Effect of treatment with GLP-1R agonists on the urinary peptidome of T2DM patients

Sonnal Lohia, Justyna Siwy, Emmanouil Mavrogeorgis, Susanne Eder, Stefanie Thoeni, Gert Mayer, Harald Mischak, Antonia Vlahou, Vera Jankowski
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.05.03.23289439

Abstract

Aim Type II Diabetes mellitus (T2DM) accounts for approximately 90% of all DM cases in the world; and is diagnosed with increased levels of blood glucose or hyperglycemia. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists have established an increased capability to target directly or indirectly six core defects associated with T2DM, while, the underlying molecular mechanisms of these pharmacological effects are not fully known. This exploratory study was conducted to analyze the effect of treatment with GLP-1R agonists on the urinary peptidome of T2DM patients.

Material and Methods Urine samples of thirty-two T2DM patients from the PROVALID study (A Prospective Cohort Study in Patients with T2DM for Validation of Biomarkers) were collected at pre- and post-treatment with GLP-1R agonist drugs, and analyzed by capillary electrophoresis coupled to mass spectrometry (CE-MS).

Results In total, 329 urinary peptides were identified, of which 70 were significantly affected by the GLP-1R agonist treatment; fragmenting from 26 different proteins. The downregulation of MMP proteases, based on the concordant downregulation of urinary collagen peptides with GLP-1R agonist treatment was highlighted in the study. Treatment also resulted in the downregulation of peptides from SERPINA1, APOC3, CD99, CPSF6, CRNN, SERPINA6, HBA2, MB, VGF, PIGR and TTR, many of which were previously found associated with increased kidney and/or vascular damage, indicating beneficial effect of GLP-1R agonists.

Conclusions The novel findings in this study, indicate potential molecular mechanisms of GLP-1R agonists in the context of management of T2DM and prevention or delaying the progression of its associated diseases.

Introduction

In 2021, the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) predicted a five-fold increase in the worldwide adult population of Diabetes mellitus, from 150 million in 20001 to 783 million in 20452; of which Type II Diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is said to account for approximately 90% of all cases3. T2DM is characterized as a chronic disease4 and is diagnosed with increased levels of blood glucose or hyperglycemia5. T2DM has been associated with macrovascular complications, such as atherosclerosis, myocardial infarction and diabetic foot syndrome; as well as microvascular complications, such as neuropathy, retinopathy, and nephropathy6-8. Approximately 44% of all T2DM cases have been linked to obesity, correlating an exponential increase in their worldwide prevalence9,10. Additionally, the World Health Organization (WHO) predicts 57.8% of the world population to be overweight and obese by 203011.

Since no cure exists, efforts to control and treat T2DM have escalated12. The American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends healthy lifestyle changes as the first-in-line response, followed by metformin-based pharmaceutical interventions13. The approach of lowering glucose plasma levels, remains the most sought-after treatment and has recently witnessed novel and effective advances. These alongside metformin, commonly include treatment with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and insulin pumps followed by continuous monitoring of glucose levels8. Furthermore, research focusing on treatment paradigms targeting the ‘ominous octet’ of T2DM, implicated in the development and progression of hyperglycemia, has gained momentum in the last couple of decades.

The GLP-1R agonists have dramatically transformed patient care guidelines for T2DM14. In comparison to the other antihyperglycemic medications, GLP-1R agonists have established an increased capability to target directly or indirectly six out of the eight core defects associated with T2DM15-17. In response to food intake, the intestinal L-cells dependent secretion of GLP-1 is significantly impaired in T2DM patients, which affects the pancreatic β cells dependent insulin secretion; eventually resulting in hyperglycemia18-20. The synthetically produced GLP-1R agonists stimulate GLP-1R, in a similar fashion as the native GLP-1. Treatment benefits of peptide-based GLP-1R agonists include glycemic control, weight loss, delayed onset of macroalbuminuria, prevention of clinical hyperglycemic episodes and cardiovascular events, and reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline; that in turn indirectly result in the inhibition of glucagon secretion and increased secretion of insulin with minimal hypoglycemic risks8,21-23.

Since their first approval in 2005, seven GLP-1R agonists drugs have been developed for glycemic control in T2DM patients. In 2021, Trujillo et al., described fourteen head-to-head trials conducted on these seven GLP-1R agonists, the results of which continue to establish the benefits of this class of drugs in treatment of T2DM patients. The authors further highlighted studies that have published beneficial cardiovascular and renal outcomes of the treatment; however, the results, in terms of the magnitude for glycemic control and adverse effects are not consistent24. The focus of research thus needs to shift from investigating the pharmacological effects of GLP-1R agonists, to understanding the underlying molecular mechanisms. Therefore, in this exploratory study, we aimed to assess the effect of treatment with GLP-1R agonists on the urinary peptidome of T2DM patients, in an untargeted peptidomics approach.

Recent advances in the analyses of urinary proteome and peptidome, have paved way for the detection of alterations at both pathological as well as physiological levels in chronic diseases25. Urine-based omics studies have especially garnered relevance, due to the ease of sample collection, longer stability of the peptides, complex composition (from blood, kidney, and bladder) and the possibility of larger cohort studies because of its non-invasive approach. In addition, the water soluble and charged nature of urinary peptides enable their uncomplicated mass spectrometric (MS) based detections26. The urinary peptidomic analysis in this study was performed by a capillary electrophoresis coupled to mass spectrometry (CE-MS) technique, which supports the identification of naturally occurring urinary peptides and peptidomic changes in response to drug interventions27.

Materials and Methods

Study population and sample collection

Used were urine samples of thirty-two T2DM patients, administered renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitor medications at the primary health care level, recruited within the Prospective Cohort Study in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus for Validation of Biomarkers (PROVALID) study. PROVALID is an observational, prospective cohort study in five European countries, as described previously28. Consent was obtained from all the patients. Urine samples were collected from T2DM patients at their visit just before GLP-1R agonists prescription (Liraglutide 1.2-6 mg/ml or Exenatide 0.01-0.25 mg/ml or Lixisenatide 0.01-0.02 mg/ml) and labelled as pre-treatment samples. The urine samples collected at the first visit after the treatment initiation were labelled as post-treatment samples. All urine samples were stored at -20°C until analysis.

Sample preparation and CE-MS analysis

The standard operating protocols describing urine sample preparation and extraction of peptides followed in this study, have been previously published29. The CE-MS analysis was conducted as described in detail by Zurbig et al.,30 utilizing a P/ACE MDQ capillary electrophoresis system (Beckman Coulter, Fullerton, CA, USA) coupled with a Micro-TOF II MS (Bruker Daltonic, Bremen, Germany) instrument. Literary evidence on the advantages of CE-MS analysis in terms of reproducibility, sensitivity, precision and accuracy are extensively available31. The relative peptide intensities were normalized based on an internal standard of 29 stable collagen peptides, that can be detected naturally in urine samples of healthy and diseased. This calibration was performed for normalizing the variability in peptide intensities32. The resulting peptides and their normalized intensity values were stored in an internal Microsoft SQL database33, which enabled the comparison of the pre- and post-treatment urinary peptide profiles. For identification of the peptide sequences, MS/MS based analysis by a Dionex Ultimate 3000 RSLS nanoflow system (Dionex, Camberley, UK) or a Beckman P/ACE MDQ CE that was coupled to an Orbitrap Velos MS instrument (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Boston, MA, USA) was performed, as described previously34.

Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses in this study were performed using R programming (R version 4.2.2, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria with IDE: R Studio Version 1.2.5, Boston, MA, USA). As a pre-requisite for the analysis, thresholds of 30% peptide frequency (in at least one treatment group) and area under the curve (AUC) value ≥ 0.60 were applied. The normally distributed and continuous datasets generated from CE-MS based peptide profiles of the urine samples, obtained from pre-treatment (n=32) and post-treatment (n=32); were compared by a paired Wilcoxon rank-sum test, using the row_wilcoxon_paired() function from the matrixTests package. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant, which was further adjusted for false discovery rates (FDR) by the Benjamini-Hochberg method35. All the plots in this manuscript were created using the ggplot() function from the ggplot2 package.

Bioinformatic - Proteasix analysis

The proteolytic events responsible for the secretion of the statistically significant urinary peptides were investigated by the open-source online tool “Proteasix” (http://www.proteasix.org, accessed on 6 March 2023). In brief, Proteasix retrieves information from literature and databases like MEROPs, UniProt Knoweldgebase (KB) and CutDB. The “Observed Prediction tool” of Proteasix with search parameters set to default, was utilized in this study.

Results

Study design

The exploratory and untargeted urinary peptidomic approach in this study, was conducted to analyze the effect of GLP-1R agonist treatment on the urinary peptidome of T2DM patients, as illustrated in Figure 1. Briefly, urine samples from thirty-two T2DM patients were collected at two time points: pre-treatment and post-treatment, with a time interval of 11.5 ± 3.72 months in between. Intervention with GLP-1R agonist was introduced at 4.4 ± 4.11 months from pre-treatment visit and the treatment duration until the post-treatment visit was 6.9 ± 3.59 months.

Figure 1:
Figure 1:

Urine samples from thirty-two T2DM patients were collected at two time points; pre-treatment and post-treatment with the intervention of GLP-1R agonists at 4.4 ± 4.11 months from first sample collection. Naturally occurring urinary peptides were quantified in the urine samples by CE-MS analysis, followed by statistical and bioinformatic analysis of the CE-MS generated urinary peptide profiles.

Clinical information

The clinical information of all the thirty-two T2DM patients participating in this study, from pre- and post-treatment visits with GLP-1R agonists are provided in the Table 1. The mean age for the patients at first sample collection was 63.7 ± 7.25 years and 56.3% of them were females. As depicted in the Table 1, no statistically significant difference between the clinical levels of Hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C), body weight (BW), body mass index (BMI), systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP), eGFR, albuminuria to creatinine ratio (UACR) and urinary creatinine (UCREA) was observed after the treatment with GLP-1R agonists.

View this table:
Table 1:

Clinical information of the T2DM patients in mean ± SD; from pre- and post-treatment with GLP-1R agonists

Peptidomic analysis

Following their collection, the urine samples subjected to CE-MS analysis, generated in total sixty-four urinary peptide profiles (pre-treatment, n=32 and post-treatment, n=32). The normalized urinary peptide profiles were statistically analyzed by Wilcoxon-rank sum test, pair-wise (pre- and post-treatment per patient). A threshold of AUC values ≥ 0.60 along with a frequency threshold of 30% (i.e., ≥ 10 out of 32 datasets) in at least one treatment group, was applied to the peptide data. This analysis resulted in a list of 329 sequenced peptides to be further investigated. Statistical assessment including Benjamini-Hochberg FDR adjustment yielded a list of 70 statistically significant peptides (adjusted p-value < 0.05) affected by the GLP-1R agonist treatment, detailed information of which is provided in Table S1. The distribution of peptide intensity of these 70 statistically significant peptides (red spots) amongst the 329 peptides was also examined (Figure 2a). Assessing the distribution in regulation of all the 329 peptides in response to the treatment (Figure 2b), highlighted the downregulation of urinary peptides in the majority of the statistically significant peptides (66 out of 70 peptides).

Figure 2:
Figure 2:

(a) Distribution of peptide intensity for all the 329 sequenced urinary peptides identified in this study. (b) Volcano plot depicting the distribution in regulation of the 329 peptides in response to GLP-1R agonist treatment. (c) The distribution of the 70 statistically significant urinary peptide profiles in pre- and post-treatment of T2DM patients, as obtained from CE-MS analysis.

The 70 statistically significant peptides were identified as fragments of 26 proteins, as shown in Table 2. Most of the peptides (59 out of 70) originated from the collagen family of proteins and 41 out of the 59 collagen peptides belonged in majority to three collagen proteins, namely, collagen alpha-1(III) chain (P02461; COL3A1; n=16), collagen alpha-1(I) chain (P02452; COL1A1; n=15) and collagen alpha-2(I) chain (P08123; COL1A2; n=10). All the remaining identified 11 (out of 70) urinary peptides came from different proteins, alpha-1-antitrypsin (P01009; SERPINA1), apolipoprotein C-III (P02656; APOC3), CD99 antigen (P14209; CD99), cleavage and polyadenylation specificity factor subunit 6 (Q16630; CPSF6), Cornulin (Q9UBG3; CRNN), corticosteroid-binding globulin (P08185; SERPINA6), hemoglobin subunit alpha (P69905; HBA1; HBA2), myoglobin (P02144; MB), neurosecretory protein VGF (O15240; VGF), polymeric immunoglobulin receptor (P01833; PIGR) and transthyretin (P02766; TTR). The 4 out of the 70 urinary peptides showing a statistically significant upregulation on treatment with GLP-1R agonists in T2DM patients, as observed in Figure 2b, were characterized as COL3A1 (n=3) and COL1A2 (n=1) peptides (Table 2).

View this table:
Table 2:

List of 26 proteins yielding the 70 statistically significant urinary peptides, in response to GLP-1R agonists treatment. (↓ refers to down regulation and ↑ refers to upregulation)

Since several peptides from COL1A1 and COL3A1 were found significantly associated with treatment, we investigated the alignment of the peptides in the protein structure. The respective identified peptide sequences were aligned with the primary structure of the proteins, as shown in Figure 3a and Figure 3c, respectively. For both proteins, peptides appeared equally distributed, no specific hot spot became apparent.

Figure 3:
Figure 3:

(a) Alignment of identified peptide sequences in this study in the primary structure of protein COL1A1. (b) Box and Whisker plots depicting the down-regulation of all the COL1A1 peptides, in response to GLP-1R agonists treatment. (c) Alignment of identified peptide sequences in this study in the primary structure of protein COL3A1. (d) Box and Whisker plots depicting the up- and down-regulation of all the COL3A1 peptides, in response to GLP-1R agonists treatment. In (a) and (c), the amino acids in green and red depict the down-regulated and up-regulated peptide sequences, respectively.

Analysis of proteases

To uncover plausible molecular mechanisms responsible for the observed impact of GLP-1R agonists treatment on urinary peptides in T2DM patients, the proteases potentially responsible for cleavage of the 70 statistically significant peptides were investigated using Proteasix. In total, 10 endopeptidases were retrieved as a result of the default search with the “Observed Prediction tool” of Proteasix, putatively responsible for cleaving 38 urinary peptides (36 downregulated and 2 upregulated) out of the 70 urinary peptides. The results are provided in Table S2. Most of the predicted endopeptidases belonged to the matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) family of proteases (7 out of 10 proteases), responsible for cleaving peptides at both the N’ and C’ terminals. Further proteases predicted as potentially responsible for cleaving the N’ terminal belonged to the cathepsin family (CTSL and CTSD) while that cleaving at the C’ terminus was A disintegrin and metalloproteinase with thrombospondin motifs 5 (ADAMTS5).

Discussion

In the last decade, GLP-1R agonists have been the recommended and preferred second line treatment for T2DM patients. Despite the various advantages of GLP-1R agonists over other anti-hyperglycemic drugs, the underlying molecular mechanisms of treatment with GLP-1R agonists have not been studied in-depth. Aiming to understand the effect of GLP-1R agonist treatment on T2DM patients, the urinary peptidome of thirty-two T2DM patients were analyzed for the first time in this study, using the CE-MS technology. The untargeted peptidomic analysis coupled with statistical tools identified 70 sequenced peptide fragments from 26 proteins, as statistically significantly different (adjusting for multiple testing) in abundance between the pre- and post-treatment samples. Uniform distribution of intensity of the 70 peptides (red spots in Figure 2a), emphasized that their observed significant change with GLP-1R agonist treatment was not a function of abundance in the urine samples. For most of these 70 peptides, a comparative analysis further revealed a combined downregulation with GLP-1R agonist treatment (66/70 peptides).

Along these lines, collectively, all the non-collagen peptides (11 out of 70) showed lower abundance after GLP-1R agonist treatment and each was generated from a different protein namely, SERPINA1, APOC3, CD99, CPSF6, CRNN, SERPINA6, HBA2, MB, VGF, PIGR and TTR. In studies analyzing the effect of Liraglutide (GLP-1R agonist type) on T2DM patients, Rafiullah et al.,36 reported the downregulation of the urinary protein SERPINA1 and Adiels et al.,37 reported decreased secretion of APOC3, respectively with treatment. No literature was found reporting regulation of CD99, CPSF6, HBA2, MB and TTR by GLP-1R agonist treatment. However, impact of diabetes and/or obesity on these molecules has been reported: CD99 transcripts have been stated to up-regulate in T2DM profiles38; CPSF6 indirectly modulates insulin secretion39; HBA2, a commonly known marker for anemia and β-thalassaemia, interferes with glycemic markers of T2DM patients40. In addition, elevated levels of MB, a known cardiac marker, were reported in T2DM patients41 and increased levels of TTR have been associated with glucose intolerance, obesity and T2DM42. Benchoula et al.,43 in their extensive review reported that VGF is expected to induce obesity, while also playing a role in lipolysis and insulin secretion, hence, acting as a potential target in T2DM therapy. The results in this study may therefore indicate towards the further beneficial effect of GLP-1R agonists in downregulation of CD99, CPSF6, HBA2, MB, TTR and VGF peptides. No evidence on the association of SERPINA6 and PIGR protein with T2DM and/or GLP-1R agonists treatment could be found in the literature.

On the other hand, the remaining 59 out of the 70 statistically significant urinary peptides, majorly generated from three prominent collagen proteins COL3A1 (n=16), COL1A1 (n=15) and COL1A2 (n=10). Recently, He et al.,44 reported about the high abundance of collagen peptides observed in urine samples, as a result of proline hydroxylation which plausibly inhibits its reabsorption in the kidney. 55 out of the 59 collagen peptides were observed to be significantly downregulated with GLP-1R agonists treatment in the T2DM urinary proteome, while 4 peptides (COL3A1; n=3 and COL1A2; n=1) showed a significant upregulation on treatment. In-line with the extensive recent report by Mavrogeorgis et al.,45 all the urinary collagen peptides identified in this study were devoid of the signal peptide, N-terminal pro-peptide and C-terminal pro-peptide; corresponding only to the mature protein region (Figure 3a and 3c). The observed downregulation of the collagen peptides in our study could potentially represent rather an attenuated degradation of the mature collagen protein than resulting from protein synthesis or protein assembling processes.

To further corroborate the above speculation, endopeptidases responsible for putatively cleaving the 70 statistically significant peptides were analyzed with Proteasix. The MMP family of proteases accounted for cleaving the maximum statistically significant peptides (89% of the cleavage sites, i.e., 34 out of the 38 urinary peptides); majorly by MMP2 (21.1%), MMP9 (21.1%) and MMP13 (15.5%). The suggested downregulation in the activity of MMP peptidases as observed by decrease in intensity of collagen peptides in this study, is in-line with literature. Down-regulation in expression of MMP9 was observed on treatment with Liraglutide in a study that included induced-DM rabbit models46. In an another study, 45% and 60% reduction in activity of MMP2 and MMP9, respectively, in addition to 60% reduced COL1A1 levels, was observed in a male C57BL/6 mice on treatment with Semaglutide (GLP-1R agonist type)47. Research groups exploring the effect of Exenatide (GLP-1R agonist type) treatment on tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α human coronary artery smooth muscle cells48 and human retinal pigment epithelium cells49, reported the downregulated expression of MMP2 and MMP9, respectively on treatment. Another study analyzing atherosclerosis associated biomarkers in T2DM female subjects, reported decrease in MMP2 and MMP9 levels, with an increase in GLP-1 and GLP-1R levels50. Interestingly, treatment of Human SW1353 with Dulaglutide (GLP-1R agonist type)51 and Fibroblast-like synoviocytes cell lines with Exenatide52, also resulted in the downregulation of MMP13 and ADAMTS5 proteases.

To conclude, this untargeted peptidomic analysis to identify the effect of GLP-1R agonists treatment on the urinary peptidome of T2DM patients, indicated as a prominent finding the downregulation of MMP proteases, as identified by the downregulation of urinary collagen peptides on GLP-1R agonists treatment. Treatment with GLP-1R agonists also resulted in the decrease of SERPINA1, APOC3, CD99, CPSF6, CRNN, SERPINA6, HBA2, MB, VGF, PIGR and TTR peptides; indicating a potential benefit as many of these proteins express increased levels in T2DM patients. The results also merit the possibility of larger cohort studies to further understand the underlying molecular mechanisms behind the findings.

Data Availability

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest. Author H.M. is the founder and co-owner of Mosaiques Diagnostics (Hannover, Germany). Authors E.M. and J.S. are employed by Mosaiques Diagnostics.

Funding

This work was supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program by grant No 860329 (Marie-Curie ITN “STRATEGY-CKD”) and No 848011 (“DC-ren”).

Acknowledgments

Author S.L. would like to extend deepest gratitude to the members of Vlahou Lab at BRFAA, Greece and Mosaiques Diagnostics, Germany. Author V.J. is funded by the ‘Deutsche Forschunggemeinschaft’ (DFG, German Research Foundation) through the Transregional Collaborative Research Centre (TRR 219; Project-ID 322900939), (subproject S-03), (INST 948/4S-1); CRU 5011 project number 445703531. Authors H.M., A.V. and V.J. are funded by the Cost-Action CA 21165, IZKF Multiorgan complexity in Friedreich Ataxia, CA201165.

Footnotes

  • slohia{at}bioacademy.gr (S.L.); vlahoua{at}bioacademy.gr (A.V.)

  • mavrogeorgis{at}mosaiques.de (E.M.); vjankowski{at}ukaachen.de (V.J.)

  • siwy{at}mosaiques-diagnostics.com (J.S.); mischak{at}mosaiques.de (H.M.)

  • susanne.eder{at}i-med.ac.at (S.E.); stefanie.thoeni{at}i-med.ac.at (S.T); gert.mayer{at}i-med.ac.at (G.M.)

References

  1. 1.↵
    Cho NH, Shaw JE, Karuranga S, et al. IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global estimates of diabetes prevalence for 2017 and projections for 2045. Diabetes research and clinical practice. Apr 2018;138:271–281. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2018.02.023
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    Sun H, Saeedi P, Karuranga S, et al. IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global, regional and country-level diabetes prevalence estimates for 2021 and projections for 2045. Diabetes research and clinical practice. Jan 2022;183:109119. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2021.109119
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    Kotwas A, Karakiewicz B, Zabielska P, Wieder-Huszla S, Jurczak A. Epidemiological factors for type 2 diabetes mellitus: evidence from the Global Burden of Disease. Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique. Jun 22 2021;79(1):110. doi:10.1186/s13690-021-00632-1
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    Tinajero MG, Malik VS. An Update on the Epidemiology of Type 2 Diabetes: A Global Perspective. Review. Endocrinology and metabolism clinics of North America. Sep 2021;50(3):337–355. doi:10.1016/j.ecl.2021.05.013
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. 5.↵
    Schmidt AM. Highlighting Diabetes Mellitus: The Epidemic Continues. Review. Arteriosclerosis, thrombosis, and vascular biology. Jan 2018;38(1):e1–e8. doi:10.1161/ATVBAHA.117.310221
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    Beckman JA, Creager MA. Vascular Complications of Diabetes. Review. Circulation research. May 27 2016;118(11):1771–85. doi:10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.306884
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.
    Thipsawat S. Early detection of diabetic nephropathy in patient with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A review of the literature. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t Review. Diabetes & vascular disease research. Nov-Dec 2021;18(6):14791641211058856. doi:10.1177/14791641211058856
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. 8.↵
    Nauck MA, Wefers J, Meier JJ. Treatment of type 2 diabetes: challenges, hopes, and anticipated successes. Review. The lancet Diabetes & endocrinology. Aug 2021;9(8):525–544. doi:10.1016/S2213-8587(21)00113-3
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  9. 9.↵
    Vilsboll T, Christensen M, Junker AE, Knop FK, Gluud LL. Effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists on weight loss: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. Meta-Analysis Review Systematic Review. BMJ. Jan 10 2012;344:d7771. doi:10.1136/bmj.d7771
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    Mokdad AH, Ford ES, Bowman BA, et al. Prevalence of obesity, diabetes, and obesity-related health risk factors, 2001. Jama. Jan 1 2003;289(1):76–9. doi:10.1001/jama.289.1.76
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. 11.↵
    Iqbal J, Wu HX, Hu N, et al. Effect of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists on body weight in adults with obesity without diabetes mellitus-a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Meta-Analysis Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t Review Systematic Review. Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity. Jun 2022;23(6):e13435. doi:10.1111/obr.13435
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  12. 12.↵
    Artasensi A, Pedretti A, Vistoli G, Fumagalli L. Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Review of Multi-Target Drugs. Review. Molecules. Apr 23 2020;25(8)doi:10.3390/molecules25081987
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Aroda VR, et al. 1. Improving Care and Promoting Health in Populations: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023. Diabetes care. Jan 1 2023;46(Supple 1):S10–S18. doi:10.2337/dc23-S001
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  14. 14.↵
    Sheahan KH, Wahlberg EA, Gilbert MP. An overview of GLP-1 agonists and recent cardiovascular outcomes trials. Review. Postgraduate medical journal. Mar 2020;96(1133):156–161. doi:10.1136/postgradmedj-2019-137186
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    DeFronzo RA, Triplitt CL, Abdul-Ghani M, Cersosimo E. Novel Agents for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association. May 2014;27(2):100–12. doi:10.2337/diaspect.27.2.100
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.
    Abdul-Ghani M, DeFronzo RA. Is It Time to Change the Type 2 Diabetes Treatment Paradigm? Yes! GLP-1 RAs Should Replace Metformin in the Type 2 Diabetes Algorithm. Diabetes care. Aug 2017;40(8):1121–1127. doi:10.2337/dc16-2368
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    Brunton SA, Wysham CH. GLP-1 receptor agonists in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: role and clinical experience to date. Review Video-Audio Media. Postgraduate medicine. Nov 2020;132(up2):3–14. doi:10.1080/00325481.2020.1798099
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  18. 18.↵
    Defronzo RA. Banting Lecture. From the triumvirate to the ominous octet: a new paradigm for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Lecture. Diabetes. Apr 2009;58(4):773–95. doi:10.2337/db09-9028
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  19. 19.
    Taylor SI, Yazdi ZS, Beitelshees AL. Pharmacological treatment of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes. Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t Review. The Journal of clinical investigation. Jan 19 2021;131(2)doi:10.1172/JCI142243
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    Holst JJ. The physiology of glucagon-like peptide 1. Review. Physiological reviews. Oct 2007;87(4):1409–39. doi:10.1152/physrev.00034.2006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. 21.↵
    Gentilella R, Pechtner V, Corcos A, Consoli A. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in type 2 diabetes treatment: are they all the same? Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t Review. Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews. Jan 2019;35(1):e3070. doi:10.1002/dmrr.3070
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.
    Greco EV, Russo G, Giandalia A, Viazzi F, Pontremoli R, De Cosmo S. GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Kidney Protection. Review. Medicina (Kaunas). May 31 2019;55(6)doi:10.3390/medicina55060233
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  23. 23.↵
    Nauck MA, Quast DR, Wefers J, Meier JJ. GLP-1 receptor agonists in the treatment of type 2 diabetes - state-of-the-art. Review. Molecular metabolism. Apr 2021;46:101102. doi:10.1016/j.molmet.2020.101102
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. 24.↵
    Trujillo JM, Nuffer W, Smith BA. GLP-1 receptor agonists: an updated review of head-to-head clinical studies. Review. Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism. 2021;12:2042018821997320. doi:10.1177/2042018821997320
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  25. 25.↵
    Sirolli V, Pieroni L, Di Liberato L, Urbani A, Bonomini M. Urinary Peptidomic Biomarkers in Kidney Diseases. Review. International journal of molecular sciences. Dec 21 2019;21(1)doi:10.3390/ijms21010096
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  26. 26.↵
    Latosinska A, Siwy J, Faguer S, Beige J, Mischak H, Schanstra JP. Value of Urine Peptides in Assessing Kidney and Cardiovascular Disease. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t Review. Proteomics Clinical applications. Jan 2021;15(1):e2000027. doi:10.1002/prca.202000027
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  27. 27.↵
    Siwy J, Klein T, Rosler M, von Eynatten M. Urinary Proteomics as a Tool to Identify Kidney Responders to Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibition: A Hypothesis-Generating Analysis from the MARLINA-T2D Trial. Clinical Trial, Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t. Proteomics Clinical applications. Mar 2019;13(2):e1800144. doi:10.1002/prca.201800144
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  28. 28.↵
    Eder S, Leierer J, Kerschbaum J, et al. A Prospective Cohort Study in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus for Validation of Biomarkers (PROVALID) - Study Design and Baseline Characteristics. Kidney & blood pressure research. 2018;43(1):181–190. doi:10.1159/000487500
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  29. 29.↵
    Haubitz M, Good DM, Woywodt A, et al. Identification and validation of urinary biomarkers for differential diagnosis and evaluation of therapeutic intervention in anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodyassociated vasculitis. Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t. Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP. Oct 2009;8(10):2296–307. doi:10.1074/mcp.M800529-MCP200
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    Zurbig P, Renfrow MB, Schiffer E, et al. Biomarker discovery by CE-MS enables sequence analysis via MS/MS with platform-independent separation. Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural. Electrophoresis. Jun 2006;27(11):2111–25. doi:10.1002/elps.200500827
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  31. 31.↵
    Mischak H, Vlahou A, Ioannidis JP. Technical aspects and inter-laboratory variability in native peptide profiling: the CE-MS experience. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t Review. Clinical biochemistry. Apr 2013;46(6):432–43. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2012.09.025
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    Jantos-Siwy J, Schiffer E, Brand K, et al. Quantitative urinary proteome analysis for biomarker evaluation in chronic kidney disease. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t. Journal of proteome research. Jan 2009;8(1):268–81. doi:10.1021/pr800401m
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  33. 33.↵
    Schanstra JP, Zurbig P, Alkhalaf A, et al. Diagnosis and Prediction of CKD Progression by Assessment of Urinary Peptides. Clinical Trial Multicenter Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN. Aug 2015;26(8):1999–2010. doi:10.1681/ASN.2014050423
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. 34.↵
    Klein J, Papadopoulos T, Mischak H, Mullen W. Comparison of CE-MS/MS and LC-MS/MS sequencing demonstrates significant complementarity in natural peptide identification in human urine. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t. Electrophoresis. Apr 2014;35(7):1060–4. doi:10.1002/elps.201300327
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  35. 35.↵
    Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the False Discovery Rate - a Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing. J R Stat Soc B. 1995;57(1):289–300. doi:DOI 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    Rafiullah M, Benabdelkamel H, Masood A, et al. Urinary Proteome Differences in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Pre and Post Liraglutide Treatment. Current issues in molecular biology. Feb 6 2023;45(2):1407–1421. doi:10.3390/cimb45020092
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  37. 37.↵
    Adiels M, Taskinen MR, Bjornson E, et al. Role of apolipoprotein C-III overproduction in diabetic dyslipidaemia. Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t. Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. Aug 2019;21(8):1861–1870. doi:10.1111/dom.13744
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  38. 38.↵
    Marques ES, Formato E, Liang W, Leonard E, Timme-Laragy AR. Relationships between type 2 diabetes, cell dysfunction, and redox signaling: A meta-analysis of single-cell gene expression of human pancreatic alpha- and beta-cells. Meta-Analysis. Journal of diabetes. Jan 2022;14(1):34–51. doi:10.1111/1753-0407.13236
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  39. 39.↵
    Yang K, Sun J, Zhang Z, Xiao M, Ren D, Liu SM. Reduction of mRNA m(6)A associates with glucose metabolism via YTHDC1 in human and mice. Diabetes research and clinical practice. Mar 4 2023;198:110607. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2023.110607
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  40. 40.↵
    Gluvic Z, Obradovic M, Lackovic M, et al. HbA1C as a marker of retrograde glycaemic control in diabetes patient with co-existed beta-thalassaemia: A case report and a literature review. Case Reports Review. Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics. Apr 2020;45(2):379–383. doi:10.1111/jcpt.13073
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  41. 41.↵
    Odum EP, Young EE. Elevated cardiac troponin I, creatine kinase and myoglobin and their relationship with cardiovascular risk factors in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes & metabolic syndrome. Apr-Jun 2018;12(2):141–145. doi:10.1016/j.dsx.2017.12.001
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  42. 42.↵
    Pandey GK, Balasubramanyam J, Balakumar M, et al. Altered Circulating Levels of Retinol Binding Protein 4 and Transthyretin in Relation to Insulin Resistance, Obesity, and Glucose Intolerance in Asian Indians. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t. Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists. Aug 2015;21(8):861–9. doi:10.4158/EP14558.OR
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    Benchoula K, Parhar IS, Hwa WE. The molecular mechanism of vgf in appetite, lipids, and insulin regulation. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t Review. Pharmacological research. Oct 2021;172:105855. doi:10.1016/j.phrs.2021.105855
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  44. 44.↵
    He T, Pejchinovski M, Mullen W, Beige J, Mischak H, Jankowski V. Peptides in Plasma, Urine, and Dialysate: Toward Unravelling Renal Peptide Handling. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t. Proteomics Clinical applications. Jan 2021;15(1):e2000029. doi:10.1002/prca.202000029
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  45. 45.↵
    Mavrogeorgis E, Mischak H, Latosinska A, et al. Collagen-Derived Peptides in CKD: A Link to Fibrosis. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t. Toxins. Dec 23 2021;14(1)doi:10.3390/toxins14010010
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  46. 46.↵
    Ding HX, Dong NX, Zhou CX, et al. Liraglutide Attenuates Restenosis After Vascular Injury in Rabbits With Diabetes Via the TGF-beta/Smad3 Signaling Pathway. Alternative therapies in health and medicine. Sep 2022;28(6):22–28.
    OpenUrl
  47. 47.↵
    Cardoso LEM, Marinho TS, Martins FF, Aguila MB, Mandarim-de-Lacerda CA. Treatment with semaglutide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist, improves extracellular matrix remodeling in the pancreatic islet of diet-induced obese mice. Life sciences. Apr 15 2023;319:121502. doi:10.1016/j.lfs.2023.121502
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  48. 48.↵
    Gallego-Colon E, Klych-Ratuszny A, Kosowska A, et al. Exenatide modulates metalloproteinase expression in human cardiac smooth muscle cells via the inhibition of Akt signaling pathway. Pharmacological reports : PR. Feb 2018;70(1):178–183. doi:10.1016/j.pharep.2017.10.003
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  49. 49.↵
    Garczorz W, Gallego-Colon E, Kosowska A, et al. Exenatide modulates expression of metalloproteinases and their tissue inhibitors in TNF-alpha stimulated human retinal pigment epithelial cells. Pharmacological reports : PR. Feb 2019;71(1):175–182. doi:10.1016/j.pharep.2018.10.003
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  50. 50.↵
    Dehghan F, Soori R, Gholami K, et al. Purslane (Portulaca oleracea) Seed Consumption And Aerobic Training Improves Biomarkers Associated with Atherosclerosis in Women with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D). Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t. Scientific reports. Dec 5 2016;6:37819. doi:10.1038/srep37819
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  51. 51.↵
    Li H, Chen J, Li B, Fang X. The protective effects of dulaglutide against advanced glycation end products (AGEs)-induced degradation of type ? collagen and aggrecan in human SW1353 chondrocytes. Chemico-biological interactions. May 1 2020;322:108968. doi:10.1016/j.cbi.2020.108968
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  52. 52.↵
    Tao Y, Ge G, Wang Q, et al. Exenatide ameliorates inflammatory response in human rheumatoid arthritis fibroblast-like synoviocytes. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t. IUBMB life. Jul 2019;71(7):969–977. doi:10.1002/iub.2031
    OpenUrlCrossRef
Back to top
Posted May 05, 2023.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email
Effect of treatment with GLP-1R agonists on the urinary peptidome of T2DM patients
Sonnal Lohia, Justyna Siwy, Emmanouil Mavrogeorgis, Susanne Eder, Stefanie Thoeni, Gert Mayer, Harald Mischak, Antonia Vlahou, Vera Jankowski
medRxiv 2023.05.03.23289439; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.05.03.23289439
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools

Subject Area