Sitagliptin in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial

AIM To evaluate the effect of sitagliptin vs placebo on histologic and non-histologic parameters of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis(NASH).METHODS Twelve patients with biopsy-proven NASH were randomized to sitagliptin(100 mg daily)(n=6)or placebo(n=6)for 24 wk.The primary outcome was improvement in live...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inWorld journal of gastroenterology : WJG Vol. 23; no. 1; pp. 141 - 150
Main Authors Joy, Tisha R, McKenzie, Charles A, Tirona, Rommel G, Summers, Kelly, Seney, Shannon, Chakrabarti, Subrata, Malhotra, Neel, Beaton, Melanie D
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 07.01.2017
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:AIM To evaluate the effect of sitagliptin vs placebo on histologic and non-histologic parameters of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis(NASH).METHODS Twelve patients with biopsy-proven NASH were randomized to sitagliptin(100 mg daily)(n=6)or placebo(n=6)for 24 wk.The primary outcome was improvement in liver fibrosis after 24 wk.Secondary outcomes included evaluation of changes in NAFLD activity score(NAS),individual components of NAS(hepatocyte ballooning,lobular inflammation,and steatosis),glycemic control and insulin resistance[including measurements of glycated hemoglobin(Hb A1C)and adipocytokines],lipid profile including free fatty acids,adipose distribution measured using magnetic resonance imaging(MRI),and thrombosis markers(platelet aggregation and plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 levels).We also sought to determine the correlation between changes in hepatic fat fraction(%)[as measured using the Iterative Decomposition of water and fat with Echo Asymmetry and Least-squares estimation(IDEAL)MRI technique]and changes in hepatic steatosis on liver biopsy.RESULTS Sitagliptin was not significantly better than placebo at reducing liver fibrosis score as measured on liver biopsy(mean difference between sitagliptin and placebo arms,0.40,P=0.82).There were no significant improvements evident with the use of sitagliptin vs placebo for the secondary histologic outcomes of NAS total score as well as for the individual components of NAS.Compared to baseline,those patients who received sitagliptin demonstrated improved Hb A1C(6.7%±0.4%vs 7.9%±1.0%,P=0.02),and trended towards improved adiponectin levels(4.7±3.5μg/m L vs 3.9±2.7μg/m L,P=0.06)and triglyceride levels(1.26±0.43 mmol/L vs 2.80±1.64 mmol/L,P=0.08).However,when compared with placebo,sitagliptin did not cause a statistically significant improvement in Hb A1C(mean difference,-0.7%,P=0.19)nor triglyceride levels(mean difference-1.10mmol/L,P=0.19)but did trend towards improved adiponectin levels only(mean difference,0.60μg/m L,P=0.095).No significant changes in anthropometrics,liver enzymes,other adipocytokines,lipid profile,thrombosis parameters,or adipose distribution were demonstrated.The MRI IDEAL procedure correlated well with steatosis scores obtained on liver biopsy in both groups at baseline and post-treatment,and the Spearman correlation coefficients ranged from r=0.819(baseline)to r=0.878(post-treatment),P=0.002.CONCLUSION Sitagliptin does not improve fibrosis score or NAS after 24 wk of therapy.The MRI IDEAL technique may be useful for non-invasive measurement of hepatic steatosis.
Bibliography:Tisha R Joy;Charles A McKenzie;Rommel G Tirona;Kelly Summers;Shannon Seney;Subrata Chakrabarti;Neel Malhotra;Melanie D Beaton;Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, St. Joseph’s Hospital, Western University;Department of Medical Biophysics, Western University;Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Western University;Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Western University;Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Western University;Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, London Health Sciences Centre, Western University
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-News-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
Author contributions: Joy TR and Beaton MD contributed equally to this work and designed the research; Joy TR, Tirona RG, Summers K, Seney S, McKenzie CA and Beaton MD performed the research; Joy TR, McKenzie CA, Tirona RG, Summers K, Seney S, Malhotra N and Beaton MD contributed to the interpretation of the results; Joy TR and Beaton MD wrote the manuscript; and Joy TR, McKenzie CA, Tirona RG, Summers K, Seney S, Malhotra N and Beaton MD provided critical revisions of the manuscript.
Correspondence to: Dr. Melanie D Beaton, Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, 339 Windermere Road, London, Ontario N6A 5A5, Canada. melanie.beaton@lhsc.on.ca
Supported by the Physicians’ Services Incorporated Foundation 10q2083 (Joy TR and Beaton MD); Academic Medical Organization of Southwestern Ontario, No. F10-002 (Beaton MD); as well as partly funded through academic research funds from the Program of Experimental Medicine (Joy TR); and Department of Medicine Academic Funds (Joy TR) from Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Telephone: +1-519-6633344 Fax: +1-519-6633220
ISSN:1007-9327
2219-2840
DOI:10.3748/wjg.v23.i1.141