Search

Background Chronic pain is prevalent but difficult to treat in patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD). Effective and safe analgesics are limited in this patient population. Our aim in this feasibility study was to evaluate the safety of sublingual oil based medical cannabis for pain management in patients undergoing HD. Methods In a prospective randomized, double-blind, cross-over design, patients undergoing HD with chronic pain were assigned to one of three arms: BOL-DP-o-04-WPE whole-plant extract (WPE), BOL-DP-o-04 cannabinoid extraction (API) or placebo. WPE and API contained trans-delta-9-‏tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) in a 1:6 ratio (1:6, THC:CBD). Patients were treated for 8 weeks, with subsequent 2-week wash out, followed by a cross-over to a different arm. The primary endpoint was safety. Results Eighteen patients were recruited and 15 were randomized. Three did not complete drug titration period due to adverse events (AEs) and one patient died during titration due to sepsis (WPE). Of those who completed at least one treatment period, seven patients were in the WPE arm, five in the API and nine receiving placebo. The most common AEs were sleepiness, which improved after dose reduction or patient adaptation. Most AEs were mild to moderate and resolved spontaneously. Serious AEs considered related to study drug included one episode of accidental overdose (WPE) leading to hallucinations. Liver enzymes were stable during cannabis treatment. Conclusions Short-term medical cannabis use in patients treated with HD was generally well tolerated. The safety data supports further studies to assess the overall risk–benefit of a treatment paradigm utilizing medical cannabis to control pain in this patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The cardiorenal benefits of adding sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor therapy for patients on insulin, particularly those on intensive regimens that include short-acting (SA) insulin, have not been explored.Research Design and Methods: In Dapagliflozin Effect on Cardiovascular Events trial (DECLARE-TIMI 58), 17,160 patients with type 2 diabetes were randomized to dapagliflozin or placebo for a median follow-up of 4.2 years. Cardiovascular (CV), renal, metabolic, and safety outcomes with dapagliflozin versus placebo by insulin dose and regimen were studied with Cox regression models.Results: The study included 7,013 insulin users at baseline, with 4,650 (66.3%) patients on regimens including SA insulin. Insulin doses varied, with 2,443 (34.8%) patients receiving <0.5 IU/kg, 2,795 (39.9%) 0.5 to ≤1 IU/kg, and 1,339 (19.1%) >1 IU/kg. Dapagliflozin reduced CV death/hospitalization for heart failure among overall insulin users (hazard ratio [HR] 0.82 [95% CI 0.69-0.97]) and consistently in patients on insulin regimens with or without SA insulin (0.83 [0.67-1.03] and 0.78 [0.57-1.07], respectively, Pinteraction = 0.75). No heterogeneity was observed by insulin dose (Pinteraction = 0.43). The HR for major adverse CV events with dapagliflozin among insulin users (0.84 [0.74-0.97]) was similar irrespective of regimen or dose (Pinteraction = 0.75 and 0.07). Dapagliflozin reduced the rate of adverse renal outcomes overall and consistently across subgroups of insulin users. Decreases in HbA1c, weight, and systolic blood pressure with dapagliflozin were seen regardless of insulin dose or regimen. The known safety profile of dapagliflozin was unchanged in patients on intensive insulin regimens.Conclusions: The benefits and safety of dapagliflozin were maintained in high-risk patients receiving high-dose or intensive insulin regimens including SA insulin.Article Highlights: Limited data exist regarding the cardiorenal, metabolic, and safety outcomes of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients on high-dose or intensive insulin regimens including short-acting insulin. In DECLARE-TIMI 58, 17,160 patients including 7,013 baseline insulin users were randomized to dapagliflozin versus placebo. Outcomes among insulin users by insulin dose and regimen were studied. Our results suggest that use of dapagliflozin by patients with type 2 diabetes managed with insulin, including high-dose or intensive insulin regimens, provided significant cardiovascular, renal, and metabolic benefits, in line with overall trial results. Adverse events associated with dapagliflozin, including hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis, were rare in this cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Data regarding the effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in the elderly (age ≥65 years) and very elderly (age ≥75 years) are limited.Research Design and Methods: The Dapagliflozin Effect on Cardiovascular Events (DECLARE)-TIMI 58 assessed cardiac and renal outcomes of dapagliflozin versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes. Efficacy and safety outcomes were studied within age subgroups for treatment effect and age-based treatment interaction.Results: Of the 17,160 patients, 9,253 were <65 years of age, 6,811 ≥65 to <75 years, and 1,096 ≥75 years. Dapagliflozin reduced the composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure consistently, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.88 (95% CI 0.72, 1.07), 0.77 (0.63, 0.94), and 0.94 (0.65, 1.36) in age-groups <65, ≥65 to <75, and ≥75 years, respectively (interaction P value 0.5277). Overall, dapagliflozin did not significantly decrease the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events, with HR 0.93 (95% CI 0.81, 1.08), 0.97 (0.83, 1.13), and 0.84 (0.61, 1.15) in age-groups <65, ≥65 to <75, and ≥75 years, respectively (interaction P value 0.7352). The relative risk reduction for the secondary prespecified cardiorenal composite outcome ranged from 18% to 28% in the different age-groups with no heterogeneity. Major hypoglycemia was less frequent with dapagliflozin versus placebo, with HR 0.97 (95% CI 0.58, 1.64), 0.50 (0.29, 0.84), and 0.68 (0.29, 1.57) in age-groups <65, ≥65 to <75, and ≥75 years, respectively (interaction P value 0.2107). Safety outcomes, including fractures, volume depletion, cancer, urinary tract infections, and amputations were balanced with dapagliflozin versus placebo, and acute kidney injury was reduced, all regardless of age. Genital infections that were serious or led to discontinuation of the study drug and diabetic ketoacidosis were uncommon, yet more frequent with dapagliflozin versus placebo, without heterogeneity (interaction P values 0.1058 and 0.8433, respectively).Conclusions: The overall efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin are consistent regardless of age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors may have a protective effect in diabetic nephropathy.Research Design and Methods: We studied renal outcomes of 16,492 patients with type 2 diabetes, randomized to saxagliptin versus placebo and followed for a median of 2.1 years in the Saxagliptin Assessment of Vascular Outcomes Recorded in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 53 (SAVOR-TIMI 53) trial.Results: At baseline, 9,696 (58.8%) subjects had normoalbuminuria (albumin/creatinine ratio [ACR] <30 mg/g), 4,426 (26.8%) had microalbuminuria (ACR 30-300 mg/g), and 1,638 (9.9%) had macroalbuminuria (ACR >300 mg/g). Treatment with saxagliptin was associated with improvement in and/or less deterioration in ACR categories from baseline to end of trial (EOT) (P = 0.021, P < 0.001, and P = 0.049 for individuals with baseline normoalbuminuria, microalbuminuria, and macroalbuminuria, respectively). At 2 years, the difference in mean ACR change between saxagliptin and placebo arms was -19.3 mg/g (P = 0.033) for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) >50 mL/min/body surface area per 1.73 m2 (BSA), -105 mg/g (P = 0.011) for 50 ≥ eGFR ≥ 30 mL/min/BSA, and -245.2 mg/g (P = 0.086) for eGFR <30 mL/min/BSA. Analyzing ACR as a continuous variable showed reduction in ACR with saxagliptin (1 year, P < 0.0001; 2 years, P = 0.0143; and EOT, P = 0.0158). The change in ACR did not correlate with that in HbA1c (r = 0.041, 0.052, and 0.036; 1 year, 2 years, and EOT, respectively). The change in eGFR was similar in the saxagliptin and placebo groups. Safety renal outcomes, including doubling of serum creatinine, initiation of chronic dialysis, renal transplantation, or serum creatinine >6.0 mg/dL, were similar as well.Conclusions: Treatment with saxagliptin improved ACR, even in the normoalbuminuric range, without affecting eGFR. The beneficial effect of saxagliptin on albuminuria could not be explained by its effect on glycemic control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic pain is prevalent but difficult to treat in patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD). Effective and safe analgesics are limited in this patient population. Our aim in this feasibility study was to evaluate the safety of sublingual oil based medical cannabis for pain management in patients undergoing HD., Methods: In a prospective randomized, double-blind, cross-over design, patients undergoing HD with chronic pain were assigned to one of three arms: BOL-DP-o-04-WPE whole-plant extract (WPE), BOL-DP-o-04 cannabinoid extraction (API) or placebo. WPE and API contained trans-delta-9-‏tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) in a 1:6 ratio (1:6, THC:CBD). Patients were treated for 8 weeks, with subsequent 2-week wash out, followed by a cross-over to a different arm. The primary endpoint was safety., Results: Eighteen patients were recruited and 15 were randomized. Three did not complete drug titration period due to adverse events (AEs) and one patient died during titration due to sepsis (WPE). Of those who completed at least one treatment period, seven patients were in the WPE arm, five in the API and nine receiving placebo. The most common AEs were sleepiness, which improved after dose reduction or patient adaptation. Most AEs were mild to moderate and resolved spontaneously. Serious AEs considered related to study drug included one episode of accidental overdose (WPE) leading to hallucinations. Liver enzymes were stable during cannabis treatment., Conclusions: Short-term medical cannabis use in patients treated with HD was generally well tolerated. The safety data supports further studies to assess the overall risk-benefit of a treatment paradigm utilizing medical cannabis to control pain in this patient population., Competing Interests: N.A. is an employee of BOL Pharma Ltd. N.V. and B.H. are former employees of BOL Pharma Ltd. O.M. is a former employee of BOL; Advisory Board: Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BOL Pharma; Research grant: Novo Nordisk, AstraZeneca; Speakers Bureau: Novo Nordisk, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer Ingelheim., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the ERA.)