin once daily and vice versa. The adjusted mean (95% confidence interval) difference in change from baseline in HbA1c with empagliflozin 12.5 mg twice daily versus 25 mg once daily was -0.11% (-0.26, 0.03), and with empagliflozin 5 mg twice daily versus 10 mg once daily it was -0.02% (-0.16, 0.13). All empagliflozin regimens were well tolerated; thus, when used as add-on to metformin IR in patients with T2DM, the therapeutic effect of empagliflozin twice-daily and once-daily regimens can be considered equivalent.

Bioequivalence of Linagliptin 5 mg once daily and 2.5 mg twice daily: pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in an open-label crossover trial.

Linagliptin is an oral antihyperglycemic drug that acts by inhibiting the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 enzyme. A 5-mg once-daily regimen is available, but an alternative regimen was needed for twice-daily fixed-dose combinations. Although linagliptin has non-linear pharmacokinetics, simulation suggested 2.5 mg twice-daily would provide bioequivalent exposure and comparable plasma dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibition to 5 mg once-daily.This crossover study compared steady-state pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of linagliptin 5 mg once-daily and 2.5 mg twice-daily, both administered for 7 days.In total, 16 healthy volunteers entered the study, and 15 completed both treatment periods. Exposure over 24-h at steady state (AUC0-24,ss) was similar for linagliptin 5 mg once-daily and 2.5 mg twice-daily (132 vs. 124 nmol · h/L), and the 90% confidence interval of the adjusted geometric mean ratio of AUC0-24,ss was well within the acceptance range for bioequivalence (ratio 93.9%; 90% confidence interval 89.5, 98.5). Median dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibition over a 24-h interval at steady state was 85.9% with linagliptin 5 mg once-daily and 86.5% with 2.5 mg twice-daily, and median dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibition values were approximately 80.0% at trough. Most subjects had no adverse events and there were no serious adverse events.Linagliptin 5 mg once-daily and 2.5 mg twice-daily provided bioequivalent exposure and similar inhibition of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 over the whole dosing interval.

Initial combination of linagliptin and metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: efficacy and safety in a randomised, double-blind 1-year extension study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and safety of linagliptin in initial combination with metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This 1-year randomised, double-blind study was an extension of a 6-month randomised controlled trial, in which adults with type 2 diabetes received one of six treatment regimens (linagliptin 2.5 mg plus metformin 500 mg bid, linagliptin 2.5 mg plus metformin mg 1000 bid, metformin 1000 mg bid, metformin 500 mg bid, linagliptin 5 mg qd or placebo). In the extension, patients in the first three treatment groups continued their regimen (non-switched group, n = 333) while the metformin 500 mg bid, linagliptin 5 mg qd and placebo groups were re-randomised to one of the three continuing regimens (switched group, n = 233). RESULTS: All three non-switched groups maintained reductions in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c; mean ± standard deviation reductions across the 1.5-year period: linagliptin 2.5 plus metformin 1000 bid, -1.63 ± 1.05%; linagliptin 2.5 plus metformin 500 bid, -1.32 ± 1.06%; metformin 1000 bid, -1.25 ± 0.91%) while the switched groups showed additional HbA1c reductions. During the extension, there were no clinically meaningful changes in body weight in any group. Adverse event rates were similar between groups, with most events being mild or moderate, and the incidence of investigator-defined hypoglycaemia was low, with no severe events. DISCUSSION: Initial combination of linagliptin and metformin was well tolerated over the 1-year extension period, with low risk of hypoglycaemia, and improved glycaemic control vs. metformin alone. CONCLUSION: The initial combination of linagliptin and metformin appears to provide a useful treatment option in patients whose blood glucose levels are increased to an extent that metformin monotherapy may not achieve treatment targets.

Initial combination of linagliptin and metformin improves glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy with linagliptin plus metformin versus linagliptin or metformin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In this 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase III trial, 791 patients were randomized to one of six treatment arms. Two free combination therapy arms received linagliptin 2.5 mg twice daily (bid) + either low (500 mg) or high (1000 mg) dose metformin bid. Four monotherapy arms received linagliptin 5 mg once daily, metformin 500 mg or 1000 mg bid or placebo. Patients with haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥11.0% were not eligible for randomization and received open-label linagliptin + high-dose metformin. RESULTS: The placebo-corrected mean (95% confidence interval) change in HbA1c from baseline (8.7%) to week 24 was -1.7% (-2.0, -1.4) for linagliptin + high-dose metformin, -1.3% (-1.6, -1.1) for linagliptin + low-dose metformin, -1.2% (-1.5, -0.9) for high-dose metformin, -0.8% (-1.0, -0.5) for low-dose metformin and -0.6 (-0.9, -0.3) for linagliptin (all p < 0.0001). In the open-label arm, the mean change in HbA1c from baseline (11.8%) was -3.7%. Hypoglycaemia occurred at a similar low rate with linagliptin + metformin (1.7%) as with metformin alone (2.4%). Adverse event rates were comparable across treatment arms. No clinically significant changes in body weight were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Initial combination therapy with linagliptin plus metformin was superior to metformin monotherapy in improving glycaemic control, with a similar safety and tolerability profile, no weight gain and a low risk of hypoglycaemia.

Telmisartan vs losartan plus hydrochlorothiazide in the treatment of mild-to-moderate essential hypertension--a randomised ABPM study.

The objective of this prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-end point parallel-group, multicentre study was to show that telmisartan 80 mg is not inferior to a fixed-dose combination of losartan 50 mg/hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. The criterion for noninferiority was a treatment difference of < or =3.0 mmHg in the reduction of 24-h mean ambulatory diastolic blood pressure (DBP) from the end of the 4-week placebo washout period to the end of the 6-week active treatment period. In the intent-to-treat analysis, the mean reduction in 24-h DBP was 8.3+/-6.7 mmHg among telmisartan-treated patients (n=332) and 10.3+/-6.3 mmHg among losartan/HCTZ-treated patients (n=350). The mean adjusted difference in 24-h DBP between the two treatment groups was 1.9 mmHg, allowing rejection of the a priori null hypothesis of a treatment difference of >3 mmHg. The reduction in mean 24-h systolic blood pressure was 13.2+/-10.2 mmHg with telmisartan and 17.1+/-10.3 mmHg with losartan/HCTZ. Both drugs provided effective control over the 24-h dosing interval. Analyses of morning (0600-1159) ambulatory blood pressure monitoring DBP means and trough cuff DBP confirmed the noninferiority hypothesis of the protocol for telmisartan 80 mg vs losartan 50 mg/HCTZ 12.5 mg. The reductions in office blood pressures measured at trough in patients treated with telmisartan were -16.3/-9.6 and -18.5/-11.1 mmHg in the patients treated with losartan/HCTZ (difference -2.4/-1.2 mmHg). There were no differences between the side-effect profiles of the two treatments.

Inhibitory effect of telmisartan on the blood pressure response to angiotensin II challenge.

Telmisartan is a new angiotensin receptor antagonist possessing potent, selective, and insurmountable inhibitory activity specific to the angiotensin II type 1 (AT 1 ) receptor. The current study was performed to determine the inhibition of the angiotensin II pressor response by telmisartan in 48 healthy volunteers challenged with hypertension-inducing doses of i.v. angiotensin II. Subjects were challenged with this dose of angiotensin II at intervals between 0.25 and 48 h after double-blind single-dose oral administration of telmisartan 20 mg (n = 12), 40 mg (n = 12), or 80 mg (n = 12) or placebo (n = 12) in parallel groups. Diastolic and systolic blood pressure and pulse rate were recorded continuously using a servophotoplethysmograph. Urine samples were collected during the study for urinalysis. Tolerability of telmisartan, in comparison with placebo, was also monitored throughout the study. Telmisartan 20-80 mg dose dependently inhibited the increase in diastolic and systolic blood pressure induced by angiotensin II. Telmisartan 40 mg produced 80.1% maximum inhibition, and with 80 mg 89.6% maximum inhibition of diastolic blood pressure was achieved. Inhibition was apparent after 0.3-1.1 h and was still observed 48 h after administration for all telmisartan doses. The inhibitory effect of telmisartan 20, 40, and 80 mg, 48 h after dosing was significantly greater than that of placebo. A > 25% inhibition of the angiotensin II response on diastolic blood pressure was detected until 26.9, 35.4, and 40.5 h, respectively, after telmisartan 20 mg, 40 mg, and 80 mg. Anti-clockwise hysteresis was observed, indicating a delay and longer persistence of effect than to be expected from the plasma concentration-time course. The slow dissociation of telmisartan from the receptor probably contributed to this hysteresis. The incidence of adverse events was comparable in telmisartan-and placebo-treated subjects and was not dose dependent. In conclusion, telmisartan 40 mg provides rapid-onset, well-tolerated, and near-maximal inhibition of angiotensin II-induced hypertension, with maintenance of the inhibitory effect for 48 h.

Comparison of 26-week efficacy and tolerability of telmisartan and atenolol, in combination with hydrochlorothiazide as required, in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension: a randomized, multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and tolerability of telmisartan, a novel antihypertensive agent, and atenolol, a well-established beta-blocker, in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension. METHODS: This 26-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, titration-to-response study compared doses of telmisartan (40 mg titrated to 80 mg titrated to 120 mg) with atenolol (50 mg titrated to 100 mg) required to achieve diastolic blood pressure (DBP) control (< or = 90 mm Hg or a decrease from baseline of > or = 10 mm Hg). Open-label hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 or 25 mg was added if needed according to a prespecified titration rule. Men and women aged > 18 years with mild to moderate hypertension (morning mean supine DBP [SDBP] > or = 95 mm Hg and < or = 114 mm Hg) were eligible to participate. Patients with significant cardiovascular, metabolic, hepatic, or renal dysfunction or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were excluded. The primary efficacy end point was trough SDBP response at 26 weeks; secondary efficacy end points included changes from baseline at trough in both standing and supine DBP and systolic blood pressure (SBP), and heart rate after 4, 8, 16, and 26 weeks; SBP control (reduction from baseline of > or = 10 mm Hg); normalization of supine SDBP to < or = 90 mm Hg; and the need for add-on HCTZ. Changes in quality of life were also examined. Adverse events were obtained from spontaneous reporting and recorded. Serious adverse events were reported to the sponsor according to predefined timelines. RESULTS: A total of 533 patients from 49 centers participated. Patients' mean age was 57.9 years (range, 22-79 years); 55.9% (298/533) of the population was male and 98.1% (523/533) was white. Of the 533 patients randomly assigned to treatment and included in the safety analysis, 520 (97.6%) were included in the efficacy analysis; 346 received telmisartan and 174 received atenolol. A total of 489 patients (91.7%) completed the study (325 [93.9%], telmisartan; 164 [94.2%], atenolol). Full SDBP response (trough SDBP < or = 90 mm Hg and/or a reduction from baseline of > or = 10 mm Hg) was observed in 84% and 78% of telmisartan- and atenolol-treated patients, respectively; this difference was not statistically significant. Final SBP/DBP reductions of 20.9/14.4 mm Hg were observed for the telmisartan regimen versus 16.7/13.3 mm Hg for the atenolol regimen; only the difference in SBP was significant (P = 0.005). Reduction from baseline in SBP of > or = 10 mm Hg was achieved by 80% of telmisartan-treated and 68% of atenolol-treated patients (P = 0.003). Adverse events were reported by 52.7% of patients given telmisartan and 61.2% of patients given atenolol; this difference was not statistically significant. Most events were mild or moderate. Although fatigue and male impotence were more common in atenolol-treated patients (3.4% and 4.0%, respectively), the incidence of these adverse events was too low to differentiate statistically. CONCLUSIONS: Telmisartan appears to be at least as effective as atenolol in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension and may be better tolerated.

The relationship between pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of enoximone in healthy man.

The relationship between the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of enoximone, a new positive inotropic agent, was investigated in 6 healthy men. The volunteers received single oral and i.v. doses of 3 and 1 mg/kg, respectively, and placebo in a double-blind cross-over trial. Plasma concentrations of enoximone and its sulphoxide metabolite, effects on the corrected electromechanical systole (QS2c), the impedance cardiogram (dZ/dt)/RZ index, blood pressure and heart rate were determined over an 8-h period. Peak effects on QS2c and the (dZ/dt)/RZ index were obtained after approximately 1 h. During the first hour, the cardiac effects lagged behind the high plasma concentrations. Thereafter, the effects on QS2c were closely correlated with the plasma concentrations both of enoximone and its sulphoxide derivative (r greater than or equal to 0.90). The concentration-effect curves of both substances were parallel and were independent of the route of administration. The inotropic activity was not related to the drug level in hypothetical peripheral compartments. The results suggest that determination of plasma enoximone 1 h after administration and thereafter may be useful in assessing the haemodynamic activity of the drug. Should this observation also be present in a clinical situation, plasma enoximone measurement might be a valuable tool in management of patients suffering from heart failure.

Pharmacokinetics of piroximone (MDL 19.205) in healthy volunteers.

Six healthy, male subjects received single intravenous and oral doses of piroximone. Plasma piroximone concentrations were assayed up to 8 h after each dose by HPLC. Urinary excretion of the parent compound was also determined. Following the oral dose, piroximone reached peak plasma concentrations within 30 to 90 min. The t1/2 of the terminal decay phase was 2.8 h, the mean apparent volume of distribution was 2.5 l/kg, and the mean total body clearance was 755 ml/min. Mean urinary recovery of parent drug within 24 h was 50% after the intravenous dose and 41% after the oral dose. Renal clearance accounted for approximately 50% of total body clearance. Oral bioavailability, estimated from AUC or urinary recovery, was 80%.

Kinetics of fenoximone, a new cardiotonic, in healthy subjects.

Fenoximone, a new cardiotonic, was given to six healthy men as a single intravenous dose of 1 mg/kg and a single oral dose of 3 mg/kg as solution in a crossover study. Plasma concentrations were monitored for 8 hr and urine was collected for 24 hr. Peak plasma concentrations (Cmax) were reached 30 min after the oral dose. Decay of plasma concentrations was fitted to a mean (+/- SD) elimination t1/2 (t1/2 beta) of 60 +/- 14 min after intravenous injection and 78 +/- 26 min after oral dosing. Mean total body clearance for intravenous dosing was 2062 +/- 846 ml/min, renal clearance (ClR) was 5.3 +/- 2.4 ml/min, and extrapolated volume of distribution was 0.37 +/- 0.26 l/kg. The sulfoxide derivative was detected as the main metabolite. Cmax of the sulfoxide metabolite occurred 10 min after the end of the intravenous infusion and 20 to 60 min after oral dosing. From the decay of the plasma concentrations of the sulfoxide, the t1/2 beta s were calculated as 132 +/- 15 min after intravenous injection and 140 +/- 27 min after oral dosing of fenoximone. ClR of the sulfoxide was 499 +/- 106 ml/min after intravenous injection; 24-hr urinary recovery of the sulfoxide was 75.7% +/- 5.7% after intravenous injection and 64.3% +/- 10.4% after oral dosing. Mean oral bioavailability of fenoximone was 53% (range 44% to 69%).