Antonino Tuttolomondo1,2, Anna Cirrincione3, Alessandra Casuccio3, Alessandro Del Cuore3,4, Mario Daidone3,4, Tiziana Di Chiara3,4, Domenico Di Raimondo3,4, Vittoriano Della Corte3,4,5, Carlo Maida3,4,5, Irene Simonetta3,4, Stefania Scaglione3,4, Antonio Pinto3,4. 1. Department of Promoting Health, Maternal-Infant, Excellence and Internal and Specialized Medicine (ProMISE) G. D'Alessandro, University of Palermo (Italy), Piazza delle Cliniche n.2, 90127, Palermo, Italy. bruno.tuttolomondo@unipa.it. 2. Internal Medicine and Stroke Care Ward, Policlinico 'P. Giaccone', Palermo, Italy. bruno.tuttolomondo@unipa.it. 3. Department of Promoting Health, Maternal-Infant, Excellence and Internal and Specialized Medicine (ProMISE) G. D'Alessandro, University of Palermo (Italy), Piazza delle Cliniche n.2, 90127, Palermo, Italy. 4. Internal Medicine and Stroke Care Ward, Policlinico 'P. Giaccone', Palermo, Italy. 5. PhD Programme in Molecular and Clinical Medicine, University of Palermo, Piazza delle Cliniche n.2, 90127, Palermo, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent cardiovascular outcome trials have shown significant reductions in major cardiovascular (CV) events with glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 receptor agonists. Additionally, adjunctive surrogates for cardiovascular risk validated by some studies include arterial stiffness and endothelial function indexes. To date, no randomized trial has addressed the possible effects of antidiabetic interventional drugs such as GLP1 agonists on endothelial and arterial stiffness indexes as surrogate markers of vascular damage. AIMS: We aimed to evaluate metabolic efficacy and surrogate vascular efficacy endpoints of once-weekly dulaglutide (1.5 mg) plus traditional antidiabetic treatment compared with traditional antidiabetic treatment alone in subjects with type 2 diabetes. METHODS:Men and women (aged ≥ 50 years) with established or newly detected type 2 diabetes whose HbA1c level was 9.5% or less on stable doses of up to two oral glucose- lowering drugs with or without basal insulin therapy were eligible for randomization. Subcutaneous dulaglutide was initiated at the full dose (1.5 mg/day weekly). Arterial stiffness (PWV: pulse wave velocity and augmentation index) and endothelial function (RHI: reactive hyperaemia index) were evaluated at baseline and at three-month and nine-month examination visits. At each visit (at 3 and 9 months), the subjects were also evaluated for glycaemic variables such as fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and HbA1c and lipid variables such as total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglyceride levels. RESULTS: At the three-month follow-up, the subjects treated with dulaglutide showed significantly lower serum levels of FPG and HbA1c than control subjects treated with conventional therapy. At the 9-month follow-up, subjects treated with dulaglutide showed significant lower values of the mean diastolic blood pressure, BMI, total serum cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, FPG, HbA1c and PWV and higher mean RHI values than control subjects treated with conventional therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our randomized trial showed that subjects with type 2 diabetes treated withconventional therapy plus 1.5 mg/day of subcutaneous dulaglutide compared with subjects treated with conventional therapy alone showed favourable metabolic effects associated with positive effects on vascular health markers such as arterial stiffness and endothelial function markers. These findings are consistent with previous study findings indicating the strict relationship between cardiovascular risk factors such as systolic blood pressure, total serum cholesterol and LDL levels and cardiovascular events and vascular health surrogate markers.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Recent cardiovascular outcome trials have shown significant reductions in major cardiovascular (CV) events with glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 receptor agonists. Additionally, adjunctive surrogates for cardiovascular risk validated by some studies include arterial stiffness and endothelial function indexes. To date, no randomized trial has addressed the possible effects of antidiabetic interventional drugs such as GLP1 agonists on endothelial and arterial stiffness indexes as surrogate markers of vascular damage. AIMS: We aimed to evaluate metabolic efficacy and surrogate vascular efficacy endpoints of once-weekly dulaglutide (1.5 mg) plus traditional antidiabetic treatment compared with traditional antidiabetic treatment alone in subjects with type 2 diabetes. METHODS:Men and women (aged ≥ 50 years) with established or newly detected type 2 diabetes whose HbA1c level was 9.5% or less on stable doses of up to two oral glucose- lowering drugs with or without basal insulin therapy were eligible for randomization. Subcutaneous dulaglutide was initiated at the full dose (1.5 mg/day weekly). Arterial stiffness (PWV: pulse wave velocity and augmentation index) and endothelial function (RHI: reactive hyperaemia index) were evaluated at baseline and at three-month and nine-month examination visits. At each visit (at 3 and 9 months), the subjects were also evaluated for glycaemic variables such as fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and HbA1c and lipid variables such as total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglyceride levels. RESULTS: At the three-month follow-up, the subjects treated with dulaglutide showed significantly lower serum levels of FPG and HbA1c than control subjects treated with conventional therapy. At the 9-month follow-up, subjects treated with dulaglutide showed significant lower values of the mean diastolic blood pressure, BMI, total serum cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, FPG, HbA1c and PWV and higher mean RHI values than control subjects treated with conventional therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our randomized trial showed that subjects with type 2 diabetes treated with conventional therapy plus 1.5 mg/day of subcutaneous dulaglutide compared with subjects treated with conventional therapy alone showed favourable metabolic effects associated with positive effects on vascular health markers such as arterial stiffness and endothelial function markers. These findings are consistent with previous study findings indicating the strict relationship between cardiovascular risk factors such as systolic blood pressure, total serum cholesterol and LDL levels and cardiovascular events and vascular health surrogate markers.
Authors: Paolo Palatini; Athanase Benetos; Guido Grassi; Stevo Julius; Sverre E Kjeldsen; Giuseppe Mancia; Krzystof Narkiewicz; Gianfranco Parati; Achille C Pessina; Luis M Ruilope; Alberto Zanchetti Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 4.844
Authors: M D Turton; D O'Shea; I Gunn; S A Beak; C M Edwards; K Meeran; S J Choi; G M Taylor; M M Heath; P D Lambert; J P Wilding; D M Smith; M A Ghatei; J Herbert; S R Bloom Journal: Nature Date: 1996-01-04 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Catherine M Loria; Kiang Liu; Cora E Lewis; Stephen B Hulley; Stephen Sidney; Pamela J Schreiner; O Dale Williams; Diane E Bild; Robert Detrano Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-05-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Michael Nauck; Ruth S Weinstock; Guillermo E Umpierrez; Bruno Guerci; Zachary Skrivanek; Zvonko Milicevic Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2014-04-17 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Dean Gilham; Audrey L Smith; Li Fu; Dalia Y Moore; Abenaya Muralidharan; St Patrick M Reid; Stephanie C Stotz; Jan O Johansson; Michael Sweeney; Norman C W Wong; Ewelina Kulikowski; Dalia El-Gamal Journal: Biomedicines Date: 2021-04-18
Authors: Seong-Joon Lee; Jin Soo Lee; Min Kim; So Young Park; Ji Hyun Park; Bumhee Park; Woo Sang Jung; Jin Wook Choi; Ji Man Hong Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-08-29 Impact factor: 4.086