Ipragliflozin Vs Sitagliptin in T2D with Metformin: A glimpse of NISM study

Written By :  MD Bureau
Medically Reviewed By :  Dr. Kamal Kant Kohli
Published On 2021-02-02 16:16 GMT   |   Update On 2021-02-03 09:10 GMT
Advertisement

According to US and European guidelines, sodium - glucose co - transporter - 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are considered second‐line drugs after metformin for patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or chronic kidney disease. In a recent study, researchers have found that sitagliptin, a DPP4 inhibitor (DPP-4i), effectively reduces the HbA1c levels better than Ipragliflozin (SGLPT2i) by the end of 24 weeks; However, they found no significant difference in HbA1c and body weight by the end of 52 weeks. They also found that ipragliflozin improved some atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors. The research has been published in the journal DIABETES, OBESITY AND METABOLISM on January 08, 2021.

Advertisement

Dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 (DPP‐4) inhibitors are widely used in the treatment of diabetes because they do not cause weight gain and are associated with a low risk of hypoglycaemia. SGLT2 inhibitors are also widely used because of their weight‐loss effects and evidence of prevention of ASCVD, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. However, the results of studies comparing the efficacy of these drugs as second‐line drugs after metformin in patients at low‐risk of ASCVD are controversial. Previous study findings indicate that a 24‐week period is not sufficient, to evaluate the efficacy of either drug and suggests for a long‐term randomized controlled trial to produce meaningful results. Therefore, researchers of Japan conducted NISM study to compare the long‐term efficacy of sodium‐glucose co‐transporter‐2 inhibitors and dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitors as second‐line drugs after metformin for patients, not at high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

It was a 52‐week, long‐term, prospective, randomized, open‐label, controlled trial in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes, who had an inadequate response to metformin and no history of ASCVD. Researchers included a total of 111 patients and randomly assigned them to receive either ipragliflozin (n=54) or sitagliptin (n=57). The primary endpoint assessed were glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction of ≥0.5% (5.5 mmol/mol) without weight gain at 52 weeks.

Key findings of the study were:

• By the end of 52 weeks, researchers noted no significant difference between the group in reducing the HbA1c level (37.0% and 40.3%); however, at 24 weeks, they noted that the significant HbA1c reduction rate was greater in patients who received sitagliptin (56.1%) than in patients who were on ipragliflozin (31.5%).

• They also noted the effect of sitagliptin from week 24 to 52 attenuated, with no significant difference in HbA1c reduction after 52 weeks between sitagliptin (54.4%) and ipragliflozin (38.9%).

• They found improvements in BMI, C‐peptide and high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol were greater with ipragliflozin than with sitagliptin.

• They reported 17 adverse events with ipragliflozin and 10 with sitagliptin.

The authors concluded, "The HbA1c‐lowering effect at 24 weeks was greater with sitagliptin than with ipragliflozin, but with no difference in efficacy related to HbA1c and body weight at 52 weeks. However, some ASCVD risk factors improved with ipragliflozin".

For further information:

https://dom-pubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dom.14288


Tags:    
Article Source :   DIABETES, OBESITY AND METABOLISM

Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.

NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.

Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Similar News