BackgroundStudies of the bacterial communities of the gut microbiota have revealed a shift in the ratio of Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes in obese patients. Determining the variations of microbial communities in feces may be beneficial for the identification of specific profiles in patients with abnormal weights. The roles of the archaeon Methanobrevibacter smithii and Lactobacillus species have not been described in these studies.Methods and FindingsWe developed an efficient and robust real-time PCR tool that includes a plasmid-based internal control and allows for quantification of the bacterial divisions Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, and Lactobacillus as well as the methanogen M. smithii. We applied this technique to the feces of 20 obese subjects, 9 patients with anorexia nervosa, and 20 normal-weight healthy controls. Our results confirmed a reduction in the Bacteroidetes community in obese patients (p<0.01). We found a significantly higher Lactobacillus species concentration in obese patients than in lean controls (p = 0.0197) or anorexic patients (p = 0.0332). The M. smithii concentration was much higher in anorexic patients than in the lean population (p = 0.0171).Conclusions Lactobacillus species are widely used as growth promoters in the farm industry and are now linked to obesity in humans. The study of the bacterial flora in anorexic patients revealed an increase in M. smithii. This increase might represent an adaptive use of nutrients in this population.

Background:Obesity is associated with increased health risk and has been associated with alterations in bacterial gut microbiota, with mainly a reduction in Bacteroidetes, but few data exist at the genus and species level. It has been reported that the Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium genus representatives may have a critical role in weight regulation as an anti-obesity effect in experimental models and humans, or as a growth-promoter effect in agriculture depending on the strains.Objectives and methods:To confirm reported gut alterations and test whether Lactobacillus or Bifidobacterium species found in the human gut are associated with obesity or lean status, we analyzed the stools of 68 obese and 47 controls targeting Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Methanobrevibacter smithii, Lactococcus lactis, Bifidobacterium animalis and seven species of Lactobacillus by quantitative PCR (qPCR) and culture on a Lactobacillus-selective medium.Findings:In qPCR, B. animalis (odds ratio (OR)=0.63; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39–1.01; P=0.056) and M. smithii (OR=0.76; 95% CI 0.59–0.97; P=0.03) were associated with normal weight whereas Lactobacillus reuteri (OR=1.79; 95% CI 1.03–3.10; P=0.04) was associated with obesity.Conclusion:The gut microbiota associated with human obesity is depleted in M. smithii. Some Bifidobacterium or Lactobacillus species were associated with normal weight (B. animalis) while others (L. reuteri) were associated with obesity. Therefore, gut microbiota composition at the species level is related to body weight and obesity, which might be of relevance for further studies and the management of obesity. These results must be considered cautiously because it is the first study to date that links specific species of Lactobacillus with obesity in humans.

OBJECTIVETo compare efficacy and safety of lixisenatide once daily versus exenatide twice daily in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSAdults with diabetes inadequately controlled (HbA1c 7–10%) with metformin were randomized to lixisenatide 20 μg once daily (n = 318) or exenatide 10 μg twice daily (n = 316) in a 24-week (main period), open-label, parallel-group, multicenter study. The primary objective was a noninferiority assessment of lixisenatide versus exenatide in HbA1c change from baseline to week 24.RESULTSLixisenatide once daily demonstrated noninferiority in HbA1c reduction versus exenatide twice daily. The least squares mean change was −0.79% (mean decrease 7.97 to 7.17%) for lixisenatide versus −0.96% (mean decrease 7.96 to 7.01%) for exenatide, and treatment difference was 0.17% (95% CI, 0.033–0.297), meeting a predefined noninferiority upper CI margin of 0.4%. Responder rate (HbA1c <7.0%) and improvements in fasting plasma glucose were comparable. Both agents induced weight loss (from 94.5 to 91.7 kg and from 96.7 to 92.9 kg with lixisenatide and exenatide, respectively). Incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar for lixisenatide and exenatide, as was incidence of serious AEs (2.8 and 2.2%, respectively). Discontinuations attributable to AEs occurred in 33 lixisenatide (10.4%) and 41 exenatide (13.0%) patients. In the lixisenatide group, fewer participants experienced symptomatic hypoglycemia (2.5 vs. 7.9%; P < 0.05), with fewer gastrointestinal events (especially nausea; 24.5 vs. 35.1%; P < 0.05).CONCLUSIONSAdd-on lixisenatide once daily in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin demonstrated noninferior improvements in HbA1c, with slightly lower mean weight loss, lower incidence of hypoglycemia, and better gastrointestinal tolerability compared with exenatide twice daily.

OBJECTIVETo assess efficacy and safety of lixisenatide monotherapy in type 2 diabetes.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSRandomized, double-blind, 12-week study of 361 patients not on glucose-lowering therapy (HbA1c 7–10%) allocated to one of four once-daily subcutaneous dose increase regimens: lixisenatide 2-step (10 μg for 1 week, 15 μg for 1 week, and then 20 μg; n = 120), lixisenatide 1-step (10 μg for 2 weeks and then 20 μg; n = 119), placebo 2-step (n = 61), or placebo 1-step (n = 61) (placebo groups were combined for analyses). Primary end point was HbA1c change from baseline to week 12.RESULTSOnce-daily lixisenatide significantly improved HbA1c (mean baseline 8.0%) in both groups (least squares mean change vs. placebo: −0.54% for 2-step, −0.66% for 1-step; P < 0.0001). Significantly more lixisenatide patients achieved HbA1c <7.0% (52.2% 2-step, 46.5% 1-step) and ≤6.5% (31.9% 2-step, 25.4% 1-step) versus placebo (26.8% and 12.5%, respectively; P < 0.01). Lixisenatide led to marked significant improvements of 2-h postprandial glucose levels and blood glucose excursions measured during a standardized breakfast test. A significant decrease in fasting plasma glucose was observed in both lixisenatide groups versus placebo. Mean decreases in body weight (∼2 kg) were observed in all groups. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal—nausea was the most frequent (lixisenatide 23% overall, placebo 4.1%). Symptomatic hypoglycemia occurred in 1.7% of lixisenatide and 1.6% of placebo patients, with no severe episodes. Safety/tolerability was similar for the two dose regimens.CONCLUSIONSOnce-daily lixisenatide monotherapy significantly improved glycemic control with a pronounced postprandial effect (75% reduction in glucose excursion) and was safe and well tolerated in type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVETo compare the improvements in glycemic control associated with transitioning to insulin pump therapy in patients using continuous glucose monitoring versus standard blood glucose self-monitoring.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSThe RealTrend study was a 6-month, randomized, parallel-group, two-arm, open-label study of 132 adults and children with uncontrolled type 1 diabetes (A1C ≥8%) being treated with multiple daily injections. One group was fitted with the Medtronic MiniMed Paradigm REAL-Time system (PRT group), an insulin pump with integrated continuous subcutaneous glucose monitoring (CGM) capability, with instructions to wear CGM sensors at least 70% of the time. Conventional insulin pump therapy was initiated in the other group (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII] group). Outcome measures included A1C and glycemic variability.RESULTSA total of 115 patients completed the study. Between baseline and trial end, A1C improved significantly in both groups (PRT group −0.81 ± 1.09%, P < 0.001; CSII group −0.57 ± 0.94%, P < 0.001), with no significant difference between groups. When the 91 patients who were fully protocol-compliant (including CGM sensor wear ≥70% of the time) were considered, A1C improvement was significantly greater in the PRT group (P = 0.004) (PRT group −0.96 ± 0.93%, P < 0.001; CSII group −0.55 ± 0.93%, P < 0.001). Hyperglycemia parameters decreased in line with improvements in A1C with no impact on hypoglycemia.CONCLUSIONSCGM-enabled insulin pump therapy improves glycemia more than conventional pump therapy during the first 6 months of pump use in patients who wear CGM sensors at least 70% of the time.