Long-term effects of dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus glimepiride on a background of metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: Results of a 104-week extension to a 52-week randomized, phase 3 study and liver fat MRI substudy.

AIM: To report the results of a 104-week extension to a 52-week study in which dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin (DAPA+SAXA) improved glycaemic control, liver fat and metabolic variables compared with glimepiride (GLIM) in participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D) receiving background metformin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This extension to a 52-week global, multicentre, parallel-group, active-controlled, double-blind study (NCT02419612) continued randomized participants (1:1) on DAPA+SAXA (10/5 mg) plus placebo, or GLIM (1-6 mg) plus placebo, once daily. Eligible participants were aged ≥18 years, had T2D (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 58.5-91.3 mmol/mol [7.5%-10.5%]), and a body mass index of 20.0 to 45.0 kg/m2 , and were receiving metformin (MET; ≥1500 mg/d). Key outcomes were: requirement for treatment intensification, based on HbA1c ≥53 mmol/mol (7%); achieving therapeutic glycaemic response; and changes in adipose tissue and liver fat on magnetic resonance imaging in a substudy. RESULTS: Overall, 382 participants entered and 338 completed the 104-week extension period (MRI substudy, n = 82). The need for treatment intensification during the 156-week period was lower for DAPA+SAXA+MET (37.0%) than GLIM+MET (55.6%; hazard ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.68; P < 0.001). At week 156, 21.4% of DAPA+SAXA+MET versus 11.7% of GLIM+MET participants achieved therapeutic glycaemic response (HbA1c <53 mmol/mol; odds ratio 2.1, 95% CI 1.23-3.42; P = 0.006). DAPA+SAXA+MET led to greater adjusted mean reductions from baseline in liver fat and visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue volumes versus GLIM+MET at week 122 (least-squares mean difference from GLIM+MET -4.89%, -0.41 L and -0.44 L, respectively; nominal P values ≤ 0.008). Safety was consistent with that of the monocomponents. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, glycaemic control, metabolic benefits and efficacy were better maintained with DAPA+SAXA+MET than with GLIM+MET in T2D.

Correction to: Safety and Efficacy of Exenatide Once Weekly in Participants with Type 2 Diabetes and Stage 2/3 Chronic Kidney Disease.

In the original article, the Table 1 has published with error.

Exenatide once weekly decreases urinary albumin excretion in patients with type 2 diabetes and elevated albuminuria: Pooled analysis of randomized active controlled clinical trials.

AIMS: To examine the albuminuria-lowering effect of exenatide once weekly (EQW) compared with active glucose-lowering comparators in patients with type 2 diabetes and elevated urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR). METHODS: Six randomized double-blind and open-label phase III studies were pooled in a post hoc, exploratory analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EQW versus non-glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist comparators in patients with type 2 diabetes and baseline uACR ≥30 mg/g. Treatment groups were EQW versus all comparators pooled. Efficacy outcomes were percent change from baseline to week 26/28 in uACR and absolute change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (SBP), body weight and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were generally similar between the two treatment groups (EQW: N = 194, all comparators: N = 274). Relative to the comparator group, EQW changed albuminuria by -26.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] -39.5 to -10). Similar improvements were observed with EQW versus oral glucose-lowering drugs (-29.6% [95% CI -47.6 to -5.3) or insulin (-23.8% [95% CI -41.8 to -0.2]). The effect of EQW on uACR was independent of baseline renin-angiotensin system inhibitor usage. Adjusted mean decreases in HbA1c, SBP and body weight were more pronounced in the EQW versus the comparator group. Adjustment for changes in HbA1c, eGFR and SBP did not substantially affect the uACR-lowering effect of EQW. When also adjusting for changes in body weight, the uACR-lowering effect was reduced to (-13.0% [95% CI -29.9 to 7.8]). CONCLUSION: Exenatide once weekly reduced uACR in patients with type 2 diabetes and elevated albuminuria compared to commonly used glucose-lowering drugs.

Safety and Efficacy of Exenatide Once Weekly in Participants with Type 2 Diabetes and Stage 2/3 Chronic Kidney Disease.

INTRODUCTION: The safety and efficacy of exenatide once weekly (EQW) is overall well established. EQW is primarily renally eliminated. In this study, the efficacy and renal and gastrointestinal tolerability of EQW were summarised in participants with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease stage 3 (CKD3; moderate renal impairment; estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] ≥ 30 to < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) or CKD stage 2 (CKD2; mild renal impairment; eGFR ≥ 60 to < 90 mL/min/1.73 m2). METHODS: Data on participants with type 2 diabetes and baseline CKD3 or CKD2 from eight phase 3, double-blind or open-label studies with 26- or 28-week controlled treatment periods were pooled. Participants received EQW or a placebo/non-glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist comparator (sitagliptin, metformin, pioglitazone, dapagliflozin and insulin). RESULTS: Participants with baseline CKD3 (N = 182) or CKD2 (N = 772) receiving EQW differed in a number of baseline characteristics, such as age < 65 years, race, mean body mass index and mean type 2 diabetes duration, whereas mean blood pressure and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) were similar. Mean reductions in HbA1c, body weight and systolic blood pressure from baseline to week 26/28 in participants receiving EQW were similar between the CKD subgroups. The proportions of participants (CKD3 and CKD2) with any adverse event (AE) were 81% and 72%, respectively, for EQW and 74% and 68%, respectively, for all comparators; those for serious AEs were 2.7% and 3.4%, respectively, for EQW and 6% and 5%, respectively, for all comparators. Gastrointestinal AE rates were higher in the EQW CKD3 subgroup (42.2% of participants) than in the CKD2 (32.8%) subgroup, although rates for nausea and vomiting were similar. There were no dehydration events; one participant in each treatment group had a serious AE of acute kidney injury (EQW with CKD3, n = 1; pioglitazone with CKD2, n = 1). CONCLUSION: Exenatide once weekly was well tolerated and demonstrated similar efficacy in participants with type 2 diabetes with mild and moderate renal impairment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00637273, NCT00676338, NCT02229383, NCT02229396, NCT00641056, NCT01652729, NCT00935532, NCT01003184.

Healing of gastric ulcers with esomeprazole versus ranitidine in patients who continued to receive NSAID therapy: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare orally administered esomeprazole 40 mg once daily and 20 mg once daily with ranitidine 150 mg twice daily for the healing of gastric ulcers (GUs) during 8 wks in patients who continued to receive daily nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial included patients who were receiving nonselective or cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2)-selective NSAIDs and had at least one GU >or=5 mm but no gastric or duodenal ulcer >25 mm in diameter at the baseline esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). After 4 and 8 wks of treatment, ulcer-healing status was confirmed by EGD. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients in each treatment group who had no GUs (GU healing rate) at week 8. RESULTS: A total of 406 patients were randomized to treatment. At week 8, GU healing rates with esomeprazole 40 and 20 mg were 91.5% (118/129; 95% CI, 86.7-96.3%) and 88.4% (122/138; 95% CI, 83.1-93.7%), respectively, and were significantly higher than the 74.2% rate (98/132; 95% CI, 66.8-81.7%) with ranitidine (p<0.01 for both comparisons). GU healing rates at 4 wks (78.3%[101/129] and 79.0%[109/138] in the esomeprazole 40- and 20-mg groups, respectively) were also significantly higher (p<0.05) than in the ranitidine group (66.7%[88/132]). All treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Esomeprazole 40 and 20 mg once daily are effective and well-tolerated therapies compared with ranitidine 150 mg twice daily for healing GUs in patients who need to continue NSAID therapy.