Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Limited is an Indian multinational pharmaceutical company headquartered in Mumbai, India that was founded in 1977 by Gracias Saldanha as a generic drug and active pharmaceutical ingredient manufacturer; he named the company after his two sons. The company initially sold its products in India, Russia, and Africa. The company went public in India in 1999, and used some of the proceeds to build its first research facility. Saldanha's son Glenn took over as CEO in 2001, having returned to India after working at PricewaterhouseCoopers. By 2008 Glenmark was the fifth-biggest pharmaceutical company in India.By 2011 the founder of the company was one of the richest men in India, and Glenmark had worldwide sales of $778 million, a 37% increase over the last year's sales; the growth was driven by Glenmark's entry into the US and European generics markets.In the mid-2010s the generics industry in general began transitioning to the end of an era of giant patent cliffs in the pharmaceutical industry; patented drugs with sales of around $28 billion were set to come off patent in 2018, but in 2019 only about $10 billion in revenue was set to open for competition, and less the next year. Companies in the industry responded with consolidation or trying to generate new, patented drugs.Glenn Saldanha took the company down the path of seeking innovation, which was controversial within the company and with shareholders. The company focused on new drugs and biosimilars in the fields of cancer, dermatology and respiratory diseases, which it sought to monetize by partnering with major pharmaceutical companies. In 2016 it had four such drugs in clinical trials. For the financial year 2016–2017 its sales were around 81 billion INR (ca. $1.25 billion), making it the fourth-biggest Indian pharmaceutical company.In May 2019, Yasir Rawjee was elected as CEO of Glenmark Life Sciences.
Background: In diabetic patients, managing glycaemic control while preserving renal function is a challenge, necessitating the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, which have demonstrated reno-protective and cardiovascular benefits. Remogliflozin, a novel sodium-glucose co transporter-2 inhibitors, has shown efficacy in glycemic control, but its renal effects in chronic kidney disease patients remain unexplored. Aim: To assess the non-inferiority of remogliflozin compared to dapagliflozin in terms of renal and glycaemic parameters in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease. Methods: A prospective, multicentre, randomized, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority study was conducted in patients diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease. Participants were assigned to receive either remogliflozin or dapagliflozin over a treatment period of 24 weeks. Primary endpoints included changes in renal parameters such as estimated glomerular filtration rate, urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio, serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, and uric acid. Secondary endpoints included measures of glycemic control, body weight, and safety outcomes Results: Both treatment groups showed significant improvement in renal parameters from baseline to weeks 12 and 24 (p<0.001), with no significant difference between groups. Glycaemic parameters also improved significantly in both groups, with similar mean % reductions in HbA1c [Remogliflozin: 8.46% to 7.40%; Dapagliflozin: 8.11%to 7.49%]. The incidence of a ≥50% sustained decline in eGFR was comparable (Remogliflozin: 9.46%; Dapagliflozin: 6.67%; p>0.05). End-stage renal disease was observed in 4.05% and 2.67% of patients in the remogliflozin and dapagliflozin groups, respectively. No cases of cardiovascular or renal death were reported. Both groups demonstrated reductions in body weight and body mass index. Adverse events were mild and comparable between groups, with no serious safety concerns. Conclusion: Remogliflozin demonstrated non-inferiority to dapagliflozin in renal and glycaemic outcomes, with a comparable safety profile. These findings suggest that remogliflozin is a viable treatment option for patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease. Further long-term studies are warranted to validate these findings.
Obesity is a chronic metabolic disease of global concern, often associated with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM). Global guidelines recommend holistic approach for T2DM management by addressing the associated comorbidities. Here, we have conducted a post-hoc evaluation of Liraglutide biosimilar Phase III trial on weight reduction and glycaemic benefits in Indian T2DM patients with obesity in comparison to reference liraglutide. We have conducted a post-hoc analysis of Liraglutide biosimilar Phase III trial on weight reduction in Indian T2DM patients with obesity in comparison to reference liraglutide. We evaluated weight reduction and HbA1c improvement in Indian T2DM patients (BMI > 25 kg/m2) from baseline to week 24. Group A – Intervention arm: Liraglutide Biosimilar in T2DM patients with obesity Group B – Control arm: Reference Liraglutide in T2DM patients with obesity. Primary endpoint was mean change in body weight from baseline to week 24. 179 T2DM patients (BMI > 25 Kg/m2 and above) who satisfied the inclusion criteria, were included in this post-hoc analysis. The mean BMI of T2DM patients with obesity in Biosimilar Liraglutide arm was 29.8 ± 4.6 kg/m2 and that in the Reference Liraglutide arm it was 29.8 ± 4.8 kg/m2. Significant mean weight reduction (Mean ± SD) of 5.5 ± 1.2 kg (7.3 ± 1.7
INTRODUCTION: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic metabolic disorder marked by persistent hyperglycemia. While HbA1c has traditionally been used to assess glycemic control, growing evidence highlights glycemic variability (GV) and Time in Range (TIR) as more precise indicators of glucose fluctuations, which are linked to diabetic complications, especially chronic kidney disease (CKD). Emerging combination therapies targeting different pathophysiologic mechanisms of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), such as SGLT2 inhibitors and DPP-4 inhibitors, offer promise in reducing GV. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of three commonly prescribed fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapies—Teneligliptin + Dapagliflozin (Arm-A), Sitagliptin + Dapagliflozin (Arm-B), and Linagliptin + Empagliflozin (Arm-C)—in improving glycemic control and renal parameters in Indian T2DM patients using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). METHOD: This prospective, comparative study enrolled 90 patients (30 in each arm). CGM was used to evaluate glycemic parameters including TIR, TAR, TBR, MAGE, LAGE, MPPGE, HbA1c, FPG, PPG, and renal function indicators (eGFR, serum creatinine, BUN) at baseline and study conclusion. RESULTS: All arms demonstrated significant improvements in TIR, MAGE, LAGE, HbA1c, FPG, and PPG (p<0.001). Arm-A showed a significantly superior reduction in TAR and MPPGE compared to Arm-B (p=0.029 and p=0.040, respectively) and also outperformed Arm-B in reducing FPG (p=0.042). Renal function improved comparably across arms, with a significant decline in serum creatinine noted in Arm-A. CONCLUSION: All three FDC therapies significantly improved glycemia, with the Teneligliptin + Dapagliflozin combination offering slightly superior efficacy in reducing TAR, MPPGE, and FPG. These findings support its clinical utility in reducing glycemic variability in patients with T2DM in India. Although favorable trends were observed in renal parameters, the study duration was too short to draw definitive conclusions regarding renal safety. As such, references to renal outcomes should be interpreted with caution, and further long-term studies are warranted to validate these findings.
Introduction:The concurrent use of tetracyclines and isotretinoin in acne treatment can cause pseudotumor cerebri (PTC). However, topical minocycline (4%) was significantly less systemically absorbed. Aim:To assess the efficacy and safety of a combination of topical minocycline gel 4% with oral isotretinoin compared to isotretinoin alone in the treatment of acne vulgaris in the Indian population. Material and methods:This prospective, randomised, comparative study included 60 patients aged ≥ 12 years with acne. Two groups were formed: the Mino-Iso group applied minocycline gel 4% and took 20 mg isotretinoin capsules in the evening, whereas the Iso group took only 20 mg isotretinoin capsules in the evening. The study duration was 12 weeks. Results:At week 12, the Mino-Iso group showed a significantly greater reduction in inflammatory lesions (-88.5%) than the Iso group (-67.42%) (p < 0.05). The investigator's global assessment (IGA) treatment score was statistically lower and success significantly higher in the Mino-Iso group (p < 0.05 and p = 0.03, respectively). Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 6 and 4 patients in the Mino-Iso and Iso groups, respectively (p = 0.73), all of which were mild in nature and resolved during the study. Conclusions:The combination of topical gel 4% and oral isotretinoin 20 mg capsule significantly reduced inflammatory lesions, improved IGA scores, and had a higher success rate at week 12 than isotretinoin alone, with similar tolerability. Therefore, this combination can be considered a preferable treatment option for moderate-to-severe acne.
