Dataset Information

Renal hemodynamic effects differ between antidiabetic combination strategies: randomized controlled clinical trial comparing empagliflozin/linagliptin with metformin/insulin glargine.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Type 2 diabetes causes cardio-renal complications and is treated with different combination therapies. The renal hemodynamics profile of such combination therapies has not been evaluated in detail.

Methods

Patients (N = 97) with type 2 diabetes were randomized to receive either empagliflozin and linagliptin (E+L group) or metformin and insulin glargine (M+I group) for 3 months. Renal hemodynamics were assessed with para-aminohippuric acid and inulin for renal plasma flow (RPF) and glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Intraglomerular hemodynamics were calculated according the Gomez´ model.

Results

Treatment with E+L reduced GFR (p = 0.003), but RPF remained unchanged (p = 0.536). In contrast, M+I not only reduced GFR (p = 0.001), but also resulted in a significant reduction of RPF (p < 0.001). Renal vascular resistance (RVR) decreased with E+L treatment (p = 0.001) but increased with M+I treatment (p = 0.001). The changes in RPF and RVR were different between the two groups (both p_adjust < 0.001). Analysis of intraglomerular hemodynamics revealed that E+L did not change resistance of afferent arteriole (R_A) (p = 0.116), but diminished resistance of efferent arterioles (R_E) (p = 0.001). In M+I group R_A was increased (p = 0.006) and R_E remained unchanged (p = 0.538). The effects on R_A (p_adjust < 0.05) and on R_E (p_adjust < 0.05) differed between the groups.

Conclusions

In patients with type 2 diabetes and preserved renal function treatment with M+I resulted in reduction of renal perfusion and increase in vascular resistance, in contrast to treatment with E+I that preserved renal perfusion and reduced vascular resistance. Moreover, different underlying effects on the resistance vessels have been estimated according to the Gomez model, with M+I increasing R_A and E+L predominantly decreasing R_E, which is in contrast to the proposed sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor effects.

Trial registration

The study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02752113) on April 26, 2016.

SUBMITTER: Ott C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8418746 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Renal hemodynamic effects differ between antidiabetic combination strategies: randomized controlled clinical trial comparing empagliflozin/linagliptin with metformin/insulin glargine.

Ott Christian C Jung Susanne S Korn Manuel M Kannenkeril Dennis D Bosch Agnes A Kolwelter Julie J Striepe Kristina K Bramlage Peter P Schiffer Mario M Schmieder Roland E RE

Cardiovascular diabetology 20210904 1

<h4>Background</h4>Type 2 diabetes causes cardio-renal complications and is treated with different combination therapies. The renal hemodynamics profile of such combination therapies has not been evaluated in detail.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients (N = 97) with type 2 diabetes were randomized to receive either empagliflozin and linagliptin (E+L group) or metformin and insulin glargine (M+I group) for 3 months. Renal hemodynamics were assessed with para-aminohippuric acid and inulin for renal plasma flo ...[more]

PMID: 34481498

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesSafe and easily implemented treatment regimens are needed for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in long-term care (LTC) and skilled nursing facilities.DesignThis 6-month open-label randomized controlled trial compared the efficacy and safety of a DPP4 inhibitor (linagliptin) and basal insulin (glargine) in LTC residents with T2DM.SettingsThree LTC institutions affiliated with a community safety-net hospital, US Department of Veterans Affairs and Emory Healthcare System in Atlanta, Georgia.ParticipantsA total of 140 residents with T2DM treated with oral antidiabetic agents or low-dose insulin (≤0.1 U/kg/d), with fasting or premeal blood glucose (BG) > 180 mg/dL and/or HbA1c >7.5%.InterventionBaseline antidiabetic therapy, except metformin, was discontinued on trial entry. Residents were treated with linagliptin 5 mg/d (n = 67) or glargine at a starting dose of 0.1 U/kg/d (n = 73). Both groups received supplemental rapid-acting insulin before meals for BG > 200 mg/dL.MeasurementsPrimary outcome was mean difference in daily BG between groups. Main secondary endpoints included differences in frequency of hypoglycemia, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), complications, emergency department visits, and hospital transfers.ResultsTreatment with linagliptin resulted in no significant differences in mean daily BG (146 ± 34 mg/dL vs. 157 ± 36 mg/dL, P = .07) compared to glargine. Linagliptin treatment resulted in fewer mild hypoglycemic events <70 mg/dL (3% vs. 37%, P < .001), but there were no differences in BG < 54 mg/dL (P = .06) or <40 mg/dL (P = .05) compared to glargine. There were no significant between-group differences in HbA1c, length of stay, complications, emergency department visits, or hospitalizations.ConclusionTreatment with linagliptin resulted in noninferior glycemic control and in significantly lower risk of hypoglycemia compared to insulin glargine in long-term care and skilled nursing facility residents with type 2 diabetes.

Project description:ObjectiveThis study assessed the efficacy and safety of LixiLan, a fixed-ratio, titratable, combination of 2 units insulin glargine (Gla-100) and 1 μg lixisenatide administered once daily via a single pen, versus Gla-100 in insulin-naïve type 2 diabetes on metformin.Research design and methodsParticipants were randomized to once-daily LixiLan (n = 161) or Gla-100 (n = 162) for 24 weeks, while continuing metformin. LixiLan and Gla-100 were started at 10 units/5 μg and 10 units, respectively, and titrated based on the Gla-100 requirement according to fasting plasma glucose levels. The primary objective was to test noninferiority (upper bound of the 95% CI ≤0.4%) of LixiLan in reducing HbA1c; if met, statistical superiority was tested. Secondary objectives included body weight changes, hypoglycemia, and safety.ResultsBaseline characteristics (mean age 57 years, diabetes duration 6-7 years, BMI 32 kg/m(2)) were similar between groups. At week 24, mean HbA1c was reduced from 8.0% (64 mmol/mol) at baseline to 6.3% (45 mmol/mol) and 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) with LixiLan and Gla-100, respectively, establishing statistical noninferiority and superiority of LixiLan (least-squared mean [95% CI] difference: -0.17% [-0.31, -0.04] {-1.9 mmol/mol [-3.4, -0.4]}; P = 0.01). HbA1c <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) was achieved in 84% and 78% of participants (nonsignificant), respectively. LixiLan improved 2-h postmeal plasma glucose versus Gla-100 (least-squared mean difference: -3.17 mmol/L [-57 mg/dL]; P < 0.0001). Body weight was reduced with LixiLan (-1 kg) and increased with Gla-100 (+0.5 kg; P < 0.0001), with no increase in hypoglycemic events (∼25% in each group). The incidence of nausea (7.5%) and vomiting (2.5%) was low with LixiLan.ConclusionsLixiLan achieved statistically significant reductions to near-normal HbA1c levels with weight loss and no increased hypoglycemic risk, compared with insulin glargine alone, and a low incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin.

Dataset Information

Renal hemodynamic effects differ between antidiabetic combination strategies: randomized controlled clinical trial comparing empagliflozin/linagliptin with metformin/insulin glargine.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Publications

Renal hemodynamic effects differ between antidiabetic combination strategies: randomized controlled clinical trial comparing empagliflozin/linagliptin with metformin/insulin glargine.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets