Effect of liraglutide on physical performance in type 2 diabetes: Results of a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial (LIPER2)

Wägner, Ana M.; Miranda-Calderín, Guillermo; Ugarte-Lopetegui, M.A.; Marrero-Santiago, Héctor; Suárez-Castellano, L.; López-Madrazo, María José; Alberiche-Ruano, María Pino; Ahmed, Naveed; Alemán, Carolina; Castellot-Martín, A.; Pino, A. Díez del; Nóvoa-Mogollón, Francisco J.

doi:10.1016/j.diabet.2018.08.010

“…Several studies indicate that liraglutide is a GLP-1 RA because the GLP-1 RAs encourage insulin secretion according to the blood glucose levels, by reducing the hypoglycemic episodes, glycemic control, fasting plasma glucose, and total insulin need. [29][30][31][32][33][34][35] Concurring with our results, earlier research also showed that liraglutide lowers the FBS and glycated hemoglobin, with a low risk of hypoglycemia. [12][13][14] From the recent studies, liraglutide was noted to appreciably heighten the glycemic control and lower the body weight without adversely affecting the QoL in T2D patients with obesity.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Clinical Characteristics and Satisfaction of Liraglutide Treatment among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Prospective Study

Hayek

¹

,

Robert

²

,

Dawish

³

2019

Clin Med Insights Endocrinol Diabetes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Evaluation of patient-reported results, treatment satisfaction, in particular, is popularly gaining recognition as crucial to the assessment of the efficiency of new therapies. The aim of this study is to examine the clinical features and treatment satisfaction with liraglutide in insulin-dependent obese patients having uncontrolled diabetes.Methods:A prospective study was performed for 12 weeks using 64 type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients, 30 to 70 years of age, who came in for treatment to the Diabetes Treatment Center in Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from November 2017 to July 2018. All the patients enrolled in this study were given liraglutide in addition to their existing treatment. For the first week, they were subcutaneously administered 0.6 mg once per day, which was gradually raised to 1.2 mg after 1 week, and the final given dose went up to 1.8 mg per day until the study period was completed. Purposive and suitable selection of the respondents was performed at their convenience. They were interviewed adopting the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (Arabic version) at baseline and after 12 weeks. Besides, the clinical variables like hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting blood sugar (FBS), total daily insulin dose (TDD), number of injections, and hypoglycemia/weeks were also recorded at baseline and at the end of the study.Results:In comparison with the baseline values, notable positive differences were identified in the domains of treatment satisfaction, namely, satisfied with current treatment (P = .0001), frequency of perceived hyperglycemia (P = .0001), frequency of perceived hypoglycemia (P = .0001), convenience of current treatment (P = .0001), understanding diabetes (P = .0001), recommend the current treatment (P = .018), and continue the present treatment (P = .0001) when the study is completed. After 12 weeks, the addition of liraglutide to the existing treatment showed significant positive changes on FBS (P = .0001), HbA1c (P = .001), TDD (P = .0001), number of injections (P = .0001), documented hypoglycemia/weeks (P = .0005), and body weight (P = .0001) in comparison with the baseline values.Conclusions:The addition of liraglutide to the existing treatment raised the level of treatment satisfaction and minimized the frequency of hypoglycemic/hyperglycemic events apart from the other clinical variables.

show abstract

“…Since only one study [18] reported the endpoint of e ′ , no data were available for the pooling analysis. ree RCTs [18,20,22] presented E/e ′ at the end of the study, and the results were comparable between the liraglutide and the placebo group (I 2 � 0.0%; WMD: −0.763, 95% CI: −2.157 to 0.630, P � 0.283). Four studies [18,19,21,24] reported the outcomes of Δe ′ and ΔE/e ′ .…”

Section: Left Ventricular Diastolicmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…Among the 20 full-text review articles, ten were further excluded for reasons such as substudy [14], registering as one trial [15], comparing with other drugs, or no available data for pooling [16,17]. Finally, ten placebocontrolled RCTs [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] involving a total of 732 cases were included in the meta-analysis. e detailed flowchart is shown in Figure 1.…”

Section: Basic Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Liraglutide on Left Ventricular Function: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trials

Zhong

¹

,

Chen

²

,

Zhao

³

et al. 2021

International Journal of Endocrinology

1

2

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. The effects of liraglutide treatment on the left ventricular systolic and diastolic function remain unclear. Methods. This meta-analysis was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. All relevant randomized, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science from the establishment to January 2021 without language limitations. The weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated. Results. Ten placebo-controlled RCTs involving a total of 732 cases were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with the placebo group, liraglutide therapy showed no beneficial effect on the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at the end of the study (WMD: 2.120, 95% CI: −0.688 to 4.929, P = 0.139 ) and ΔLVEF during the trial period (WMD: −0.651, 95% CI: −1.649 to 0.348, P = 0. 202 ). Similarly, no statistical differences were noted in diastolic function parameters between the two groups, including the value early diastolic filling velocity (E)/the mitral annular early diastolic velocity ( e ′ ) (WMD: −0.763, 95% CI: −2.157 to 0.630, P = 0. 283 ), Δ e ′ (WMD: −0.069, 95% CI: −0.481 to 0.343, P = 0. 742 ), and Δ E / e ′ (WMD: −0.683, 95% CI: −1.663 to 0.298, P = 0. 172 ). Conclusions. Liraglutide treatment did not improve the left ventricular systolic and diastolic function. Given the study’s limitations, further investigation may be warranted.

show abstract

“…If ventricular remodeling can be delayed, the process of HF can be fundamentally delayed. Recently, a study found that empagliflozin-treated pigs showed higher LV ejection fraction (LVEF) and significantly greater contractile reserve than control animals [10]. Empagliflozin improved adverse anatomic LV remodeling, enhanced left ventricular systolic function, and inhibited neurohormonal activation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of antidiabetic drugs on left ventricular function/dysfunction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Zhang

¹

,

Xu

²

,

Wang

³

et al. 2020

Cardiovasc Diabetol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Although a variety of antidiabetic drugs have significant protective action on the cardiovascular system, it is still unclear which antidiabetic drugs can improve ventricular remodeling and fundamentally delay the process of heart failure. The purpose of this network meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of sodium glucose cotransporter type 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists, metformin (MET), sulfonylurea (SU) and thiazolidinediones (TZDs) in improving left ventricular (LV) remodeling in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and/or cardiovascular disease (CVD). Methods: We searched articles published before October 18, 2019, regardless of language or data, in 4 electronic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. We included randomized controlled trials in this network meta-analysis, as well as a small number of cohort studies. The differences in the mean changes in left ventricular echocardiographic parameters between the treatment group and control group were evaluated. Results: The difference in the mean change in LV ejection fraction (LVEF) between GLP-1 agonists and placebo in treatment effect was greater than zero (MD = 2.04% [0.64%, 3.43%]); similar results were observed for the difference in the mean change in LV end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) between SGLT-2 inhibitors and placebo (MD = − 3.3 mm [5.31, − 5.29]), the difference in the mean change in LV end-systolic volume (LVESV) between GLP-1 agonists and placebo (MD = − 4.39 ml [− 8.09, − 0.7]); the difference in the mean change in E/e′ between GLP-1 agonists and placebo (MD = − 1.05[− 1.78, − 0.32]); and the difference in the mean change in E/e′ between SGLT-2 inhibitors and placebo (MD = − 1.91[− 3.39, − 0.43]). Conclusions: GLP-1 agonists are more significantly associated with improved LVEF, LVESV and E/e′, SGLT-2 inhibitors are more significantly associated with improved LVEDD and E/e′, and DPP-4 inhibitors are more strongly associated with a negative impact on LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) than are placebos. SGLT-2 inhibitors are superior to other drugs in pairwise comparisons.

show abstract

Effect of liraglutide on physical performance in type 2 diabetes: Results of a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial (LIPER2)

Cited by 17 publications

References 25 publications

Clinical Characteristics and Satisfaction of Liraglutide Treatment among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Prospective Study

Clinical Characteristics and Satisfaction of Liraglutide Treatment among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Prospective Study

Effects of Liraglutide on Left Ventricular Function: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trials

Effects of antidiabetic drugs on left ventricular function/dysfunction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About