OBJECTIVESodium–glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors cause substantially less weight loss than expected from the energy excreted via glycosuria. Our aim was to analyze this phenomenon quantitatively.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSEighty-six patients with type 2 diabetes (HbA1c 7.8 ± 0.8% [62 ± 9 mmol/mol], estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] 89 ± 19 mL ⋅ min−1 ⋅ 1.73 m−2) received empagliflozin (25 mg/day) for 90 weeks with frequent (n = 11) assessments of body weight, eGFR, and fasting plasma glucose (FPG). Time-dependent glucose filtration was calculated as the product of eGFR and FPG; time-dependent glycosuria was estimated from previous direct measurements. The relation of calorie-to-weight changes was estimated using a mathematical model of human energy metabolism that simulates the time course of weight change for a given change in calorie balance and calculates the corresponding energy intake changes.RESULTSAt week 90, weight loss averaged −3.2 ± 4.2 kg (corresponding to a median calorie deficit of 51 kcal/day [interquartile range (IQR) 112]). However, the observed calorie loss through glycosuria (206 kcal/day [IQR 90]) was predicted to result in a weight loss of –11.3 ± 3.1 kg, assuming no compensatory changes in energy intake. Thus, patients lost only 29 ± 41% of the weight loss predicted by their glycosuria; the model indicated that this difference was accounted for by a 13% (IQR 12) increase in calorie intake (269 kcal/day [IQR 258]) coupled with a 2% (IQR 5) increase in daily energy expenditure (due to diet-induced thermogenesis). This increased calorie intake was inversely related to baseline BMI (partial r = −0.34, P < 0.01) and positively to baseline eGFR (partial r = 0.29, P < 0.01).CONCLUSIONSChronic glycosuria elicits an adaptive increase in energy intake. Combining SGLT2 inhibition with caloric restriction is expected to be associated with major weight loss.

Aims:To evaluate the effects of the sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor empagliflozin added to metformin for 12 weeks in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods:This dose-ranging, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized 495 participants with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin [haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) >7 to ≤10%] to receive 1, 5, 10, 25, or 50 mg empagliflozin once daily (QD), or placebo, or open-label sitagliptin (100 mg QD), added to metformin for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 12 (empagliflozin groups versus placebo).Results: Reductions in HbA1c of −0.09 to −0.56% were observed with empagliflozin after 12 weeks, versus an increase of 0.15% with placebo (baseline: 7.8-8.1%). Compared with placebo, empagliflozin doses from 5 to 50 mg resulted in reductions in fasting plasma glucose (−2 to −28 mg/dl vs. 5 mg/dl with placebo; p < 0.0001) and body weight (−2.3 to −2.9 kg vs. −1.2 kg; p < 0.01). Frequency of adverse events was generally similar with empagliflozin (29.6-48.6%), placebo (36.6%) and sitagliptin (35.2%). Hypoglycaemia rates were very low and balanced among groups. Most frequent adverse events with empagliflozin were urinary tract infections (4.0% vs. 2.8% with placebo) and pollakiuria (2.5% vs. 1.4% with placebo). Genital infections were reported only with empagliflozin (4.0%). Conclusions:Once daily empagliflozin as add-on therapy to metformin was well tolerated except for increased genital infections and resulted in reductions in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose and body weight in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy.

OBJECTIVETo investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of empagliflozin, a sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor; sitagliptin; and metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSIn this randomized, open-label, 78-week extension study of two 12-week, blinded, dose-finding studies of empagliflozin (monotherapy and add-on to metformin) with open-label comparators, 272 patients received 10 mg empagliflozin (166 as add-on to metformin), 275 received 25 mg empagliflozin (166 as add-on to metformin), 56 patients received metformin, and 56 patients received sitagliptin as add-on to metformin.RESULTSChanges from baseline in HbA1c at week 90 were −0.34 to −0.63% (−3.7 to −6.9 mmol/mol) with empagliflozin, −0.56% (−6.1 mmol/mol) with metformin, and −0.40% (−4.4 mmol/mol) with sitagliptin. Changes from baseline in weight at week 90 were −2.2 to −4.0 kg with empagliflozin, −1.3 kg with metformin, and −0.4 kg with sitagliptin. Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 63.2–74.1% of patients on empagliflozin and 69.6% on metformin or sitagliptin; most AEs were mild or moderate in intensity. Hypoglycemic events were rare in all treatment groups, and none required assistance. AEs consistent with genital infections were reported in 3.0–5.5% of patients on empagliflozin, 1.8% on metformin, and none on sitagliptin. AEs consistent with urinary tract infections were reported in 3.8–12.7% of patients on empagliflozin, 3.6% on metformin, and 12.5% on sitagliptin.CONCLUSIONSLong-term empagliflozin treatment provided sustained glycemic and weight control and was well tolerated with a low risk of hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes.

BackgroundThis study evaluated the effect of empagliflozin on postprandial glucose (PPG) and 24-hour glucose variability in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).MethodsPatients (N = 60; baseline mean [SD] HbA1c 7.91 [0.80]%; body mass index 24.3 [3.2] kg/m2) were randomized to receive empagliflozin 10 mg (n = 20), empagliflozin 25 mg (n = 19) or placebo (n = 21) once daily as monotherapy for 28 days. A meal tolerance test and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for 24 hours were performed at baseline and on days 1 and 28. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in area under the glucose concentration-time curve 3 hours after breakfast (AUC1–4h for PPG) at day 28.ResultsAdjusted mean (95%) differences versus placebo in changes from baseline in AUC1-4h for PPG at day 1 were −97.1 (−126.5, −67.8) mg · h/dl with empagliflozin 10 mg and −91.6 (−120.4, −62.8) mg · h/dl with empagliflozin 25 mg (both p < 0.001 versus placebo) and at day 28 were −85.5 (−126.0, −45.0) mg · h/dl with empagliflozin 10 mg and −104.9 (−144.8, −65.0) mg · h/dl with empagliflozin 25 mg (both p < 0.001 versus placebo). Adjusted mean (95% CI) differences versus placebo in change from baseline in 24-hour mean glucose (CGM) at day 1 were −20.8 (−27.0, −14.7) mg/dl with empagliflozin 10 mg and −23.9 (−30.0, −17.9) mg/dl with empagliflozin 25 mg (both p < 0.001 versus placebo) and at day 28 were −24.5 (−35.4, −13.6) mg/dl with empagliflozin 10 mg and −31.7 (−42.5,-20.9) mg/dl with empagliflozin 25 mg (both p < 0.001 versus placebo). Changes from baseline in mean amplitude of glucose excursions (MAGE; CGM) were not significantly different with either empagliflozin dose versus placebo at either timepoint. Curves of mean glucose (CGM) did not change between baseline and day 1 or 28 with placebo, but shifted downward with empagliflozin. Percentage of time with glucose ≥70 to <180 mg/dl increased from 52.0% at baseline to 77.0% at day 28 with empagliflozin 10 mg and from 55.0% to 81.1% with empagliflozin 25 mg, without increasing time spent with hypoglycemia.ConclusionEmpagliflozin for 28 days reduced PPG from the first day and improved daily blood glucose control in Japanese patients with T2DM.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT01947855Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12933-014-0169-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

Background Defining the transition from relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) can be challenging and delayed. A digital tool (MSProDiscuss) was developed to facilitate physician-patient discussion in evaluating early, subtle signs of multiple sclerosis (MS) disease progression representing this transition. Objective This study aimed to determine cut-off values and corresponding sensitivity and specificity for predefined scoring algorithms, with or without including Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores, to differentiate between RRMS and SPMS patients and to evaluate psychometric properties. Methods Experienced neurologists completed the tool for patients with confirmed RRMS or SPMS and those suspected to be transitioning to SPMS. In addition to age and EDSS score, each patient’s current disease status (disease activity, symptoms, and its impacts on daily life) was collected while completing the draft tool. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves determined optimal cut-off values (sensitivity and specificity) for the classification of RRMS and SPMS. Results Twenty neurologists completed the draft tool for 198 patients. Mean scores for patients with RRMS (n=89), transitioning to SPMS (n=47), and SPMS (n=62) were 38.1 (SD 12.5), 55.2 (SD 11.1), and 69.6 (SD 12.0), respectively (P<.001, each between-groups comparison). Area under the ROC curve (AUC) including and excluding EDSS were for RRMS (including) AUC 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95, RRMS (excluding) AUC 0.88, 95% CI 0.84-0.93, SPMS (including) AUC 0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.95, and SPMS (excluding) AUC 0.86, 95% CI 0.81-0.91. In the algorithm with EDSS, the optimal cut-off values were ≤51.6 for RRMS patients (sensitivity=0.83; specificity=0.82) and ≥58.9 for SPMS patients (sensitivity=0.82; specificity=0.84). The optimal cut-offs without EDSS were ≤46.3 and ≥57.8 and resulted in similar high sensitivity and specificity (0.76-0.86). The draft tool showed excellent interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=.95). Conclusions The MSProDiscuss tool differentiated RRMS patients from SPMS patients with high sensitivity and specificity. In clinical practice, it may be a useful tool to evaluate early, subtle signs of MS disease progression indicating the evolution of RRMS to SPMS. MSProDiscuss will help assess the current level of progression in an individual patient and facilitate a more informed physician-patient discussion.

No abstract

The results suggest that hypoglycaemia, weight change, gastrointestinal side effects and efficacy are of primary importance to patients in their OAD preferences in T2DM. These four attributes comprised over 80% of the RI.