EFFECT OF SITAGLIPTIN ON POSTPRANDIAL GLUCAGON AND GLP-1 LEVELS IN PATIENTS WITH TYPE 1 DIABETES: INVESTIGATOR-INITIATED, DOUBLE-BLIND, RANDOMIZED, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED TRIAL

Objective: Peripheral insulin resistance in type 1 diabetes may be related to a paradoxical postprandial glucagon increase. This study evaluated the effects of sitagliptin (dipeptidyl peptidase-IV [DPP-IV] inhibitor, approved for patients with type 2 diabetes), in adults with type 1 diabetes to improve glycemic control through decreasing postprandial glucagon. Methods: This investigator-initiated, double-blind, randomized-parallel 20-week study enrolled 141 subjects. Subjects received sitagliptin 100 mg/day or placebo for 16 weeks. A subset of 85 patients wore blinded continuous glucose monitors (CGM) for 5 separate 7-day periods. The primary outcome was post-meal (Boost (TM)) reduction in 4-hour glucagon area under the curve (AUC). Secondary endpoints included changes in glycated hemoglobin (A1c), CGM data, insulin dose, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP), and C-peptide levels. Results: There were no differences at screening between groups; however, after a 4-week run-in phase, A1c was significantly lower in the sitagliptin vs. placebo group. Post-meal GLP-1 levels were higher (P<.001) and GIP levels lower (P = .03), with glucagon suppression at 30 minutes (LS means 23.2 +/- 1.9 versus 16.0 +/- 1.8; P = .006) in the sitagliptin group at 16 weeks. There were no differences between the groups in change in A1c, insulin dose, weight, or C-peptide after 16 weeks of treatment. However, C-peptide positive patients randomized to sitagliplin had a non-significant trend toward decrease in A1c, mean glucose, and time spent in hyperglycemia. Conclusion: Sitagliptin use in type 1 diabetes did not change glucagon AUC, A1c, insulin dose, or weight despite post-meal rise in GLP-1 levels. C-peptide positive subjects treated with sitagliptin had a nonsignificant trend in decreasing hyperglycemia, which needs further evaluation. (Endocr Pract. 2013; 19: 19-28)