Introduction: Various types of skin lesions with pruritus have been reported in participants of Asian clinical trials on sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. The aim of this study was to determine whether the diuretic effect of a SGLT2 inhibitor could modify skin hydration status in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: A prospective, short-term, open-label, two-parallel-arm, pilot study was conducted. Eligible patients were assigned to either a SGLT2 inhibitor (50 mg ipragliflozin once daily) group or to a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (50 mg sitagliptin once daily) group (control). The biophysical characteristics of the skin were measured and blood chemistry tests were run in all participants 1 day prior to medication initiation (pre-treatment values) and 14 days thereafter (post-treatment values). Results: Fourteen patients were enrolled in the study, of whom eight were in the ipragliflozin group and six in the sitagliptin group. Compared to the pre-treatment values, the glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels were slightly but significantly reduced in the ipragliflozin group (p = 0.02), but the changes in HbA1c from the pre-treatment to post-treatment time points did not significantly differ between the two treatment groups. Serum 3-hydroxy butyrate levels were significantly higher in the ipragliflozin group than in the sitagliptin group (p \ 0.02). Neither electrical capacitance nor electrical conductance of the stratum corneum (SC), parameters that reflect skin water content, was reduced by 14 days of ipragliflozin treatment; similarly, no changes in these parameters were found in the sitagliptin control group. There was also no difference in the changes in water barrier function of the SC between the two treatment groups. There was a significant linear correlation (p \ 0.01) in skin water content at pre-treatment and that 14 days after treatment with each drug, respectively. Conclusion: Ipragliflozin treatment for 14 days did not significantly affect the skin hydration status in patients with well-controlled type 2
A new meal tolerance test (MTT) using a 75 g glucose-and high fat-containing meal was applied to classify glucose intolerance in morbidly obese patients. According to the MTT data, the concordance rate of diagnosis was 82.5% compared to the 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in patients with normal glucose tolerance (NGT, n = 40). In the NGT patients, the insulinogenic index (r = 0.833), Matsuda index (r = 0.752), and disposition index (r = 0.845) calculated from the MTT data were each significantly (p < 0.001) correlated with those derived from the OGTT data. However, in patients with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT, n = 23) or diabetes mellitus (DM, n = 17), the postprandial glucose levels post-MTT were significantly lower than those post-OGTT, without increases in the postprandial insulin levels post-MTT. Thus, the severity of glucose intolerance measured by the MTT was milder than that indicated by the OGTT. Plasma levels of both glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) were increased at the postprandial state, but only the GIP levels post-MTT were significantly higher than those post-OGTT. The enhancement of glucose disposal rates in patients with NGT or IGT after the MTT was associated with increased GIP levels. The postprandial hypertriglyceridemia induced by the MTT was associated with insulin resistance, but it was not associated with the impaired insulinogenic index or the disposition index. These results indicate that the new MTT is clinically useful to evaluate both abnormal glucose and triglyceride excursions caused by abnormal insulin sensitivity and secretions of insulin and gut hormones in morbidly obese patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.