Effect of orlistat in overweight and obese patients with type 2 diabetes treated with metformin

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of orlistat, a gastrointestinal lipase inhibitor, on body weight, glycemic control, and cardiovascular risk factors in metformin-treated type 2 diabetic patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A 1-year multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 120 mg orlistat t.i.d. (n = 249) or placebo (n = 254) combined with a reduced-calorie diet was conducted in overweight and obese patients with suboptimal control of type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: After 1 year of treatment, mean (+/-SE) weight loss was greater in the orlistat than in the placebo group (-4.6 +/- 0.3% vs. -1.7 +/- 0.3% of baseline wt, P < 0.001). Orlistat treatment caused a greater improvement in glycemic control than placebo, as evidenced by a greater reduction in serum HbA(1c), adjusted for changes in metformin and sulfonylurea therapy (-0.90 +/- 0.08 vs. -0.61 +/- 0.08, P = 0.014); a greater proportion of patients achieving decreases in HbA(1c) of > or = 0.5 and > or = 1.0% (both P < 0.01); and a greater reduction in fasting serum glucose (-2.0 +/- 0.2 vs. -0.7 +/- 0.2 mmol/l, P = 0.001). Compared with the placebo group, patients treated with orlistat also had greater decreases in total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and systolic blood pressure (all P < 0.05). Although more subjects treated with orlistat experienced gastrointestinal side effects than placebo (83 vs. 62%, P < 0.05), more subjects in the placebo group withdrew prematurely from the study than in the orlistat group (44 vs. 35%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Orlistat is a useful adjunctive treatment for producing weight loss and improving glycemic control, serum lipid levels, and blood pressure in obese patients with type 2 diabetes who are being treated with metformin.     

Effect of a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma agonist on myocardial blood flow in type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: The relationship between coronary endothelial function and insulin resistance remains speculative. We sought to determine whether pioglitazone, an insulin-sensitizing peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)-gamma agonist, improves cardiac endothelial function in individuals with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Sixteen subjects with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes and without overt cardiovascular disease were randomly assigned to receive either 45 mg of pioglitazone or matching placebo for 3 months. Rest and adenosine-stimulated myocardial blood flow (MBF) were quantified with [(13)N]ammonia and positron emission tomography at baseline and study conclusion. RESULTS: After 3 months, HbA(1c) levels dropped by 0.68% in the pioglitazone group and increased by 0.17% in the placebo group (P = 0.009 for difference between groups). Triglyceride (-93 vs. -39 mg/dl, P = 0.026) and HDL concentrations (+4.8 vs. -6.0 mg/dl, P = 0.014) improved significantly in the pioglitazone group compared with placebo. Despite these favorable changes, there was no demonstrable change in baseline MBF (-0.05 +/- 0.24 vs. -0.09 +/- 0.24 ml . min(-1) . g(-1), P = 0.45), adenosine-stimulated MBF (0.10 +/- 0.75 vs. 0.14 +/- 0.31 ml . min(-1) . g(-1), P = 0.25), or coronary flow reserve (0.45 +/- 1.22 vs. 0.35 +/- 0.72 ml . min(-1) . g(-1), P = 0.64) after 12 weeks of exposure to pioglitazone or placebo, respectively. Regression analysis revealed that lower glucose concentration at the time of the study was associated with higher coronary flow reserve (P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Pioglitazone treatment for 12 weeks in subjects with insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes had no demonstrable effect on coronary flow reserve despite metabolic improvements. Higher ambient glucose levels contribute to impaired vascular reactivity in individuals with diabetes.     

Effect of acarbose on insulin sensitivity in elderly patients with diabetes

OBJECTIVE: To study the effect of acarbose, an alpha-glucosidase inhibitor, on insulin release and insulin sensitivity in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Elderly patients with type 2 diabetes were randomly treated in a double-blind fashion with placebo (n = 23) or acarbose (n = 22) for 12 months. Before and after randomization, subjects underwent a meal tolerance test and a hyperglycemic glucose clamp study designed to measure insulin release and sensitivity. RESULTS: After 12 months of therapy there was a significant difference in the change in fasting plasma glucose levels (0.2 +/- 0.3 vs. -0.5 +/- 0.2 mmol/l, placebo vs. acarbose group, respectively; P < 0.05) and in incremental postprandial glucose values (-0.4 +/- 0.6 vs. -3.5 +/- 0.6 mmol/l, placebo vs. acarbose group, P < 0.001) between groups. There was a significant difference in the change in HbA(1c) values in response to treatment (0.4 +/- 0.2 vs. -0.4 +/- 0.1%, placebo vs. acarbose group, P < 0.01). The change in fasting insulin in response to treatment (-2 +/- 2 vs. -13 +/- 4 pmol/l, placebo vs. acarbose group, P < 0.05) and incremental postprandial insulin responses (-89 +/- 26 vs. -271 +/- 59 pmol/l, placebo vs. acarbose group, P < 0.01) was also significantly different between groups. During the hyperglycemic clamps, glucose and insulin values were similar in both groups before and after therapy However, there was a significant difference in the change in insulin sensitivity in response to treatment between the placebo and the acarbose groups (0.001 +/- 0.001 vs. 0.004 +/- 0.001 mg/kg x min(-1) [pmol/l](-1), respectively, P < 0.05) CONCLUSIONS: Acarbose increases insulin sensitivity but not insulin release in elderly patients with diabetes.     

Triple therapy in type 2 diabetes: insulin glargine or rosiglitazone added to combination therapy of sulfonylurea plus metformin in insulin-naive patients

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of add-on insulin glargine versus rosiglitazone in insulin-na?ve patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on dual oral therapy with sulfonylurea plus metformin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this 24-week multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel trial, 217 patients (HbA(1c) [A1C] 7.5-11%, BMI >25 kg/m(2)) on > or =50% of maximal-dose sulfonylurea and metformin received add-on insulin glargine 10 units/day or rosiglitazone 4 mg/day. Insulin glargine was forced-titrated to target fasting plasma glucose (FPG) < or =5.5-6.7 mmol/l (< or =100-120 mg/dl), and rosiglitazone was increased to 8 mg/day any time after 6 weeks if FPG was >5.5 mmol/l. RESULTS: A1C improvements from baseline were similar in both groups (-1.7 vs. -1.5% for insulin glargine vs. rosiglitazone, respectively); however, when baseline A1C was >9.5%, the reduction of A1C with insulin glargine was greater than with rosiglitazone (P < 0.05). Insulin glargine yielded better FPG values than rosiglitazone (-3.6 +/- 0.23 vs. -2.6 +/- 0.22 mmol/l; P = 0.001). Insulin glargine final dose per day was 38 +/- 26 IU vs. 7.1 +/- 2 mg for rosiglitazone. Confirmed hypoglycemic events at plasma glucose <3.9 mmol/l (<70 mg/dl) were slightly greater for the insulin glargine group (n = 57) than for the rosiglitazone group (n = 47) (P = 0.0528). The calculated average rate per patient-year of a confirmed hypoglycemic event (<70 mg/dl), after adjusting for BMI, was 7.7 (95% CI 5.4-10.8) and 3.4 (2.3-5.0) for the insulin glargine and rosiglitazone groups, respectively (P = 0.0073). More patients in the insulin glargine group had confirmed nocturnal hypoglycemia of <3.9 mmol/l (P = 0.02) and <2.8 mmol/l (P < 0.05) than in the rosiglitazone group. Effects on total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglyceride levels from baseline to end point with insulin glargine (-4.4, -1.4, and -19.0%, respectively) contrasted with those of rosiglitazone (+10.1, +13.1, and +4.6%, respectively; P < 0.002). HDL cholesterol was unchanged with insulin glargine but increased with rosiglitazone by 4.4% (P < 0.05). Insulin glargine had less weight gain than rosiglitazone (1.6 +/- 0.4 vs. 3.0 +/- 0.4 kg; P = 0.02), fewer adverse events (7 vs. 29%; P = 0.0001), and no peripheral edema (0 vs. 12.5%). Insulin glargine saved $235/patient over 24 weeks compared with rosiglitazone. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose insulin glargine combined with a sulfonylurea and metformin resulted in similar A1C improvements except for greater reductions in A1C when baseline was > or =9.5% compared with add-on maximum-dose rosiglitazone. Further, insulin glargine was associated with more hypoglycemia but less weight gain, no edema, and salutary lipid changes at a lower cost of therapy.     

Clinical efficacy of orlistat therapy in overweight and obese patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: A 1-year randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE; Weight loss improves glycemic control, lipid profiles, and blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes. However, successful long-term weight loss is difficult for these patients, particularly those treated with insulin. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of orlistat, a gastrointestinal lipase inhibitor, on weight loss, glycemic control, and cardiovascular risk factors in overweight or obese insulin-treated type 2 diabetic patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study was a 1-year multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of orlistat (120 mg three times a day) or placebo combined with a reduced-calorie diet in overweight or obese adults (BMI 28-40 kg/m(2)) with type 2 diabetes treated with insulin alone or combined with oral agents, but with suboptimal metabolic control (HbA(1c) 7.5-12.0%). Outcome measurements included changes in body weight, glycemic control, blood pressure, and serum lipids. RESULTS; After 1 year, the orlistat group lost significantly more weight (-3.89 +/- 0.3% of baseline body weight, means +/- SE) than the placebo group (-1.27 +/- 0.3%, P < 0.001). Orlistat treatment, compared with placebo, produced greater decreases in HbA(1c) (-0.62 +/- 0.08 vs. -0.27 +/- 0.08%, P = 0.002), fasting serum glucose (-1.63 +/- 0.3 vs. -1.08 +/- 0.3 mmol/l, P = 0.02), and the required doses of insulin and other diabetic medications. Orlistat also produced greater improvements than placebo in serum total cholesterol (P = 0.0002) and LDL cholesterol concentrations (P = 0.001) and LDL/HDL ratio (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS; Orlistat therapy produces clinically significant weight loss, with improvements in glycemic control and cardiovascular disease risk factors, in overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes who have suboptimal metabolic control with insulin therapy.     

Bromocriptine: a novel approach to the treatment of type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: In vertebrates, body fat stores and insulin action are controlled by the temporal interaction of circadian neuroendocrine oscillations. Bromocriptine modulates neurotransmitter action in the brain and has been shown to improve glucose tolerance and insulin resistance in animal models of obesity and diabetes. We studied the effect of a quick-release bromocriptine formulation on glucose homeostasis and insulin sensitivity in obese type 2 diabetic subjects. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: There were 22 obese subjects with type 2 diabetes randomized to receive a quick-release formulation of bromocriptine (n = 15) or placebo (n = 7) in a 16-week double-blind study. Subjects were prescribed a weight-maintaining diet to exclude any effect of changes in body weight on the primary outcome measurements. Fasting plasma glucose concentration and HbA(1c) were measured at 2- to 4-week intervals during treatment. Body composition (underwater weighing), body fat distribution (magnetic resonance imaging), oral glucose tolerance (oral glucose tolerance test [OGTT]), insulin-mediated glucose disposal, and endogenous glucose production (2-step euglycemic insulin clamp, 40 and 160 mU x min(-1) x m(-2)) were measured before and after treatment. RESULTS: No changes in body weight or body composition occurred during the study in either placebo- or bromocriptine-treated subjects. Bromocriptine significantly reduced HbA(1c) (from 8.7 to 8.1%, P = 0.009) and fasting plasma glucose (from 190 to 172 mg/dl, P = 0.02) levels, whereas these variables increased during placebo treatment (from 8.5 to 9.1%, NS, and from 187 to 223 mg/dl, P = 0.02, respectively). The differences in HbA(1c) (delta = 1.2%, P = 0.01) and fasting glucose (delta = 54 mg/dl, P < 0.001) levels between the bromocriptine and placebo group at 16 weeks were highly significant. The mean plasma glucose concentration during OGTT was significantly reduced by bromocriptine (from 294 to 272 mg/dl, P = 0.005), whereas it increased in the placebo group. No change in glucose disposal occurred during the first step of the insulin clamp in either the bromocriptine- or placebo-treated group. During the second insulin clamp step, bromocriptine improved total glucose disposal from 6.8 to 8.4 mg x min(-1) kg(-1) fat-free mass (FFM) (P = 0.01) and nonoxidative glucose disposal from 3.3 to 4.3 mg min(-1) x kg(-1) FFM (P < 0.05), whereas both of these variables deteriorated significantly (P < or = 0.02) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Bromocriptine improves glycemic control and glucose tolerance in obese type 2 diabetic patients. Both reductions in fasting and postprandial plasma glucose levels appear to contribute to the improvement in glucose tolerance. The bromocriptine-induced improvement in glycemic control is associated with enhanced maximally stimulated insulin-mediated glucose disposal.     

Rosiglitazone improves insulin sensitivity and lowers blood pressure in hypertensive patients

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of rosiglitazone on insulin resistance and blood pressure in patients with essential hypertension, classified based on abnormalities of their renin-angiotensin system. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 24 hypertensive nondiabetic patients (age 58 +/- 6 years, BMI 30 +/- 5 kg/m2) were studied before and after rosiglitazone treatment. After 2 weeks off antihypertensive medication, subjects received a euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp (40 mU. m(-2). min(-1)) with 6,6-[2H2]glucose infusion, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, and blood tests for cardiovascular risk factors. Subjects were then placed on rosiglitazone (4 mg orally b.i.d.) and their usual antihypertensive medications (but not ACE inhibitors) for 16 weeks, and baseline tests were repeated. RESULTS: There was no change in fasting plasma glucose (83 +/- 2 vs. 82 +/- 2 mg/dl, P = 0.60), but fasting insulin decreased (16.1 +/- 1.4 vs. 12.5 +/- 0.9 micro U/ml, P < 0.01). Total glucose disposal during the clamp increased (5.0 +/- 0.4 vs. 5.9 +/- 0.5 mg. kg(-1). min(-1), P < 0.001), with no change in suppression of hepatic glucose output. There were significant decreases in mean 24-h systolic (138 +/- 2 vs. 134 +/- 2 mmHg, P < 0.02) and diastolic (85 +/- 2 vs. 80 +/- 2 mmHg, P < 0.0001) blood pressure, and the decline in systolic blood pressure was correlated with the improvement in insulin sensitivity (r = 0.59, P < 0.005). Triglycerides (135 +/- 16 vs. 89 +/- 8 mg/dl, P < 0.01), LDL cholesterol (129 +/- 6 vs. 122 +/- 8 mg/dl, P = 0.18), and HDL cholesterol (51 +/- 3 vs. 46 +/- 3 mg/dl, P < 0.02) all decreased, with no change in the LDL-to-HDL ratio. Plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 and C-reactive protein also declined significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Rosiglitazone treatment of nondiabetic hypertensive patients improves insulin sensitivity, reduces systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and induces favorable changes in markers of cardiovascular risk. Insulin sensitizers may provide cardiovascular benefits when used in the treatment of patients with hypertension.     

Prospective study of lipoprotein(a) as a risk factor for deteriorating renal function in type 2 diabetic patients with overt proteinuria

OBJECTIVE: The effect of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] on the progression of diabetic nephropathy has not been evaluated yet. The aim of this study was to determine whether Lp(a) is an independent risk factor for deteriorating renal function in type 2 diabetic patients with nephropathy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted this prospective study in type 2 diabetic patients with overt proteinuria. Patients were divided into two groups according to their baseline serum Lp(a) level. Group 1 had Lp(a) levels < or =30 mg/dl (n = 40) and group 2 had Lp(a) levels >30 mg/dl (n = 41). Patients were followed for 2 years. Progression of diabetic nephropathy was defined as a greater than twofold increase of follow-up serum creatinine concentration from the baseline value. RESULTS: At baseline and during the follow-up, there was no difference in HbA(1c) and lipid profile between groups 1 and 2. However, serum creatinine was significantly higher in group 2 than in group 1 after 1 year (148.3 +/- 78.0 vs. 108.1 +/- 34.9 micromol/l, P = 0.004) and after 2 years (216.9 +/- 144.5 vs. 131.3 +/- 47.3 micromol/l, P = 0.001), although baseline serum creatinine did not differ significantly between groups. In all, 13 of 14 patients with progression of diabetic nephropathy (progressors) were from group 2. Baseline Lp(a) levels were higher in the progressors than in the nonprogressors (62.9 +/- 26.7 vs. 33.5 +/- 27.5 mg/dl, P < 0.001). Multiple logistic regression showed that baseline Lp(a) level was a significant and independent predictor of the progression of diabetic nephropathy. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that Lp(a) is an independent risk factor for the progression of diabetic nephropathy in type 2 diabetic patients with overt proteinuria.     

A comparison of lipid and glycemic effects of pioglitazone and rosiglitazone in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidemia

OBJECTIVE: Published reports suggest that pioglitazone and rosiglitazone have different effects on lipids in patients with type 2 diabetes. However, these previous studies were either retrospective chart reviews or clinical trials not rigorously controlled for concomitant glucose- and lipid-lowering therapies. This study examines the lipid and glycemic effects of pioglitazone and rosiglitazone. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We enrolled subjects with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes (treated with diet alone or oral monotherapy) and dyslipidemia (not treated with any lipid-lowering agents). After a 4-week placebo washout period, subjects randomly assigned to the pioglitazone arm (n = 400) were treated with 30 mg once daily for 12 weeks followed by 45 mg once daily for an additional 12 weeks, whereas subjects randomly assigned to rosiglitazone (n = 402) were treated with 4 mg once daily followed by 4 mg twice daily for the same intervals. RESULTS: Triglyceride levels were reduced by 51.9 +/- 7.8 mg/dl with pioglitazone, but were increased by 13.1 +/- 7.8 mg/dl with rosiglitazone (P < 0.001 between treatments). Additionally, the increase in HDL cholesterol was greater (5.2 +/- 0.5 vs. 2.4 +/- 0.5 mg/dl; P < 0.001) and the increase in LDL cholesterol was less (12.3 +/- 1.6 vs. 21.3 +/- 1.6 mg/dl; P < 0.001) for pioglitazone compared with rosiglitazone, respectively. LDL particle concentration was reduced with pioglitazone and increased with rosiglitazone (P < 0.001). LDL particle size increased more with pioglitazone (P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Pioglitazone and rosiglitazone have significantly different effects on plasma lipids independent of glycemic control or concomitant lipid-lowering or other antihyperglycemic therapy. Pioglitazone compared with rosiglitazone is associated with significant improvements in triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, LDL particle concentration, and LDL particle size.     

The synergistic effect of miglitol plus metformin combination therapy in the treatment of type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE--To investigate the efficacy and safety of miglitol in combination with metformin in improving glycemic control in outpatients in whom type 2 diabetes is insufficiently controlled by diet alone. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS--In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 324 patients with type 2 diabetes were randomized, after an 8-week placebo run-in period, to treatment with either placebo, miglitol alone, metformin alone, or miglitol plus metformin for 36 weeks. The miglitol was titrated to 100 mg three times a day and metformin was administered at 500 mg three times a day. The primary efficacy criterion was change in HbA(1c) from baseline to the end of treatment. Secondary parameters included changes in fasting and postprandial plasma glucose and insulin levels, serum triglyceride levels, and responder rate. RESULTS--A total of 318 patients were valid for intent-to-treat analysis. A reduction in mean placebo-subtracted HbA(1c) of -1.78% was observed with miglitol plus metformin combination therapy, which was significantly different from treatment with metformin alone (-1.25; P = 0.002). Miglitol plus metformin also resulted in better metabolic control than metformin alone for fasting plasma glucose (-44.8 vs. -20.4 mg/dl; P = 0.0025), 2-h postprandial glucose area under the curve (-59.0 vs. -18.0 mg/dl; P = 0.0001), and responder rate (70.6 vs. 45.52%; P = 0.0014). All therapies were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS--In type 2 diabetic patients, miglitol in combination with metformin gives greater glycemic improvement than metformin monotherapy.     

Addition of nateglinide to rosiglitazone monotherapy suppresses mealtime hyperglycemia and improves overall glycemic control

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of nateglinide added to rosiglitazone monotherapy on glycemic control and on postprandial glucose and insulin levels in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This 24-week, multicenter, double-blind, randomized study compared the efficacy of nateglinide (120 mg a.c.) and placebo added to rosiglitazone monotherapy (8 mg q.d.) in 402 patients with type 2 diabetes with HbA(1c) between 7 and 11% (inclusive). Efficacy parameters tested included HbA(1c) and plasma glucose and insulin levels in the fasting state and after a standardized meal challenge. Safety data were also collected. RESULTS: In placebo-treated patients, HbA(1c) did not change (Delta = 0.0 +/- 0.1%). In patients randomized to nateglinide, HbA(1c) decreased from 8.3 to 7.5% (Delta = -0.8 +/- 0.1%, P < 0.0001 vs. placebo). Target HbA(1c) (<7.0%) was achieved by 38% of patients treated with combination therapy and by 9% of patients remaining on rosiglitazone monotherapy. In nateglinide-treated patients, fasting plasma glucose levels decreased by 0.7 mmol/l, 2-h postprandial glucose levels decreased by 2.7 mmol/l, and 30-min insulin levels increased by 165 pmol/l compared with no changes from baseline of these parameters with placebo added to rosiglitazone (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: By selectively augmenting early insulin release and decreasing prandial glucose excursions, nateglinide produced a clinically meaningful improvement in overall glycemic exposure in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with rosiglitazone. Therefore, nateglinide substantially improves the likelihood of achieving a therapeutic target of HbA(1c) <7.0%.     

Effects of tomatoes on the lipid profile

PURPOSE: The Mediterranean diet has been reported to reduce cardiovascular mortality and morbidity considerably. Tomatoes and lycopene are considered potent antioxidants. Our purpose was to study the effects of a tomatoe-rich diet on the lipid profile following 300g daily of tomatoes for one month. METHODS: Plasma concentrations of triglyceride, total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and VLDL-cholesterol were determined in 98 apparently healthy volunteers (mean age 45.5+/-14.1 yr) before and after one month of follow-up. Fifty volunteers (34 women and 16 men) ate tomatoes 300g daily and 48 volunteers (32 women and 16 men) continued their regular diet without eating tomatoes for a month. RESULTS: In the regular diet group, there were no changes in the lipid profile: triglyceride level (169.6+/-156.8 vs. 147.6+/-93.4mg/dl; P=0.33), total cholesterol level (198.3+/-41.2mg/dl vs. 204.2+/-70.9mg/dl; P=0.23), HDL-cholesterol level (50.6+/-12.2mg/dl vs. 47.6+/-10.8mg/dl; P=0.79), and LDL-cholesterol level (122.7+/-39.4mg/dl vs. 120.2+/-32.2mg/dl; P=0.24) before and after the 1 month offollow-up. In the tomato-rich diet group: triglyceride level 170.8+/-85.4mg/dl to 167.4+/-99.4mg/ dl (P=0.98), total cholesterol level 207.5+/-44.3mg/ dl to 204.1+/-45.1mg/dl (P=0.68), HDL-cholesterol level 46.1+/-10.6mg/dl to 53.4+/-13.3mg/dl (P=0.03), and LDL-cholesterol level 127.7+/-41.8mg/dl to 119.1+/-41.7mg/dl (P=0.57). CONCLUSION: We found that tomatoes'-rich diet (300g daily for one month) increased HDL-cholesterol level significantly by 15.2%.     

Urinary transforming growth factor-beta1 and alpha1-microglobulin in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: Transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta1 is an important mediator in the pathogenesis of diabetic nephropathy. Urinary TGF-beta1 reflects TGF-beta1 production in the kidney, and alpha1-microglobulin tubular dysfunction. These 2 markers were studied in the early phases of type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: There were 113 type 1 diabetic children and adolescents (mean +/- SD: age 14.1 +/- 2.9 years, and diabetes duration 7.4 +/- 2.9 years, HbA1c 9.3 +/- 1.5%) and 39 healthy subjects (age 13.8 +/- 2.8 years) who participated in the study. Of the diabetic patients, 105 were normoalbuminuric (2-3 consecutive overnight urinary albumin excretion rates [AERs] <20 microg/min) and 8 had microalbuminuria (at least 2 AERs 20-200 microg/min). Overnight urinary TGF-beta1 and alpha1-microglobulin levels were measured and the results expressed as the ratio to urinary creatinine concentration. RESULTS: Data are medians (range). Diabetic patients had higher urinary TGF-beta1 levels than those of control subjects: 0.9 ng/mg (0.05-122.3) vs. 0.3 ng/mg (0.05-2.2) creatinine, respectively (P = 0.003). Urinary TGF-beta1 levels correlated with urinary glucose (r = 0.2, P = 0.03) and alpha1-microglobulin (r = 0.2, P = 0.02) levels, but not with HbA1c, AER, age, or duration of diabetes. In 43 patients with urinary TGF-beta1 above the control levels, urinary TGF-beta1 levels correlated with urinary glucose (r = 0.6, P < 0.001) and alpha1-microglobulin (r = 0.6, P < 0.001) levels. Diabetic patients had higher urinary alpha1-microglobulin levels than those of control subjects: 4.8 microg/mg (0.6-48.8) vs. 2.7 microg/mg (0.8-11.6) creatinine, respectively (P < 0.001). Alpha1-microglobulin levels correlated with AER (r = 0.2, P = 0.02), HbA1c (r = 0.3, P = 0.001), urinary glucose (r = 0.5, P < 0.001), and urinary TGF-beta1 levels. CONCLUSIONS: An early rise in urinary TGF-beta1 levels was observed in young type 1 diabetic patients. Urinary TGF-beta1 is associated with 2 interrelated tubular markers, alpha1-microglobulin and urinary glucose.     

Pioglitazone hydrochloride monotherapy improves glycemic control in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes: a 6-month randomized placebo-controlled dose-response study. The Pioglitazone 001 Study Group

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of four doses of pioglitazone monotherapy in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: There were 408 patients randomized in this multicenter double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial. Patients who had HbA1c > or = 7.0%, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) > or = 140 mg/dl, and C-peptide > 1 ng/ml were randomized to receive placebo or 7.5, 15, 30, or 45 mg pioglitazone administered once a day for 26 weeks. RESULTS: Patients treated with 15, 30, or 45 mg pioglitazone had significant mean decreases in HbA1c (range -1.00 to -1.60% difference from placebo) and FPG (-39.1 to -65.3 mg/dl difference from placebo). The decreases in FPG were observed as early as the second week of therapy; maximal decreases occurred after 10-14 weeks and were maintained until the end of therapy (week 26). In the 15-, 30-, or 45-mg pioglitazone groups, there were significant mean percent decreases in triglycerides, significant mean percent increases in HDL cholesterol, and only small percent changes in total cholesterol and LDL. The subset of patients naive to therapy had greater improvements in HbA1c and FPG (difference from placebo of -2.55% and -79.9 mg/dl for the 45-mg group) compared with previously treated patients. The overall adverse event profile of pioglitazone was similar to that of placebo. There was no evidence of drug-induced hepatotoxicity or drug-induced elevations of alanine aminotransferase levels in this study CONCLUSIONS: Pioglitazone monotherapy significantly improves HbA1c and FPG while producing beneficial effects on serum lipids in patients with type 2 diabetes with no evidence of drug-induced hepatotoxicity.     

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.     

Dose-response effect of pioglitazone on insulin sensitivity and insulin secretion in type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the dose-response effects of pioglitazone on glycemic control, insulin sensitivity, and insulin secretion in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 58 diet-treated patients with type 2 diabetes (aged 54 +/- 1 years; 34 men and 24 women; BMI 31.5 +/- 0.6 kg/m(2)) were randomly assigned to receive placebo (n=11) or 7.5 mg (n=13), 15 mg (n=12), 30 mg (n=11), or 45 mg (n=11) of pioglitazone per day for 26 weeks. Before and after 26 weeks, subjects underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). RESULTS: Patients treated with 7.5 or 15 mg/day of pioglitazone had no change in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and fasting plasma insulin (FPI) concentrations or in plasma glucose (PG) and insulin concentrations during the OGTT. Patients treated with 30 and 45 mg/day of pioglitazone, respectively, had significant decreases from placebo in HbA1c (delta=-2.0 and -2.9%), FPG (delta=-66 and -97 mg/dl), and mean PG during OGTT (delta=-84 and -107 mg/dl). Fasting plasma insulin decreased significantly in the 45-mg/day pioglitazone group, but the mean plasma insulin during the OGTT did not change. The insulinogenic index (delta area under the curve [AUC] insulin/deltaAUC glucose) during the OGTT increased significantly in the 30- and 45-mg/day pioglitazone groups (0.13 +/- 0.03 to 0.27 +/- 0.05, P < 0.05). From the OGTT, we previously have derived a composite whole-body insulin sensitivity index (ISI) that correlates well with that measured directly with the insulin clamp technique. Whole-body ISI [ISI=10,000/(square-root (FPG x FPI) x (PG x PI)) where PG and PI equal mean plasma glucose and insulin concentrations during OGTT] increased significantly in patients treated with 30 mg (1.8 +/- 0.3 to 2.5 +/- 0.3, P < 0.05) or 45 mg (1.6 +/- 0.2 to 2.7 +/- 0.6, P < 0.05) per day of pioglitazone. In the basal state, the hepatic ISI [k/(FPG x FPI)[k/(FPG x FPI)], which agrees closely with that measured directly with tritiated glucose, increased in patients treated with 30 mg (0.13 +/- 0.02 to 0.21 +/- 0.03, P < 0.05) and 45 mg (0.11 +/- 0.02 to 0.24 +/- 0.06, P < 0.05) per day of pioglitazone. Significant correlations between the dose of pioglitazone and the changes in HbA1c (r=-0.58), FPG (r=-0.47), mean PG during the OGTT (r=-0.46), insulinogenic index (r=0.34), hepatic ISI (r=0.44), and whole-body ISI (r=0.36) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Pioglitazone improves glycemic control through the dose-dependent enhancement of beta-cell function and improved whole-body and hepatic insulin sensitivity.     

A randomized,double-blind,placebo-controlled,clinical trial of the effects of pioglitazone on glycemic control and dyslipidemia in oral antihyperglycemic medication-naive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare the effects of 2 doses of pioglitazone hydrochloride (a thiazolidinedione insulin sensitizer) with placebo on glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)), insulin sensitivity, and lipid profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had suboptimal glycemic control and mild dyslipidemia. METHODS: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (HbA(1c) >/=6.5% and /=7% to <8%) or high (>/=8% to 相似文献   

Improved glycemic control and enhanced insulin sensitivity in type 2 diabetic subjects treated with pioglitazone

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the effects of pioglitazone treatment on glucose and lipid metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 23 diabetic patients (age 30-70 years BMI < 36 kg/m2) who being treated with a stable dose of sulfonylurea were randomly assigned to receive either placebo (n = 11) or pioglitazone (45 mg/day) (n = 12) for 16 weeks. Before and after 16 weeks of treatment, all subjects received a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and hepatic peripheral insulin sensitivity was measured with a two-step euglycemic insulin (40 and 160 mU x min(-1) x m(-2) clamp performed with 3-[3H]glucose and indirect calorimetry HbA1c measured monthly throughout the study period. RESULTS: After 16 weeks of pioglitazone treatment, the fasting plasma glucose (FPG; 184 +/- 15 to 135 +/- 11 mg/dl, P < 0.01), mean plasma glucose during OGTT(293 +/- 12 to 225 +/- 14 mg/dl, P < 0.01), and HbA1c (8.9 +/- 0.3 to 7.2 +/- 0.5%, P < 0.01 ) decreased significantly without change in fasting or glucose-stimulated insulin/C-peptide concentrations. Fasting plasma free fatty acid (FFA; 647 +/- 39 to 478 +/- 49) microEq/l, P < 0.01) and mean plasma FFA during OGTT (485 +/- 30 to 347 +/- 33 microEq/l, P < 0.01) decreased significantly after pioglitazone treatment. Before and after pioglitazone treatment, basal endogenous glucose prodution (EGP) and FPG were strongly correlated (r = 0.67, P < 0.01). EGP during the first insulin clamp step was significantly decreased after pioglitazone treatment (P < 0.05) whereas insulin-stimulated total and nonoxidative glucose disposal during the second insulin clamp was increased (P < 0.01). The change in FPG was related to the change in basal EGP, EGP during the first insulin clamp step, and total glucose disposal during the second insulin clamp step. The change in mean plasma glucose concentration during the OGGTT was strongly related to the change in total body glucose disposl during the second insulin clamp step. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that pioglitazone therapy in type 2 diabetic patients decreases lasting and postprandial plasma glucose levels by improving hepatic and peripheral (muscle) tissue sensitivity to insulin.     

The effect of rosiglitazone on overweight subjects with type 1 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of rosiglitazone in the treatment of overweight subjects with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 50 adult type 1 diabetic subjects with a baseline BMI > or =27 kg/m(2) were randomly assigned in a double-blind fashion to take insulin and placebo (n = 25) or insulin and rosiglitazone 4 mg twice daily (n = 25) for a period of 8 months. Insulin regimen and dosage were modified in all subjects to achieve near-normal glycemic control. RESULTS: Both groups experienced a significant reduction in HbA(1c) (A1C) level (rosiglitazone: 7.9 +/- 1.3 to 6.9 +/- 0.7%, P < 0.0001; placebo: 7.7 +/- 0.8 to 7.0 +/- 0.9%, P = 0.002) and a significant increase in weight (rosiglitazone: 97.2 +/- 11.8 to 100.6 +/- 16.0 kg, P = 0.008; placebo: 96.4 +/- 12.2 to 99.1 +/- 15.0, P = 0.016). Baseline measures of BMI (P = 0.001), total daily insulin dose (P = 0.002), total cholesterol (P = 0.005), HDL cholesterol (P = 0.001), and LDL cholesterol (P = 0.02) were predictors of improvement in A1C level only in the group treated with rosiglitazone. Total daily insulin dose increased in subjects taking placebo (74.0 +/- 33.8 to 82.0 +/- 48.9 units, P < 0.05 baseline vs. week 32), but it decreased slightly in subjects taking rosiglitazone (77.5 +/- 28.6 to 75.3 +/- 33.1 units). Both systolic blood pressure (137.4 +/- 15.6 vs. 128.8 +/- 14.8 mmHg, baseline vs. week 32, P < 0.02) and diastolic blood pressure (87.2 +/- 9.4 vs. 79.4 +/- 7.2 mmHg, P < 0.0001) improved in the group treated with rosiglitazone. The total incidence of hypoglycemia did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Rosiglitazone in combination with insulin resulted in improved glycemic control and blood pressure without an increase in insulin requirements, compared with insulin- and placebo-treated subjects, whose improved glycemic control required an 11% increase in insulin dose. Weight gain and hypoglycemia were similar in both groups at the end of the study. The greatest effect of rosiglitazone occurred in subjects with more pronounced markers of insulin resistance.     

Results of the glucose-lowering effect of WelChol study (GLOWS): a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study evaluating the effect of colesevelam hydrochloride on glycemic control in subjects with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)-lowering effect of colesevelam hydrochloride, a bile acid sequestrant, in subjects with type 2 diabetes that was inadequately controlled by existing antihyperglycemic therapy. METHODS: After a 4-week placebo run-in period, subjects with type 2 diabetes and an HbA(1c) value of 7.0% to 10.0% were randomized to receive colesevelam 3.75 g/d or matching placebo for 12 weeks. Subjects' previous oral anti hyperglycemic medication (sulfonylurea and/or metformin) was continued throughout the study. Fasting blood samples were obtained at weeks -5, -1, 0, 1, 4, 8, and 12. The primary efficacy end point was the change in HbA(1c) from baseline to week 12. Secondary end points included changes in fructosamine levels, fasting plasma glucose levels, postprandial glucose level, and meal glucose response (ie, difference between preprandial and postprandial levels), and percent changes in lipid parameters from baseline to week 12. RESULTS: The 65 randomized subjects (31 colesevelam, 34 placebo) had a mean age of 56.2 years and a mean body mass index of 32.4 kg/m(2); 55.4% were male and 53.8% were white. The difference in least squares (LS) mean (SE) change in HbA(1c) between the colesevelam group and the placebo group was -0.5% (0.18) (P = 0.007). In subjects with a baseline HbAIc > or = 8.0%, the difference in LS mean change in HbA(1c) was -1.0% (0.27) (P = 0.002). Relative to placebo, colesevelam treatment was associated with reductions in levels of fructosamine (-29.0 [10.9] pmol/L; P = 0.011) and postprandial glucose (-31.5 [13.6] mg/dL; P = 0.026). The mean percent change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was -9.6% in the colesevelam group, compared with 2.1% in the placebo group (treatment difference, -11.7% [4.2]; P = 0.007); the respective mean percent changes in total cholesterol were -4.0% and 3.4% (treatment difference, -7.3% [3.0]; P = 0.019). Colesevelam also was associated with significant decreases in the percent change in apolipoprotein B (P = 0.003) and low-density lipoprotein particle concentration (P = 0.037). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar in both groups, although treatment-related adverse events were more frequent in the colesevelam group than in the placebo group (29.0% vs 8.8%, respectively). The most frequent TEAEs in the colesevelam group were gastrointestinal disorders (22.6%), primarily constipation (19.4%), compared with an 8.8% incidence of gastrointestinal disorders (0% constipation) in the placebo group. There were no significant changes in body weight or the occurrence of hypoglycemia between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In these subjects with type 2 diabetes, 12 weeks of colesevelam treatment were associated with significant reductions in HbA(1c) and in fructosamine and postprandial glucose levels compared with placebo. The 2 groups had a similar adverse-event profile, with the exception of an increased incidence of constipation in the colesevelam group. These results suggest that colesevelam may improve both lipid control and glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving oral antihyperglycemic medications.