Aleglitazar

To assess the impact of age on the prognostic value of NT-proBNP concentration in patients with type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) stabilised after an Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS).

The AleCardio study compared aleglitazar with placebo in 7226 patients with T2DM and recent ACS. Patients with heart failure were excluded. Median follow-up was 104 weeks. Baseline NT-proBNP plasma concentration was measured centrally. Multivariable Cox regression was used to determine the mortality predictive information provided by NT-proBNP across age groups.

Median age was 61y (IQR 54, 67). NT-proBNP concentration increased by quartile (Q) of age (median 264, 318, 391, and 588 pg/ml). Compared to Q1, patients in Q4 of NT-proBNP had higher (p < 0.001) adjusted HR for all-cause (aHR 6.9; 95 % CI 4.0-12) and cardiovascular (11; 5.4-23) death. Within each age Q, baseline NT-proBNP in patients who died was 3 times higher than in survivors (all p < 0.001). When age and NT-proBNP levels were modeled as continuous variables, their interaction term was nonsignificant. The relative prognostic information provided by NT-proBNP (percent of total X²) increased from 38 % in age Q1 to 75 % in age Q4 for mortality, and from 50 % to 88 % for CV death.

Among patients with T2DM stabilised after an ACS, NT-proBNP level predicts death irrespective of age.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) are nuclear receptor-type transcription factors that consist of three subtypes (α, γ, and β/δ) with distinct functions and PPAR dual/pan agonists are expected to be the next generation of drugs for metabolic diseases. Saroglitazar is the first clinically approved PPARα/γ dual agonist for treatment of diabetic dyslipidemia and is currently in clinical trials to treat non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD); however, the structural information of its interaction with PPARα/γ remains unknown. We recently revealed the high-resolution co-crystal structure of saroglitazar and the PPARα-ligand binding domain (LBD) through X-ray crystallography, and in this study, we report the structure of saroglitazar and the PPARγ-LBD. Saroglitazar was located at the center of "Y"-shaped PPARγ-ligand-binding pocket (LBP), just as it was in the respective region of PPARα-LBP. Its carboxylic acid was attached to four amino acids (Ser289/His323/His449/Thr473), which contributes to the stabilization of Activating Function-2 helix 12, and its phenylpyrrole moiety was rotated 121.8 degrees in PPARγ-LBD from that in PPARα-LBD to interact with Phe264. PPARδ-LBD has the consensus four amino acids (Thr253/His287/His413/Tyr437) towards the carboxylic acids of its ligands, but it seems to lack sufficient space to accept saroglitazar because of the steric hindrance between the Trp228 or Arg248 residue of PPARδ-LBD and its methylthiophenyl moiety. Accordingly, in a coactivator recruitment assay, saroglitazar activated PPARα-LBD and PPARγ-LBD but not PPARδ-LBD, whereas glycine substitution of either Trp228, Arg248, or both of PPARδ-LBD conferred saroglitazar concentration-dependent activation. Our findings may be valuable in the molecular design of PPARα/γ dual or PPARα/γ/δ pan agonists.