Comparison of glargine insulin versus rosiglitazone addition in poorly controlled type 2 diabetic patients on metformin plus sulfonylurea

OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the mechanisms by which the addition of glargine insulin or rosiglitazone improves glycemic control in type 2 diabetic subjects poorly controlled on maximally effective doses of metformin plus sulfonylurea. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Subjects (aged 47 +/- 11 years, BMI 31 +/- 5 kg/m(2), HbA(1c) [A1C] 9.4 +/- 1.3%) received bedtime glargine insulin (titrated based on the fasting plasma glucose [FPG], n = 10) or rosiglitazone (4 mg twice daily, n = 10). At baseline and after 4 months, A1C was measured and an oral glucose tolerance test and a 3-h euglycemic insulin (80 mU/m(2) per min) clamp with [3-(3)H]glucose were performed. RESULTS: A1C and FPG decreased similarly in the glargine insulin (9.1 +/- 0.4 to 7.6 +/- 0.3% and 212 +/- 14 to 139 +/- 5 mg/dl, respectively, both P < 0.0001) and rosiglitazone (9.4 +/- 0.3 to 7.6 +/- 0.4% and 223 +/- 14 to 160 +/- 19 mg/dl, respectively, both P < 0.005) groups. After 4 months, endogenous glucose production (EGP) declined similarly with glargine insulin (2.27 +/- 0.10 to 1.73 +/- 0.12 mg . kg(-1) . min(-1), P < 0.0001) and rosiglitazone (2.21 +/- 0.12 to 1.88 +/- 0.12 mg . kg(-1) . min(-1), P = 0.01). The hepatic insulin resistance index declined in the rosiglitazone group (32 +/- 3 to 21 +/- 1 mg . kg(-1) . min(-1) x microU/ml, P = 0.03 vs. baseline and P < 0.05 vs. glargine insulin) and did not change in the glargine group (22 +/- 5 to 20 +/- 3 mg . kg(-1) . min(-1) x microU/ml, P = NS). At 4 months, glargine insulin (3.6 +/- 0.5 to 4.2 +/- 0.4 mg . kg(-1) . min(-1), P < 0.01) and rosiglitazone (2.7 +/- 0.3 to 3.8 +/- 0.3 mg . kg(-1) . min(-1), P < 0.0005) increased R(d), but the increment was greater in the rosiglitazone group (P < 0.05). Diastolic blood pressure was reduced only by rosiglitazone (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Triple therapy with glargine insulin or rosiglitazone similarly reduced A1C, primarily by suppressing basal EGP (hepatic). Glargine insulin reduced basal EGP by increasing plasma insulin levels, while rosiglitazone decreased basal hepatic glucose production by improving hepatic insulin sensitivity.     

Comparison of basal insulin added to oral agents versus twice-daily premixed insulin as initial insulin therapy for type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of adding once-daily basal insulin versus switching to twice-daily premixed insulin in type 2 diabetic patients insufficiently controlled by oral antidiabetic agents (OADs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a 24-week, multinational, multicenter, open, parallel group clinical trial, 371 insulin-naive patients with poor glycemic control (fasting blood glucose [FBG] >/=120 mg/dl, HbA(1c) 7.5-10.5%) on OADs (sulfonylurea plus metformin) were randomized to once-daily morning insulin glargine plus glimepiride and metformin (glargine plus OAD) or to 30% regular/70% human NPH insulin (70/30) twice daily without OADs. Insulin dosage was titrated to target FBG 相似文献   

Efficacy of benfluorex in combination with sulfonylurea in type 2 diabetic patients: an 18-week, randomized, double-blind study

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the superiority of benfluorex over placebo as an add-on therapy in type 2 diabetic patients in whom diabetes is insufficiently controlled by sulfonylurea monotherapy and who have a limitation for the use of metformin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Type 2 diabetic patients with HbA(1c) (A1C) (7-10%) who were receiving the maximum tolerated sulfonylurea dose and had a contraindication to or poor tolerance of metformin were randomly assigned (double blind) to receive benfluorex 450 mg/day (n = 165) or placebo (n = 160) for 18 weeks. The main efficacy criterion was A1C, analyzed as the change from baseline to the end of treatment using ANCOVA with baseline and country as covariates. Secondary criteria were fasting plasma glucose (FPG), insulin resistance, and plasma lipid level. RESULTS: Both groups were similar at baseline in the intention-to-treat population. A1C significantly decreased with benfluorex from 8.34 +/- 0.83 to 7.52 +/- 1.04% (P < 0.001) and tended to increase with placebo from 8.33 +/- 0.87 to 8.52 +/- 1.36% (NS), resulting in a mean adjusted difference between groups of -1.01% (95% CI -1.26 to -0.76; P < 0.001). The target A1C (< or =7%) was achieved in 34% of patients receiving benfluorex versus 12% of patients receiving placebo. Significant between-group differences in favor of benfluorex were observed for mean FPG (-1.65 mmol/l) (P < 0.001) and for homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance. Overall tolerance was similar in both groups. Serious adverse events were more frequent in the benfluorex group, without evidence of causality relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Benfluorex as an add-on therapy was superior to placebo in lowering A1C with a between-group difference of 1% in type 2 diabetic patients whose disease was insufficiently controlled with sulfonylurea alone and in whom metformin was contraindicated or not tolerated.     

Less hypoglycemia with insulin glargine in intensive insulin therapy for type 1 diabetes. U.S. Study Group of Insulin Glargine in Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE: Insulin glargine (21A-Gly-30Ba-L-Arg-30Bb-L-Arg-human insulin) is a biosynthetic insulin analog with a prolonged duration of action compared with NPH human insulin. This study compared insulin glargine with NPH human insulin in subjects with type 1 diabetes who had been previously treated with multiple daily injections of NPH insulin and regular insulin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study was a multicenter randomized parallel-group study in which subjects were randomized to receive premeal regular insulin and either insulin glargine (at bedtime) or NPH insulin (at bedtime for patients on once-daily therapy and at bedtime and in the morning for patients on twice-daily therapy) for up to 28 weeks. Dose titration of both basal insulins was based on capillary fasting whole blood glucose (FBG) levels; the goal was a premeal blood glucose concentration of 4.4-6.7 mmol/l. RESULTS: A total of 534 well-controlled type 1 diabetic subjects (mean GHb 7.7%, mean fasting plasma glucose [FPG] 11.8 mmo/l) were treated. A small decrease in GHb levels was noted with both insulin glargine (-0.16%) and NPH insulin (-0.21%; P > 0.05). Significant reductions in median FPG levels from baseline (-1.67 vs. -0.33 mmol/l with NPH insulin, P = 0.0145) and a trend for a reduction in capillary FBG levels were achieved with insulin glargine. After the 1-month titration phase, significantly fewer subjects receiving insulin glargine experienced symptomatic hypoglycemia (39.9 vs. 49.2%, P = 0.0219) or nocturnal hypoglycemia (18.2 vs. 27.1%, P = 0.0116) with a blood glucose level <2.0 mmol/l compared with subjects receiving NPH insulin. CONCLUSIONS: Lower FPG levels with fewer episodes of hypoglycemia were achieved with insulin glargine compared with once- or twice-daily NPH insulin as part of a basal-bolus regimen in patients with type 1 diabetes.     

Less nocturnal hypoglycemia and better post-dinner glucose control with bedtime insulin glargine compared with bedtime NPH insulin during insulin combination therapy in type 2 diabetes. HOE 901/3002 Study Group

OBJECTIVE: Available basal insulin formulations do not provide a constant and reliable 24-h insulin supply. We compared the efficacy and safety of glargine (a long-acting insulin analog) and NPH insulins in insulin-naive type 2 diabetic patients treated with oral antidiabetic agents. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: There were 426 type 2 diabetic patients (age 59 +/- 9 years, BMI 28.9 +/- 4.3 kg/m2, mean +/- SD) with poor glycemic control on oral antidiabetic agents randomized to treatment for 1 year with bedtime insulin glargine or bedtime NPH insulin. Oral agents were continued unchanged. The fasting blood glucose (FBG) target was 6.7 mmol/l (120 mg/dl). RESULTS: Average glycemic control improved similarly with both insulins (HbA(1c), [reference range <6.5%] 8.3 +/- 0.1 vs. 8.2 +/- 0.1% at 1 year, glargine vs. NPH, mean +/- SEM, P < 0.001 vs. baseline for both). However, there was less nocturnal hypoglycemia (9.9 vs. 24.0% of all patients, glargine vs. NPH, P < 0.001) and lower post-dinner glucose concentrations (9.9 +/- 0.2 vs. 10.7 +/- 0.3 mmol/l, P < 0.02) with insulin glargine than with NPH. Insulin doses and weight gain were comparable. In patients reaching target FBG, HbA(1c) averaged 7.7 and 7.6% in the glargine and NPH groups at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Use of insulin glargine compared with NPH is associated with less nocturnal hypoglycemia and lower post-dinner glucose levels. These data are consistent with peakless and longer duration of action of insulin glargine compared with NPH. Achievement of acceptable average glucose control requires titration of the insulin dose to an FBG target < or =6.7 mmol/l. These data support use of insulin glargine instead of NPH in insulin combination regimens in type 2 diabetes.     

Vascular effects of improving metabolic control with metformin or rosiglitazone in type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test whether vascular reactivity is modified by improving metabolic control and peripheral insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind design, we assigned 74 type 2 diabetic patients to rosiglitazone (8 mg/day), metformin (1,500 mg/day), or placebo treatment for 16 weeks and measured insulin sensitivity (euglycemic insulin clamp), ambulatory blood pressure, and forearm blood flow response to 1) intra-arterial acetylcholine (ACh), 2) intra-arterial nitroprusside, 3) the clamp, and 4) blockade of nitric oxide (NO) synthase. RESULTS: Compared with 25 nondiabetic subjects, patients had reduced insulin sensitivity (30 +/- 1 vs. 41 +/- 3 micromol. min(-1). kg fat-free mass(-1); P < 0.001) and reduced maximal response to ACh (586 +/- 42 vs. 883 +/- 81%; P < 0.001). Relative to placebo, 16 weeks of rosiglitazone and metformin similarly reduced fasting glucose (-2.3 +/- 0.5 and -2.3 +/- 0.5 mmol/l) and HbA(1c) (-1.2 +/- 0.3 and -1.6 +/- 0.3%). Insulin sensitivity increased with rosiglitazone (+6 +/- 3 micromol. min(-1). kg fat-free mass(-1); P < 0.01) but not with metformin or placebo. Ambulatory diastolic blood pressure fell consistently (-2 +/- 1 mmHg; P < 0.05) only in the rosiglitazone group. Nitroprusside dose response, clamp-induced vasodilatation, and NO blockade were not affected by either treatment. In contrast, the slope of the ACh dose response improved with rosiglitazone (+40% versus baseline, P < 0.05, +70% versus placebo, P < 0.005) but did not change with either metformin or placebo. This improvement in endothelium-dependent vasodilatation was accompanied by decrements in circulating levels of free fatty acids and tumor necrosis factor-alpha. CONCLUSIONS: At equivalent glycemic control, rosiglitazone, but not metformin, improves endothelium dependent vasodilatation and insulin sensitivity in type 2 diabetes.     

The treat-to-target trial: randomized addition of glargine or human NPH insulin to oral therapy of type 2 diabetic patients

OBJECTIVE: To compare the abilities and associated hypoglycemia risks of insulin glargine and human NPH insulin added to oral therapy of type 2 diabetes to achieve 7% HbA(1c). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a randomized, open-label, parallel, 24-week multicenter trial, 756 overweight men and women with inadequate glycemic control (HbA(1c) >7.5%) on one or two oral agents continued prestudy oral agents and received bedtime glargine or NPH once daily, titrated using a simple algorithm seeking a target fasting plasma glucose (FPG) 相似文献   

PRESERVE-beta: two-year efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy with nateglinide or glyburide plus metformin

OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy with nateglinide/metformin versus glyburide/metformin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a randomized, multicenter, double-masked, 2-year study of 428 drug-na?ve patients with type 2 diabetes. Patients received 120 mg a.c. nateglinide or 1.25 mg q.d. glyburide plus 500 mg q.d. open-label metformin for the initial 4 weeks. During a subsequent 12-week titration period, glyburide and metformin were increased by 1.25- and 500-mg increments to maximum daily doses of 10 and 2,000 mg, respectively, if biweekly fasting plasma glucose (FPG) > or = 6.7 mmol/l. Nateglinide was not titrated. Blinding was maintained by use of matching placebo for nateglinide and glyburide. An 88-week monitoring period followed, during which HbA1c (A1C), FPG, and postprandial glucose excursions (PPGEs) during an oral glucose tolerance test were measured. RESULTS: In nateglinide/metformin-treated patients, mean A1C was 8.4% at baseline and 6.9% at week 104. In glyburide/metformin-treated patients, mean A1C was 8.3% at baseline and 6.8% at week 104 (P < 0.0001 vs. baseline for both treatments, NS between treatments). The deltaPPGE averaged -96 +/- 19 (P < 0.0001) and -57 +/- 22 mmol.l(-1).min(-1) (P < 0.05) in patients receiving nateglinide/metformin and glyburide/metformin, respectively, whereas deltaFPG was -1.6 +/- 0.2 (P < 0.0001) and -2.4 +/- 0.2 mmol/l (P < 0.0001) in patients receiving nateglinide/metformin and glyburide/metformin, respectively (P < 0.01 between groups). Thus, the two treatments achieved similar efficacy with differential effects on FPG versus PPGE. Hypoglycemia occurred in 8.2 and 17.7% of patients receiving nateglinide/metformin and glyburide/metformin, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Similar good glycemic control can be maintained for 2 years with either treatment regimen, but nateglinide/metformin may represent a safer approach to initial combination therapy.     

A 16-week comparison of the novel insulin analog insulin glargine (HOE 901) and NPH human insulin used with insulin lispro in patients with type 1 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of the long-acting insulin analog, insulin glargine, as a component of basal bolus therapy in patients with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients with type 1 diabetes receiving basal-bolus insulin treatment with NPH human insulin and insulin lispro were randomized to receive insulin glargine (HOE 901), a long-acting basal insulin analog, once a day (n = 310) or NPH human insulin (n = 309) as basal treatment with continued bolus insulin lispro for 16 weeks in an open-label study NPH insulin patients maintained their prior schedule of administration once or twice a day, whereas insulin glargine patients received basal insulin once a day at bedtime. RESULTS: Compared with all NPH insulin patients, insulin glargine patients had significant decreases in fasting blood glucose measured at home (means +/- SEM, -42.0 +/- 4.7 vs. -12.4 +/- 4.7 mg/dl [-2.33 +/- 0.26 vs. -0.69 +/- 0.26 mmol/l]; P = 0.0001). These differences were evident early and persisted throughout the study More patients in the insulin glargine group (29.6%) than in the NPH group (16.8%) reached a target fasting blood glucose of 119 mg/dl (< 6.6 mmol/l). However, there were no differences between the groups with respect to change in GHb. Insulin glargine treatment was also associated with a significant decrease in the variability of fasting blood glucose values (P = 0.0124). No differences in the occurrence of symptomatic hypoglycemia, including nocturnal hypoglycemia, were observed. Overall, adverse events were similar in the two treatment groups with the exception of injection site pain, which was more common in the insulin glargine group (6.1%) than in the NPH group (0.3%). Weight gain was 0.12 kg in insulin glargine patients and 0.54 kg in NPH insulin patients (P = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: Basal insulin therapy with insulin glargine once a day appears to be as safe and at least as effective as using NPH insulin once or twice a day in maintaining glycemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes receiving basal-bolus insulin treatment with insulin lispro.     

Intensive replacement of basal insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes given rapid-acting insulin analog at mealtime: a 3-month comparison between administration of NPH insulin four times daily and glargine insulin at dinner or bedtime

OBJECTIVE: To establish differences in blood glucose between different regimens of optimized basal insulin substitution in type 1 diabetic patients given lispro insulin at meals, i.e., NPH injected four times a day versus glargine insulin once daily at dinner or at bedtime. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 51 patients with type 1 diabetes on intensive therapy (NPH four times/day and lispro insulin at each meal) were randomized to three different regimens of basal insulin substitution while continuing lispro insulin at meals: continuation of NPH four times/day (n = 17), once daily glargine at dinnertime (n = 17), and once daily glargine at bedtime (n = 17) for 3 months. Blood glucose targets were fasting, preprandial, and bedtime concentrations at 6.4-7.2 mmol/l and 2 h after meals at 8.0-9.2 mmol/l. The primary end point was HbA(1c). RESULTS: Mean daily blood glucose was lower with dinnertime glargine (7.5 +/- 0.2 mmol/l) or bedtime glargine (7.4 +/- 0.2 mmol/l) versus NPH (8.3 +/- 0.2 mmol/l) (P < 0.05). A greater percentage of blood glucose values were at the target value with glargine at dinner and bedtime versus those with NPH (P < 0.05). HbA(1c) at 3 months did not change with NPH but decreased with glargine at dinnertime (from 6.8 +/- 0.2 to 6.4 +/- 0.1%) and glargine at bedtime (from 7.0 +/- 0.2 to 6.6 +/- 0.1%) (P < 0.04 vs. NPH). Total daily insulin doses were similar with the three treatments, but with glargine there was an increase in basal and a decrease in mealtime insulin requirements (P < 0.05). Frequency of mild hypoglycemia (self-assisted episodes, blood glucose < or =4.0 mmol/l) was lower with glargine (dinnertime 8.1 +/- 0.8 mmol/l, bedtime 7.7 +/- 0.9 mmol/l) than with NPH (12.2 +/- 1.3 mmol/l) (episodes/patient-month, P < 0.04). In-hospital profiles confirmed outpatient blood glucose data and indicated more steady plasma insulin concentrations at night and before meals with glargine versus NPH (P < 0.05). There were no differences between glargine given at dinnertime and at bedtime. CONCLUSIONS: Regimens of basal insulin with either NPH four times/day or glargine once/day in type 1 diabetic patients both result in good glycemic control. However, the simpler glargine regimen decreases the HbA(1c) level and frequency of hypoglycemia versus NPH. In contrast to NPH, which should be given at bedtime, insulin glargine can be administered at dinnertime without deteriorating blood glucose control.     

Basal insulin glargine (HOE 901) versus NPH insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes on multiple daily insulin regimens. U.S. Insulin Glargine (HOE 901) Type 1 Diabetes Investigator Group

OBJECTIVE: Insulin glargine (HOE 901, 21(A)-Gly-30(B)a-L-Arg-30(B)b-L-Arg human insulin) is a novel recombinant analog of human insulin with a shift in the isoelectric point producing a retarded absorption rate and an increased duration of action that closely mimics normal basal insulin secretion. It recently received approval from the Food and Drug Administration. The aim of this study was to evaluate 2 formulations of insulin glargine for safety and efficacy in the treatment of patients with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a 4-week trial, 256 patients with type 1 diabetes received either NPH insulin or insulin glargine containing 30 microg/ml zinc (insulin glargine[30]) or 80 microg/ml zinc (insulin glargine[80]). Insulin glargine was given subcutaneously once daily at bedtime. NPH insulin was given either once daily (at bedtime) or twice daily (before breakfast and at bedtime), according to the patient's prestudy regimen. The initial doses of insulin glargine and NPH were based on the previous NPH total daily dose. RESULTS: At study end point, insulin glargine-pooled groups had significantly lower fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels than the NPH insulin group, with adjusted mean FPG levels reduced by 2.2 mmol/l (P = 0.0001). Insulin glargine was superior to NPH insulin in reducing FPG levels in patients who had previously received NPH insulin twice daily but not in patients who had previously received NPH once daily. FPG levels were more stable in patients using insulin glargine than in patients using NPH insulin. A subset of patients (n = 71) underwent hourly overnight plasma glucose measurements. Insulin glargine patients exhibited lower FPG levels after 5:00 A.M.; the difference was significant by 8:00 A.M. The adjusted mean FPG for insulin glargine[30] was 7.8 mmol/l; for insulin glargine[80], 7.3 mmol/l; and for NPH, 10.7 mmol/l. Both formulations of insulin glargine were well tolerated, similar to NPH insulin. CONCLUSIONS: Basal insulin glargine administered once daily for 4 weeks as part of a basal-bolus multiple daily insulin regimen was safe and more effective in lowering fasting plasma glucose levels than NPH in patients with type 1 diabetes.     

Repaglinide versus metformin in combination with bedtime NPH insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes established on insulin/metformin combination therapy

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect on glycemic control and weight gain of repaglinide versus metformin combined with bedtime NPH insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 80 subjects treated with 850 or 1,000 mg t.i.d. metformin combined with bedtime NPH insulin were randomized to 13 weeks of open-label treatment with 4 mg t.i.d. repaglinide (n = 39) or metformin (dose unchanged) (n = 41). Insulin dose was titrated at the clinician's discretion, aiming for a fasting blood glucose (FBG) < or =6.0 mmol/l. RESULTS: Baseline age, diabetes duration, insulin requirement, weight, BMI, FBG, and HbA(1c) (Diabetes Control and Complications Trial-aligned assay, normal range 4.6-6.2%) were similar. Glycemic control improved (nonsignificantly) with insulin/metformin by (mean) 0.4%, from 8.4 to 8.1% (P = 0.09) but deteriorated with insulin/repaglinide by (mean) 0.4%, from 8.1 to 8.6% (P = 0.03; P = 0.005 between groups). Weight gain was less with insulin/metformin: 0.9 +/- 0.4 kg (means +/- SE) (P = 0.01) versus 2.7 +/- 0.4 kg (P < 0.0001) (P = 0.002 between groups). The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire score (potential range 0 [minimum] to 36 [maximum]) increased from 32.4 +/- 0.8 to 34.1 +/- 0.5 (P = 0.01) with insulin/metformin but decreased from 32.5 +/- 0.9 to 29.1 +/- 1.3 (P < 0.002) with insulin/repaglinide. CONCLUSIONS: Combined with bedtime NPH insulin, metformin provides superior glycemic control to repaglinide with less weight gain and improved diabetes treatment satisfaction.     

Twelve- and 52-week efficacy of the dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitor LAF237 in metformin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: To assess the 12- and 52-week efficacy of the dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitor LAF237 versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes continuing metformin treatment. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 107 patients with type 2 diabetes with a 40-week extension in those completing the core study and agreeing, together with the investigator, to extend treatment to 1 year. Placebo (n=51) or LAF237 (50 mg once daily, n=56) was added to ongoing metformin treatment (1,500-3,000 mg/day). HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) were measured periodically, and standardized meal tests were performed at baseline, week 12, and week 52. RESULTS: In patients randomized to LAF237, baseline HbA1c averaged 7.7 +/- 0.1% and decreased at week 12 (Delta=-0.6 +/- 0.1%), whereas HbA1c did not change from a baseline of 7.9 +/- 0.1% in patients given placebo (between-group difference in DeltaHbA1c=-0.7 +/- 0.1%, P <0.0001). Mean prandial glucose and FPG were significantly reduced in patients receiving LAF237 versus placebo by 2.2 +/- 0.4 mmol/l (P <0.0001) and 1.2 +/- 0.4 mmol/l (P=0.0057), respectively, but plasma insulin levels were not affected. At end point of the extension, the between-group differences in change in mean prandial glucose, insulin, and FPG were -2.4 +/- 0.6 mmol/l (P=0.0001), 40 +/- 16 pmol/l (P=0.0153), and -1.1 +/- 0.5 mmol/l (P=0.0312), respectively. HbA1c did not change from week 12 to week 52 in LAF237-treated patients (n=42) but increased in participants given placebo (n=29). The between-group difference in DeltaHbA1c after 1 year was -1.1 +/- 0.2% (P <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Data from this study demonstrate that LAF237 effectively prevents deterioration of glycemic control when added to metformin monotherapy in type 2 diabetes.     

Improved meal-related beta-cell function and insulin sensitivity by the dipeptidyl peptidase-IV inhibitor vildagliptin in metformin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes over 1 year

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of dipeptidyl peptidase-IV (DPP-4) inhibition on meal-related beta-cell function and insulin sensitivity over 52 weeks in type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a 12-week core study, placebo (n = 51) or vildagliptin (n = 56; 50 mg OD) was added to metformin treatment (1.5-3.0 mg/day). A 40-week extension followed in 71 patients. Meal tests were performed at 0, 12, 24, and 52 weeks; glucose, insulin, and C-peptide were evaluated. RESULTS: In subjects completing 52 weeks with participation in all meal tests (n = 57), HbA(1c) (A1C) decreased in the vildagliptin/metformin group (VM group, n = 31) but increased in the placebo/metformin group (PM group, n = 26; between-group difference -1.0 +/- 0.2%; P < 0.001; baseline of all subjects combined 7.7 +/- 0.1%). Also, fasting glucose decreased in the VM group but increased in the PM group (difference -0.9 +/- 0.3 mmol/l, P = 0.016; baseline 9.8 +/- 0.3 mmol/l). Insulin secretion (postmeal suprabasal area under the 0- to 30-min C-peptide curve divided by the 30-min increase in glucose) was increased in the VM group but was reduced in the PM group (difference +0.011 +/- 0.03 pmol/l 30 min/mmol/l, P = 0.018; baseline 0.036 +/- 0.02). Insulin sensitivity during meal ingestion (oral glucose insulin sensitivity) increased in the VM group but was not altered in the PM group (difference +27 +/- 4 ml x min(-1) x m(-2), P = 0.036; baseline 246 +/- 6). Insulin secretion related to insulin sensitivity (adaptation index) increased in the VM group but decreased in the PM group (difference +3.2 +/- 1.0, P = 0.040; baseline 9.1 +/- 0.5). The change in adaptation index correlated to the change in A1C (r = -0.39, P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: This study presents evidence that DPP-4 inhibition by vildagliptin when added to metformin in type 2 diabetes over 52 weeks improves beta-cell function along with improved postmeal insulin sensitivity.     

Effects of metformin and rosiglitazone monotherapy on insulin-mediated hepatic glucose uptake and their relation to visceral fat in type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: Impaired insulin-mediated hepatic glucose uptake (HGU) has been implicated in the hyperglycemia of type 2 diabetes. We examined the effects of metformin (2 g/day) and rosiglitazone (8 mg/day) monotherapy on HGU and its relation to subcutaneous fat, visceral fat (VF), and whole-body insulin-mediated glucose metabolism in type 2 diabetic patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Glucose uptake was measured before and after 26 weeks of treatment using positron emission tomography with [(18)F]2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose during euglycemic hyperinsulinemia; fat depots were quantified by magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: Fasting plasma glucose levels were significantly decreased after either rosiglitazone (-0.9 +/- 0.5 mmol/l) or metformin treatment (-1.1 +/- 0.5 mmol/l) in comparison with placebo; only metformin was associated with weight loss (P < 0.02 vs. placebo). When controlling for the latter, the placebo-subtracted change in whole-body glucose uptake averaged -1 +/- 4 micromol x min(-1) x kg(-1) in metformin-treated patients (NS) and +9 +/- 3 micromol x min(-1) x kg(-1) in rosiglitazone-treated patients (P = 0.01). Both rosiglitazone and metformin treatment were associated with an increase in HGU; versus placebo, the change reached statistical significance when controlling for sex (placebo-subtracted values = +0.008 +/- 0.004 micromol x min(-1) x kg(-1) x pmol/l(-1), P < 0.03, for metformin; and +0.007 +/- 0.004, P < 0.07, for rosiglitazone). After treatment with either drug, insulin-mediated VF glucose uptake (VFGU) was higher than with placebo. In the whole dataset, changes in HGU were negatively related to changes in HbA(1c) (r = 0.43, P = 0.01) and positively associated with changes in VFGU (r = 0.48, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that both metformin and rosiglitazone monotherapy increase HGU in type 2 diabetes; direct drug actions, better glycemic control, and enhanced VF insulin sensitivity are likely determinants of this phenomenon.     

Initiating insulin therapy in type 2 Diabetes: a comparison of biphasic and basal insulin analogs

OBJECTIVE: Safety and efficacy of biphasic insulin aspart 70/30 (BIAsp 70/30, prebreakfast and presupper) were compared with once-daily insulin glargine in type 2 diabetic subjects inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This 28-week parallel-group study randomized 233 insulin-naive patients with HbA(1c) values >/=8.0% on >1,000 mg/day metformin alone or in combination with other OADs. Metformin was adjusted up to 2,550 mg/day before insulin therapy was initiated with 5-6 units BIAsp 70/30 twice daily or 10-12 units glargine at bedtime and titrated to target blood glucose (80-110 mg/dl) by algorithm-directed titration. RESULTS: A total of 209 subjects completed the study. At study end, the mean HbA(1c) value was lower in the BIAsp 70/30 group than in the glargine group (6.91 +/- 1.17 vs. 7.41 +/- 1.24%, P < 0.01). The HbA(1c) reduction was greater in the BIAsp 70/30 group than in the glargine group (-2.79 +/- 0.11 vs. -2.36 +/- 0.11%, respectively; P < 0.01), especially for subjects with baseline HbA(1c) >8.5% (-3.13 +/- 1.63 vs. -2.60 +/- 1.50%, respectively; P < 0.05). More BIAsp 70/30-treated subjects reached target HbA(1c) values than glargine-treated subjects (HbA(1c) 8.5%.     

Improving metabolic control leads to better working memory in adults with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study were to determine whether improvements in metabolic control can ameliorate the cognitive dysfunction associated with type 2 diabetes and evaluate the possibility that such improvements are mediated by changes in circulating insulin or insulin resistance. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This randomized double-blind trial enrolled 145 subjects at 18 centers in the U.S. Older adults with type 2 diabetes receiving metformin monotherapy received add-on therapy with either rosiglitazone, a thiazolidinedione insulin sensitizer, or glyburide. Cognitive function was assessed at baseline and week 24 using the Digit Symbol Substitution Test, the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, and the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery. RESULTS: Pretreatment fasting plasma glucose (FPG) in both groups was similar, and after 24 weeks both treatment groups showed similar significant reductions in FPG (2.1-2.3 mmol/l). Working memory improved with both rosiglitazone (P < 0.001) and glyburide (P = 0.017). Improvement (25-31% reduction in errors) was most evident on the Paired Associates Learning Test and was significantly correlated (r = 0.30) with improved glycemic control as measured by FPG. CONCLUSIONS: Similar and statistically significant cognitive improvement was observed with both rosiglitazone and glyburide therapy, and the magnitude of this effect was correlated with the degree to which FPG improved. These results suggest that a cognitive benefit is achievable with pharmacological interventions targeting glycemic control.     

Nateglinide alone and in combination with metformin improves glycemic control by reducing mealtime glucose levels in type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of nateglinide and metformin alone and in combination in type 2 diabetic patients inadequately controlled by diet, focusing on changes in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and mealtime glucose excursions. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this randomized double-blind study, patients with an HbA1c level between 6.8 and 11.0% during a 4-week placebo run-in received 24 weeks' treatment with 120 mg nateglinide before meals (n = 179), 500 mg metformin three times a day (n = 178), combination therapy (n = 172), or placebo (n = 172). HbA1c and FPG were evaluated regularly, and plasma glucose levels were determined after Sustacal challenge at weeks 0, 12, and 24. Hypoglycemia and other adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: At study end point, HbA1c was reduced from baseline with nateglinide and metformin but was increased with placebo (-0.5, -0.8, and +0.5%, respectively; P < or = 0.0001). Changes in FPG followed the same pattern (-0.7, -1.6, and +0.4 mmol/l; P < or = 0.0001). Combination therapy was additive (HbA1c -1.4% and FPG -2.4 mmol/l; P < or = 0.01 vs. monotherapy). After Sustacal challenge, there was a greater reduction in mealtime glucose with nateglinide monotherapy compared with metformin monotherapy or placebo (adjusted area under the curve [AUC]0-130 min -2.1, -1.1, and -0.6 mmol x h(-1) x l(-1); p < or = 0.0001). An even greater effect was observed with combination therapy (AUC0-130 min -2.5 mmol x h(-1) x l(-1); P < or = 0.0001 vs. metformin and placebo). All regimens were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Nateglinide and metformin monotherapy each improved overall glycemic control but by different mechanisms. Nateglinide decreased mealtime glucose excursions, whereas metformin primarily affected FPG. In combination, nateglinide and metformin had complementary effects, improving HbA1c, FPG, and postprandial hyperglycemia.     

Efficacy and safety of combination therapy: repaglinide plus metformin versus nateglinide plus metformin

OBJECTIVE: An open-label, parallel-group, randomized, multicenter trial was conducted to compare efficacy and safety of repaglinide versus nateglinide, when used in a combination regimen with metformin for treatment of type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Enrolled patients (n = 192) had HbA(1c) >7% and < or =12% during previous treatment with a sulfonylurea, metformin, or low-dose Glucovance (glyburide < or =2.5 mg, metformin < or =500 mg). After a 4-week metformin run-in therapy period (doses escalated to 1,000 mg b.i.d.), patients were randomized to addition of repaglinide (n = 96) (1 mg/meal, maximum 4 mg/meal) or nateglinide (n = 96) (120 mg/meal, reduced to 60 mg if needed) to the regimen for 16 weeks. Glucose, insulin, and glucagon were assessed after a liquid test meal at baseline and week 16. RESULTS: Final HbA(1c) values were lower for repaglinide/metformin treatment than for nateglinide/metformin (7.1 vs. 7.5%). Repaglinide/metformin therapy showed significantly greater mean reductions of HbA(1c) (-1.28 vs. -0.67%; P < 0.001) and of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (-39 vs. -21 mg/dl; P = 0.002). Self-monitoring of blood glucose profiles were significantly lower for repaglinide/metformin before breakfast, before lunch, and at 2:00 A.M. Changes in the area under the curve of postprandial glucose, insulin, or glucagon peaks after a test meal were not significantly different for the two treatment groups during this study. Median final doses were 5.0 mg/day for repaglinide and 360 mg/day for nateglinide. Safety assessments were comparable for the two regimens. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of repaglinide to metformin therapy resulted in reductions of HbA(1c) and FPG values that were significantly greater than the reductions observed for addition of nateglinide.     

Dosing of insulin glargine in the treatment of type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes is a progressive disease characterized by insulin resistance and declining beta-cell function, often leading to a requirement for insulin therapy to maintain good glycemic control and prevent diabetes-associated complications. Adequate insulin dosing is crucial to the achievement of good glycemic control with minimal hypoglycemia, and dose titration immediately following insulin initiation is needed to ensure its success. Insulin may be initiated as an add-on therapy to oral treatment using a single evening basal insulin dose and titrating according to fasting blood glucose (FBG) levels (with an ideal target of <5.5 mmol/L [<100 mg/dL] to achieve glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c] <7%). OBJECTIVE: This review investigated options for, and clinical efficacy of, titration algorithms of insulin glargine in type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Articles from peer-reviewed journals were identified through searches of MEDLINE (years: 2000-2006). Search terms included insulin glargine, titration, algorithm, and type 2 diabetes. Studies were assessed and included in this review if they provided information regarding the method of dose titration of insulin glargine used. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies were identified and included in this review. In the 24-week Treat-to-Target study, in which 756 patients were randomized to receive either insulin glargine or neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, once-daily using a simple titration regimen (titration of daily insulin dose by 0-2, 2, 4, or 6-8 IU if mean fasting plasma glucose over the 3 previous days was >or=5.6-<6.7, >or=6.7-<7.8, >or=7.8-<10.0 or >or=10 mmol/L [>or=100-<120, >or=120-<140, >or=140-<180, or >or=180 mg/dL], respectively, in the absence of plasma glucose <4.0 mmol/L [<72 mg/dL]) more patients reached HbA1c 相似文献