Troglitazone,an insulin action enhancer,improves glycaemic control and insulin sensitivity in elderly Type 2 diabetic patients

The management of Type 2 diabetes mellitus with currently available oral agents may be complicated in the elderly by an increased frequency of side-effects. The effects of troglitazone, an insulin action enhancer, were studied in elderly patients with Type 2 diabetes in a double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. A total of 229 patients (41 % male), mean age 75 (range 69–85) years, with two fasting capillary blood glucose values ≥7 and ≤15 mmol l⁻¹ (and within 4.0 mmol l⁻¹ of each other) and previously treated with either diet alone (30 %) or oral hypoglycaemic agents, were randomized to placebo or troglitazone 400 mg once daily or 200 mg twice daily, or 800 mg once daily or 400 mg twice daily, for 12 weeks. After 12 weeks’ treatment, fasting serum glucose was significantly lower in troglitazone-treated patients (troglitazone, adjusted geometric mean 9.4–10.4 mmol l⁻¹ vs placebo 12.7 mmol l⁻¹, p<0.001). Adjusted geometric mean fructosamine was also lower in troglitazone-treated patients by 5 to 15 % compared to placebo (P <0.05 at all doses except 400 mg od). There was no significant difference between troglitazone doses for improvement in glycaemic control. Troglitazone lowered adjusted geometric mean fasting plasma insulin by 27–34 % compared to placebo (P<0.001) and insulin sensitivity (HOMA-S) improved by 9–15 % in all troglitazone dose groups (p<0.001). Troglitazone also lowered serum non-esterified fatty acids and triglyceride. Adverse event incidence in troglitazone-treated patients was similar to that in patients treated with placebo. No weight gain or symptomatic hypoglycaemia was recorded at any of the doses studied. Troglitazone is effective and well tolerated in elderly patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus, providing improved glycaemic control in the absence of weight gain. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Rosiglitazone in Type 2 diabetes mellitus: an evaluation in British Indo-Asian patients.

AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of rosiglitazone in reducing hyperglycaemia in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) of Indo-Asian origin taking concurrent sulphonylurea therapy. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 26 weeks' duration at 31 primary and secondary care centres in areas of the UK with a high Indo-Asian population, including 177 patients aged 28-78 years. Rosiglitazone 8 mg/day or matching placebo was added to existing sulphonylurea therapy. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) at week 26. RESULTS: The mean changes in HbA1c were -1.16% with rosiglitazone (baseline 9.21%) and +0.26% with placebo (baseline 9.06%) (treatment difference P < 0.001; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.81, -1.08). HbA1c fell below 8% in 55% and 19% of patients, respectively (treatment difference P < 0.001; 95% CI 0.22, 0.51). The greatest improvements occurred in patients whose glycaemic control was initially poor. Improvements in homeostasis model assessment of insulin sensitivity and pancreatic beta-cell function with rosiglitazone were not accompanied by a change in plasma insulin or C-peptide after 26 weeks. Free fatty acids fell by 0.09 mmol/l with rosiglitazone and increased by 0.03 mmol/l with placebo (treatment difference P < 0.001; 95% CI -0.19, -0.07). CONCLUSION: Rosiglitazone improved insulin sensitivity, pancreatic beta-cell function, and glycaemic control in Indo-Asian patients with Type 2 DM who are at greater risk of the complications of Type 2 DM than other ethnic groups.     

Role of sibutramine in the treatment of obese Type 2 diabetic patients receiving sulphonylurea therapy.

AIMS: To investigate whether the satiety-inducing agent sibutramine affected body weight and associated anthropometry in overweight and obese (body mass index (BMI) > 27) Type 2 diabetic patients on sulphonylurea therapy. METHODS: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial was undertaken in 134 patients with stable metabolic control on chronic sulphonylurea therapy. Patients were placed on moderate caloric restriction and received treatment with either sibutramine (15 mg/day) or placebo for 6 months. RESULTS: Fifty-three of 69 sibutramine-treated and 57/65 placebo-treated patients completed the study. Both groups showed progressive weight loss. At the end of the trial weight loss was two times greater in the sibutramine group (mean +/- SEM; -4.5 +/- 0.5 kg) than placebo (-1.7 plus minus 0.5 kg, P < 0.001 vs. sibutramine). There was a trend for more patients to lose > 5% of initial body weight in the sibutramine group than placebo. BMI (P < 0.001) and waist circumference (P < 0.001) were also decreased to a greater extent by sibutramine. Mean reductions in HbA(1c) were commensurate with weight loss in both the sibutramine and placebo (- 0.78 +/- 0.17% and -0.73 +/- 0.23%; P = 0.84). Sibutramine was well tolerated with only two patients withdrawn due to potentially drug-related serious adverse events (palpitations). CONCLUSIONS: Sibutramine, in conjunction with moderate caloric restriction, enhances weight loss and reduces waist circumference in overweight and obese Type 2 diabetic patients receiving sulphonylurea therapy. This is associated with additional improvements in glycaemic control in a limited number of patients losing > or = 10% of their baseline body weight.     

Long-term effects of pioglitazone and metformin on insulin sensitivity in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus.

AIM: Despite their comparable glycaemic effects in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), pioglitazone and metformin may have different effects on insulin sensitivity because they have different mechanisms of action. We studied the changes in insulin sensitivity, as assessed by the Quantitative Insulin Sensitivity Check Index (QUICKI), in patients with T2DM who used metformin or pioglitazone as monotherapy or in combination therapy with sulphonylurea. METHODS: Data in this report are from two multicentre, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy studies conducted in Europe (monotherapy) or in Europe and Canada (combination therapy study). Patients were randomized to 52 weeks of treatment consisting of a 12-week forced titration period and a 40-week maintenance period. HbA(1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and fasting serum insulin (FSI) were quantified from a single blood sample at weeks 0, 8, 16, 24, 32, 42 and 52. Insulin sensitivity was assessed with QUICKI, which is calculated from FSI and fasting blood glucose (FBG) concentrations using the formula 1/(log(10) FSI + log(10) FBG). Time course effects of the treatments were compared by repeated measures analysis of covariance. RESULTS: As monotherapy, pioglitazone and metformin increased QUICKI compared with baseline (baseline vs. end point [mean +/- sem]; pioglitazone [0.303 +/- 0.001 vs. 0.321 +/- 0.001; P < 0.001] and metformin [0.304 +/- 0.001 vs. 0.315 +/- 0.001; P < 0.001]). Pioglitazone increased insulin sensitivity more than metformin from week 4 through week 52. There were significant increases in QUICKI from baseline in both combination therapy groups (baseline vs. end point; pioglitazone + sulphonylurea [0.305 +/- 0.001 vs. 0.319 +/- 0.001; P < 0.001] and metformin + sulphonylurea [0.306 +/- 0.001 vs. 0.317 +/- 0.001; P < 0.001]). Overall, pioglitazone + sulphonylurea significantly increased insulin sensitivity more than metformin + sulphonylurea. CONCLUSION: Pioglitazone differed from metformin in its effects on insulin sensitivity despite both drugs having comparable glycaemic effects.     

Poorly controlled elderly Type 2 diabetic patients: the effects of increasing sulphonylurea dosages or adding metformin.

AIMS: To assess the effects and safety of increasing sulphonylurea dosages or adding metformin in poorly controlled elderly Type 2 diabetic patients. METHODS: A 18-month multicentre clinical study was performed on sulphonylurea-treated diabetic patients over 70 years of age with well-preserved renal function, steady fasting blood glucose > or = 200 mg/dl and HbA1c > or = 9%. Patients were randomly assigned to sulphonylurea increased up to its maximum dosage (1st group) or to addition of metformin (2nd group). Glycaemic control, lipid pattern, haemostatic status and safety were monitored during run-in, at baseline and at scheduled intervals for 18 months. Results refer to 85 patients in the 1st group and 89 patients in the 2nd with complete data. RESULTS: Similar improvements in glycaemic levels were observed with both treatments within the first month and a similar decrease in HbA1c within the third month. No further changes occurred in glycaemic control. In the 1st group, fasting glucose (mmol/l, mean +/- SE) decreased from 14.21 +/- 0.49 to 9.88 +/- 0.21, average day-long glucose from 14.87 +/- 0.27 to 10.69 +/- 0.19 and HbAt1c(%) from 10.32 +/- 0.13 to 8.66 +/- 0.13. In the 2nd treatment group fasting glucose decreased from 14.59 +/- 0.61 to 9.05 +/- 37.28, average day-long glucose from 15.09 +/- 0.29 to 10.32 +/- 0.21 and HbA1c from 10.33 +/- 0.13 to 8.77+/-0.12 (for all P<0.0005). In this 2nd group, a decrease in LDL-cholesterol (P < 0.05) and an increase in HDL-cholesterol levels (P < 0.02) were also observed. In the 1st group, anthrombin III activity increased significantly (P<0.01). In the 2nd group, significant reductions in markers of platelet function (FP4 and betaTG, P < 0.01), thrombin generation (FPA, F1 + 2 and D-D, P<0.01), and fibrinolysis inhibition (PAI-1 activity, PAI-1 antigen, P< 0.001) were observed. Increases in some fibrinolytic activation markers (t-PA activity, and AT-III activity, P<0.01) occurred. Fasting lactate concentrations were unchanged in the metformin-treated group. No serious adverse effects were observed in either group. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that either high sulphonylurea dosages or a therapy combining lower sulphonylurea dosages with metformin are effective and safe in an aged but healthy population. Metformin provides additional benefits counteracting several cardiovascular risk factors but must be administered with caution, bearing in mind the general contra-indications for the drug but not age alone.     

The role of sulphonylurea in combination therapy assessed in a trial of sulphonylurea withdrawal. Scandinavian Insulin-Sulphonylurea Study Group Research Team.

AIMS: To evaluate the effect of adding insulin to sulphonylurea (SU) and the effect of SU withdrawal on glycaemic control in Type 2 diabetic patients who failed on treatment with SU alone. METHOD: One hundred and seventy-five patients were included in a placebo-controlled multicentre study. During phase I (4 months), premixed insulin was added to glibenclamide therapy; during phase II (1-4 months, depending on response) the insulin dose was fixed, while placebo or glibenclamide replaced the open SU therapy. Insulin sensitivity (KITT), beta-cell function (C-peptide) and metabolic control (HbA1c) were monitored. RESULTS: HbA1c improved from 9.65% to 7.23% (P < 0.0001) during phase I. A high HbA1c value (P < 0.0001) and a high KITT-value (P = 0.045) at baseline were associated with a beneficial response to combination treatment. During phase II, glycaemic control was unchanged in the control (glibenclamide) group. In the placebo group, after SU withdrawal, fasting blood glucose (FBG) increased by 10% or more within 4 weeks in 79% of the patients. Patients (67 of 112) with an FBG increase > or =40% during phase II were defined as 'SU responders' by protocol. In a multivariate analysis only a long duration of diabetes was associated with SU response. There were more GAD-antibody-positive patients among non-responders (18% vs. 4%, P = 0.0263). CONCLUSIONS: Poor glycaemic control in combination with preserved insulin sensitivity and lack of GAD antibodies predicts a beneficial response to combination therapy, which can be achieved in 75% of patients with SU failure.     

Effect of Combination Therapy of Troglitazone and Sulphonylureas in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Who Were Poorly Controlled by Sulphonylurea Therapy Alone

The clinical efficacy of troglitazone, a new oral hypoglycaemic agent was investigated in Type 2 diabetes in combination with sulphonylureas. Two hundred and ninety-one patients with Type 2 diabetes (age 21–81 years) whose previous glycaemic control by sulphonylureas was judged stable but unsatisfactory (fasting plasma glucose (FPG) > 8.3 mmol l⁻¹) were randomly allocated into the troglitazone treatment group (troglitazone group, n = 145) or the placebo treatment group (placebo group, n = 146). They were treated by test drugs for 12 weeks in combination with the same dose of sulphonylureas before the trial. One hundred and twenty-two patients who received troglitazone and 126 patients who received placebo were evaluated for efficacy. The baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. In the troglitazone group, FPG and HbA_1C decreased significantly after the treatment (before vs after, FPG: 10.8 ± 2.0 mmol l⁻¹ vs 9.2 ± 2.5 mmol l⁻¹, p < 0.001; HbA_1C: 9.2 ± 1.4 % vs 8.5 ± 1.5 %, p < 0.001). FPG and HbA_1C did not change after the treatment in the placebo group (before vs after, FPG: 10.5 ± 1.7 mmol l⁻¹ vs 10.7 ± 2.2 mmol l⁻¹; HbA_1C: 9.0 ± 1.5 % vs 9.2 ± 1.6 %). Serum total cholesterol and HDL-cholesterol did not change in either group, however, serum triglyceride significantly decreased in the troglitazone group. No serious adverse events occurred in either group. In conclusion, troglitazone 400 mg day⁻¹ had a significant hypoglycaemic effect in combination with sulphonylureas without any serious adverse events. Troglitazone, developed as an insulin action enhancer, can be a useful hypoglycaemic agent in the treatment of patients with Type 2 diabetes who are not well controlled by sulphonylureas alone.     

Effect of troglitazone on urinary albumin excretion and serum type IV collagen concentrations in Type 2 diabetic patients with microalbuminuria or macroalbuminuria.

AIMS: Troglitazone, a newly developed thiazolidinedione derivative, has been shown to ameliorate microalbuminuria in diabetic animal model and in human diabetic nephropathy in short-term studies. The aim of the present study was to determine whether troglitazone or sulphonylurea affect micro- albuminuria, macroalbuminuria, or serum type IV collagen concentrations in patients with diabetic nephropathy. METHODS: We studied 32 normotensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus associated with microalbuminuria (n = 16) or macroalbuminuria (n = 16) and 20 healthy controls. The patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups: those treated with glibenclamide (5.0 mg/day) (n = 8) and those treated with troglitazone (400 mg/day) (n = 8). They received the drug regimen for 12 months. Serum type IV collagen was measured with sandwich enzyme immunoassay. RESULTS: Type IV collagen concentrations in macroalbuminuric patients were higher than those in microalbuminuric patients (P < 0.05) and healthy controls (P < 0.01). Troglitazone reduced urinary albumin excretion (UAE) in micro-albuminuric patients from 126 microg/min (range 58--180 microg/min) to 42 microg/min (range 14--80 microg/min) (P < 0.01) and also reduced serum type IV collagen levels gradually at 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment (P < 0.05). However, glibenclamide did not affect UAE and type IV collagen levels in micro- albuminuric diabetes patients. In addition, neither troglitazone nor gliben- clamide changed UAE and type IV collagen levels in macroalbuminuric patients. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that troglitazone is an effective treatment for renal injury in patients with early diabetic nephropathy.     

Glycaemic responsiveness to long-term insulin plus sulphonylurea therapy as assessed by sulphonylurea withdrawal.

AIMS: To assess the effect of sulphonylurea (SU) in patients with Type 2 diabetes undergoing long-term combination therapy with insulin, by withdrawal of SU, and to identify clinically useful markers of long-term response. METHODS: We studied 25 patients, aged 59-83 years, mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) 7.0 +/- 0.6%, who had been treated with SU for 16 years (7-24 years) in combination with insulin for 10 years (6-15 years). After basal measurements, SU was withdrawn. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and C-peptide were then monitored every 2-3 days during the following 2 weeks. If FPG increased > 40% or P-glucose exceeded 20 mmol/l, SU was restarted. If neither criterion was met, a clinical follow-up visit with measurement of HbA(1c) was scheduled within 8 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty patients were restarted on SU because of worsening glycaemic control, eight within the first 4 weeks and the remaining 12 at the follow-up visit as their HbA(1c) had increased by 1.1% (range 0.4-2.0%). All these patients were defined as 'SU responders'. The increase in FPG during the initial 2 weeks correlated positively with duration of diabetes (P < 0.01) and duration of SU treatment (P < 0.001). The 'SU responders' had higher levels of basal fasting C-peptide (0.84 +/- 0.44 vs. 0.41 +/- 0.15 nmol/l, P < 0.05), but the variation was wide and none of the measured variables identified 'SU responders'. CONCLUSIONS: In 80% of this group of patients, glycaemic control deteriorated after SU withdrawal despite long duration of SU treatment.     

Efficacy and safety of troglitazone in the treatment of lipodystrophy syndromes

BACKGROUND: Troglitazone promotes adipocyte differentiation in vitro and increases insulin sensitivity in vivo. Therefore, troglitazone may have therapeutic benefit in lipoatrophic diabetes. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether troglitazone ameliorates hyperglycemia and hypertriglyceridemia or increases fat mass in lipoatrophic patients. DESIGN: Open-labeled prospective study. SETTING: United States and Canada. PATIENTS: 20 patients with various syndromes associated with lipoatrophy or lipodystrophy. INTERVENTION: 6 months of therapy with troglitazone, 200 to 600 mg/d. MEASUREMENTS: Levels of hemoglobin A1c triglycerides, free fatty acids, and insulin; respiratory quotient; percentage of body fat; liver volume; and regional fat mass. RESULTS: In the 13 patients with diabetes who completed 6 months of troglitazone therapy, hemoglobin A1c levels decreased by a mean of 2.8% (95% CI, 1.9% to 3.7%; P < 0.001). In all 19 study patients, fasting triglyceride levels decreased by 2.6 mmol/L (230 mg/dL) (CI, 0.7 to 4.5 mmol/L [62 to 398 mg/dL]; P = 0.019) and free fatty acid levels decreased by 325 micromol/L (CI, 135 to 515 micromol/L; P = 0.035). The respiratory quotient decreased by a mean of 0.12 (CI, 0.08 to 0.16; P < 0.001), suggesting that troglitazone promoted oxidation of fat. Body fat increased by a mean of 2.4 percentage points (CI, 1.3 to 4.5 percentage points; P = 0.044). Magnetic resonance imaging showed an increase in subcutaneous adipose tissue but not in visceral fat. In one patient, the serum alanine aminotransferase level increased eightfold during the 10th months of troglitazone treatment but normalized 3 months after discontinuation of treatment Liver biopsy revealed an eosinophilic infiltrate, suggesting hypersensitivity reaction as a cause of hepatotoxicity. CONCLUSION: Troglitazone therapy improved metabolic control and increased body fat in patients with lipoatrophic diabetes. The substantial benefits of troglitazone must be balanced against the risk for hepatotoxicity, which can occur relatively late in the treatment course.     

A randomized study of orlistat in combination with a weight management programme in obese patients with Type 2 diabetes treated with metformin.

AIMS: To assess the effects of orlistat vs. placebo, in combination with a weight management programme, on weight loss and metabolic control in obese patients with Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Patients treated with either metformin alone or metformin in combination with sulphonylurea were randomized to double-blind treatment with orlistat or placebo (120 mg) three times daily, combined with a mildly reduced calorie diet and a weight management programme for 52 weeks. Changes in body weight, anthropometry, glycaemic control and lipid profile were assessed. RESULTS: After 52 weeks, orlistat-treated patients achieved an almost threefold greater reduction in weight compared with placebo recipients (-5.0% vs. -1.8%; P<0.0001). The decrease in waist circumference was significantly greater with orlistat than placebo (-4.8 cm vs. -2.8 cm; P=0.0022). Orlistat treatment was also associated with significantly greater reductions in haemoglobin A(1c) (-1.1% vs. -0.2%; P<0.0001), fasting plasma glucose (-1.9 mmol/l vs. -0.3 mmol/l; P<0.0001), total cholesterol (-0.2 mmol/l vs. 0.1 mmol/l; P=0.03) and apolipoprotein B (-0.08 g/l vs. 0.01 g/l; P=0.0085) and greater improvements in beta-cell function (P=0.031) and insulin resistance (P=0.001) assessed using the homeostasis model assessment (HOMA). Similar results were obtained for subgroups of patients treated with metformin alone or metformin in combination with sulphonylurea. Orlistat treatment reduced the requirement for anti-diabetic medication more than placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Orlistat, in combination with a reduced calorie diet and a weight management programme, promotes weight loss and clinically relevant improvements in glycaemic control and other cardiovascular risk factors in obese patients with Type 2 diabetes.     

Addition of low-dose rosiglitazone to sulphonylurea therapy improves glycaemic control in Type 2 diabetic patients.

AIMS: This study was designed to test the efficacy and safety of low-dose rosiglitazone, a potent, insulin-sensitizing thiazolidinedione, in combination with sulphonylurea in Type 2 diabetic patients. METHODS: For the intention-to-treat analysis, 574 patients (59% male, mean age 61 years) were available, randomized to receive 26 weeks of twice-daily placebo (n = 192), rosiglitazone 1 mg (n = 199) or rosiglitazone 2 mg (n = 183) in addition to existing sulphonylurea treatment with gliclazide (47.6% of patients), glibenclamide (41.8%) or glipizide (9.4%) (two patients were taking carbutamide or glimepiride). Change in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fructosamine, insulin, C-peptide, albumin, and lipids were measured, and safety was evaluated. RESULTS: Mean baseline HbA1c was 9.2% and FPG was 11.4 mmol/l. Rosiglitazone at doses of 1 and 2 mg b.d. plus sulphonylurea produced significant decreases, compared with sulphonylurea plus placebo, in HbA1c (-0.59% and -1.03%, respectively; both P<0.0001) and FPG (1.35 mmol/l and 2.44 mmol/l, respectively; both P<0.0001). Both HDL-cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol increased and potentially beneficial decreases in non-esterified fatty acids and gamma glutamyl transpeptidase levels were seen in both rosiglitazone groups. The overall incidence of adverse experiences was similar in all three treatment groups, with no significant cardiac events, hypoglycaemia or hepatotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the combination of rosiglitazone and a sulphonylurea was safe, well tolerated and effective in patients with Type 2 diabetes.     

Effects of vildagliptin on glucose control in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with a sulphonylurea

Aim: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of vildagliptin vs. placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who are inadequately controlled [haemoglobin A_1c (HbA_1c) 7.5 to 11%] with prior sulphonylurea (SU) monotherapy. Methods: This 24‐week, multicentre, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study assessed the effects of the dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitor vildagliptin (50 mg given once or twice daily) vs. placebo added to glimepiride (4 mg once daily) in 515 patients with T2DM. Adjusted mean changes from baseline to end‐point (AMΔ) in HbA_1c, fasting plasma glucose, fasting lipids and body weight were compared by analysis of covariance. Results: The between‐group difference (vildagliptin ? placebo) in AMΔ HbA_1c was ?0.6 ± 0.1% in patients receiving vildagliptin 50 mg daily and ?0.7 ± 0.1% in those receiving 100 mg daily (p < 0.001 vs. placebo for both). Greater efficacy was seen in patients ≥65 years of age (?0.7 ± 0.1% and ?0.8 ± 0.2% for 50 and 100 mg daily respectively) and in patients with baseline HbA_1c > 9% (Δ = ?1.0 ± 0.2% and ?0.9 ± 0.2% for 50 and 100 mg daily respectively). Relative to placebo, patients receiving vildagliptin also had improvements in β‐cell function and postprandial glucose, with small changes in fasting lipids and body weight. The incidences of adverse events (AEs) (67.1, 66.3 and 64.2%) and serious AEs (2.9, 2.4 and 5.1%) were similar in patients receiving 50 mg vildagliptin, 100 mg vildagliptin or placebo respectively. The incidence of hypoglycaemic events was low but slightly higher in the group receiving vildagliptin 100 mg (3.6%) than in the group receiving vildagliptin 50 mg (1.2%) or placebo (0.6%). Conclusions: In patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with prior SU monotherapy, addition of vildagliptin (50 or 100 mg daily) to glimepiride (4 mg once daily) improves glycaemic control and is well tolerated. Addition of vildagliptin 50 mg daily to SU monotherapy may be a particularly attractive therapy in elderly patients.     

Vasodilatory effects of troglitazone improve blood pressure at rest and during mental stress in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

The present study examined the hemodynamic mechanisms of blood pressure (BP) lowering by troglitazone in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) at rest and during a mental arithmetic test (MAT). Twenty-two patients with DM with normal to high-normal BP and 12 controls matched for age, gender, glucose tolerance, and BP were studied. DM subjects showed significantly higher systolic BP response during MAT than controls (157 versus 139 mm Hg; P<0.01). All 22 DM patients and 5 of 12 controls had systolic BP >140 mm Hg during MAT. Heart rate and diastolic BP were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The DM group was then randomized to receive troglitazone (n=10; 400 mg/d) or glyburide (n=12; 20 mg/d). MAT was repeated after 6 months of treatment. Both treatments reduced glucose equally (-1.7 mmol/L for troglitazone and -1.5 mmol/L for glyburide), but only troglitazone reduced insulin (-15 microU/mL; P<0.001) and C-peptide (-0.9 ng/mL; P<0.02) levels. Troglitazone significantly reduced BP at baseline (P<0.05) and systolic BP response to MAT (P<0.01), whereas glyburide did not affect BP at baseline or during MAT. Stroke volume and cardiac output did not change with either drug, but troglitazone decreased peripheral vascular resistance (-112 dyne. s. cm(-5); P<0.05). Improved insulin resistance rather than an improved glycemic control is associated with lower resting and stress BP values in patients with DM. A reduction in vascular resistance may be a primary hemodynamic mechanism of the manner in which troglitazone lowers BP. Insulin sensitizers may offer potential therapeutic advantage in subjects with DM with elevated BP.     

Plasma interleukin-6 is associated with coagulation in poorly controlled patients with Type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: We investigated the relationship between interleukin (IL)-6 and coagulation, i.e. whether changes in the plasma IL-6 are associated with those in coagulation markers (D dimer and fibrinogen) after glycaemic control with sulphonylurea or insulin in poorly controlled patients with Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We studied 42 patients with Type 2 diabetes, including 19 subsequently treated with sulphonylurea, 23 treated with insulin and 48 control subjects. All patients were in poor glycaemic control and were hospitalized for 3 weeks. At the beginning and end of treatment, we measured plasma concentrations of IL-6, fibrinogen, and D dimer. RESULTS: Plasma concentrations of IL-6 and D dimer were significantly higher in diabetic patients than in controls (P<0.0001 for both). In all patients with diabetes, the plasma concentration of IL-6 decreased significantly (P<0.001) after treatment. Changes in the plasma IL-6 during hospitalization were positively correlated with those in plasma D dimer and fibrinogen (r=0.664, P<0.0001; r=0.472, P=0.0042, respectively). Treatment with sulphonylurea or insulin caused a similar fall in the plasma IL-6 concentration with a concomitant decrease in the BMI and an equal improvement in glycaemia. CONCLUSIONS: In poorly controlled patients with Type 2 diabetes, plasma IL-6 concentrations were reduced significantly even by short-term metabolic control. As changes in the plasma concentrations of D dimer are related to plasma IL-6, plasma IL-6 may reflect a pro-coagulant as well as an inflammatory state in patients with Type 2 diabetes.     

Troglitazone reduces reactive oxygen species generation by leukocytes and lipid peroxidation and improves flow-mediated vasodilatation in obese subjects

Because troglitazone has been shown to have antioxidant properties, we investigated whether troglitazone administration to obese subjects causes a reduction in (1) reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation by polymorphonuclear leukocytes (PMNLs) and mononuclear cells (MNCs) and (2) lipid peroxidation as reflected in the plasma concentrations of 9-hydroxyoctadecadienoic acid (9-HODE) and 13-hydroxyoctadecadienoic acid (13-HODE). Seven obese subjects were given 400 mg/d troglitazone for 4 weeks. Blood samples were obtained before troglitazone administration and at weekly intervals thereafter. Insulin concentrations fell significantly at week 1 and remained low at weeks 2 and 4 (P:<0.001). ROS generation by PMNLs fell to 77.6+/-25.1% of the basal at week 1 and 47.9+/-41.1% at week 4 (P:<0.001). ROS generation by MNCs fell to 59.8+/-15.7% of the basal at week 1 and 35.1+/-17.6% at week 4 (P:<0.001). 9-HODE and 13-HODE concentrations fell significantly from 787.4+/-52.4 and 713. 1+/-44.7 pg/mL to 720.4+/-66.7 (P:<0.004) and 675.2+/-65.0 pg/mL (P:<0.01) after 4 weeks, respectively. Postischemic dilatation of the brachial artery was measured by ultrasonography. The mean percent dilatation after forearm ischemia before and after troglitazone was 5.5+/-3.01% and 8.75+/-3.37% (P:<0.02), respectively. The percent increase in diameter after nitroglycerin was 17.08+/-1.18% before troglitazone, whereas it was 18.9+/-1.91% (P:<0.02) after troglitazone. We conclude that troglitazone has a potent and rapid biological inhibitory effect on ROS generation by PMNLs and MNCs and that it inhibits lipid peroxidation significantly. These changes are associated with a significant improvement in postischemic flow-mediated vasodilation in the brachial artery over a relatively short period of 4 weeks.     

Long‐term glycaemic effects of pioglitazone compared with placebo as add‐on treatment to metformin or sulphonylurea monotherapy in PROactive (PROactive 18)

Aims To assess the long‐term glycaemic effects, concomitant changes in medications and initiation of permanent insulin use (defined as daily insulin use for a period of ≥ 90 days or ongoing use at death/final visit) with pioglitazone vs. placebo in diabetic patients receiving metformin or sulphonylurea monotherapy at baseline in the PROspective pioglitAzone Clinical Trial in macroVascular Events (PROactive). Methods In PROactive, patients with Type 2 diabetes and macrovascular disease were randomized to pioglitazone (force titrated to 45 mg/day) or placebo, in addition to other existing glucose‐lowering therapies. In a post‐hoc analysis, we categorized patients not receiving insulin at baseline and treated by oral monotherapy into two main cohorts: add‐on to metformin alone (n = 514) and sulphonylurea alone (n = 1001). The follow‐up averaged 34.5 months. Results There were significantly greater reductions in glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) with pioglitazone than with placebo and more pioglitazone‐treated patients achieved HbA_1c targets, irrespective of the baseline oral glucose‐lowering regimen and despite a decrease in the use of other glucose‐lowering agents. Approximately twice as many in the placebo groups progressed to permanent insulin use than in the pioglitazone groups across the two cohorts: 3.4% for pioglitazone and 6.5% for placebo when added to metformin monotherapy and 6.3% and 14.8%, respectively, when added to sulphonylurea monotherapy. The overall safety of both dual therapies was good. Conclusions Intensifying an existing oral monotherapy regimen to a dual oral regimen by adding pioglitazone resulted in sustained improvements in glycaemic control and reduced progression to insulin therapy. The efficacy and safety of adding pioglitazone to either metformin monotherapy or sulphonylurea monotherapy were good.     

Sustained effects of pioglitazone vs. glibenclamide on insulin sensitivity, glycaemic control, and lipid profiles in patients with Type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: This study compared the effects of 52 weeks' treatment with pioglitazone, a thiazolidinedione that reduces insulin resistance, and glibenclamide, on insulin sensitivity, glycaemic control, and lipids in patients with Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Patients with Type 2 diabetes were randomized to receive either pioglitazone (initially 30 mg QD, n = 91) or micronized glibenclamide (initially 1.75 mg QD, n = 109) as monotherapy. Doses were titrated (to 45 mg for pioglitazone and 10.5 mg for glibenclamide) to achieve glycaemic targets during the next 12 weeks: fasting blood glucose of < or = 7 mmol/l and 1-h postprandial blood glucose of < or = 10 mmol/l. Patients were maintained on the titrated dose for 40 weeks. RESULTS: Pioglitazone significantly increased insulin sensitivity compared with glibenclamide, as assessed by homeostasis model assessment (17.0% vs. -13.0%; P < 0.001), quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (0.011 vs. -0.007; P < 0.001) and fasting serum insulin (-1.3 pmol/l vs. 23.8 pmol/l; P = 0.007). The glibenclamide group had significantly lower HbA1c than the pioglitazone group after 12 weeks of therapy (7.8% vs. 8.3%, P = 0.015), but significantly higher HbA1c after 52 weeks of therapy (7.8% vs. 7.2%, P = 0.001). Pioglitazone significantly (vs. glibenclamide) increased mean HDL-C (P < 0.001), decreased mean triglycerides (P = 0.019), and decreased mean atherogenic index of plasma (AIP; P = 0.001) and mean total cholesterol/HDL-C (P = 0.004), without significantly elevating mean total cholesterol or mean LDL-C compared with glibenclamide. CONCLUSIONS These data suggest that the effects of pioglitazone are more sustained than those of glibenclamide for improving insulin sensitivity in patients with Type 2 diabetes, and that 52 weeks' treatment with pioglitazone has favourable effects on glycaemic control and lipoprotein profile.     

Troglitazone increases the resistance of low density lipoprotein to oxidation in healthy volunteers

Summary The oxidative modification of low density lipoprotein is of importance in atherogenesis. Antioxidant supplementation has been shown, in published work, to increase low density lipoprotein resistance to oxidation in both healthy subjects and diabetic subjects; in animal studies a contemporary reduction in atherogenesis has been demonstrated. Troglitazone is a novel oral antidiabetic drug which has similarities in structure with vitamin E. The present study assessed the effect of troglitazone 400 mg twice daily for 2 weeks on the resistance of low density lipoprotein to oxidation in healthy male subjects. Ten subjects received troglitazone and ten received placebo in a randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group design. The lag phase (a measure of the resistance of low density lipoprotein to oxidation) was determined by measurement of fluorescence development during copper-catalysed oxidative modification of low density lipoprotein. The lag phase was increased by 27 % (p < 0.001) at week 1 and by 24 % (p < 0.001) at week 2 in the troglitazone treated group compared with the placebo group. A number of variables known to influence the resistance of low density lipoprotein to oxidation were measured. They included macronutrient consumption, plasma and lipoprotein lipid profile, alpha-tocopherol, beta-carotene levels in low density lipoprotein, low density lipoprotein particle size, mono and polyunsaturated fatty acid content of low density lipoprotein and pre-formed low density lipoprotein hydroperoxide levels in low density lipoprotein. Troglitazone was associated with a significant reduction in the amount of pre-formed low density lipoprotein lipid hydroperoxides. At weeks 1 and 2, the low density lipoprotein hydroperoxide content was 17 % (p < 0.05) and 18 % (p < 0.05) lower in the troglitazone group compared to placebo, respectively. In summary the increase in lag phase duration in the troglitazone group appeared to be due to the compound's activity as an antioxidant and to its ability to reduce the amount of pre-formed low density lipoprotein lipid hydroperoxides. This antioxidant activity could provide considerable benefit to diabetic patients where atherosclerosis accounts for the majority of total mortality. [Diabetologia (1997) 40: 1211–1218] Received: 18 February 1997 and in revised form: 6 June 1997     

A double-blind randomized study comparing the effects of continuing or not continuing rosiglitazone + metformin therapy when starting insulin therapy in people with Type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of either continuing or discontinuing rosiglitazone + metformin fixed-dose combination when starting insulin therapy in people with Type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on oral therapy. METHODS: In this 24-week double-blind study, 324 individuals with Type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on maximum dose rosiglitazone + metformin therapy were randomly assigned to twice-daily premix insulin therapy (target pre-breakfast and pre-evening meal glucose < or = 6.5 mmol/l) in addition to either rosiglitazone + metformin (8/2000 mg) or placebo. RESULTS: Insulin dose at week 24 was significantly lower with rosiglitazone + metformin (33.5 +/- 1.5 U/day, mean +/- se) compared with placebo [59.0 +/- 3.0 U/day; model-adjusted difference -26.6 (95% CI -37.7, -15,5) U/day, P < 0.001]. Despite this, there was greater improvement in glycaemic control [HbA(1c) rosiglitazone + metformin vs. placebo 6.8 +/- 0.1 vs. 7.5 +/- 0.1%; difference -0.7 (-0.8, -0.5)%, P < 0.001] and more individuals achieved glycaemic targets (HbA(1c) < 7.0% 70 vs. 34%, P < 0.001). The proportion of individuals reporting at least one hypoglycaemic event during the last 12 weeks of treatment was similar in the two groups (rosiglitazone + metformin vs. placebo 25 vs. 27%). People receiving rosiglitazone + metformin in addition to insulin reported greater treatment satisfaction than those receiving insulin alone. Both treatment regimens were well tolerated but more participants had oedema [12 (7%) vs. 4 (3%)] and there was more weight gain [3.7 vs. 2.6 kg; difference 1.1 (0.2, 2.1) kg, P = 0.02] with rosiglitazone + metformin. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of insulin to rosiglitazone + metformin enabled more people to reach glycaemic targets with less insulin, and was generally well tolerated.