4.5 Review

Hope and fear for new classes of type 2 diabetes drugs: is there preclinical evidence that incretin-based therapies alter pancreatic morphology?

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENDOCRINOLOGY
Volume 221, Issue 1, Pages T43-T61

Publisher

BIOSCIENTIFICA LTD
DOI: 10.1530/JOE-13-0577

Keywords

GLP1; DPP4; islets; beta-cells; pancreatitis; mice; rats

Funding

  1. Sanofi-Aventis
  2. Boehringer Ingelheim
  3. MSD
  4. GSK
  5. Servier
  6. Medtronic
  7. AZ/BMS

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Incretin-based therapies appear to offer many advantages over other approaches for treating type 2 diabetes. Some preclinical studies have suggested that chronic activation of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor (GLP1R) signalling in the pancreas may result in the proliferation of islet beta-cells and an increase in beta-cell mass. This provided hope that enhancing GLP1 action could potentially alter the natural progression of type 2 diabetes. However, to date, there has been no evidence from clinical trials suggesting that GLP1R agonists or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors can increase beta-cell mass. Nevertheless, while the proliferative capacity of these agents remains controversial, some studies have raised concerns that they could potentially contribute to the development of pancreatitis and hence increase the risk of pancreatic cancer. Currently, there are very limited clinical data to directly assess these potential benefits and risks of incretin-based therapies. However, a review of the preclinical studies indicates that incretin-based therapies probably have only a limited capacity to regenerate pancreatic beta-cells, but may be useful for preserving any remaining beta-cells in type 2 diabetes. In addition, the majority of preclinical evidence does not support the notion that GLP1R agonists or DPP4 inhibitors cause pancreatitis. Journal of Endocrinology

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available