Effect of dapagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes who have inadequate glycaemic control with metformin: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Bailey, Clifford J.; Gross, Jorge Luiz; Pieters, Anne; Bastien, Arnaud; List, James F.

doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60407-2

Cited by 777 publications

(880 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

773

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Given its beneficial effects on liver enzymes, insulin sensitivity, and weight loss, remogliflozin represents an attractive target for drug development in patients with diabetes and NASH. Similar improvements in serum aminotransferases were noted with other SGLT2 inhibitors, including cangliflozin26 and dapagliflozin,27 but the effects of this class of drugs on liver histology remain to be determined in future RCTs.…”

Section: Nafld/nash‐specific Therapiesmentioning

confidence: 72%

Management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Lessons learned from type 2 diabetes

Alkhouri

Poordad

Lawitz

2018

Hepatology Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is considered the hepatic manifestation of insulin resistance, which is the hallmark of type 2 diabetes (T2D). NAFLD is a known risk factor for developing T2D and has a very high prevalence in those with existing T2D. The diabetes spectrum includes several conditions from prediabetes to T2D to insulin‐dependent diabetes leading to macrovascular and microvascular complications. Similarly, NAFLD has a histologic spectrum that ranges from the relatively benign nonalcoholic fatty liver to the aggressive form of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis with or without liver fibrosis to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis‐cirrhosis leading to end‐stage liver disease. The management of T2D has witnessed significant changes over the past few decades with multiple new drug classes entering the treatment algorithm. Unfortunately, there are no U.S. Food and Drug Administration‐approved medications to treat NAFLD, and guidelines for the management of NAFLD are less established. However, the field of drug development in NAFLD has witnessed a revolution over the past 5 years with the establishment of a regulatory pathway for Food and Drug Administration approval; this has generated substantial interest from pharmaceutical companies. Several diabetes medications have been studied as potential treatments for NAFLD with promising results; moreover, drugs that target specific pathways that play a role in NAFLD development and progression are being developed at a rapid pace. Given the similarities between NAFLD and T2D in terms of pathogenesis, underlying risk factors, and disease spectrum, lessons learned from optimizing treatment for T2D can be extrapolated to the management of NAFLD. The aim of this review is to use the founding principles of the comprehensive type 2 diabetes management algorithm to optimize the management of NAFLD. (Hepatology Communications 2018;2:778‐785)

show abstract

Section: Nafld/nash‐specific Therapiesmentioning

confidence: 72%

Management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Lessons learned from type 2 diabetes

Alkhouri

Poordad

Lawitz

2018

Hepatology Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Four studies had moderate risk of bias,13, 17, 26, 36 whereas other studies evaluated had a low risk of bias based on selective outcome reporting. Details of the quality of bias assessment are shown in Table S3.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Data were sorted by first author, year of publication, country of the study, design, age range of the participants, total sample size, SGLT2 inhibitor, comparator, number of patients, dosage, and follow‐up duration (Table 1). 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Sodium‐Glucose Cotransport‐2 Inhibitors on Blood Pressure in People With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of 43 Randomized Control Trials With 22 528 Patients

Mazidi

Rezaie

Gao

et al. 2017

JAHA

266

174

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe sodium‐glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are a class of oral hypoglycemic agents. We undertake a systematic review and meta‐analysis of prospective studies to determine the effect of SGLT2 on blood pressure (BP) among individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Methods and ResultsPubMed‐Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify trial registries evaluating the impact of SGLT2 on BP. Random‐effects models meta‐analysis was used for quantitative data synthesis. The meta‐analysis indicated a significant reduction in systolic BP following treatment with SGLT2 (weighted mean difference −2.46 mm Hg [95% CI −2.86 to −2.06]). The weighted mean differences for the effect on diastolic BP was −1.46 mm Hg (95% CI −1.82 to −1.09). In these subjects the weighted mean difference effects on serum triglycerides and total cholesterol were −2.08 mg/dL (95% CI −2.51 to −1.64) and 0.77 mg/dL (95% CI 0.33‐1.21), respectively. The weighted mean differences for the effect of SGLT2 on body weight was −1.88 kg (95% CI −2.11 to −1.66) across all studies. These findings were robust in sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsTreatment with SGLT2 glucose cotransporter inhibitors therefore has beneficial off‐target effects on BP in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and may also be of value in improving other cardiometabolic parameters including lipid profile and body weight in addition to their expected effects on glycemic control. However, our findings should be interpreted with consideration for the moderate statistical heterogeneity across the included studies.

show abstract

“…The sample size was calculated based on results from three previous studies: (1) dapagliflozin add‐on to sitagliptin and metformin19; (2) dapagliflozin add‐on to metformin20; and (3) ipragliflozin add‐on to metformin 15. Assuming the difference for changes in HbA1c from baseline to EOT between the ipragliflozin and placebo groups would be −0.45% with an SD of 0.80, approximately 67 patients per treatment group would be required to detect superiority of ipragliflozin to placebo with 90% power and a significance level of 5% for a two‐sided test.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy and safety of ipragliflozin as an add‐on therapy to sitagliptin and metformin in Korean patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus: A randomized controlled trial

Han

Chon

Chung

et al. 2018

Diabetes Obesity Metabolism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of ipragliflozin vs placebo as add‐on therapy to metformin and sitagliptin in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).MethodsThis double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, multi‐centre, phase III study was conducted in Korea in 2015 to 2017. Patients were randomized to receive either ipragliflozin 50 mg/day or placebo once daily for 24 weeks in addition to metformin and sitagliptin. The primary endpoint was the change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to end of treatment (EOT).ResultsIn total, 143 patients were randomized and 139 were included in efficacy analyses (ipragliflozin: 73, placebo: 66). Baseline mean (SD) HbA1c levels were 7.90 (0.69)% for ipragliflozin add‐on and 7.92 (0.79)% for placebo. The corresponding mean (SD) changes from baseline to EOT were −0.79 (0.59)% and 0.03 (0.84)%, respectively, in favour of ipragliflozin (adjusted mean difference −0.83% [95% CI −1.07 to −0.59]; P < .0001). More ipragliflozin‐treated patients than placebo‐treated patients achieved HbA1c target levels of <7.0% (44.4% vs 12.1%) and < 6.5% (12.5% vs 1.5%) at EOT (P < .05 for both). Fasting plasma glucose, fasting serum insulin, body weight and homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance decreased significantly at EOT, in favour of ipragliflozin (adjusted mean difference −1.64 mmol/L, −1.50 μU/mL, −1.72 kg, and −0.99, respectively; P < .05 for all). Adverse event rates were similar between groups (ipragliflozin: 51.4%; placebo: 50.0%). No previously unreported safety concerns were noted.ConclusionsIpragliflozin as add‐on to metformin and sitagliptin significantly improved glycaemic variables and demonstrated a good safety profile in Korean patients with inadequately controlled T2DM.

show abstract

Effect of dapagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes who have inadequate glycaemic control with metformin: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Cited by 777 publications

References 26 publications

Management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Lessons learned from type 2 diabetes

Management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Lessons learned from type 2 diabetes

Effect of Sodium‐Glucose Cotransport‐2 Inhibitors on Blood Pressure in People With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of 43 Randomized Control Trials With 22 528 Patients

Efficacy and safety of ipragliflozin as an add‐on therapy to sitagliptin and metformin in Korean patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus: A randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About