Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘GLP-1’

Weighty Decisions: Drugs or Surgery for Diabetes?

Curator: Dr. Sudipta Saha, Ph. D.

 

A multicenter retrospective cohort study published in The Lancet has evaluated the effectiveness of GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), including semaglutide and tirzepatide, versus bariatric surgery in managing type 2 diabetes and obesity. The study was conducted using data from real-world clinical settings involving adults with type 2 diabetes and a body mass index (BMI) over 30.

Patients treated with GLP-1 RAs were found to have significant improvements in glycemic control and weight loss; however, bariatric surgery led to more pronounced and sustained reductions in HbA1c and body weight over a 2-year follow-up. Cardio-metabolic benefits, including blood pressure and lipid profile improvements, were also more prominent in the surgery group.

Despite this, GLP-1 RAs were associated with a lower incidence of early complications and shorter recovery times. Adverse gastrointestinal events were commonly reported in both groups, though surgical complications were more severe but less frequent.

This study suggested that while bariatric surgery remains the most effective intervention for sustained weight and glycemic outcomes, GLP-1 RAs offer a safer, non-invasive alternative with substantial benefit, particularly for patients ineligible or unwilling to undergo surgery. The potential for GLP-1 RA therapy to delay or reduce the need for surgical intervention was also discussed.

These findings have emphasized the importance of personalized treatment strategies based on patient comorbidities, preferences, and risk profiles.

References:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(25)00145-2/fulltext

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27222544

https://diabetes.org/newsroom/press-releases/american-diabetes-association-releases-standards-care-diabetes-2024

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17715408

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2206038

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32870301

Read Full Post »

Tirzepatide Outperforms Semaglutide in Diabetes Control

Curator: Dr. Sudipta Saha, Ph. D.

In a recent clinical study published in The New England Journal of Medicine, the effectiveness of tirzepatide was compared with that of semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes. The trial was conducted to evaluate which of the two medications offers better glycemic control and weight loss benefits when combined with standard care.

It was found that participants treated with tirzepatide achieved significantly greater reductions in both HbA1c levels and body weight than those who received semaglutide. A once-weekly administration of tirzepatide was shown to be more effective across multiple dosages. These findings were consistent even in patients with longstanding diabetes and those previously treated with insulin or oral agents.

Gastrointestinal side effects were commonly observed in both groups, including nausea and diarrhoea, but were generally mild to moderate in severity. No new safety concerns were identified during the study period.

The enhanced dual agonist mechanism of tirzepatide, which targets both GIP and GLP-1 receptors, is believed to have contributed to its superior efficacy. While semaglutide acts only on the GLP-1 pathway, tirzepatide’s dual action is thought to improve insulin sensitivity, promote satiety, and reduce appetite more robustly.

This trial represents a significant advancement in diabetes care and suggests that tirzepatide may become a preferred treatment option in clinical practice. It has been proposed that future studies investigate its long-term cardiovascular effects, impact on diabetic complications, and cost-effectiveness in diverse populations.

References:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2416394

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S154235652400226X

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29364588

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29364588

https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241565257

Read Full Post »

Live Notes from JP Morgan Healthcare Conference Virtual Endpoints Preview: January 8-9 2024

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

Endpoints at #JPM24 | Primed to unlock biopharma’s next dealmaking wave
Endpoints at JP Morgan Healthcare Conference
January 8-9 | San Francisco, CA80 Mission St, San Francisco, CA

An oasis has emerged in the biopharma money desert as backers look to replenish capital — still, uncertainty remains on whether it’s a mirage or the much needed dealmaking bump the industry needs. Yet spirits run high as JPM24 marks the triumphant return of inking strategic alliances and peering into the industry crystal ball — while keeping an eye out for some major M&A.

We’re back live from San Francisco for JPM Monday and Tuesday — our calendar of can’t-miss panels and fireside chats will feature prominent biopharma leaders to watch. The Endpoints Hub provides the ultimate coworking space with everything you need — 1:1 and group meeting spots plus guest pass capabilities and more. Join us in-person at the Endpoints Hub or watch online to stay plugged into all the action.

8 JAN
Welcome remarks
8:05 AM – 8:25 AM PST
Pfizer vet Mikael Dolsten has some thoughts on Big Pharma R&D

Endpoints News founding editor John Carroll will sit down with longtime Pfizer CSO Mikael Dolsten to talk about Pfizer’s pipeline, what he’s learned on the job about preclinical research and development and what’s ahead for the pharma giant in drug development and deals.

Mikael Dolsten

Chief Scientific Officer, President, Pfizer Research & Development

Pfizer

Pfizer Mikael Dolsten: Pfizer produced a series of AI generated molecules with new properties. Sees rapid adoption of AI in the area of drug discovery and molecular design.

 
 
8:25 AM – 9:05 AM PST
What pharma wants: The industry’s dealmakers look ahead at 2024

The drug industry’s appetite for new assets hasn’t slowed down. Top business development execs will give their outlook on the year, what they’re looking for and how they see the market.

Glenn Hunzinger

Pharmaceutical & Life Sciences Consulting Solutions Leader

PwC US

Rachna Khosla

SVP, Head of Business Development

Amgen

James Sabry

Global Head of Pharma Partnering

Roche

Devang Bhuva

SVP, Corporate Development

Gilead Sciences, Inc.

Endpoints News

Dealmaking panel

Glenn Hunzinger: if you do not have a GLP1 will have a tough time getting a good market price for your company; capital markets are not where they want to be; sees a tough deal making climate like last year.  The problem with many biotech companies are they are coming earlier to the venture capital because of greater funding needs and so it is imperative that they articulate the potential of their company in scientific detail

Rachna Khosla:  Make sure your investors are not just CAPITAL PARTNERS but use their expertise and involve them in development issues you may have, especially ones that a young firm will face.  The problem is most investments assume what the future looks like (for example how antibody drug conjugates, once a field left for dead, has been rejuvenated because of advances in chemistry). 

James Sabry: noted that cardiac and metabolic drugs are now at the focus of many investors, especially with the new anti-obesity drugs on market

Devang Bhuva: Most deals we see start as collaborations or partnerships.  You want to involve an alliance management team early in the deal making process.  This process could take years.

 
9:05 AM – 9:20 AM PST
The IPO: How Apogee Therapeutics went public in the most challenging market in years

Not many biotechs went public in 2023. And of those that did, not many have had a great time of it. Apogee is the exception and our panel will offer a behind-the-scenes look at their decision to enter the market and what life is like as a young public company.

Michael Henderson

CEO

Apogee Therapeutics

Kyle LaHucik

MODERATOR

Senior Reporter

Endpoints News

Michael Henderson:  Not many biotech IPOs deals happened in 2023.  Michael feels it is because too many biotechs focused on building platforms, which was a hard sell in 2023.  He felt not many biotechs had clear milestones and investors wanted a clear primary validated target.  He said many biotech startups are in a funding crunch and most need at least $440M on their balance sheet to get to 2026.

9:50 AM – 10:10 AM PST
Top predictions for biotech in 2024

Catalent CEO Alessandro Maselli will be back at the big JPM healthcare confab to talk with Endpoints News founder John Carroll about their top predictions of what’s coming up for the biotech industry in 2024. The stakes couldn’t be higher as the industry grapples with headwinds and new opportunities in a gale of market forces. Two top observers share their thoughts on the year ahead.

Alessandro Maselli

President & CEO

Catalent

10:15 AM – 10:35 AM PST
Innovation at a crossroads: Keys to unlocking the value of science and technology

The industry has long discussed the promise of technology and the acceleration it provides in scientific advancement and across the industry value chain. However, the promise of its impact has yet to fully be realized. This discussion will outline the keys to unleashing this promise and the implications and actions to be taken by the biopharmaceutical companies across the industry.

Ray Pressburger

North America Life Sciences Industry Lead & Global Life Sciences Strategy Lead

Accenture

SPONSORED BY

10:35 AM – 11:05 AM PST
Activism and Investing: In conversation with Elliott Investment Management’s Marc Steinberg

Elliott has been behind many of 2023’s highest-profile healthcare investments, including multiple activist engagements and taking Syneos Health private. What has made large healthcare companies such interesting investment opportunities for firms like Elliott? What’s Elliott’s investing strategy in healthcare? And what should companies expect when an activist calls?

Marc Steinberg

Senior Portfolio Manager

Elliott Investment Management

Andrew Dunn

MODERATOR

Biopharma Correspondent

Endpoints News

11:05 AM – 11:35 AM PST
Creating ROI from AI

AI is predicted to transform the way drugs are made, from discovery to clinical trials to market. But beyond the initial hype and early adoption, where has AI made meaningful contributions to R&D? How does it help drug developers advance science? Endpoints publisher Arsalan Arif is convening a panel of leading experts to discuss the state of AI in the pharmaceutical landscape and the outlook for 2024. How does AI impact the drug pipeline, from the early steps of discovery to reducing trial failure rate?

Thomas Clozel

Co-Founder & CEO

Owkin

Venkat Sethuraman

SVP, Global Biometrics & Data Sciences

Bristol Myers Squibb

Frank O. Nestle

Global Head of Research & Chief Scientific Officer

Sanofi

Matthias Evers

Chief Business Officer

Evotec

Arsalan Arif

MODERATOR

Founder & Publisher

Endpoints News

SPONSORED BY

11:35 AM – 12:00 PM PST
Biopharma’s dealmaker: Behind the scenes with Centerview Partners co-president Eric Tokat

Almost every major biopharma deal in 2023 had Centerview’s name attached to it. And much of the time, Eric Tokat was the banker making those deals happen. Hear his outlook for 2024, how transactions are getting done and what’s placed his firm at the center of so much action.

E. Eric Tokat

Co-President, Investment Banking

Centerview Partners

CenterView Partners Eric Tokat feels dealmaking will improve in 2024, given the recent flurry of dealmaking at end of last year and right before main JPM Healthcare Conference.  He says Centerview wants to help the biotechs they invest in on their strategic path.  This may translate into buyers more actively involved (more than startups want) and buyers now are in the drivers seat as far as the timeline of deals and development.

Is the megamerger dead for this year?  He says it is very hard to see two major mergers happening but there will be many smaller and mid size biotech deals happening, but these deals will be more speculative in nature..  The focus for large pharma is top line growth.  Most of the buyers have an infrastructure and value is more of buying and dropping it in their business so there is now a huge emphasis on due diligence on whether synergies exist or not

 
12:00 PM – 12:30 PM PST
Founder, legend, leader: In conversation with Nobel laureate Carolyn Bertozzi

Carolyn Bertozzi’s discoveries around bioorthogonal chemistry won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2022 and are at the heart of new therapies being tested in patients. Join us as we discuss what inspires her and where she sees the next big advances.

Carolyn Bertozzi

Prof. of Chemistry, Stanford University and Baker Family Director of Sarafan ChEM-H

Stanford University

Nicole DeFeudis

MODERATOR

Editor

Endpoints News

Bioorthogonal chemistry: class of high yielding chemical reactions that proceed rapidly and selectively in biological environments without side reactions toward endogenous functions.  This is also a type of ‘click chemistry’ in biological system where only specifically alter the biomolecule of interest.

Orthogonal: two chemicals not interacting with each other

Dr. Bertozzi noted she has started a new Antibody-Drug-Conjugate (ADC) company which involves designing with biorthogonal chemistry to make new functional molecules with varying properties

She noted hardly any biologists knew anything about glycobiology when she first started.  However now she feels pharma and academia are working very well with each other

Bioorthogonal and Click Chemistry
Curated by Prof. Carolyn R. Bertozzi, 2022 winner of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry

Source: https://pubs.acs.org/page/vi/bioorthogonal-click-chemistry

The 2022 Nobel Prize in Chemistry has been awarded jointly to ACS Central Science Editor-in-Chief, Carolyn R. Bertozzi of Stanford University, Morten Meldal of the University of Copenhagen, and K. Barry Sharpless of Scripps Research, for the development of click chemistry and bioorthogonal chemistry.

To celebrate this remarkable achievement, 2022 Nobel Prize winner Professor Carolyn R. Bertozzi has curated this Bioorthogonal and Click Chemistry Virtual Issue, highlighting papers published across ACS journals that have built upon the foundational work in this exciting area of chemistry.

From Mechanism to Mouse: A Tale of Two Bioorthogonal Reactions

Ellen M. Sletten and Carolyn R. Bertozzi* Acc. Chem. Res. 2011, 44, 9, 666-676 August 15, 2011

Abstract

Bioorthogonal reactions are chemical reactions that neither interact with nor interfere with a biological system. The participating functional groups must be inert to biological moieties, must selectively reactive with each other under biocompatible conditions, and, for in vivo applications, must be nontoxic to cells and organisms. Additionally, it is helpful if one reactive group is small and therefore minimally perturbing of a biomolecule into which it has been introduced either chemically or biosynthetically. Examples from the past decade suggest that a promising strategy for bioorthogonal reaction development begins with an analysis of functional group and reactivity space outside those defined by nature. Issues such as stability of reactants and products (particularly in water), kinetics, and unwanted side reactivity with biofunctionalities must be addressed, ideally guided by detailed mechanistic studies. Finally, the reaction must be tested in a variety of environments, escalating from aqueous media to biomolecule solutions to cultured cells and, for the most optimized transformations, to live organisms.

9 JAN

9:40 AM – 10:10 AM PST

Biotech downturn survival school

Our panelists have seen the worst, and made it through to the other side. Join us for downturn survival school as our panelists talk about what sets apart the ones who make it through tough times.

These panalists think it will be specialist capital year to shine while the general capital is still sitting on the sidelines

JJ Kang

CEO

Appia Bio

“2023 was a tough year while 2020 was a boon year to start a company.  We will continue to see these cycles; many of these new CEOs have never seen a biotech downturn yet and may not know how to preserve capital for the downturn”.

“Doing a partnership with Kite Pharmaceuticals early in our startp allowed us to get work done without risking a lot of capital, even if it means equity and asset dilution.  That makes sense. However even if you are small insist on being an equal partner.”

“There are many investors we talk to who do not want to invest in cell therapy.  Too risky now”

Carl Gordon

Managing Partner

OrbiMed Advisors

There are many macroeconomic factors affecting investment and capital today which will carry on through 2024.   Not raising money when you do not need money is a bad philosophy.  Always bbe raising captial.  This is especially true when you have to rely on hedge funds.  Parnerships howeve are sometimes the only way for small biotechs to leverage their strengths.

Joshua Boger

Executive Chair

Alkeus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Boger: Expect volatility for 2024.  This environment feels very different than past downturns.

Even in downturns there is still lots of capital; remember access to human capital is better in a downturn and is easier to access;  however it has become harder to get drug approvals

The panelists agree that access to capital and funding will be as tricky in 2024 than 2023.  They did

suggest that a new funding avenue, private credit, may be a source of capital.  This is discussed below:

When thinking about a private alternative investment asset class, the first thing that springs to mind is private equity. But there’s one more asset class with the word private in its name that has recently gained much attention. We’re talking about private credit

Indeed, this once little-known investment strategy is now growing rapidly in popularity, offering private investors worldwide an exciting opportunity to diversify their portfolio with, in theory, less risky investments that yield significant returns. 

  • Private credit investments refer to investors lending money to companies who then repay the loan at a given interest rate within the predetermined period.
  • The private credit market has grown significantly over the past years, rising from $875 million in 2020 to $1.4 trillion at the beginning of 2023. 

Please WATCH VIDEO BY GOLDMAN SACHS ON PRIVATE CREDIT

 

 

 

 

10:50 AM – 11:20 AM PST

The New Molecule: How breakthrough technologies are actually changing pharma R&D

Join us for a look at how AI, machine learning and generative technologies are actually being applied inside drugmakers’ labs. We’ll explore how new technologies are being used, their implications, how they intersect with regulatory and IP issues and how this fast-changing field is likely to evolve.

Kailash Swarna

Managing Director & Global Life Sciences Clinical Development Lead

Accenture

Artificial Intelligence is making impact in a grand way on biology in three aspects:

  1. Speeding up target validation: now we can get through 300 molecules a day
  2. Predicition like AlphaFold is doing; molecular simulations
  3. Document submission especially with regulatory and IND submissions

Pamela Carroll

COO

Isomorphic Labs formerly of AlphaFold

We were first with Novartis at last year JPM and was one year old but parnering with them in that initial year was very important for sealing the deal.

They are looking now at neurologic diseases like ALS.  She wondered whether ALS is actually multiple diseases and we need to stratify patients like we do in oncology trials.  Their main competion is the whole tech world like Amazon, Google and other Machine Learning companies so being a tech player in the biotech world means you are not just competing with other biotechs but large tech companies as well.

Jorge Conde

General Partner

Andreessen Horowitz

Need is still great for drug discovery; early adopters show AI tools can be used in big pharma. There are lots of applications of AI in managing care; a lot of back office applications including patient triaging.  He does not see big AI mergers with pharma companies –  this will be mainly partnerships not M&A deals

Alicyn Campbell

Chief Scientific Officer

Evinova, a Healthtech Subsidiary of the AstraZeneca Group

There is a need to turn AI for real world example.  For example AI tools were used in clinical trials to determine patient cohorts with pneumonitis.  At Evinova they are determining how AI can hel[p show clinical benefit with respect to efficacy and safety

Joshua Boger at #JPM24 (Brian Benton Photography)

  January 12, 2024 09:06 AM ESTUpdated 10:00 AM PeopleStartups

Vertex founder Joshua Boger on surviving downturns, ‘painful’ partnerships, and the importance of culture: #JPM24

Andrew Dunn

Biopharma Correspondent

Source: https://endpts.com/jpm24-vertex-founder-joshua-boger-on-surviving-downturns-painful-partnerships-and-the-importance-of-culture/

While the JP Morgan Healthcare Conference was full of voices of measured optimism, rooting for the market to bounce back in 2024, one longtime biotech leader warned against setting any firm expectations.

Instead of predicting when the downturn may end, Vertex Pharmaceuticals founder Joshua Boger said he advises biotech leaders to expect — and plan for — volatility. Speaking Tuesday on an Endpoints News panel alongside OrbiMed’s Carl Gordon and Appia Bio CEO JJ Kang, Boger shared lessons learned on surviving downturns, striking pharma deals, and the importance of keeping a company’s culture based on his two decades of founding and leading Vertex as CEO from 1989 to 2009. The 72-year-old is now serving as executive chairman of Alkeus Pharmaceuticals, a startup developing a rare disease drug.

“I never experienced a straight line up,” Boger said. “Everything had its cycles, and it was how you respond to the cycle, not by predicting when the end is going to be, but just by responding to the present situation.”

At Boger’s first appearance at the JP Morgan conference in 1991, he said the conference’s theme was the end of biotech financing. Just a few months later, Regeneron successfully went public, rapidly changing the outlook for the whole field.

“We had no idea we were ever going to take public money,” he said. “When Regeneron did their IPO, we went, ‘Whoa, there’s something happening here,’ and we pivoted quickly.”

Vertex went public later that year. Throughout his 20-year tenure, Boger said no pharma company ever made an acquisition offer for Vertex, which now commands a market value of $110 billion and recently won the first FDA approval for a CRISPR gene editing therapy.

“We had an uber corporate policy to always make ourselves more expensive than anyone would stomach,” Boger said.

However, Vertex did strike a range of partnerships with Big Pharmas, which Boger described as a painful but necessary part of running a biotech startup.

“It’s impossible for a partnership not to slow you down,” he said. “You can and should try as hard as you can not to do that, but just count on it. They’ll slow you down.”

Boger said startups should insist on being equal partners in pharma deals, at least making sure they have a seat at a partner’s development meetings.

“Realize they’re going to be painful, it’s going to be horrible, and you need to do it,” Boger said.

While Vertex suffered through layoffs, stock price plunges, and trial failures, Boger credited a focus on culture as key to its long-term success.

“It’s the most important ingredient for a successful company,” he said. “Technology is acquirable. Culture is not acquirable. There are 10 companies that will fail because of culture for every one that succeeds, and the successful companies in retrospect will almost always have special cultural aspects that kept them through those downtimes.”

JPM24 opens with ADCs the hottest ticket in San Francisco

By Annalee ArmstrongJan 8, 2024 6:30am

Source: https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/jpm24-opens-adcs-hottest-ticket-san-francisco

The overall deal flow in biopharma tapered off in 2023 but the big companies sure know what they want (what they really, really want), according to a new report from J.P. Morgan.

And that’s antibody-drug conjugates, which drove a fourth-quarter spike in licensing deal proceeds and provided a glimmer of hope to an industry battered by outside forces and grim financing prospects.

J.P. Morgan’s annual 2023 Biopharma Licensing and Venture Report arrived on the eve of the firm’s famous conference, which is set to welcome thousands of attendees in San Francisco today—East Coast weather permitting.

2023 was tough, but clinical biotechs still had a lot of opportunities to wheel and deal, according to J.P. Morgan. While licensing deals, venture investments, M&A and IPOs were down overall in the fourth quarter, deal values stayed fairly high thanks to a flurry of late-stage tie ups.

Follow the Fierce team’s coverage of the 2024 J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference here

Biopharma licensing partnerships accounted for $63 billion in total value during the fourth quarter from 108 deals. Just one deal—Merck’s ADC partnership with Daiichi Sankyo—accounted for $22 billion of that. Another huge one was another ADC bet, with Bristol Myers Squibb signing on to work with SystImmune for a total value of $8.4 billion. If you exclude the Merck deal, the total value of these partnerships is still higher than the previous quarter, which ended with $32.1 billion.

The total number of licensing deals compares to 149 in the same quarter a year earlier, 195 for Q4 2021 and 223 for Q4 2022.

As for venture investments, the year closed out with $17 billion total across 250 rounds, thanks to $3.5 billion earned through 79 rounds in the last quarter. Aiolos Bio snagged the title of largest venture round of the quarter with $245 million, which also proved to be the largest series A, too.

There was just one IPO in all of the fourth quarter—Cargo Therapeutics making the plunge for $300 million—and 13 overall for the year. It’s a far cry from the heyday of 2021 and experts are still unsure what 2024 will hold. J.P. Morgan reported $2.5 billion raised from 12 completed biopharma IPOs for the year on Nasdaq and NYSE. Nine out of the 12 companies had clinical programs when they took the leap to the public markets. As of December 13, five of the companies were trading above their IPO price.

As for M&A, December saw a rush of Big Pharmas snapping up companies around Christmas. J.P. Morgan tallied the fourth quarter at $37.6 billion and $128.8 billion across 112 total acquisitions for all of 2023.

AbbVie was the top buyer of the quarter with the two largest acquisitions thanks to the $10 billion outlay for ImmunoGen and $8.7 billion buy of Cerevel Therapeutics.

All of this adds up to 270 total deals in the fourth quarter total, which is lower than the third quarter which exceeded 300.

J.P. Morgan sees some big potential for smaller biopharmas looking for licensing partners, as Big Pharmas have been handing out larger upfront payments for the deals they really want.

Cancer was once again the most in-demand therapeutic areas, reaching a new height of $86.1 billion in 2023. Followed by $21.1 billion for neurological disorders.

For More Articles on Real Time Conference Coverage in this Open Access Scientific Journal see:

Part One: The Process of Real Time Coverage using Social Media

Part Two: List of BioTech Conferences 2013 to Present

https://worldmedicalinnovation.org/

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2022/05/01/2022-world-medical-innovation-forum-gene-cell-therapy-may-2-4-2022-boston-in-person/

 

https://event.technologyreview.com/emtech-digital-2022/agenda-overview

 

Read Full Post »

Autocrine selection of GLP-1 binding site

Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP, Curator

LPBI

Update 12/15/2015

TSRI Team Finds Unique Anti-Diabetes Compound

Scientists from The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI) have deployed a powerful new drug discovery technique to identify an anti-diabetes compound with a novel mechanism of action

http://www.technologynetworks.com/HTS/news.aspx?ID=186055

The finding may lead to a new type of diabetes treatment. Just as importantly, it demonstrates the potential of the new technique, which enables researchers to quickly find drug candidates that activate cellular receptors in desired ways.

“In principle, we can apply this technique to hundreds of other receptors like the one we targeted in this study to find disease treatments that are more potent and have fewer side effects than existing therapies. It has been a very productive cross-campus collaboration, so we’re hoping to build on its success as we continue to collaborate on interrogating potential therapeutic targets,” said Patricia H. McDonald, an assistant professor at TSRI’s Jupiter, Florida campus and a senior investigator of the study.

McDonald’s laboratory collaborated on the study with the laboratory of Richard A. Lerner, the Lita Annenberg Hazen Professor of Immunochemistry at TSRI’s La Jolla campus, and with other TSRI groups. Lerner has pioneered techniques for generating and screening large libraries of antibodies or proteins to find new therapies.

In Search of a Better Activator

Three years ago, Lerner and colleagues devised a technique called autocrine selection, which enables scientists to screen very large libraries of molecules to find those that not only bind a given cellular receptor but also activate it to bring about a desired therapeutic effect. Since then, the Lerner laboratory and collaborating scientists have used the technique to find new molecules that block cold virus infection, boost red blood cell production and kill cancer cells, among other effects.

For the new study, Lerner and his laboratory used the technique to target a receptor linked to type 2 diabetes, a life-shortening disease estimated to affect 30 million people in the US alone.

The GLP-1 receptor, as it is known, is expressed by insulin-producing “beta cells” in the pancreas. Several drugs that activate this receptor—drugs called GLP-1 receptor agonists—are already approved for treating type 2 diabetes. In this case, the TSRI team’s aim was to find a molecule that activates the GLP-1 receptor in a unique way.

The GLP-1 receptor belongs to a large class of receptors known as G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Scientists recently have come to understand that when a molecule activates a GPCR, it doesn’t necessarily trigger a single chain of biochemical signals within the cell. In fact, most GPCR agonists trigger signals via multiple distinct pathways—one being via a so-called G protein and another via a protein known as beta-arrestin. In some cases, a “biased agonist” that principally activates just one of these pathways would work better than one that activates both.

In this case, Lerner and his laboratory teamed up with McDonald, an expert on GPCRs and metabolic disease, to find a molecule that would preferentially activate the GLP-1 receptor’s G protein pathway.

To start, researchers in Lerner’s laboratory, including Hongkai Zhang, a senior staff scientist and co-first author of the study, generated a library of candidate molecules—based on a known GLP-1 receptor agonist, Exendin-4, a small protein (peptide) originally found in the venom of Gila monster lizards; a synthetic version of this protein is now used as a type 2 diabetes medication. Zhang created about one million new peptides by randomly varying one end of Exendin-4—the end that normally activates the G protein and beta arrestin pathways.

“The idea was that at least one of these many variants would induce a change in the shape of the GLP-1 receptor that would activate the G-protein pathway without activating the beta arrestin pathway,” Zhang said.

Using the autocrine selection system, Zhang and colleagues rapidly screened these variant peptides and eventually isolated one, P5, that potently and selectively activated the GLP-1 receptor’s G-protein pathway. An initial test in healthy mice showed that P5 worked well at boosting glucose tolerance—at about one-hundredth the dose of Exendin-4 needed for the same effect.

Protein expert Philip E. Dawson, an associate professor at TSRI’s La Jolla campus, synthesized sufficient quantities of P5, and McDonald and her laboratory performed more advanced tests in cultured cells and in mice.

A Different Mechanism

Exendin-4 and and other GLP-1 receptor agonists work in part by strongly stimulating pancreatic beta cells to produce more insulin—which signals muscle and fat cells to draw glucose from the blood, thus lowering blood glucose levels.

McDonald and her team found that although P5 equals or outperforms Exendin-4 in standard mouse models of diabetes, it stimulates insulin production only weakly.

“We didn’t expect that, but in fact, it was a nice finding because less reliance on stimulating insulin could mean less stress on the beta cells,” said Emmanuel Sturchler, staff scientist in the McDonald laboratory and co-first author of the study.

Investigating further, the team found that while the peptide doesn’t make mice fatter or heavier, it triggers the growth of new fat cells. In typical obesity-related diabetes, fat cells grow larger, not more numerous, and as they grow larger, they lose their ability to respond to insulin (insulin resistance). The proliferation of fat cells with P5 was accompanied by signs of increased insulin sensitivity in those cells, suggesting that the peptide works in part by alleviating insulin resistance.

Exendin-4 induces a feeling of satiety, causing mice (and people) to modestly lower food intake and thus lose weight. But the researchers found that P5 lacks this mechanism and appears to have no effect on appetite or weight.

“P5’s mechanisms of action turned out to be quite different from Exendin-4’s, and we think that this finding could lead to new therapeutics,” Sturchler said.

The team will now look for opportunities to develop P5 into a new diabetes drug. The researchers also see this as the first of many discoveries of GPCR-targeting compounds with unique and potentially valuable properties—as well as discoveries in basic GPCR biology.

 

New screening tech at Scripps spotlights diabetes drug candidates

Wednesday, December 9, 2015 | By John Carrol

 

The Scripps Research Institute has used a new drug screening platform to identify a drug which researchers believe has strong potential for treating diabetes.

Working with a technique dubbed autocrine selection, investigators are able to screen molecules in search of targets that can bind to and activate cellular receptors in order to achieve a sought-after drug effect.

In this latest study, published in Nature Communications, the Scripps team went after the GLP-1 receptor, which is already the target of a number of GLP-1 agonists. Scripps, though, wanted to activate the GLP-1 receptor’s G protein pathway.

Hongkai Zhang focused on the GLP-1 agonist Extendin-4, whipping up a million peptides that could alter the end of the protein that activates the G protein and beta arrestin pathways.

“The idea was that at least one of these many variants would induce a change in the shape of the GLP-1 receptor that would activate the G-protein pathway without activating the beta arrestin pathway,” Zhang said.

They then identified the one in a million that improved glucose tolerance at a radically reduced dose of Extendin-4, testing it on mice.

“P5’s mechanisms of action turned out to be quite different from Exendin-4’s, and we think that this finding could lead to new therapeutics,” said Emmanuel Sturchler, a staff scientist in the McDonald laboratory and co-first author of the study.

https://www.scripps.edu/news/press/2015/20151207lerner-mcdonald.html

Scientists from The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI) have deployed a powerful new drug discovery technique to identify an anti-diabetes compound with a novel mechanism of action.

The finding, which appeared online ahead of print in Nature Communications, may lead to a new type of diabetes treatment. Just as importantly, it demonstrates the potential of the new technique, which enables researchers to quickly find drug candidates that activate cellular receptors in desired ways.

“In principle, we can apply this technique to hundreds of other receptors like the one we targeted in this study to find disease treatments that are more potent and have fewer side effects than existing therapies. It has been a very productive cross-campus collaboration, so we’re hoping to build on its success as we continue to collaborate on interrogating potential therapeutic targets,” said Patricia H. McDonald, an assistant professor at TSRI’s Jupiter, Florida campus and a senior investigator of the study.

 

‘Fingerprints’ for Major Drug Development Targets

For the first time, scientists from the Florida campus of The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI) have created detailed “fingerprints” of a class of surface receptors that have proven highly useful for drug development.

http://www.technologynetworks.com/HTS/news.aspx?ID=185860

These detailed “fingerprints” show the surprising complexity of how these receptors activate their binding partners to produce a wide range of signaling actions.

The study focuses on interactions of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) with their signaling mediators known as G proteins. GPCRs—currently accounting for about 40 percent of all prescription pharmaceuticals on the market—play key roles in many physiological functions because they transmit signals from outside the cell to the interior. When an outside substance binds to a GPCR, it activates a G protein inside the cell to release components and create a specific cellular response.

“Until now, it was generally believed that GPCRs are very selective, activating only a few G proteins they were designed to work with,” said TSRI Associate Professor Kirill Martemyanov, who led the study. “It turns out the reality is much more complex.”

Ikuo Masuho, a senior research associate in the Martemyanov lab, added, “Our imaging technology opens a unique avenue of developing drugs that would precisely control complex GPCR-G protein coupling, maximizing therapeutic potency by activating G proteins that contribute to therapeutic efficacy while inhibiting other G proteins that cause adverse side effects.”

The study found that individual GPCRs engage multiple G proteins with varying efficacy and rates, much like a dance where the most desirable partner, the GPCR, is surrounded by 14 suitors all vying for attention. The results, as in any dance, depend on which G proteins bind to the receptor—and for how long. The same receptor changes G protein partners—and the signaling outcome—depending on the action of the signal received from outside of the cell.

This finding was made possible by novel imaging technology used by the Martemyanov lab to monitor G protein activation in live cells. Using a pair of light-emitting proteins, one attached to the G protein, the other attached to what’s known as a reporter molecule, Martemyanov and his colleagues were able to measure simultaneously both the signal and activation rates of most G proteins present in the body.

“Our approach looks at 14 different types of G proteins at once—and we only have 16 in our bodies,” he said. “This is as close as it can get to what is actually happening in real time.”

In the accompanying commentary in Science Signaling, Alan Smrcka, a professor at University of Rochester Medical School and a prominent GPCR researcher, wrote, “[The findings] suggest the power of the GPCR fingerprinting approach, in that it could predict the G protein coupling specificity of a GPCR in a native system, which was previously undetected by conventional analysis. This could be very helpful for identifying previously unappreciated signaling pathways downstream of individual GPCRs that could be useful therapeutically or identified as potential side effects of GPCRs.”

 

Long-Acting Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists  

A review of their efficacy and tolerability

Alan J. Garber, MD, PHD

Diabetes Care May 2011; 34(Supplement 2): S279-S284    http://dx.doi.org/10.2337/dc11-s231

Targeting the incretin system has become an important therapeutic approach for treating type 2 diabetes. Two drug classes have been developed: glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors. Clinical data have revealed that these therapies improve glycemic control while reducing body weight (GLP-1 receptor agonists, specifically) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) in patients with type 2 diabetes. Furthermore, incidence of hypoglycemia is relatively low with these treatments (except when used in combination with a sulfonylurea) because of their glucose-dependent mechanism of action. There are currently two GLP-1 receptor agonists available (exenatide and liraglutide), with several more currently being developed. This review considers the efficacy and safety of both the short- and long-acting GLP-1 receptor agonists. Head-to-head clinical trial data suggest that long-acting GLP-1 receptor agonists produce superior glycemic control when compared with their short-acting counterparts. Furthermore, these long-acting GLP-1 receptor agonists were generally well tolerated, with transient nausea being the most frequently reported adverse effect.

Careful consideration should be given to the selection of therapies for managing type 2 diabetes. In particular, antidiabetic agents that offer improved glycemic control without increasing cardiovascular risk factors or rates of hypoglycemia are warranted. At present, many available treatments for type 2 diabetes fail to maintain glycemic control in the longer term because of gradual disease progression as β-cell function declines. Where sulfonylureas or thiazolidinediones (common oral antidiabetic drugs) are used, the risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain can increase (1,2). The development of new therapies for the treatment of type 2 diabetes that, in addition to maintaining glycemic control, could reduce body weight and hypoglycemia risk (3,4), may help with patient management. Indeed, guidelines have been developed that support the consensus that blood pressure, weight reduction, and avoidance of hypoglycemic events should be targeted in type 2 diabetes management alongside glycemic targets. For example, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) defines multiple goals of therapy that include A1C <7.0% and SBP <130 mmHg and no weight gain (or, in the case of obese subjects, weight loss) (5). In particular, incretin-based therapies (GLP-1 receptor agonists, specifically) can help meet these new targets by offering weight reduction, blood pressure reduction, and reduced hypoglycemia in addition to glycemic control.

WHAT IS GLP-1?

The incretin effect, responsible for 50–70% of total insulin secretion after oral glucose administration, is defined as the difference in insulin secretory response from an oral glucose load compared with intravenous glucose administration (6) (Supplementary Fig. 1).

There are two naturally occurring incretin hormones that play a role in the maintenance of glycemic control: glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and GLP-1, both of which have a short half-life because of their rapid inactivation by DPP-4 (7). In patients with type 2 diabetes, the incretin effect is reduced or, in some cases, absent (8). In particular, the insulinoptropic action of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide is lost in patients with type 2 diabetes. However, it has been shown that, after administration of pharmacological levels of GLP-1, the insulin secretory function can be restored in this population (9), and thus GLP-1 has become an important target for research into new therapies for type 2 diabetes.

GLP-1 has multiple physiological effects that make it an attractive candidate for type 2 diabetes therapy. It increases insulin secretion while inhibiting glucagon release, but only when glucose levels are elevated (6,10), thus offering the potential to lower plasma glucose while reducing the likelihood of hypoglycemia. Furthermore, gastric emptying is delayed (10) and food intake is decreased after GLP-1 administration. Indeed, in a 6-week study investigating continuous GLP-1 infusion, patients with type 2 diabetes achieved a significant weight loss of 1.9 kg and a reduction in appetite from baseline compared with patients receiving placebo, where there was no significant change in weight or appetite (11). Preclinical studies reveal other potential benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment in individuals with type 2 diabetes, which include the promotion of β-cell proliferation (12) and reduced β-cell apoptosis (13). These preclinical results indicate that GLP-1 could be beneficial in treating patients with type 2 diabetes. However, because native GLP-1 is rapidly inactivated and degraded by the enzyme DPP-4 and has a very short half-life of 1.5 min (14), to achieve the clinical potential for native GLP-1, patients would require 24-h administration of native GLP-1 (15). Because this is impractical as a therapeutic option for type 2 diabetes, it was necessary to develop longer-acting derivatives of GLP-1.

DEVELOPMENT OF DPP-4–RESISTANT GLP-1 RECEPTOR AGONISTS

Two classes of incretin-based therapy have been developed to overcome the clinical limitations of native GLP-1: GLP-1 receptor agonists (e.g., liraglutide and exenatide), which exhibit increased resistance to DPP-4 degradation and thus provide pharmacological levels of GLP-1, and DPP-4 inhibitors (e.g., sitagliptin, vildagliptin, saxagliptin), which reduce endogenous GLP-1 degradation, thereby providing physiological levels of GLP-1. In this review, we focus on the GLP-1 receptor agonist class of incretin-based therapies. The efficacy and tolerability of the DPP-4 inhibitors have been reviewed elsewhere (16). Two GLP-1 receptor agonists are licensed at present in Europe, the U.S., and Japan: exenatide (Byetta, Eli Lilly) (17) and liraglutide (Victoza, Novo Nordisk) (18). For the purposes of this review, we refer to “short-acting” GLP-1 receptor agonists as those agents having duration of action of <24 h and “long-acting” as those agents with duration of action >24 h (Table 1).

….. more        http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/34/Supplement_2/S279.full.pdf+html

 

Autocrine selection of a GLP-1R G-protein biased agonist with potent antidiabetic effects

Hongkai ZhangEmmanuel SturchlerJiang ZhuAinhoa NietoPhilip A. Cistrone,…., Patricia H. McDonald & Richard A. Lerner
Nature Communications Dec 2015; 6(8918)
       
     http://dx.doi.org:/10.1038/ncomms9918

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor (GLP-1R) agonists have emerged as treatment options for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). GLP-1R signals through G-protein-dependent, and G-protein-independent pathways by engaging the scaffold protein β-arrestin; preferential signalling of ligands through one or the other of these branches is known as ‘ligand bias’. Here we report the discovery of the potent and selective GLP-1R G-protein-biased agonist, P5. We identified P5 in a high-throughput autocrine-based screening of large combinatorial peptide libraries, and show that P5 promotes G-protein signalling comparable to GLP-1 and Exendin-4, but exhibited a significantly reduced β-arrestin response. Preclinical studies using different mouse models of T2DM demonstrate that P5 is a weak insulin secretagogue. Nevertheless, chronic treatment of diabetic mice with P5 increased adipogenesis, reduced adipose tissue inflammation as well as hepatic steatosis and was more effective at correcting hyperglycemia and lowering hemoglobin A1clevels than Exendin-4, suggesting that GLP-1R G-protein-biased agonists may provide a novel therapeutic approach to T2DM.

Figure 1: Autocrine-based system for selection of agonists from large combinatorial peptide libraries

Autocrine-based system for selection of agonists from large combinatorial peptide libraries.

(a) Schematic representation of the peptide libraries. (b) Schematic representation of the membrane-tethered Exendin-4 (top) and FACS analysis of mCherry and GFP expression 2 days after transduction of HEK293-GLP-1R-GFP cells with the membrane-tethered Exendin-4 displaying different linker size (bottom). (c) Schematic representation of the autocrine-based selection of combinatorial peptide library. The lentivirus peptide libraries are preparred from lentiviral plasmids (step 1). The CRE-responsive GLP-1R reporter cell line is transduced with lentiviral library (step 2). GFP expressing cells are sorted (step 3) and peptide-encoding genes are amplified from genomic DNA of sorted cells to make the library for the next selection round (step 4). After iterative rounds of selection, enriched peptide sequences are analysed by deep sequencing (step 5). (d) Enrichment of GFP positive cells during three rounds of FACS selection. (e) N termini sequences of top 13 peptides (frequency>1.0% representation).

 

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a complex metabolic disorder characterized by hyperglycaemia arising from a combination of insufficient insulin secretion together with the development of insulin resistance. The incretin, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) is an endogenous peptide hormone secreted from intestinal endocrine cells in response to food intake1. GLP-1 lowers postprandial glucose excursion by potentiating glucose-stimulated insulin secretion from pancreatic β-cells and has also recently been shown to promote β-cell survival in rodents2. In addition, GLP-1 exerts extra-pancreatic actions such as promoting gastric emptying, weight loss and increasing insulin sensitivity in peripheral tissues3. Hence, incretin-based therapies represent a strategy for the treatment of T2DM.

GLP-1 exerts its action through the GLP-1 receptor (GLP-1R)4 expressed in the pancreas, other peripheral tissues, and the central nervous system. Activation of GLP-1R triggers Gαs-protein coupling leading to an elevation of cyclic AMP (cAMP), modulates intracellular calcium concentration5 and induces β-arrestin recruitment6, 7. Historically, β-arrestins were believed to serve an exclusive role in G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) desensitization8. However, it has since been shown that β-arrestins can also function to activate signalling cascades9, 10. In this regard, in the pancreatic β-cell, elevation of both cAMP and cytosolic Ca2+ and β-arrestin signalling downstream of GLP-1R activation are critical events in promoting glucose-dependent insulin secretion.

Recently, the concept of ‘functional selectivity’ or ‘ligand bias’ has emerged whereby ligand binding promotes engagement of only a particular subset of the full GPCR signalling repertoire to the exclusion of others11. A better understanding of GLP-1R pleiotropic signalling and the underlying physiological consequences might provide new avenues for the development of drugs with novel modes of action that have the potential to provide greater therapeutic value while possibly avoiding unwanted side effects12, 13. Therefore we developed an autocrine-based system, to screen large and diverse, combinatorial peptide libraries containing up to 100 million different members with the aim of identifying potent, selective, G-protein-biased GLP-1R agonists. We identified one such ligand, designated P5 and have characterized its in vitro pharmacological phenotype, and explored its therapeutic potential.

P5 is a selective and potent G-protein-biased GLP-1R agonist

To assess potential signalling bias, the active peptides were further characterized in vitro using distinct assays that monitor receptor proximal signals. Cell-based assays for Gαs-protein (cAMP production), Gαq-protein (intracellular Ca2+ mobilization) and β-arrestin (1 and 2) signalling were used to determine the potency (EC50; effector concentration for half-maximum response) and maximal efficacy (Emax (%)) of peptides relative to the reference ligand Ex4 (Table 1). Peptides P1, P2, P5 and P10 all stimulated cAMP production. However, only P5 functioned as a full agonist (Emax=100%) displaying sub-nanomolar potency at both the human (hGLP-1R) and mouse receptor (mGLP-1R) (Fig. 2a,b; Table 1). The P5 EC50 was similar to the endogenous ligand GLP-1 but was slightly right shifted when compared with the reference peptide Ex4 (Fig. 2a,b; Table 1). Importantly, P5-induced cAMP production was inhibited by the selective GLP-1R antagonist Ex 9–39 in a concentration-dependent manner (Supplementary Fig. 1a,b). In addition, P5-induced cAMP production was negligible in HEK293 cells expressing the human glucagon receptor (Supplementary Fig. 1c). These data suggest that P5 selectively interacts with the GLP-1R.

 

In line with previous reports43, 44, 45 our data support the notion that non β-cell actions of GLP-1 agonists can improve glycaemic control. Importantly, GLP-1R is expressed in adipose tissue, in both the stromal vascular and the adipocyte fraction and its expression level has been found to correlate with the degree of insulin resistance46. In addition, the GLP-1 peptide has been reported to regulate adipogenesis in vitro47, 48. Given that P5, a G-protein-biased agonist with a severely blunted β-arrestin response has less propensity to induce GLP-1R desensitization, sustained activation of the receptor in adipose tissue may lead to the changes we observed in eWAT. Consistent with this notion, increased expression of adipogenic genes and a decrease in resistin expression was reported in β-arrestin 1 knockout mice49. Nevertheless, considering the multitude of metabolic pathways regulated by β-arrestin, further studies are warranted to determine the role of β-arrestin signalling downstream of GLP-1R activation in adipogenesis. Additionally, we found that chronic treatment with P5 increased circulating level of GIP to a greater extent than Ex4. Several studies demonstrated that GIP acts as an insulin sensitizer in adipocytes and disruption of the GIP/GIP-R axis has been reported in insulin-resistant states such as obesity50, 51. Interestingly, PPARγ activation was shown to increase GIP-R levels during adipocyte differentiation52. Thus, by increasing GIP and PPARγ levels, P5 chronic treatment may restore GIP/GIP-R signalling in adipocytes. Furthermore, previous studies have demonstrated that the simultaneous activation of the GLP-1R and the GIP-R results in enhanced glycaemic control, and lower HbA1c levels in human and rat, when compared with GLP-1R alone53, suggesting a GIP and GLP-1 synergism. Thus, the superior glycaemic control observed with the G-protein-biased agonist may result from P5-induced increases in GIP level and concomitant receptor activation. In addition, the GLP-1R can form homodimers as well as ligand-induced heterodimers with the GIP-R54. It is conceivable, that P5 may promote the formation of new and pharmacologically distinct homo/heterodimers displaying different signalling capacity. However, further studies are required to delineate more precisely the molecular and cellular mechanisms and the consequences of P5-induced increase in GIP levels.

In summary, high-throughput autocrine-based functional screening of combinatorial peptide libraries enabled the discovery of a high potency G-protein-biased GLP-1R agonist demonstrating new pharmacological virtues. In a series of translational preclinical studies we demonstrate that P5 is a weak insulin secretagogue yet displays superior antidiabetic effect (Fig. 7). Thus, GLP-1R G-protein-biased ligands may offer new and unappreciated advantages in the context of chronic treatment such as promoting adipocyte hyperplasia, restoring insulin responsiveness and long-term glycaemic control while preserving pancreatic β-cell function by minimizing the insulin secretory burden.

 

Figure 7: Schematic depicting the identification and characterization of a novel GLP-1R-biased agonist.

Schematic depicting the identification and characterization of a novel GLP-1R-biased agonist.

Using an autocrine-based system coupled to FACS, we screened large, diverse, combinatorial peptide libraries and identified P5, a potent and selective G-protein-biased GLP-1R agonist. P5 displayed a decreased insulinotropic effect, yet significantly improved glucose tolerance and insulin responsiveness by promoting white adipocyte tissue hyperplasia.

 

Exendin-4 Is a High Potency Agonist and Truncated Exendin-(9-39)- amide an Antagonist at the Glucagon-like Peptide 1-(7-36)-amide Receptor of Insulin-secreting ,&Cells*

Riidiger Goke, Hans-Christoph Fehmann, Thomas LinnS, Harald Schmidt, Michael Krause9, John EngT, and Burkhard GokeII
J Biol Chem  Sept 1993;268(26):19650-19655      http://www.jbc.org/content/268/26/19650.full.pdf

Exendin-4 purified from Heloderma suspecturn venom shows structural relationship to the important incretin hormone glucagon-like peptide 1-(7-36)- amide (GLP-1). We demonstrate that exendin-4 and truncated exendin-(9-39)-amide specifically interact with the GLP-1 receptor on insulinoma-derived cells and on lung membranes. Exendin-4 displaced “‘IGLP- 1, and unlabeled GLP- 1 displaced lZ6I-exendin-4 from the binding site at rat insulinoma-derived RINmSF cells. Exendin-4 had, like GLP-1, a pronounced effect on intracellular CAMP generation, which was reduced by exendin-(9-39)-amide. When combined, GLP-1 and exendin-4 showed additive action on CAMP. They each competed with the radiolabeled version of the other peptide in cross-linking experiments. The apparent molecular mass of the respective ligand-binding protein complex was 63,000 Da. Exendin-(9-39)-amide abolished the cross-linking of both peptides. Exendin-4, like GLP-1, stimulated dose dependently the glucose-induced insulin wcretion in isolated rat islets, and, in mouse insulinoma TC-1 cells, both peptides stimulated the proinsulin gene expression at the level of transcription. Exendin- (9-39)-amide reduced these effects. In conclusion, exendin-4 is an agonist and exendin-(9-39)-amide is a specific GLP- 1 receptor antagonist.

 

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Kathleen Dungan, MDAnthony DeSantis, MD
http://www.uptodate.com/contents/glucagon-like-peptide-1-receptor-agonists-for-the-treatment-of-type-2-diabetes-mellitus

Despite advances in options for the treatment of diabetes, optimal glycemic control is often not achieved. Hypoglycemia and weight gain associated with many antidiabetic medications may interfere with the implementation and long-term application of “intensive” therapies [1]. Current treatments have centered on increasing insulin availability (either through direct insulin administration or through agents that promote insulin secretion), improving sensitivity to insulin, delaying the delivery and absorption of carbohydrate from the gastrointestinal tract, or increasing urinary glucose excretion.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1)-based therapies (eg, GLP-1 receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 [DPP-4] inhibitors) affect glucose control through several mechanisms, including enhancement of glucose-dependent insulin secretion, slowed gastric emptying, and reduction of postprandial glucagon and of food intake (table 1). These agents do not usually cause hypoglycemia in the absence of therapies that otherwise cause hypoglycemia.

This topic will review the mechanism of action and therapeutic utility of GLP-1 receptor agonists for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. DPP-4 inhibitors are discussed separately. A general discussion of the initial management of blood glucose and the management of persistent hyperglycemia in adults with type 2 diabetes is also presented separately. (See “Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus”.)

GLUCAGON-LIKE PEPTIDE-1

Glucose homeostasis is dependent upon a complex interplay of multiple hormones: insulin and amylin, produced by pancreatic beta cells; glucagon, produced by pancreatic alpha cells; and gastrointestinal peptides, including glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP; gastric inhibitory polypeptide) (figure 1). Abnormal regulation of these substances may contribute to the clinical presentation of diabetes. The role of GLP-1 in glucose homeostasis is illustrative of the incretin effect, in which oral glucose has a greater stimulatory effect on insulin secretion than intravenous glucose [2]. This effect is mediated by several gastrointestinal peptides, particularly GLP-1, that are released in the setting of a meal and stimulate insulin synthesis and insulin secretion, which does not occur when carbohydrate is administered intravenously.

GLP-1 is produced from the proglucagon gene in L-cells of the small intestine and is secreted in response to nutrients (figure 1) [3]. GLP-1 binds to a specific GLP-1 receptor, which is expressed in various tissues including pancreatic beta cells, pancreatic ducts, gastric mucosa, kidney, lung, heart, skin, immune cells, and the hypothalamus [2,4]. GLP-1 exerts its main effect by stimulating glucose-dependent insulin release from the pancreatic islets [2]. It has also been shown to slow gastric emptying [5], inhibit inappropriate post-meal glucagon release [3,6], and reduce food intake (table 1) [3]. Owing in part to the effects of GLP-1 on slowed gastric emptying and appetite centers in the brain, therapy with GLP-1 and its receptor agonists is associated with weight loss, even among patients without significant nausea and vomiting.

 

Exendin-4, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, reduces Alzheimer disease-associated tau hyperphosphorylation in the hippocampus of rats with type 2 diabetes.
Impaired insulin signaling pathway in the brain in type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a risk factor for Alzheimer disease (AD). Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and its receptor agonist are widely used for treatment of T2D. Here we studied whether the effects of exendin-4 (EX-4), a long-lasting GLP-1 receptor agonist, could reduce the risk of AD in T2D.  RESULTS: The levels of phosphorylated tau protein at site Ser199/202 and Thr217 level in the hippocampus of T2D rats were found to be raised notably and evidently decreased after EX-4 intervention. In addition, brain insulin signaling pathway was ameliorated after EX-4 treatment, and this result was reflected by a decreased activity of PI3K/AKT and an increased activity of GSK-3β in the hippocampus of T2D rats as well as a rise in PI3K/AKT activity and a decline in GSK-3β activity after 4 weeks intervention of EX-4. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that multiple days with EX-4 appears to prevent the hyperphosphorylation of AD-associated tau protein due to increased insulin signaling pathway in the brain. These findings support the potential use of GLP-1 for the prevention and treatment of AD in individuals with T2D.

Read Full Post »

 

Pathophysiology of GLP-1 in Type 2 Diabetes

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

By Mark Abrahams, MD

Reviewed by Loren Wissner Greene, MD, MA (Bioethics), Clinical Associate Professor of Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY

Published: 05/23/2012

 

 

 

For many years, it has been well known that causes of type 2 diabetes include: decreased ability of pancreatic beta cells to produce insulin, insulin resistance, and increased production of glucose by the liver.1,2 More recently, the role of the incretin hormones, GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide 1) and GIP (glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide) has been elucidated. This article reviews the pathophysiology of GLP-1 and the impaired incretin effect observed in type 2 diabetes.

The significant reduction in the “incretin effect” observed in patients with type 2 diabetes offers strong evidence as to the importance of GLP-1. The incretin effect refers to the observation that, when challenged by glucose delivered via an oral route (as would occur with ingestion of a meal), the resulting increase in insulin levels is higher than that seen when glucose is delivered intravenously.3 The impaired ability of patients with type 2 diabetes to mount such a postprandial incretin effect appears to be due primarily to decreased circulating levels of GLP-1. This may be secondary to either decreased secretion by the gut or increased elimination of GLP-1 (elimination occurs most notably via enzymatic degradation by DPP-4 [dipeptidyl peptidase-4]).4

Despite the impaired incretin effect seen in patients with type 2 diabetes, the ability of GLP-1, when present, to elicit the secretion of insulin by pancreatic beta cells appears to be preserved.4Furthermore, it has also been shown that the ability of GLP-1 to slow gastric emptying and decrease glucagon secretion remains intact in these patients.4 This implies that the impaired incretin effect appears to be largely a function of decreased circulating levels of incretin hormones, rather than a decreased ability of target tissues to respond appropriately.

At present, it is not known if the decreased incretin effect seen in patients with type 2 diabetes is a cause or effect of the disease. While it may be intuitive to think about pathophysiology as preceding clinical disease, at least two studies suggest otherwise. In one study in patients with chronic pancreatitis, the investigators leveraged the assumption that these patients eventually develop diabetes.5 This study compared patients with chronic pancreatitis and secondary diabetes to patients with chronic pancreatitis and normal glucose tolerance. In the patients with secondary diabetes, the incretin effect was significantly impaired—but not so in patients with normal glucose tolerance. The authors concluded that clinical diabetes is more likely a cause of an impaired incretin effect rather than a consequence. In another study comparing identical twins, one with type 2 diabetes and one without, impaired secretion of GLP-1 was seen only in the siblings with diabetes—also suggesting that clinical disease may precede deficits in GLP-1 secretion.6Regardless, this subject remains controversial.

The relationship between obesity and the incretin effect is an area of active exploration as well. In one study investigating the impact of obesity on the incretin effect, a proportional relationship was observed between severity of obesity and degree of impairment of incretin effect. The authors concluded that obesity was an independent cause of diminished incretin effect.7

In summary, decreased levels of circulating GLP-1 and GIP appear to be primarily responsible for the impaired ability of the type 2 diabetes patient to mount an effective postprandial insulin response—while tissue sensitivity to hormone, when present, remains intact. Obesity is believed to contribute to the development of such an impaired incretin effect, and the question of incretin effect as either causing, or resulting from, clinical disease remains controversial.

 

References:

  1. Boyle PJ, et al. Application of Incretin Mimetics and Dipeptidyl Peptidase IV Inhibitors in Managing Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2007;107(suppl):S10-S16.
  2. Freeman JS. The Pathophysiologic Role of IncretinsJ Am Osteopath Assoc. 2007;107(suppl):S6-S9.
  3. Phillips WT, et al. Rapid Gastric Emptying of an Oral Glucose Solution in Type 2 Diabetic Patients. J Nucl Med. 1992;33:1496-1500.
  4. Freeman JS. Role of the Incretin Pathway in the Pathogenesis of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Cleve Clin J Med. 2009;76(suppl 5):S12-S19.
  5. Knop FK, et al. Reduced Incretin Effect in Type 2 Diabetes: Cause or Consequence of the Diabetic State?Diabetes. 2007;56:1951-1959.
  6. Vaag AA, et al. Gut Incretin Hormones in Identical Twins Discordant for Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (NIDDM)-Evidence for Decreased Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Secretion During Oral Glucose Ingestion in NIDDM Twins. Eur J Endocrinol. 1996;135:425-432.
  7. Muscelli E, et al. Separate Impact of Obesity and Glucose Tolerance on the Incretin Effect in Normal Subjects and Type 2 Diabetic Patients. Diabetes. 2008;57:1340-1348.

 

More on GLP-1 and Type 2 Diabetes

Read Full Post »