Skip to content

Study · Randomized controlled trial · n = 38 · 2023

4 results

Effects of exenatide on coronary stent's endothelialization in subjects with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. The Rebuild study.

Santos-Pardo I, Witt N, Angerås O, Nyström T

Cardiovascular diabetology8 Dec 2023Cited by 1 (Europe PMC)

PMID38066597 (opens in a new tab)PMCIDPMC10709975 (opens in a new tab)DOI10.1186/s12933-023-02071-4 (opens in a new tab)PepBankPUB-38066597
Download PDFPubMedAsk about this study
Jump to 4 results

Summary

BackgroundSubjects with type 2 diabetes (T2D) have a higher risk of in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis. The activation of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) has been suggested to induce several effects on the vasculature that may reduce the risk of stent failure following an angioplasty. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of the GLP-1R agonist exenatide on endothelialization of a modern drug-eluting stent (DES) in subjects with T2D.Methods38 subjects with T2D who were eligible for revascularization with implantation of DES were randomized to treatment with exenatide (once weekly) plus standard treatment, or to standard treatment alone. After 12 weeks, a new coronary angiography was performed to evaluate the percentage of strut coverage (primary endpoint) and the presence of neo-atherosclerosis by optical coherence tomography. This study was approved by the Stockholm's Ethical Review Board.ResultsThe two groups were well balanced regarding baseline clinical characteristics. Strut coverage was 95% (88.7-98.5%) in the exenatide group and 91.4% (88.8-98.5%) in the control group (p = 0.692). There were no significant differences between groups neither in the thickness of neo-intima (0.2 mm in both groups, p = 0.471), nor the maximal in-stent obstruction by neo-intima (15.5% in exenatide group vs 14.7% in control group, p = 0.801). No significant differences were detected in the rate of target lesion revascularization between groups (p = 0.224).ConclusionTwelve weeks treatment with exenatide did not lead to a significantly better stent coverage in people with T2D. No significant differences in the occurrence of neo-atherosclerosis were detected between groups.Trial registrationThe study was registered at www.Clinicaltrialsgov (Rebuild Study, NCT02621489).
CC BYText from Europe PMC. Highlighted sentences are the source of results.

Results from this study4

4 results from studies that gave the peptide. 4 results from people.

  1. 01HumanRandomized controlled trialEfficacy outcome

    In people with diabetes and coronary stents, exenatide did not significantly improve strut coverage versus standard treatment alone.

    In plain wordsIn people with diabetes and coronary stents, exenatide did not significantly improve strut coverage versus standard treatment alone.

    Peptide
    Exenatide (exendin-4)
    Outcome
    No significant changeStent strut coverage
    Study

    n = 38

    Comparator
    Standard treatment alone
    Analysis
    Primary
    Outcome group
    Heart function · Cardiovascular
    Studied dose
    Once weekly · 12 weeksAs given in this study (human).

    Measurements

    Strut coverage
    95%
    exenatide
    Strut coverage
    91.4%
    control

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Strut coverage was 95% (88.7-98.5%) in the exenatide group and 91.4% (88.8-98.5%) in the control group (p = 0.692).
    2 context sentences
    Summary · context
    38 subjects with T2D who were eligible for revascularization with implantation of DES were randomized to treatment with exenatide (once weekly) plus standard treatment, or to standard treatment alone.
    Summary · context
    After 12 weeks, a new coronary angiography was performed to evaluate the percentage of strut coverage (primary endpoint) and the presence of neo-atherosclerosis by optical coherence tomography.
  2. 02HumanRandomized controlled trialEfficacy outcome

    In people with diabetes and coronary stents, neo-intima thickness did not differ between exenatide and control groups.

    In plain wordsIn people with diabetes and coronary stents, neo-intima thickness did not differ between exenatide and control groups.

    Peptide
    Exenatide (exendin-4)
    Outcome
    No significant changeNeo-intima thickness
    Study

    n = 38

    Comparator
    Standard treatment alone
    Outcome group
    Heart function · Cardiovascular
    Studied dose
    Once weekly · 12 weeksAs given in this study (human).

    Measurements

    Neo-intima thickness
    0.2 mm
    exenatide and control groups

    Source sentences

    Summary
    There were no significant differences between groups neither in the thickness of neo-intima (0.2 mm in both groups, p = 0.471), nor the maximal in-stent obstruction by neo-intima (15.5% in exenatide group vs 14.7% in control group, p = 0.801).
    2 context sentences
    Summary · context
    38 subjects with T2D who were eligible for revascularization with implantation of DES were randomized to treatment with exenatide (once weekly) plus standard treatment, or to standard treatment alone.
    Summary · context
    After 12 weeks, a new coronary angiography was performed to evaluate the percentage of strut coverage (primary endpoint) and the presence of neo-atherosclerosis by optical coherence tomography.
  3. 03HumanRandomized controlled trialEfficacy outcome

    In people with diabetes and coronary stents, maximal neo-intimal obstruction did not differ between exenatide and control groups.

    In plain wordsIn people with diabetes and coronary stents, maximal neo-intimal obstruction did not differ between exenatide and control groups.

    Peptide
    Exenatide (exendin-4)
    Outcome
    No significant changeMaximal in-stent obstruction
    Study

    n = 38

    Comparator
    Standard treatment alone
    Outcome group
    Heart function · Cardiovascular
    Studied dose
    Once weekly · 12 weeksAs given in this study (human).

    Measurements

    Maximal in-stent obstruction by neo-intima
    15.5%
    exenatide
    Maximal in-stent obstruction by neo-intima
    14.7%
    control

    Source sentences

    Summary
    There were no significant differences between groups neither in the thickness of neo-intima (0.2 mm in both groups, p = 0.471), nor the maximal in-stent obstruction by neo-intima (15.5% in exenatide group vs 14.7% in control group, p = 0.801).
    2 context sentences
    Summary · context
    38 subjects with T2D who were eligible for revascularization with implantation of DES were randomized to treatment with exenatide (once weekly) plus standard treatment, or to standard treatment alone.
    Summary · context
    After 12 weeks, a new coronary angiography was performed to evaluate the percentage of strut coverage (primary endpoint) and the presence of neo-atherosclerosis by optical coherence tomography.
  4. 04HumanRandomized controlled trialEfficacy outcome

    In people with diabetes and coronary stents, target lesion revascularization rates did not differ between exenatide and control groups.

    In plain wordsIn people with diabetes and coronary stents, repeat treatment rates at the target lesion did not differ between exenatide and control groups.

    Peptide
    Exenatide (exendin-4)
    Outcome
    No significant changeTarget lesion revascularization
    Study

    n = 38

    Comparator
    Standard treatment alone
    Outcome group
    Heart function · Cardiovascular
    Studied dose
    Once weekly · 12 weeksAs given in this study (human).

    Source sentences

    Summary
    No significant differences were detected in the rate of target lesion revascularization between groups (p = 0.224).
    2 context sentences
    Summary · context
    38 subjects with T2D who were eligible for revascularization with implantation of DES were randomized to treatment with exenatide (once weekly) plus standard treatment, or to standard treatment alone.
    Summary · context
    After 12 weeks, a new coronary angiography was performed to evaluate the percentage of strut coverage (primary endpoint) and the presence of neo-atherosclerosis by optical coherence tomography.

AI wrote and checked these results. AI can make mistakes, so check important results against the source.

Registered trials1

Trials this study reports on, or that list this study as a reference. Registry data from ClinicalTrials.gov.

1 trial · 1 completed · source ClinicalTrials.gov (opens in a new tab)

CompletedPhase 4NCT02621489

Effects on Re-endothelialisation With Bydureon Treatment in Type 2 Diabetes Subjects

Karolinska Institutetn = 38Dec 2015 to Oct 2022

Atherosclerosis · Diabetes · Restenosis

Trial pageClinicalTrials.govUpdated 20 Apr 2023

Version history

PepBank keeps every version of the data on this study. Status changes from Retraction Watch, Europe PMC and Crossref are listed with their source.

  1. Version 2Current

    22 Oct 2026, 02:26 UTC

    Study results updated

  2. Version 1

    21 Oct 2026, 18:59 UTC

    First added · source update from Europe PMC

Subjects

Terms as the source lists them.

PepBank is a research reference. Talk to a doctor before you use any peptide.