0
selected
-
1.
Different glucagon effects during DPP-4 inhibition versus SGLT-2 inhibition in metformin-treated type 2 diabetes patients.
Alsalim, W, Persson, M, Ahrén, B
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(7):1652-1658
Abstract
AIMS: Previous studies have shown that dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibition lowers glucagon levels whereas sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibition increases them. This study evaluated the extent of these opposite effects in a direct comparative head-to-head study. METHODS In a single-centre, randomized study with a cross-over design, 28 metformin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) (mean age, 63 years; baseline HbA1c, 6.8%) were treated with vildagliptin (50 mg twice daily) or dapagliflozin (10 mg once daily) for 2 weeks, with a 4-week wash-out period between the two separate treatments. After each treatment period, a meal test was undertaken, with measurements of islet and incretin hormones and 4-hour area under the curve (AUC) levels were estimated. RESULTS Fasting glucagon (35.6 ± 2.5 vs 39.4 ± 3.4 pmoL/L; P = .032) and postprandial glucagon (4-hour AUCglucagon , 32.1 ± 2.3 vs 37.5 ± 2.7 nmoL/L min; P = .001) were ~15% lower after vildagliptin compared to dapagliflozin treatment. This was associated with stronger early (15 minute) C-peptide response and higher 4-hour AUCC-peptide (P < .010), higher 4-hour AUC of the intact form of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) (P < .001) and lower 4-hour AUC of total GIP and GLP-1 (P < .001). CONCLUSION Treatment with DPP-4 inhibition with vildagliptin results in 15% lower fasting and postprandial glucagon levels compared to SGLT-2 inhibition with dapagliflozin. DPP-4 inhibition also induces more rapid insulin secretion and higher levels of intact incretin hormones, resulting in stronger feedback inhibition of incretin hormone secretion than SGLT-2 inhibition.
-
2.
Effect of Age on Blood Glucose and Plasma Insulin, Glucagon, Ghrelin, CCK, GIP, and GLP-1 Responses to Whey Protein Ingestion.
Giezenaar, C, Hutchison, AT, Luscombe-Marsh, ND, Chapman, I, Horowitz, M, Soenen, S
Nutrients. 2017;(1)
Abstract
Protein-rich supplements are used widely to prevent and manage undernutrition in older people. We have previously shown that healthy older, compared to younger, adults have less suppression of energy intake by whey protein-although the effects of age on appetite-related gut hormones are largely unknown. The aim of this study was to determine and compare the acute effects of whey protein loads on blood glucose and plasma gut hormone concentrations in older and younger adults. Sixteen healthy older (eight men, eight women; mean ± SEM: age: 72 ± 1 years; body mass index: 25 ± 1 kg/m²) and 16 younger (eight men, eight women; 24 ± 1 years; 23 ± 0.4 kg/m²) adults were studied on three occasions in which they ingested 30 g (120 kcal) or 70 g (280 kcal) whey protein, or a flavored-water control drink (~2 kcal). At regular intervals over 180 min, blood glucose and plasma insulin, glucagon, ghrelin, cholecystokinin (CCK), gastric inhibitory peptide (GIP), and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) concentrations were measured. Plasma ghrelin was dose-dependently suppressed and insulin, glucagon, CCK, GIP, and GLP-1 concentrations were dose-dependently increased by the whey protein ingestion, while blood glucose concentrations were comparable during all study days. The stimulation of plasma CCK and GIP concentrations was greater in older than younger adults. In conclusion, orally ingested whey protein resulted in load-dependent gut hormone responses, which were greater for plasma CCK and GIP in older compared to younger adults.
-
3.
Effects of DPP-4 inhibitor linagliptin and GLP-1 receptor agonist liraglutide on physiological response to hypoglycaemia in Japanese subjects with type 2 diabetes: A randomized, open-label, 2-arm parallel comparative, exploratory trial.
Yabe, D, Eto, T, Shiramoto, M, Irie, S, Murotani, K, Seino, Y, Kuwata, H, Kurose, T, Seino, S, Ahrén, B, et al
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2017;(3):442-447
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors reduce the risk of hypoglycaemia, possibly through augmentation of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) action, but not that of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) on glucagon secretion. To examine this model in Japanese individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D), the effects of the DPP-4 inhibitor linagliptin on glucagon and other counter-regulatory hormone responses to hypoglycaemia were evaluated and compared with those of the GLP-1 receptor agonist liraglutide in a multi-centre, randomized, open-label, 2-arm parallel comparative, exploratory trial. Three-step hypoglycaemic clamp glucose tests preceded by meal tolerance tests were performed before and after 2-week treatment with the drugs. Glucagon levels were increased during the hypoglycaemic clamp test at 2.5 mmol/L. This increase was similar in the linagliptin and liraglutide groups, both before and after the 2-week treatment. Changes in other counter-regulatory hormones (ie, growth hormone, cortisol, epinephrine and norepinephrine) were also similar between the groups, but were suppressed substantially after 2-week treatment compared to baseline. In conclusion, we confirmed that the glucagon response to hypoglycaemia was not affected by linagliptin or liraglutide treatment in Japanese individuals with T2D.
-
4.
Saxagliptin improves glycemic control by modulating postprandial glucagon and C-peptide levels in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes.
Sjöstrand, M, Iqbal, N, Lu, J, Hirshberg, B
Diabetes research and clinical practice. 2014;(2):185-91
Abstract
AIMS: Saxagliptin reduced glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and postprandial glucose (PPG) in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). To understand the physiology of this effect, indices of α- and β-cell function were measured in a subpopulation of Chinese patients following a noodle mixed-meal tolerance test. METHODS Data from Chinese patients were pooled from two phase 3, 24-week studies of saxagliptin 5mg/d as monotherapy in drug-naive patients and as add-on to metformin in patients inadequately controlled with metformin alone. The end points for β- and α-cell function were change from baseline in C-peptide, insulin, and glucagon areas under the curve from 0 to 180 min (AUC0-180), insulinogenic index, and insulin sensitivity from Matsuda index after a mixed meal. Also glycemic variables, HbA1c, FPG, and PPG (AUC0-180), and homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) 2β were measured. RESULTS At 24 weeks, greater improvements in adjusted mean change from baseline HbA1c (difference vs placebo [95% CI], -0.33% [-0.50%, -0.17%], [-4 (-5.5, -1.9) mmol/mol], P<0.0001), FPG (-0.41 [-0.78, -0.03] mmol/L, P=0.03), PPG AUC0-180 (-168 [-245, -91.8] mmol min/L, P<0.0001), C-peptide AUC0-180 (19.7 [5.2, 34.2] nmol min/L, P=0.008), insulinogenic index (0.06% [0.02%, 0.09%], P=0.002), and greater suppression of glucagon secretion (glucagon AUC0-180, -322 [-493.6, -150.7] pmol min/L, P=0.0003) were observed with saxagliptin versus placebo. CONCLUSION In Chinese patients with T2DM, saxagliptin as monotherapy or as add-on to metformin improved glycemic control by modulating α- and β-cell function.
-
5.
Evaluation of long-term treatment effect in a type 1 diabetes intervention trial: differences after stimulation with glucagon or a mixed meal.
Pozzilli, P, Raz, I, Peled, D, Elias, D, Avron, A, Tamir, M, Eren, R, Dagan, S, Cohen, IR
Diabetes care. 2014;(5):1384-91
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Endogenous insulin secretion, measured by C-peptide area under the curve (AUC), can be tested using both the glucagon stimulation test (GST) and the mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT). This study compares these two stimulation methods using long-term data from patients newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes or with latent autoimmune diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A recently completed phase 3 intervention study with DiaPep277 demonstrated improved glycemic control and a significant treatment effect of glucagon-stimulated C-peptide secretion. Unexpectedly, MMTT failed to detect differences between the treated and control groups. Data from 343 patients in two balanced-randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials of DiaPep277 were used to compare and correlate between GST- and MMTT-derived C-peptide AUC. Pearson's correlations were calculated for absolute C-peptide AUC at baseline and 12 and 24 months and for long-term changes in AUC (AUC). RESULTS The absolute AUC values obtained at any single time point by the two tests were well correlated in both data sets (r = 0.74-0.9). However, the correlations between the AUC were much weaker (r = 0.39-0.58). GST-stimulated C-peptide secretion was stable over the fasting glucose range permitted for the test (4-11.1 mmol/L), but MMTT-stimulated C-peptide secretion decreased over the same range, implying differences in sensitivity to glucose. CONCLUSIONS Measurement of long-term changes in stimulated C-peptide, reflecting endogenous insulin secretion, during the course of intervention trials may be affected by the method of stimulation, possibly reflecting different sensitivities to the physiological status of the tested subject.
-
6.
Effects of exenatide versus sitagliptin on postprandial glucose, insulin and glucagon secretion, gastric emptying, and caloric intake: a randomized, cross-over study.
DeFronzo, RA, Okerson, T, Viswanathan, P, Guan, X, Holcombe, JH, MacConell, L
Current medical research and opinion. 2008;(10):2943-52
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study evaluated the effects of exenatide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist, and sitagliptin, a DPP-4 inhibitor, on 2-h postprandial glucose (PPG), insulin and glucagon secretion, gastric emptying, and caloric intake in T2D patients. METHODS This double-blind, randomized cross-over, multi-center study was conducted in metformin-treated T2D patients: 54% female; BMI: 33 +/- 5 kg/m(2); HbA(1c): 8.5 +/- 1.2%; 2-h PPG: 245 +/- 65 mg/dL. Patients received exenatide (5 microg BID for 1 week, then 10 microg BID for 1 week) or sitagliptin (100 mg QAM) for 2 weeks. After 2 weeks, patients crossed-over to the alternate therapy. Postprandial glycemic measures were assessed via standard meal test; caloric intake assessed by ad libitum dinner (subset of patients). Gastric emptying was assessed by acetaminophen absorption (Clinicaltrials.gov Registry Number: NCT00477581). RESULTS After 2 weeks of therapy, 2-h PPG was lower with exenatide versus sitagliptin: 133 +/- 6 mg/dL versus 208 +/- 6 mg/dL, p < 0.0001 (evaluable, N = 61). Switching from exenatide to sitagliptin increased 2-h PPG by +73 +/- 11 mg/dL, while switching from sitagliptin to exenatide further reduced 2-h PPG by -76 +/- 10 mg/dL. Postprandial glucose parameters (AUC, C(ave), C(max)) were lower with exenatide than sitagliptin (p < 0.0001). Reduction in fasting glucose was similar with exenatide and sitagliptin (-15 +/- 4 mg/dL vs. -19 +/- 4 mg/dL, p = 0.3234). Compared to sitagliptin, exenatide improved the insulinogenic index of insulin secretion (ratio exenatide to sitagliptin: 1.50 +/- 0.26, p = 0.0239), reduced postprandial glucagon (AUC ratio exenatide to sitagliptin: 0.88 +/- 0.03, p = 0.0011), reduced postprandial triglycerides (AUC ratio exenatide to sitagliptin: 0.90 +/- 0.04, p = 0.0118), and slowed gastric emptying (acetaminophen AUC ratio exenatide to sitagliptin: 0.56 +/- 0.05, p < 0.0001). Exenatide reduced total caloric intake compared to sitagliptin (-134 +/- 97 kcal vs. +130 +/- 97 kcal, p = 0.0227, N = 25). Common adverse events with both treatments were mild to moderate in intensity and gastrointestinal in nature. CONCLUSIONS Although this study was limited by a 2-week duration of exposure, these data demonstrate that, exenatide had: (i) a greater effect than sitagliptin to lower postprandial glucose and (ii) a more potent effect to increase insulin secretion and reduce postprandial glucagon secretion in T2D patients. In contrast to sitagliptin, exenatide slowed gastric emptying and reduced caloric intake. These key findings differentiate the therapeutic actions of the two incretin-based approaches, and may have meaningful clinical implications.