4.3 Article

Favorable effect of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, dapagliflozin, on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease compared with pioglitazone

期刊

JOURNAL OF DIABETES INVESTIGATION
卷 12, 期 7, 页码 1272-1277

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jdi.13457

关键词

Fatty liver; Sodium– glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor; Type 2 diabetes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dapagliflozin may be more beneficial than pioglitazone for patients with NAFLD, and improvements in FLI are closely related to glycemic control.
Aims/Introduction Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, as well as thiazolidines, suppress nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD); however, few comparative studies have been reported. Dapagliflozin has shown non-inferiority compared with pioglitazone for glycemic control, and superiority regarding weight reduction in patients with type 2 diabetes. We carried out a secondary analysis for the favorable effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors for NAFLD. Materials and Methods In this multicenter, open-label, prospective, randomized, parallel-group comparison trial, patients taking pioglitazone for >= 12 weeks were randomly switched to dapagliflozin or continued pioglitazone for a further 24 weeks. The fatty liver index (FLI), consisting of body mass index, triglycerides, waist circumference and gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase, was used for the evaluation of NAFLD. Results A total of 53 participants with NAFLD (27 dapagliflozin; 26 pioglitazone) were included in this analysis. FLI decreased significantly in the dapagliflozin group (48.7 +/- 23.4 to 42.1 +/- 23.9) compared with the pioglitazone group (49.0 +/- 26.1 to 51.1 +/- 25.8; P < 0.01). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that the changes in FLI had a significantly positive correlation with changes in glycated hemoglobin (P = 0.03) and insulin level (P < 0.01) in the dapagliflozin group. Conclusion Dapagliflozin might be more beneficial than pioglitazone in patients with NAFLD. Improvements in FLI would be closely related to glycemic control.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据