Dataset Information

Effects of linagliptin vs glimepiride on cognitive performance in type 2 diabetes: results of the randomised double-blind, active-controlled CAROLINA-COGNITION study.

ABSTRACT:

Aims/hypothesis

Type 2 diabetes, particularly with concomitant CVD, is associated with an increased risk of cognitive impairment. We assessed the effect on accelerated cognitive decline (ACD) of the DPP-4 inhibitor linagliptin vs the sulfonylurea glimepiride in individuals with type 2 diabetes.

Methods

The CAROLINA-COGNITION study was part of the randomised, double-blind, active-controlled CAROLINA trial that evaluated the cardiovascular safety of linagliptin vs glimepiride in individuals with age ≥40 and ≤85 years and HbA_1c 48-69 mmol/mol (6.5-8.5%) receiving standard care, excluding insulin therapy. Participants were randomised 1:1 using an interactive telephone- and web-based system and treatment assignment was determined by a computer-generated random sequence with stratification by center. The primary cognitive outcome was occurrence of ACD at end of follow-up, defined as a regression-based index score ≤16th percentile on either the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) or a composite measure of attention and executive functioning, in participants with a baseline MMSE score ≥24. Prespecified additional analyses included effects on ACD at week 160, in subgroups (sex, age, race, ethnicity, depressive symptoms, cardiovascular risk, duration of type 2 diabetes, albuminuria), and absolute changes in cognitive performance. Participants, caregivers, and people involved in measurements, examinations or adjudication, were all masked to treatment assignment.

Results

Of 6033 participants recruited from hospital and primary care sites, 3163 (38.0% female, mean age/diabetes duration 64/7.6 years, MMSE score 28.5, HbA_1c 54 mmol/mol [7.1%]) represent the CAROLINA-COGNITION cohort. Over median 6.1 years, ACD occurred in 27.8% (449/1618, linagliptin) vs 27.6% (426/1545, glimepiride), OR 1.01 (95% CI 0.86, 1.18). Also, no differences in ACD were observed at week 160 (OR 1.07 [0.91, 1.25]), between treatments across subgroups, or for absolute cognitive changes.

Conclusions/interpretation

In a large, international outcome trial in people with relatively early type 2 diabetes at elevated cardiovascular risk, no difference in risk for ACD was observed between linagliptin and glimepiride over 6.1 years.

Funding

This study was sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01243424.

SUBMITTER: Biessels GJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8099814 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with cognitive dysfunction and an increased risk of dementia. Linagliptin is a glucose-lowering agent of the dipeptidyl peptidase-IV (DPP-IV) inhibitor class that is of particular interest for the prevention of accelerated cognitive decline, because it may potentially benefit the brain through pleiotropic effects, beyond glucose lowering. This paper presents the design of a study that aims to establish if linagliptin is superior to the sulfonylurea glimepiride in the prevention of accelerated cognitive decline in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS:The cognition substudy is an integral part of the ongoing event-driven, randomised, double blind CARdiOvascular safety of LINAgliptin (CAROLINA®) trial, which evaluates the effect of treatment with linagliptin versus glimepiride on cardiovascular outcomes. CAROLINA® includes patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with sub-optimal glycaemic control at elevated cardiovascular risk. The substudy will evaluate patients randomised and treated who have a baseline Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) score???24, documented years of formal education with at least one valid cognitive assessment at baseline and during follow-up. The primary cognitive outcome is the occurrence of accelerated cognitive decline at the end of follow-up. The two treatment groups will be compared by using a logistic regression. Accelerated cognitive decline is defined as a rate of cognitive decline that falls at or below the 16th percentile of decline for the whole cohort on either the MMSE or a combined score of the trail making and verbal fluency test. Potential confounders are taken into account at an individual patient level, using a regression based index. DISCUSSION:Between December 2010 and December 2012, 6042 patients were randomised and treated with either linagliptin (5 mg) or glimepiride (1-4 mg) once daily in CAROLINA®. Cognitive tests were conducted in nearly 4500 participants at baseline and are scheduled for two subsequent assessments, after 160 weeks of follow-up and end of follow-up. This substudy of the ongoing CAROLINA® trial will establish if linagliptin is superior to glimepiride in the prevention of accelerated cognitive decline in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Final results are expected in 2019. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT 01243424 .

Project description:ImportanceType 2 diabetes is associated with increased cardiovascular risk. In placebo-controlled cardiovascular safety trials, the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor linagliptin demonstrated noninferiority, but it has not been tested against an active comparator.ObjectiveThis trial assessed cardiovascular outcomes of linagliptin vs glimepiride (sulfonylurea) in patients with relatively early type 2 diabetes and risk factors for or established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.Design, setting, and participantsRandomized, double-blind, active-controlled, noninferiority trial, with participant screening from November 2010 to December 2012, conducted at 607 hospital and primary care sites in 43 countries involving 6042 participants. Adults with type 2 diabetes, glycated hemoglobin of 6.5% to 8.5%, and elevated cardiovascular risk were eligible for inclusion. Elevated cardiovascular risk was defined as documented atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, multiple cardiovascular risk factors, aged at least 70 years, and evidence of microvascular complications. Follow-up ended in August 2018.InterventionsPatients were randomized to receive 5 mg of linagliptin once daily (n = 3023) or 1 to 4 mg of glimepiride once daily (n = 3010) in addition to usual care. Investigators were encouraged to intensify glycemic treatment, primarily by adding or adjusting metformin, α-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, or insulin, according to clinical need.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was time to first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke with the aim to establish noninferiority of linagliptin vs glimepiride, defined by the upper limit of the 2-sided 95.47% CI for the hazard ratio (HR) of linagliptin relative to glimepiride of less than 1.3.ResultsOf 6042 participants randomized, 6033 (mean age, 64.0 years; 2414 [39.9%] women; mean glycated hemoglobin, 7.2%; median duration of diabetes, 6.3 years; 42% with macrovascular disease; 59% had undergone metformin monotherapy) were treated and analyzed. The median duration of follow-up was 6.3 years. The primary outcome occurred in 356 of 3023 participants (11.8%) in the linagliptin group and 362 of 3010 (12.0%) in the glimepiride group (HR, 0.98 [95.47% CI, 0.84-1.14]; P < .001 for noninferiority), meeting the noninferiority criterion but not superiority (P = .76). Adverse events occurred in 2822 participants (93.4%) in the linagliptin group and 2856 (94.9%) in the glimepiride group, with 15 participants (0.5%) in the linagliptin group vs 16 (0.5%) in the glimepiride group with adjudicated-confirmed acute pancreatitis. At least 1 episode of hypoglycemic adverse events occurred in 320 (10.6%) participants in the linagliptin group and 1132 (37.7%) in the glimepiride group (HR, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.21-0.26]).Conclusions and relevanceAmong adults with relatively early type 2 diabetes and elevated cardiovascular risk, the use of linagliptin compared with glimepiride over a median 6.3 years resulted in a noninferior risk of a composite cardiovascular outcome.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01243424.

Project description:BackgroundDue to an ageing population in Australia there has been an increase in the number of older adults with subjective cognitive impairment (SCI), a self-reported decline in cognitive function associated with an increased risk of mild cognitive impairment and dementia. There is no current, recommended treatment for SCI; therefore, the effectiveness of a supplement approved by the Therapeutic Goods Association that has the potential to enhance cognitive function in an at-risk cohort should be tested. The primary aim of this proposed research is to determine the efficacy of 6 months of treatment with BioCeuticals Cognition Support Formula® (containing Bacopa monniera (brahmi), Ginkgo biloba, Panax ginseng and alpha-lipoic acid) on cognition in older adults with SCI (utilising the CogState® one card learning and identification tests as co-primary outcome measures of visual short-term memory and attention; mean speed (ms), accuracy (%), and total number of hits, misses, and anticipations) compared with placebo. The secondary aims are to assess an improvement in other cognitive domains (executive functioning, processing speed, and working memory), evaluate safety, adverse effects, and determine efficacy on mood, fatigue, and neurocognition. It is expected that improvements across the study timepoints in the co-primary outcomes in the active treatment group (compared with placebo) will be evident.MethodOne-hundred and twenty participants will be recruited for the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of the treatment groups (active or placebo) at a 1:1 ratio, and will be required to complete a series of cognitive (using CogState®), mood (using the Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scale (DASS-42) and Short Health Anxiety Inventory (SHAI)), and fatigue (using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Scale (FACIT-F)) tasks at baseline (0 months), the midpoint (3 months), and the endpoint (6 months). These tasks will be evaluated between timepoints (baseline vs. midpoint, midpoint vs. endpoint, and baseline vs. endpoint). Neurocognition will be measured by electroencephalography at baseline and at the endpoint in half of the participants. Adverse effects will be documented over the 6-month trial period.DiscussionThis is the first study to test the efficacy of Cognition Support Formula® on cognition in older adults with SCI. As people with SCI have an increased risk of dementia, and there are limited treatments options for this population, it is important to assess a supplement that has the potential to enhance cognitive function.Trial registrationUniversal Trial Number (UTN), U1111-1196-9548. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000945325 . Registered on 30 June 2017.

Project description:AimTo determine the effect of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor linagliptin on postprandial glomerular hyperfiltration compared with the sulphonylurea glimepiride in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D).Materials and methodsIn this predefined substudy within a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, intervention trial, overweight people with T2D without renal impairment were treated with once-daily linagliptin 5 mg (N = 10) or glimepiride 1 mg (N = 13) as an add-on to metformin for 8 weeks. After a standardized liquid protein-rich meal, the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and effective renal plasma flow were determined by inulin and para-aminohippuric acid clearance, respectively, based on timed urine sampling. Intrarenal haemodynamics were estimated using the Gomez equations. Glucoregulatory/vasoactive hormones, urinary pH and fractional excretions (FE) of sodium, potassium and urea were measured.ResultsCompared with glimepiride, linagliptin increased the postprandial filtration fraction (FF; mean difference 2.1%-point; P = .016) and estimated glomerular hydraulic pressure (mean difference 3.0 mmHg; P = .050), and tended to increase GFR (P = .08) and estimated efferent renal arteriolar resistance (RE ; P = .08) from baseline to week 8. No differences in FE were noted. Glimepiride reduced HbA1c more than linagliptin (mean difference -0.40%; P = .004), without between-group differences in time-averaged postprandial glucose levels. In the linagliptin group, change in FF correlated with change in mean arterial pressure (R = 0.807; P = .009) and time-averaged mean glucagon (R = 0.782; P = .008), but not with changes in glucose, insulin, intact glucagon-like peptide-1, renin or FENa . Change in glucagon was associated with change in RE (R = 0.830; P = .003).ConclusionsIn contrast to our hypothesis, compared with glimepiride, linagliptin does not reduce postprandial hyperfiltration, yet appears to increase FF after meal ingestion by increasing blood pressure or RE .