Article

Has pancreatic damage from glucagon suppressing diabetes drugs been underplayed?

BMJ, London WC1H 9JR, UK.
BMJ (online) (Impact Factor: 16.38). 06/2013; 346:f3680. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f3680
Source: PubMed
1 Follower
 · 
64 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Post-transplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM) is a common complication after kidney transplantation that affects up to 40 % of kidney transplant recipients. By pathogenesis, PTDM is a diabetes form of its own, and may be characterized by a sudden, drug-induced deficiency in insulin secretion rather than worsening of insulin resistance over time. In the context of deteriorating allograft function leading to a re-occurrence of chronic kidney disease after transplantation, pharmacological interventions in PTDM patients deserve special attention. In the present review, we aim at presenting the current evidence regarding efficacy and safety of the modern antidiabetic armamentarium. Specifically, we focus on incretin-based therapies and insulin treatment, besides metformin and glitazones, and discuss their respective advantages and pitfalls. Although recent pilot trials are available in both prediabetes and PTDM, further studies are warranted to elucidate the ideal timing of various antidiabetics as well as its long-term impact on safety, glucose metabolism and cardiovascular outcomes in kidney transplant recipients.
    Transplantation Reviews 01/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.trre.2015.01.001 · 2.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: When incretin mimetic (IM) medications were introduced in 2005, their effectiveness compared with other less-expensive second-line diabetes therapies was unknown, especially for older adults. Physicians likely had some uncertainty about the role of IMs in the diabetes treatment armamentarium. Regional variation in uptake of IMs may be a marker of such uncertainty. To investigate the extent of regional variation in the use of IMs among beneficiaries and estimate the cost implications for Medicare. This was a cross-sectional analysis of 2009-2010 claims data from a nationally representative sample of 238 499 Medicare Part D beneficiaries aged ≥65 years, who were continuously enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare and Part D and filled ≥1 antidiabetic prescription. Beneficiaries were assigned to 1 of 306 hospital-referral regions (HRRs) using ZIP codes. The main outcome was adjusted proportion of antidiabetic users in an HRR receiving an IM. Overall, 29 933 beneficiaries (12.6%) filled an IM prescription, including 26 939 (11.3%) for sitagliptin or saxagliptin and 3718 (1.6%) for exenatide or liraglutide. The adjusted proportion of beneficiaries using IMs varied more than 3-fold across HRRs, from 5th and 95th percentiles of 5.2% to 17.0%. Compared with non-IM users, IM users faced a 155% higher annual Part D plan ($1067 vs $418) and 144% higher patient ($369 vs $151) costs for antidiabetic prescriptions. Among older Part D beneficiaries using antidiabetic drugs, substantial regional variation exists in the use of IMs, not accounted for by sociodemographics and health status. IM use was associated with substantially greater costs for Part D plans and beneficiaries. © The Author(s) 2014.
    Annals of Pharmacotherapy 12/2014; 49(3). DOI:10.1177/1060028014563951 · 2.92 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Incretin-based therapies either increase endogenous levels of glucagon-like peptide-1 by prolonging its half-life (DPP-4 inhibitors) or directly stimulate its receptor (glucagon-like peptide-1 analogues; GLP-1 RA). They are currently widely used for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus owing to good antidiabetic efficacy, low risk of hypoglycemia, and relatively few other side effects. They also offer potential additional benefits such as weight neutrality or weight loss, positive effects on blood pressure and lipid levels, and potential cardio- and neuroprotectivity. Some experimental and clinical studies have raised concerns with respect to potential cardiovascular and pancreatic side effects of these therapies such as increased risk of heart failure with DPP-4 inhibitors as well as acute pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer with both classes. The available data are at present not robust enough to enable firm conclusions regarding these potential associations. Nevertheless, some recent data suggest a possibility of slightly increased risk of acute pancreatitis with GLP-1 RAs while they do not indicate increased risk of pancreatic cancer. Ongoing cardiovascular outcome trials will shed more light on the possible cardioprotective effects of incretin-based therapies as well as on the possible interconnection of DPP-4 inhibitors and heart failure.
    Drug Safety 11/2014; DOI:10.1007/s40264-014-0238-8 · 2.62 Impact Factor