Why the study?
Does saxagliptin improve cardiac function and reduce mortality in diabetic rats following myocardial infarction?
Does saxagliptin improve cardiac function and reduce mortality in diabetic rats following myocardial infarction?
Saxagliptin improves cardiac function and reduces mortality after MI in diabetic rats via SDF-1α potentiation, independent of GLP-1 and glucose lowering.
BACKGROUND: In addition to degrading glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inactivates several chemokines, including stromal cell-derived factor-1α (SDF-1α), a pro-angiogenic and cardiomyocyte protective protein. We hypothesized that DPP-4 inhibition may confer benefit following myocardial infarction (MI) in the diabetic setting as a consequence of enhanced SDF-1α availability rather than potentiating GLP-1. To test this we compared the effects of saxagliptin with those of liraglutide and used the SDF-1α receptor (CXCR4) antagonist plerixafor. METHODS: Studies were conducted in streptozotocin-diabetic rats. Rats were randomized to receive saxagliptin (10 mg/kg per day), liraglutide (0.2 mg/kg, s.c., b.i.d.), plerixafor (1 mg/kg per day, s.c.), saxagliptin plus plerixafor or vehicle (1% phosphate-buffered saline). Two weeks later, rats underwent experimental MI, with cardiac function examined 4 weeks after MI. RESULTS: Glycemic control and MI size were similar in all groups. Four weeks after MI, mortality was reduced in saxagliptin-treated rats compared with vehicle treatment (P < 0.05). Furthermore, rats receiving saxagliptin had improved cardiac function compared with vehicle-treated rats (P < 0.05). Antagonism of CXCR4 prevented the improvement in cardiac function in saxagliptin-treated rats and was associated with increased mortality (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Saxagliptin-mediated DPP-4 inhibition, but not liraglutide-mediated GLP-1R agonism, improved cardiac function after MI independent of glucose lowering. These findings suggest that non-GLP-1 actions of DPP-4 inhibition, such as SDF-1α potentiation, mediate biological effects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Connelly et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: