Cardiovascular safety of empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of data from randomized placebo-controlled trials.

AIM: To assess the effect of empagliflozin on cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) through a meta-analysis of data from eight placebo-controlled trials. METHODS: Data were analysed from eight randomized placebo-controlled trials undertaken to investigate the efficacy and safety of empagliflozin 10 and 25 mg once daily in patients with T2DM, comprising patients at low/medium and high CV risk. Suspected CV events were prospectively adjudicated. The empagliflozin 10 and 25 mg groups were pooled for the primary analysis. The primary endpoint was a composite of CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), non-fatal stroke and hospitalization for unstable angina [4-point major adverse CV events (MACE)]. The secondary endpoint was a composite of CV death, non-fatal MI and non-fatal stroke (3-point MACE). Risk estimates were calculated using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 3835 patients received placebo and 7457 received empagliflozin. Total exposure was 7448.3 years for placebo and 15482.1 years for empagliflozin. Four-point MACE occurred in 365 (9.5%) patients receiving placebo and 635 (8.5%) patients receiving empagliflozin [hazard ratio for empagliflozin vs. placebo 0.86 (95% CI 0.76, 0.98)]. Three-point MACE occurred in 307 (8.0%) patients receiving placebo and 522 (7.0%) patients receiving empagliflozin [hazard ratio for empagliflozin vs. placebo 0.84 (95% CI 0.73, 0.96)]. CONCLUSIONS: In a meta-analysis of data from eight randomized trials involving 11 292 patients with T2DM at low/medium or high CV risk, empagliflozin was associated with a reduced risk of 4-point MACE and 3-point MACE compared with placebo.

Mixed-effects modelling to quantify the effect of empagliflozin on renal glucose reabsorption in patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To quantify the effect of the sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, empagliflozin, on renal glucose reabsorption in patients with type 2 diabetes, and to evaluate covariate effects, using a mechanistic population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) model. METHODS: Four phase I/II trials were used for model development. Empagliflozin's PK characteristics were characterized by a two-compartmental model with sequential zero- and first-order absorption. Urinary glucose excretion (UGE) was described as dependent on renal glucose filtration and reabsorption; splay of the glucose reabsorption/excretion curves was considered. The modelling assumed that empagliflozin lowers the maximum renal glucose reabsorption capacity and, thereby, the renal threshold for glucose (RTg). Covariate effects were investigated using a full covariate modelling approach, emphasizing parameter estimation. RESULTS: The PK-PD model provided a reasonable description of the PK characteristics of empagliflozin and its effects on UGE across a range of renal function levels. Its parameters are consistent with reported values for renal physiology. Using this model, the effect of empagliflozin on renal glucose reabsorption was quantified. Steady-state empagliflozin doses (1, 5, 10 and 25 mg) reduced RTg from 12.5 mmol/L [95% confidence interval (CI) 12.0, 13.1] to 5.66 (95% CI 4.62, 6.72), 3.01 (95% CI 2.33, 3.69), 2.53 (95% CI 1.83, 3.14) and 2.21 (95% CI 1.47, 2.84) mg/dl, respectively. Covariate analysis showed the effect of empagliflozin on UGE was not influenced, to a clinically relevant extent, by sex, age or race. CONCLUSIONS: A method for characterizing renal glucose reabsorption was developed that does not require complex glucose clamp experiments. These analyses indicate that empagliflozin provided concentration-dependent RTg reductions, with 10 and 25 mg providing near-maximum RTg-lowering.

Effects of empagliflozin on blood pressure and markers of arterial stiffness and vascular resistance in patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To determine the effects of empagliflozin on blood pressure (BP) and markers of arterial stiffness and vascular resistance in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of data from a phase III trial in patients with T2DM and hypertension receiving 12 weeks' empagliflozin and four phase III trials in patients with T2DM receiving 24 weeks' empagliflozin (cohort 1, n = 823; cohort 2, n = 2477). BP was measured using 24-h BP monitoring (cohort 1) or seated office measurements (cohort 2). RESULTS: Empagliflozin reduced systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP in both cohorts (p < 0.001 vs placebo), without increasing heart rate. Empagliflozin reduced pulse pressure (PP; adjusted mean difference vs placebo cohort 1: -2.3 mmHg; cohort 2: -2.3 mmHg), mean arterial pressure (MAP; cohort 1, -2.3 mmHg; cohort 2, -2.1 mmHg) and double product (cohort 1, -385 mmHg × bpm; cohort 2, -369 mmHg × bpm) all p < 0.001 vs placebo. There was a trend towards a reduction in the ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) with empagliflozin in cohort 1 (p = 0.059 vs placebo). AASI was not measured in cohort 2. Subgroup analyses showed that there were greater reductions in PP with increasing baseline SBP in cohort 1 (p = 0.092). In cohort 2, greater reductions in MAP were achieved in patients with higher baseline SBP (p = 0.027) and greater reductions in PP were observed in older patients (p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin reduced BP and had favourable effects on markers of arterial stiffness and vascular resistance.

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.

Empagliflozin as adjunct to insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes: a 4-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (EASE-1).

AIMS: To investigate the pharmacodynamics, efficacy and safety of empagliflozin as adjunct to insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: A total of 75 patients with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentrations of ≥7.5 to ≤10.5% (≥58 to ≤91 mmol/mol) were randomized to receive once-daily empagliflozin 2.5 mg, empagliflozin 10 mg, empagliflozin 25 mg, or placebo as adjunct to insulin for 28 days. Insulin dose was to be kept as stable as possible for 7 days then adjusted, at the investigator's discretion, to achieve optimum glycaemic control. The primary exploratory endpoint was change from baseline in 24-h urinary glucose excretion (UGE) on day 7. RESULTS: Empagliflozin significantly increased 24-h UGE versus placebo on days 7 and 28. On day 28, adjusted mean differences with empagliflozin versus placebo in changes from baseline in: HbA1c were -0.35 to -0.49% (-3.8 to -5.4 mmol/mol; all p < 0.05 vs. placebo); total daily insulin dose -0.07 to -0.09 U/kg (all p<0.05 vs placebo); and weight were -1.5 to -1.9 kg (all p < 0.001 vs. placebo). In the placebo, empagliflozin 2.5, 10 and 25 mg groups, respectively, adverse events were reported in 94.7, 89.5, 78.9 and 100.0% of patients, and the rate of symptomatic hypoglycaemic episodes with glucose ≤3.0 mmol/l not requiring assistance was 1.0, 0.4, 0.5 and 0.8 episodes per 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 1 diabetes, empagliflozin for 28 days as adjunct to insulin increased UGE, improved HbA1c and reduced weight with lower insulin doses compared with placebo and without increasing hypoglycaemia.

Impact of empagliflozin added on to basal insulin in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin: a 78-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

AIMS: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of empagliflozin added to basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Patients inadequately controlled [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) >7 to ≤10% (>53 to ≤86 mmol/mol)] on basal insulin (glargine, detemir, NPH) were randomized to empagliflozin 10 mg (n = 169), empagliflozin 25 mg (n = 155) or placebo (n = 170) for 78 weeks. The baseline characteristics were balanced among the groups [mean HbA1c 8.2% (67 mmol/mol), BMI 32.2 kg/m(2) ]. The basal insulin dose was to remain constant for 18 weeks, then could be adjusted at investigator's discretion. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c at week 18. Key secondary endpoints were changes from baseline in HbA1c and insulin dose at week 78. RESULTS: At week 18, the adjusted mean ± standard error changes from baseline in HbA1c were 0.0 ± 0.1% (-0.1 ± 0.8 mmol/mol) for placebo, compared with -0.6 ± 0.1% (-6.2 ± 0.8 mmol/mol) and -0.7 ± 0.1% (-7.8 ± 0.8 mmol/mol) for empagliflozin 10 and 25 mg, respectively (both p < 0.001). At week 78, empagliflozin 10 and 25 mg significantly reduced HbA1c, insulin dose and weight vs placebo (all p < 0.01), and empagliflozin 10 mg significantly reduced systolic blood pressure vs placebo (p = 0.004). Similar percentages of patients had confirmed hypoglycaemia in all groups (35-36%). Events consistent with urinary tract infection were reported in 9, 15 and 12% of patients on placebo, empagliflozin 10 and 25 mg, and events consistent with genital infection were reported in 2, 8 and 5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin for 78 weeks added to basal insulin improved glycaemic control and reduced weight with a similar risk of hypoglycaemia to placebo.

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.

Long-term treatment with empagliflozin as add-on to oral antidiabetes therapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

AIMS: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of empagliflozin for 52 weeks as add-on to one other oral antidiabetes therapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: Patients on biguanide (n = 133), thiazolidinedione (n = 273), α-glucosidase inhibitor (n = 139), dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitor (n = 139) or glinide (n = 140) were randomized 1 : 1 to receive empagliflozin 10 or 25 mg double-blind as add-on therapy for 52 weeks. Patients on sulphonylurea (SU; n = 336) were randomized 2 : 2 : 1 to receive empagliflozin 10 or 25 mg double-blind or open-label metformin as add-on therapy for 52 weeks. The primary objective was to evaluate safety. Change from baseline in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at week 52 was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 67.6-84.6% of patients receiving empagliflozin. Confirmed hypoglycaemic AEs (plasma glucose ≤70 mg/dl and/or requiring assistance) were reported in 4.4 and 6.6%, respectively, of patients receiving empagliflozin 10 and 25 mg as add-on to SU and in 0.0 to 2.9%, respectively, of patients receiving empagliflozin 10 and 25 mg as add-on to other therapies. Baseline mean ± standard deviation HbA1c ranged from 7.51 ± 0.73 to 8.06 ± 0.76% across background therapy groups. At week 52, adjusted mean ± standard error changes from baseline in HbA1c ranged from -0.77 ± 0.06 to -1.00 ± 0.06% in patients receiving empagliflozin. CONCLUSIONS: In Japanese patients with T2DM, empagliflozin 10 and 25 mg as add-on to one other oral antidiabetes therapy for 52 weeks were well tolerated and were associated with clinically meaningful reductions in HbA1c.

Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety of empagliflozin, a sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, in subjects with renal impairment.

AIMS: Empagliflozin is a selective sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor that inhibits renal glucose reabsorption and is being investigated for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: In this open-label study, the effect of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety of a 50 mg dose of empagliflozin was investigated in 40 subjects, grouped according to estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). RESULTS: Maximum empagliflozin plasma concentrations were similar in subjects with normal renal function and renal impairment. Area under the empagliflozin concentration-time curve (AUC0 -∞ ) values increased by approximately 18, 20, 66 and 48% in subjects with mild, moderate, severe renal impairment and renal failure/end stage renal disease (ESRD), respectively, in comparison to healthy subjects. This was attributed to decreased renal clearance (CLR ). Urinary glucose excretion (UGE) decreased with increasing renal impairment and correlated with decreased eGFR and CLR . Empagliflozin was well tolerated, with no increase in adverse events associated with renal impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Renal insufficiency resulted in decreased CLR of empagliflozin, moderately increased systemic exposure and decreased UGE. A single 50 mg dose of empagliflozin was well tolerated in subjects with normal renal function and any degree of renal impairment. The pharmacokinetic results of this study indicate that no dose adjustment of empagliflozin is required in patients with renal impairment.

Pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of empagliflozin, a sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, in patients with hepatic impairment.

AIMS: This open-label, parallel-group study investigated the effect of various degrees of hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of the sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin. METHODS: Thirty-six subjects [8 each with mild, moderate or severe hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh classification), and 12 matched controls with normal hepatic function] received a single 50 mg dose of empagliflozin. RESULTS: Empagliflozin was rapidly absorbed. After reaching peak levels, plasma drug concentrations declined in a biphasic fashion. Compared with subjects with normal hepatic function, geometric mean ratios (90% confidence interval) of AUC(0-∞) and C(max) were 123.15% (98.89-153.36) and 103.81% (82.29-130.95), respectively, in patients with mild hepatic impairment, 146.97% (118.02-183.02) and 123.31% (97.74-155.55), respectively, in patients with moderate hepatic impairment, and 174.70% (140.29-217.55) and 148.41% (117.65-187.23), respectively, in patients with severe hepatic impairment. Adverse events, all mild or moderate in intensity, were reported in three subjects with moderate hepatic impairment, two subjects with severe hepatic impairment and six subjects with normal hepatic function. CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin was well tolerated in subjects with hepatic impairment. Increases in empagliflozin exposure were less than twofold in patients with hepatic impairment; therefore no dose adjustment of empagliflozin is required in patients with hepatic impairment.

Empagliflozin improves glycaemic and weight control as add-on therapy to pioglitazone or pioglitazone plus metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: a 24-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

AIMS: This study investigated the efficacy and tolerability of empagliflozin as add-on to pioglitazone ± metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). METHODS: Patients with HbA1c ≥7 and ≤10% were randomized and treated with once daily empagliflozin 10 mg (n = 165), empagliflozin 25 mg (n = 168) or placebo (n = 165) as add-on to pioglitazone ± metformin for 24 weeks. Endpoints included changes from baseline in HbA1c (primary endpoint), fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and body weight at week 24. RESULTS: Adjusted mean ± standard error changes in HbA1c were -0.6 ± 0.07% and -0.7 ± 0.07% with empagliflozin 10 mg and 25 mg, respectively, vs. -0.1 ± 0.07% with placebo (both p < 0.001). More patients with HbA1c ≥7% at baseline achieved HbA1c <7% with empagliflozin 10 mg (23.8%) and 25 mg (30.0%) vs. placebo (7.7%) (both p < 0.001). FPG decreased with empagliflozin (-0.94 mmol/l for 10 mg and -1.22 mmol/l for 25 mg) and increased with placebo (+0.36 mmol/l; both p < 0.001). Adjusted mean ± standard error changes in weight were -1.62 ± 0.21 kg and -1.47 ± 0.21 kg with empagliflozin 10 mg and 25 mg, respectively, vs. +0.34 ± 0.21 kg with placebo (both p < 0.001). Similar proportions of patients reported adverse events with empagliflozin (67.3-71.4%) and placebo (72.7%). Confirmed hypoglycaemia was reported by 1.2-2.4% of patients on empagliflozin and 1.8% on placebo. CONCLUSION: Empagliflozin 10 mg and 25 mg once daily for 24 weeks as add-on to pioglitazone ± metformin reduced HbA1c, FPG and weight and were well tolerated in patients with T2DM.

[Diabetes mellitus - perioperative management]. / Perioperatives Management bei Diabetes mellitus.

The prevalence of diabetes in hospitalized adults is conservatively estimated at 12-25% and rising. Poor glucose control and presence of diabetes complications (e.g. diabetic nephropathy, diabetic neuropathy, atherosclerosis) are commonly regarded as risk factors for perioperative morbidity and mortality. Thus it is crucial to determine diabetes comorbidities preoperatively in order to avoid perioperative renal and cardiovascular complications. Perioperative glycemic control is challenging due to preoperative changes in diabetes treatment and the effects of surgery-associated stress hyperglycemia. For patients in general surgical units, evidence for specific glycemic goals is based on epidemiologic and physiologic data rather than clinical trials. According to guidelines of the German Society of Nutrition, the approximation of normoglycemia is reasonable as long as hypoglycemia is avoided (suggested range for plasma glucose 80-145 mg/dL).

Cannabinoid type 1 receptor modulates intestinal propulsion by an attenuation of intestinal motor responses within the myenteric part of the peristaltic reflex.

Cannabinoid-1 (CB1) receptor activation affects gastrointestinal propulsion in vivo. It was our aim to further characterize the involved myenteric mechanisms in vivo and in vitro. In CB1(-/-) mice and wild-type littermates we performed in vivo transit experiments by charcoal feeding and in vitro electrophysiological recordings in mouse small intestinal smooth muscle. Ascending neuronal contraction (ANC) following electrical field stimulation was studied in rat ileum in a partitioned organ bath separating the aboral stimulation site from the oral recording site. The knockout animals displayed an accelerated upper gastrointestinal transit compared to control animals. The CB1 receptor antagonist AM251 stimulated the force of the ANC in a concentration dependent manner when added in the oral chamber. Anandamide significantly inhibited the ANC when added in the oral chamber. Neither AM251 nor anandamide had an influence on the contraction latency. No effects were observed when drugs were added in the aboral chamber, proving a CB1 mediated action on the neuromuscular junction. Resting membrane potentials and neuronal induced inhibitory junction potentials in CB1(-/-) mice were unchanged as compared to wild type. However, the electrophysiological slow waves were more sensitive to blockade of Ca(2+) channels in CB1(-/-) mice. Our data strongly suggest a physiological involvement of the CB-1 receptor in the regulation of small intestinal motility. Therefore, CB1 receptors are a promising target for the treatment of motility disorders.

[Molecular diagnosis of diabetes mellitus]. / Molekulare Diagnostik des Diabetes mellitus.

Diabetes mellitus comprises a heterogeneous group of disorders characterized by chronic hyperglycemia. Type 1 and type 2 diabetes result from alterations of various genes, each having partial and additive effects. Thus, the inheritance pattern is rather complex, and environmental factors play an important role in the manifestation and clinical course of the disease. There is no genetic test to diagnose diabetes mellitus type 1 or type 2. However, certain susceptibility genes and genetic variations can be examined for specific scientific questions. Furthermore, defined genetic defects exist of pancreatic beta-cell function (maturity-onset diabetes of the young, mitochondrial diabetes) and insulin action (e.g. insulin resistance syndromes and lipodystrophy syndromes) resembling monogenic disorders. In these cases, genetic tests are crucial for the correct classification of the type of diabetes, genetic counseling, and initiation of the appropriate therapy regimen.