Explore the vast range of titles available.

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety profile of pioglitazone compared with placebo (PBO) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with metformin and dapagliflozin. In this prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, PBO-controlled trial, 366 patients with T2D who did not meet glycemic targets (7.0% ≤ glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c] ≤ 10.5%), despite treatment with metformin ≥1000 mg and dapagliflozin 10 mg, received either a PBO, 15 mg of pioglitazone daily (PIO15), or 30 mg of pioglitazone daily (PIO30). The primary end point was the mean change in HbA1c from baseline at 24 weeks across the groups. For the 366 participants (PBO, n = 124; PIO15, n = 118; PIO30, n = 124), the mean age was 55.6 years and mean duration of diabetes was 8.7 years, with a baseline HbA1c of 7.9%. After 24 weeks, HbA1c reduced significantly in the PIO15 and PIO30 groups from baseline, with intergroup differences of −0.38% and −0.83%, respectively, compared with the PBO group. The proportion of patients with HbA1c levels <7% was significantly higher in the PIO15 and PIO30 groups than in the PBO group. The adverse event rates did not significantly differ across the groups, indicating favorable safety profiles for triple combination therapy using metformin, dapagliflozin, and pioglitazone. The addition of pioglitazone as a third oral antidiabetic medication is an appropriate option for patients with T2D inadequately controlled with metformin and dapagliflozin based on the resulting significant efficacy in glycemic control and favorable safety profile. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04885712.

Multiple genetic, metabolic, and environmental abnormalities are known to contribute to the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s dementia (AD). If all of those abnormalities were addressed it should be possible to reverse the dementia; however, that would require a suffocating volume of drugs. Nevertheless, the problem may be simplified by using available data to address, instead, the brain cells whose functions become changed as a result of the abnormalities, because at least eleven drugs are available from which to formulate a rational therapy to correct those changes. The affected brain cell types are astrocytes, oligodendrocytes, neurons, endothelial cells/pericytes, and microglia. The available drugs include clemastine, dantrolene, erythropoietin, fingolimod, fluoxetine, lithium, memantine, minocycline, pioglitazone, piracetam, and riluzole. This article describes the ways by which the individual cell types contribute to AD’s pathogenesis and how each of the drugs corrects the changes in the cell types. All five of the cell types may be involved in the pathogenesis of AD; of the 11 drugs, fingolimod, fluoxetine, lithium, memantine, and pioglitazone, each address all five of the cell types. Fingolimod only slightly addresses endothelial cells, and memantine is the weakest of the remaining four. Low doses of either two or three drugs are suggested in order to minimize the likelihood of toxicity and drug–drug interactions (including drugs used for co-morbidities). Suggested two-drug combinations are pioglitazone plus lithium and pioglitazone plus fluoxetine; a three-drug combination could add either clemastine or memantine. Clinical trials are required to validate that the suggest combinations may reverse AD.

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination (FDC) of pioglitazone and metformin supplemented with dapagliflozin (test group) with those of basal insulin supplemented with metformin (control group) in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This 16-week, prospective, randomized, open-label study enrolled patients aged 18-75 years with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels between ≥ 8% and ≤ 11%. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved HbA1c < 7% at week 16 without hypoglycemia or weight gain. The secondary endpoints included blood glucose, lipid profile, body weight, body mass index, inflammatory markers, bone Gla-protein, liver enzymes, and patient satisfaction. Among the full analysis set of 147 participants, no significant difference was observed in the primary endpoint between the test group and the control group. However, the test group had a higher percentage of patients who achieved HbA1c <7% at week 16 without hypoglycemia and experienced a weight loss of ≥3% (31.51% vs 13.51%, =0.009). Patients in the test group whose BMI≥24 kg/m also achieved a substantial achievement rate (36.73% vs 15.79%, =0.014). The test group also exhibited a greater reduction in body weight and improvements in 2-hour postprandial glucose level, systolic blood pressure, and lipid profile. Notably, combination therapy did not increase the risk of hypoglycemia or weight gain. Patients in the test group were more satisfied than those in the control group with continuing to accept pioglitazone/metformin FDC combined with dapagliflozin. In the absence of contraindications, pioglitazone/metformin FDC supplemented with dapagliflozin may serve as a safe and effective alternative to basal insulin combined with metformin for rectifying inadequate glucose control, as the former enables metabolic improvements without compromising safety. CHiCTR2000036076. https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=58825.

Melanoma is the most aggressive type of skin cancer and has very high rates of mortality. The primary objective of this study was to fabricate core-shell nanofibers as a drug delivery system using the coaxial electrospinning technique, which provides some distinct features. Polycaprolactone (PCL)-chitosan (CS)/polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) core-shell nanofibers embedded with Pioglitazone hydrochloride-loaded Nanoemulsions (PIO NEs), a general anti-diabetic drug, and Gemcitabine hydrochloride (GEM), a chemotherapeutic agent, were prepared to investigate the effects of combination of GEM and PIO against A375 melanoma skin cancer cells in vitro. The prepared PCL-CS/PVA-PIO NEs-GEM core-shell nanofibers exhibited sustained and controlled release profiles of GEM and PIO NEs over 14 days, which was fitted into various kinetic models. The data demonstrated the efficacy of nanoemulsions in improving the solubility and release of the poorly aqueous soluble drug PIO. The maximum amount released from the core-shell nanofibers reached 76.99 ± 1.5% of the GEM and 80.47 ± 2.01% of the PIO in a medium of pH 7.4. The nanofibers’ morphology, chemical composition, weight loss, and swelling behavior were evaluated. MTT and flow cytometry analyses demonstrated that the combination of PIO and GEM effectively inhibited the growth of melanoma cancer cell lines by inhibiting proliferation with cell viability of 47.07 ± 2.5%, 45.36 ± 2.8%, and 39.79 ± 1.8% after 24, 48 and 72 h, inducing G 0 /G 1 phase arrest and apoptosis, and exhibited an enhanced combinatorial effect in A375 cells in vitro. Additionally, real-time PCR analysis confirmed the induction of apoptosis by measuring gene expression levels, suggesting that the mechanism is associated with the P53 and PPARγ pathways. The generated core-shell nanofibers exhibit properties that suggest their potential as an innovative local drug delivery system, suitable for direct implantation at the tumor site for melanoma treatment through a unique combination therapy of PIO and GEM.

The identification of people at risk of cognitive impairment is essential for improving recruitment in secondary prevention trials of Alzheimer's disease. We aimed to test and qualify a biomarker risk assignment algorithm (BRAA) to identify participants at risk of developing mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease within 5 years, and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of low-dose pioglitazone to delay onset of mild cognitive impairment in these at-risk participants. In this phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, we enrolled cognitively healthy, community living participants aged 65–83 years from 57 academic affiliated and private research clinics in Australia, Germany, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA. By use of the BRAA, participants were grouped as high risk or low risk. Participants at high risk were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive oral pioglitazone (0·8 mg/day sustained release) or placebo, and all low-risk participants received placebo. Study investigators, site staff, sponsor personnel, and study participants were masked to genotype, risk assignment, and treatment assignment. The planned study duration was the time to accumulate 202 events of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease in White participants who were at high risk (the population on whom the genetic analyses that informed the BRAA development was done). Primary endpoints were time-to-event comparisons between participants at high risk and low risk given placebo (for the BRAA objective), and between participants at high risk given pioglitazone or placebo (for the efficacy objective). The primary analysis included all participants who were randomly assigned, received at least one dose of study drug, and had at least one valid post-baseline visit, with significance set at p=0·01. The safety analysis included all participants who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of study medication. An efficacy futility analysis was planned for when approximately 33% of the anticipated events occurred in the high-risk, White, non-Hispanic or Latino group. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01931566. Between Aug 28, 2013, and Dec 21, 2015, we enrolled 3494 participants (3061 at high risk and 433 at low risk). Of those participants, 1545 were randomly assigned to pioglitazone and 1516 to placebo. 1104 participants discontinued treatment (464 assigned to the pioglitazone group, 501 in the placebo high risk group, and 139 in the placebo low risk group). 3399 participants had at least one dose of study drug or placebo and at least one post-baseline follow-up visit, and were included in the efficacy analysis. 3465 participants were included in the safety analysis (1531 assigned to the pioglitazone group, 1507 in the placebo high risk group, and 427 in the placebo low risk group). In the full analysis set, 46 (3·3%) of 1406 participants at high risk given placebo had mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease, versus four (1·0%) of 402 participants at low risk given placebo (hazard ratio 3·26, 99% CI 0·85–12·45; p=0·023). 39 (2·7%) of 1430 participants at high risk given pioglitazone had mild cognitive impairment, versus 46 (3·3%) of 1406 participants at high risk given placebo (hazard ratio 0·80, 99% CI 0·45–1·40; p=0·307). In the safety analysis set, seven (0·5%) of 1531 participants at high risk given pioglitazone died versus 21 (1·4%) of 1507 participants at high risk given placebo. There were no other notable differences in adverse events between groups. The study was terminated in January, 2018, after failing to meet the non-futility threshold. Pioglitazone did not delay the onset of mild cognitive impairment. The biomarker algorithm demonstrated a 3 times enrichment of events in the high risk placebo group compared with the low risk placebo group, but did not reach the pre-specified significance threshold. Because we did not complete the study as planned, findings can only be considered exploratory. The conduct of this study could prove useful to future clinical development strategies for Alzheimer's disease prevention studies. Takeda and Zinfandel.

Background The close interplay between metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) and type 2 diabetes supports the need to identify beneficial combination therapies of antidiabetic medications targeted for the treatment of MASLD. This study aimed to investigate the complementary effects of combination therapy with pioglitazone (PIO) and empagliflozin (EMPA) on MASLD in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Methods In a randomized, open-label trial, 50 participants with type 2 diabetes and MASLD were assigned 1:1:1 to receive PIO 15 mg, EMPA 10 mg, or a combination (PIO 15 mg plus EMPA 10 mg) daily for 24 weeks. Liver fat fraction and stiffness were evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging-proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) and magnetic resonance elastography (MRE), respectively. Results Combination therapy resulted in the largest reduction in liver fat and stiffness among treatment groups. Participants experiencing a relative reduction ≥ 30% or an absolute reduction ≥ 5% in liver fat were the most prevalent in the combination group (100.0% vs. 57.1% in PIO and 87.5% in EMPA, p  = 0.010). In addition, the combination group showed the highest proportion of individuals with a relative reduction ≥ 30% in liver fat and ≥ 20% in liver stiffness than the monotherapy groups (50.0% vs. 21.4% in PIO and 6.3% in EMPA, p  = 0.029). Combination therapy did not induce the changes in subcutaneous fat deposition observed in the monotherapy groups, but it did show the most substantial reduction in visceral fat, concurrently showing the largest increase in adiponectin level across the three groups ( p  = 0.036). Conclusions Combination therapy of PIO with EMPA showed synergistic benefits for MASLD in individuals with type 2 diabetes, compensating for the inadequate or unfavorable effects of monotherapies; ClincialTrials.gov number, NCT03646292. Trial registration The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (registration number: NCT03646292).

RationaleProinflammatory processes have been implicated in alcohol addiction, craving, and relapse, while studies in experimental animals have suggested that activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ) inhibits proinflammatory signaling. Accordingly, it is hypothesized that medications with PPARγ activity may have therapeutic potential in alcohol dependence.ObjectivesWe conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled mechanistic proof of principle study in alcohol-dependent inpatients to investigate the effect of pioglitazone on alcohol craving.MethodsParticipants were treated for withdrawal, if needed, and then randomized to pioglitazone (target dose 45 mg/day) or placebo. Once at target dose, they completed two experimental manipulations: guided imagery, which used personalized auditory scripts to induce alcohol cravings, and a low-dose challenge with i.v. lipopolysaccharide (LPS; 0.8 ng/kg) or placebo, on two separate sessions, in counterbalanced order. Behavioral and endocrine responses as well as CSF levels of proinflammatory cytokines were evaluated.ResultsThe study was prematurely terminated after randomization of 16 subjects, following an independent review that established a high risk of myopathy in the active treatment group. Analysis of those who completed the study indicated that pioglitazone was associated with elevated, rather than suppressed alcohol cravings in response to alcohol-associated stimuli. LPS did not induce cravings for alcohol and thus did not lend itself to evaluating pioglitazone effects; however, pioglitazone increased the neuroendocrine stress response to LPS. CSF levels of IL-6, TNF-α, or MCP-1 were unaffected by pioglitazone treatment.ConclusionsBoth safety and efficacy biomarker data suggest that pioglitazone lacks potential as a medication for the treatment of alcohol dependence.Clinical trial registrationNCT01631630

Evogliptin is a newly developed oral glucose-lowering medication of the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitor class for type 2 diabetes mellitus. The combination of a DPP-4 inhibitor with pioglitazone is a promising therapeutic option. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interaction between evogliptin and pioglitazone. A randomized, open-label, multiple-dose, three-treatment, three-period, six-sequence crossover study was conducted in healthy Korean male subjects. All subjects received evogliptin 5 mg once daily for 7 days (EVO), pioglitazone 30 mg once daily for 7 days (PIO) and co-administration of evogliptin 5 mg and pioglitazone 30 mg once daily for 7 days (EVO+PIO) according to the assigned sequence and period. Serial blood samples were collected for 24 hours for pharmacokinetic analysis and 3 hours after the oral glucose tolerance test for the pharmacodynamic analysis. Thirty-four subjects completed the study. EVO+PIO and EVO showed a similar maximum plasma concentration at steady state (C ) and area under the concentration-time curve during the dosing interval at the steady state (AUC ) of evogliptin, with geometric mean ratios (GMRs) (90% confidence interval (CI)) of 1.01 (0.97-1.05) and 1.01 (0.98-1.04), respectively. EVO+PIO and PIO showed a similar C and AUC of pioglitazone, with GMRs (90% CI) of 1.07 (0.99-1.17) and 1.08 (0.99-1.17), respectively. Reduction of the glucose level after EVO+PIO was larger compared to PIO and similar with EVO. Concomitant administration of evogliptin and pioglitazone showed similar glucose-lowering effects with those of evogliptin alone without pharmacokinetic interactions when compared to the intake of each drug alone.

The activation of the PPARG transcription factor is linked to reduced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) growth. Bioinformatics, cheminformatics, and molecular docking/dynamics studies assessing pioglitazone and telmisartan as repurposed PPARG agonists for treating NSCLC with a targeted delivery system was done. Bioinformatics confirmed that the expression of the PPARG gene can predict outcomes in lung adenocarcinoma and is related to immune cells present in the tumor. Cheminformatics data showed that pioglitazone and telmisartan have a strong attraction to the PPARG receptor, with good efficiency as ligands. Both drugs were found to be lipophilic, suggesting compatibility with a targeted delivery formulation that may include albumin. Further cheminformatics predictions highlighted systemic toxicity values and the need for targeted delivery to minimize toxic side effects. Molecular docking and dynamics simulations showed that the telmisartan-MyoVc cargo domain complex was strong and stable during an 18 ns simulation period. Bioinformatics and cheminformatics data support pioglitazone and telmisartan as promising repurposed drugs for LUAC, highlighting their lipophilicity and compatibility with exosomal components like albumin. Cheminformatics also pointed out potential off-target effects and hepatotoxicity, emphasizing the importance of exosomal targeted delivery. Molecular docking and MD simulations confirmed the affinity and stability of drug-exosomal vehicle complexes. The proposed engineering of exosomal cargo for targeted delivery of these drugs to lung cells could enhance NSCLC treatment and address drug resistance while minimizing systemic toxicity.

Background The potential for PPAR agonists to positively affect risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is of persistent attention. The PRESS XII study primarily aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of saroglitazar (2 mg and 4 mg) as compared to pioglitazone 30 mg on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods In this randomized double-blind study, patients with T2DM [glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥ 7.5%] were enrolled from 39 sites in India. Patients received once-daily doses of either saroglitazar or pioglitazone (1:1:1 allocation ratio) for a total of 24 weeks. Patients were continued in a double blind extension period for an additional 32 weeks. Efficacy evaluations of glycemic parameters [HbA1c (Primary endpoint at week 24), FPG and PPG] and other lipid parameters (TG, LDL-C, VLDL-C, HDL-C, TC, Non HDL-C, Apo A1 and Apo B) were conducted at week 12, 24 and 56 and compared to the baseline levels. The efficacy analyses were performed by using paired t-test and ANCOVA model. Results A total of 1155 patients were enrolled in this study. The baseline characteristics were similar between the three treatment groups. The within group mean (± SD) change in HbA1c (%) from baseline of the saroglitazar (2 mg and 4 mg) and pioglitazone treatment groups at week 24 were: − 1.38 ± 1.99 for saroglitazar 2 mg; − 1.47 ± 1.92 for saroglitazar 4 mg and − 1.41 ± 1.86 for pioglitazone, respectively. Statistically significant reduction from baseline in HbA1c was observed in each treatment group at week 24 with p-value < 0.016. There was a significant reduction in TG, LDL-C, VLDL-C, TC and Non HDL-C with a significant increase in HDL-C from baseline levels (< 0.016). Most of the AE’s were ‘mild’ to ‘moderate’ in severity and were resolved by the completion of the study. Conclusions Saroglitazar effectively improved glycemic control and lipid parameters over 56 weeks in patients of T2DM receiving background metformin therapy and has a promising potential to reduce the cardiovascular risk in T2DM patients. Trial registration CTRI/2015/09/006203, dated 22/09/2015