Effects of incretin-based therapies on β-cell function in type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Aim
To assess the effects of incretin-based therapies on β-cell function in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).Methods
We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Knowledge databases for eligible randomized clinical trials published up to July 2021. The inclusion criteria were patients with T1DM or latent autoimmune diabetes in adults, patients treated with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors or glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and outcomes included one of the following: fasting plasma glucose, fasting C-peptide, postprandial C-peptide, C-peptide area under the curve (AUC), homeostasis model assessment for β cell function, and insulin resistance. The effects were analyzed using a random effect model with STATA 11.0.Results
Eight trials including 427 participants were included in the final analysis. A pooled analysis found no significant difference in fasting plasma glucose, fasting C-peptide, postprandial C-peptide, or C-peptide AUC between patients treated with incretin-based therapies and placebo. The two trials that reported changes in 2-hour postprandial C-peptide and two of the four trials that reported changes in C-peptide AUC reported increases after incretin-based therapies.Conclusion
This meta-analysis showed that incretin-based therapies did not preserve β-cell function in patients with T1DM.
SUBMITTER: Wu Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8721710 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide are incretins secreted from enteroendocrine cells postprandially in part to regulate glucose homeostasis. Dysregulation of these hormones is evident in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Two new drugs, exenatide (GLP-1 mimetic) and sitagliptin [dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP) 4 inhibitor], have been approved by regulatory agencies for treating T2DM. Liraglutide (GLP-1 mimetic) and vildagliptin (DPP 4 inhibitor) are expected to arrive on the market soon.The background of incretin-based therapy and selected clinical trials of these four drugs are reviewed. A MEDLINE search was conducted for published articles using the key words incretin, glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, GLP-1, exendin-4, exenatide, DPP 4, liraglutide, sitagliptin, and vildagliptin.Exenatide and liraglutide are injection based. Three-year follow-up data on exenatide showed a sustained weight loss and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) reduction of 1%. Nausea and vomiting are common. Results from phase 3 studies are pending on liraglutide. Sitagliptin and vildagliptin are orally active. In 24-wk studies, sitagliptin reduces HbA(1c) by 0.6-0.8% as monotherapy, 1.8% as initial combination therapy with metformin, and 0.7% as add-on therapy to metformin. Vildagliptin monotherapy lowered HbA(1c) by 1.0-1.4% after 24 wk. Their major side effects are urinary tract and nasopharyngeal infections and headaches. Exenatide and liraglutide cause weight loss, whereas sitagliptin and vildagliptin do not.The availability of GLP-1 mimetics and DPP 4 inhibitors has increased our armamentarium for treating T2DM. Unresolved issues such as the effects of GLP-1 mimetics and DPP 4 inhibitors on beta-cell mass, the mechanism by which GLP-1 mimetics lowers glucagon levels, and exactly how DPP 4 inhibitors lead to a decline in plasma glucose levels without an increase in insulin secretion, need further research.
| S-EPMC2579648 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundTo assess the cardiovascular (CV) risk associated with the use of incretin-based therapy in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) primary prevention group with low CV risks.MethodsThe clinical studies on incretin-based therapy published in medical journals until August 2014 were comprehensively searched using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL with no language restriction. The studies were systemically reviewed and evaluated for CV risks using a meta-analysis approach and where they meet the following criteria: clinical trial, incidence of predefined CV disease, T2DM with no comorbidities, age > 18 years old, duration of at least 12 weeks, incretin-based therapy compared with other antihyperglycaemic agents or placebo. Statistical analyses were performed using a Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) test. The odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated and displayed for comparison.ResultsA total of 75 studies comprising 45,648 patients with T2DM were selected. The pooled estimate demonstrated no significance in decreased CV risk with incretin-based therapy versus control (M-H OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.81-1.00).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that incretin-based therapy show no significant protective effect on CV events in T2DM primary prevention group with low CV risks. Prospective randomized controlled trials are required to confirm the results of this analysis.
| S-EPMC4831684 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As a new class of antidiabetic drug, incretin-based therapies, which include dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4Is) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), have raised concerns about symptoms of withdrawal in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), such as dizziness and headache. To systematically evaluate whether incretin-based therapies may lead to dizziness and headache in patients with T2DM compared to other traditional antidiabetic drugs or placebo. We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane library, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception through June 23, 2017, to identify randomized controlled trials of the safety of DPP-4Is or GLP-1 RAs versus placebo or other antidiabetic drugs in T2DM patients. We used the network meta-analysis under the frequentist framework to compare the association between multiple antidiabetic drugs and dizziness and headache. A total of 233 clinical trials with nine treatments and 147,710 patients were included: two incretin-based therapies, one placebo, and six traditional antidiabetic drugs (metformin, insulin, sulfonylurea, thiazolidinediones, alpha-glucosidase inhibitor, and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2). Compared to insulin, thiazolidinediones, or placebo, GLP-1 RAs statistically significantly increased the risk of dizziness (odds ratios [ORs]: 1.92, 1.57, and 1.40, respectively) and headache (ORs: 1.34, 1.41, and 1.18, respectively). DPP-4Is increased the risk of headache (OR: 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02 to 1.46; moderate quality) and dizziness (OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.05 to 2.03; moderate quality) compared to insulin. Of the incretin-based therapies, DPP-4Is had a lower risk of dizziness than GLP-1 RAs (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.87; high quality). Ranking probability analysis indicated that GLP-1 RAs may have the greatest risk of both dizziness and headache among the nine treatments (22.5% and 23.4%, respectively), whereas DPP-4Is were in the middle (46.2% and 45.0%, respectively). Incretin-based therapies increase the risk of dizziness and headache compared to insulin, thiazolidinediones, and placebo.
| S-EPMC6844583 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Few randomized clinical trials have evaluated the efficacy of ginseng in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The current meta-analysis evaluated the ginseng-induced improvement in glucose control and insulin sensitivity in patients with type-2 diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance.Randomized clinical trials comparing ginseng supplementation versus control, in patients with T2DM or impaired glucose tolerance, were hand-searched from Medline, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases by 2 independent reviewers using the terms "type 2 diabetes/diabetes/diabetic, impaired glucose tolerance, and ginseng/ginsenoside(s)." The primary outcome analyzed was the change in HbA1c, whereas the secondary outcomes included fasting glucose, postprandial glucose, fasting insulin, postprandial insulin, insulin resistance Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR), triglycerides, total cholesterol, low density lipoprotein (LDL), and high density lipoprotein (HDL).Of the 141 studies identified, 8 studies were chosen for the current meta-analysis. The average number of patients, age, and sex distribution among the groups were comparable. Results reveal no significant difference in HbA1c levels between the ginseng supplementation and the control groups (pooled standardized difference in means?=?-0.148, 95% CI: -0.637 to 0.228, P?=?0.355). Ginseng supplementation improved fasting glucose, postprandial insulin, and HOMA-IR levels, though no difference in postprandial glucose or fasting insulin was observed among the groups. Similarly, triglycerides, total cholesterol, and LDL levels showed significant difference between the treatment groups, while no difference in HDL was seen. In addition, ginseng-related therapy was ineffective in decreasing the fasting glucose levels in patients treated with oral hypoglycemic agents or insulin.The present results establish the benefit of ginseng supplementation in improving glucose control and insulin sensitivity in patients with T2DM or impaired glucose intolerance.
| S-EPMC4753873 | biostudies-other
Project description:Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus are at risk for accelerated cognitive decline and dementia. Furthermore, their risk of stroke is increased and their outcome after stroke is worse than in those without diabetes. Incretin-based therapies are a class of antidiabetic agents that are of interest in relation to these cerebral complications of diabetes. Two classes of incretin-based therapies are currently available: the glucagon-like-peptide-1 agonists and the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 -inhibitors. Independent of their glucose-lowering effects, incretin-based therapies might also have direct or indirect beneficial effects on the brain. In the present review, we discuss the potential of incretin-based therapies in relation to dementia, in particular Alzheimer's disease, and stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes. Experimental studies on Alzheimer's disease have found beneficial effects of incretin-based therapies on cognition, synaptic plasticity and metabolism of amyloid-? and microtubule-associated protein tau. Preclinical studies on incretin-based therapies in stroke have shown an improved functional outcome, a reduction of infarct volume as well as neuroprotective and neurotrophic properties. Both with regard to the treatment of Alzheimer's disease, and with regard to prevention and treatment of stroke, randomized controlled trials in patients with or without diabetes are underway. In conclusion, experimental studies show promising results of incretin-based therapies at improving the outcome of Alzheimer's disease and stroke through glucose-independent pleiotropic effects on the brain. If these findings would indeed be confirmed in large clinical randomized controlled trials, this would have substantial impact.
| S-EPMC4718099 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective:Combined treatment with an incretin-based drug, such as a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) or a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor, and basal insulin is a new strategy for improving glucose control in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). We performed a meta-analysis to assess the effect of this combined treatment on glycaemic control, insulin dose, severe hypoglycaemia, weight gain and gastrointestinal side effects in T1DM patients. Methods:We searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies published before July 16, 2018. The primary outcome was glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Secondary outcomes included total daily insulin dose, body weight, severe hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal side effects. Results:Nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2389 patients were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. The pooled data suggested that incretin-based therapy was associated with a reduction in HbA1c levels (weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.17%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.24 to -0.11, P < 0.001), total daily insulin dose (WMD -5.53 IU/day, 95% CI -8.89 to -2.17, P = 0.001) and body weight (WMD -3.24 kg, 95% CI -4.43 to -2.04, P < 0.001). Incretins did not increase the risk of severe hypoglycaemia (odds ratio (OR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.60-1.16, P = 0.287) but increased the occurrence of gastrointestinal side effects (OR 3.46, 95% CI 2.20-5.45, P < 0.001). Conclusions:In T1DM patients, GLP-1 RAs, but not DPP-4 inhibitors, combined with insulin appear to be an effective therapy but may increase the occurrence of gastrointestinal side effects.
| S-EPMC6410765 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective To assess the impact of incretin based treatment on all cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.Data sources Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov.Eligibility criteria Randomised controlled trials that compared glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors with placebo or active anti-diabetic drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes.Data collection and analysis Paired reviewers independently screened citations, assessed risk of bias of included studies, and extracted data. Peto's method was used as the primary approach to pool effect estimates from trials, sensitivity analyses were carried out with other statistical approaches, and meta-regression was applied for six prespecified hypotheses to explore heterogeneity. The GRADE approach was used to rate the quality of evidence.Results 189 randomised controlled trials (n=155?145) were included, all of which were at low to moderate risk of bias; 77 reported no events of death and 112 reported 3888 deaths among 151?614 patients. Meta-analysis of 189 trials showed no difference in all cause mortality between incretin drugs versus control (1925/84?136 v 1963/67?478; odds ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.02, I2=0%; risk difference 3 fewer events (95% confidence interval 7 fewer to 1 more) per 1000 patients over five years; moderate quality evidence). Results suggested the possibility of a mortality benefit with GLP-1 agonists but not DPP-4 inhibitors, but the subgroup hypothesis had low credibility. Sensitivity analyses showed no important differences in the estimates of effects.Conclusions Current evidence does not support the suggestion that incretin based treatment increases all cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes. Further studies are warranted to examine if the effect differs between GLP-1 agonists versus DPP-4 inhibitors.
| S-EPMC5463186 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) experience many cardiovascular complications. Several studies have demonstrated the cardioprotective effects of incretin-based therapies; however, there are few studies on the effects of long-term incretin-based therapies on cardiovascular events. Therefore, the present study conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of long-term incretin-based therapies on ischaemic diseases. We searched PubMed, CENTRAL, and Clinicaltrial.gov to retrieve randomised control trials reported until December 2016 and enrolled only RCTs with more than a 1-year follow-up. The network meta-analysis was performed using R Software with a GeMTC package. A total of 40 trials were included. Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists were associated with a lower risk of myocardial infarction (MI) than were sulfonylureas (odds ratio [95% credible interval] 0.41 [0.24-0.71] and 0.48 [0.27-0.91], respectively). These results suggested that patients with T2DM receiving long-term incretin-based therapies have a lower risk of MI than do those receiving sulfonylurea-based therapy. These findings highlight the risks of cardiovascular events in patients who receive long-term incretin-based therapies, and may provide evidence for the selection of antidiabetic therapy in the future.
| S-EPMC5694013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the risk of pancreatitis associated with the use of incretin-based treatments in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov.Eligibility criteriaRandomised and non-randomised controlled clinical trials, prospective or retrospective cohort studies, and case-control studies of treatment with glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus compared with placebo, lifestyle modification, or active anti-diabetic drugs.Data collection and analysisPairs of trained reviewers independently screened for eligible studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. A modified Cochrane tool for randomised controlled trials and a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies were used to assess bias. We pooled data from randomised controlled trials using Peto odds ratios, and conducted four prespecified subgroup analyses and a post hoc subgroup analysis. Because of variation in outcome measures and forms of data, we describe the results of observational studies without a pooled analysis.Results60 studies (n=353,639), consisting of 55 randomised controlled trials (n=33,350) and five observational studies (three retrospective cohort studies, and two case-control studies; n=320,289) were included. Pooled estimates of 55 randomised controlled trials (at low or moderate risk of bias involving 37 pancreatitis events, raw event rate 0.11%) did not suggest an increased risk of pancreatitis with incretins versus control (odds ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 2.17). Estimates by type of incretin suggested similar results (1.05 (0.37 to 2.94) for GLP-1 agonists v control; 1.06 (0.46 to 2.45) for DPP-4 inhibitors v control). Analyses according to the type of control, mode, duration of treatment, and individual incretin agents suggested no differential effect by subgroups, and sensitivity analyses by alternative statistical modelling and effect measures did not show important differences in effect estimates. Three retrospective cohort studies (moderate to high risk of bias, involving 1466 pancreatitis events, raw event rate 0.47%) also did not suggest an increased risk of pancreatitis associated with either exenatide (adjusted odds ratios 0.93 (0.63 to 1.36) in one study and 0.9 (0.6 to 1.5) in another) or sitagliptin (adjusted hazard ratio 1.0, 0.7 to 1.3); a case-control study at moderate risk of bias (1003 cases, 4012 controls) also suggested no significant association (adjusted odds ratio 0.98, 0.69 to 1.38). Another case-control study (1269 cases, 1269 controls) at moderate risk of bias, however, suggested that the use of either exenatide or sitagliptin was associated with significantly increased odds of acute pancreatitis (use within two years v no use, adjusted odds ratio 2.07, 1.36 to 3.13).ConclusionsThe available evidence suggests that the incidence of pancreatitis among patients using incretins is low and that the drugs do not increase the risk of pancreatitis. Current evidence, however, is not definitive, and more carefully designed and conducted observational studies are warranted to definitively establish the extent, if any, of increased risk.
| S-EPMC3987051 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionRegulatory requirements mandate that new drugs for treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), such as dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, are evaluated to show that they do not increase cardiovascular (CV) risk.MethodsA systematic review was undertaken to evaluate the association between DPP-4 inhibitor and GLP-1 receptor agonist use and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The National Institutes of Health Medline database was searched for pooled analyses, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists that included CV endpoints.ResultsThirty-six articles met the inclusion criteria encompassing 11 pooled analyses, 17 meta-analyses, and eight RCTs (including secondary analyses). Over the short term (up to 4 years), patients with T2DM exposed to a DPP-4 inhibitor or GLP-1 receptor agonist were not at increased risk for MACE (or its component endpoints) compared with those who received comparator agents. Two meta-analyses showed a significant reduction in the incidence of MACE associated with DPP-4 inhibitor therapy as a drug class, but this beneficial effect was not observed in other meta-analyses that included large RCT CV outcome studies. In four RCTs that evaluated alogliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, or lixisenatide, there was no overall increased risk for MACE relative to placebo in T2DM patients at high risk for CV events or with established CV disease, although there was an increased rate of hospitalization for heart failure associated with saxagliptin. A fifth RCT showed that liraglutide reduced MACE risk by 13% versus placebo.ConclusionOverall, incretin therapy does not appear to increase risk for MACE in the short term.
| S-EPMC5216099 | biostudies-literature