Caroline K Kramer1,2, Bernard Zinman1,3, Haysook Choi1, Philip W Connelly2,4, Ravi Retnakaran1,3. 1. Leadership Sinai Centre for Diabetes, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada M5T 3L9. 2. Division of Endocrinology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada M5S 1A1. 3. Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada M5T 3L9. 4. Keenan Research Centre for Biomedical Science of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada M5B 1W8.
Abstract
Context: Glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists acutely lower serum glucagon. However, in the Liraglutide and β-Cell Repair (LIBRA) Trial, 48-week treatment with liraglutide yielded lower/unchanged fasting glucagon but, surprisingly, enhanced postchallenge glucagonemia [measured by R&D Systems (Minneapolis, MN) assay]. Objective: Because differences between glucagon assays potentially could explain these unexpected findings, we have remeasured glucagon in all 1222 samples from this trial using the highly-sensitive/specific Mercodia assay to compare the findings between assays. Design/Setting/Participants/Intervention: In LIBRA, 51 patients with type 2 diabetes of 2.6 ± 1.9 years duration were randomized to daily subcutaneous liraglutide or placebo injection and followed for 48 weeks, with serial oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) every 12 weeks (with liraglutide/placebo last administered ∼24 hours earlier). Outcome: Serum glucagon was measured every 30 minutes on each OGTT, enabling determination of the area under the glucagon curve (AUCglucagon). Results: With the Mercodia assay, fasting glucagon was higher in the liraglutide arm than placebo at 12 weeks (P = 0.01), with no between-group differences at 24, 36, and 48 weeks. There was no difference in AUCglucagon between the groups at any visit. Mercodia and R&D Systems glucagon measurements correlated at postchallenge time points but not at fasting. Conclusion: The Mercodia assay did not replicate the R&D Systems glucagon findings. Although neither assay demonstrated lower postchallenge glucagonemia with chronic liraglutide last administered ∼24 hours earlier, the differential response reported by these assays precludes definitive conclusion and highlights the critical role of assay selection when measuring glucagon in clinical studies.
RCT Entities:
Context:Glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists acutely lower serum glucagon. However, in the Liraglutide and β-Cell Repair (LIBRA) Trial, 48-week treatment with liraglutide yielded lower/unchanged fasting glucagon but, surprisingly, enhanced postchallenge glucagonemia [measured by R&D Systems (Minneapolis, MN) assay]. Objective: Because differences between glucagon assays potentially could explain these unexpected findings, we have remeasured glucagon in all 1222 samples from this trial using the highly-sensitive/specific Mercodia assay to compare the findings between assays. Design/Setting/Participants/Intervention: In LIBRA, 51 patients with type 2 diabetes of 2.6 ± 1.9 years duration were randomized to daily subcutaneous liraglutide or placebo injection and followed for 48 weeks, with serial oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) every 12 weeks (with liraglutide/placebo last administered ∼24 hours earlier). Outcome: Serum glucagon was measured every 30 minutes on each OGTT, enabling determination of the area under the glucagon curve (AUCglucagon). Results: With the Mercodia assay, fasting glucagon was higher in the liraglutide arm than placebo at 12 weeks (P = 0.01), with no between-group differences at 24, 36, and 48 weeks. There was no difference in AUCglucagon between the groups at any visit. Mercodia and R&D Systems glucagon measurements correlated at postchallenge time points but not at fasting. Conclusion: The Mercodia assay did not replicate the R&D Systems glucagon findings. Although neither assay demonstrated lower postchallenge glucagonemia with chronic liraglutide last administered ∼24 hours earlier, the differential response reported by these assays precludes definitive conclusion and highlights the critical role of assay selection when measuring glucagon in clinical studies.
Authors: Yury O Nunez Lopez; Ravi Retnakaran; Bernard Zinman; Richard E Pratley; Attila A Seyhan Journal: Mol Metab Date: 2018-11-16 Impact factor: 7.422
Authors: Steven E Kahn; Kieren J Mather; Silva A Arslanian; Elena Barengolts; Thomas A Buchanan; Sonia Caprio; David A Ehrmann; Tamara S Hannon; Santica Marcovina; Kristen J Nadeau; Kristina M Utzschneider; Anny H Xiang; Sharon L Edelstein Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2021-06-15 Impact factor: 17.152
Authors: Darline Garibay; Jon Lou; Seon A Lee; Karolina E Zaborska; Margot H Weissman; Erica Sloma; Leanne Donahue; Andrew D Miller; Andrew C White; M Dodson Michael; Kyle W Sloop; Bethany P Cummings Journal: Cell Rep Date: 2018-04-24 Impact factor: 9.423