Pioglitazone and rosiglitazone for diabetes

Pioglitazone (Actos-Takeda) and rosiglitazone (Avandia-GlaxoSmithKline) belong to a new class of oral antidiabetic medicines (the glitazones or thiazolidinediones). Both are licensed in the UK for "oral combination treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in [narrowly defined groups of] patients with insufficient glycaemic control despite maximal tolerated dose of oral monotherapy with either metformin or a sulphonylurea". They are not licensed for use as monotherapy, in combination with insulin, or as part of triple therapy with metformin or a sulphonylurea. What can pioglitazone and rosiglitazone offer in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes?     

Repaglinide: a review of its therapeutic use in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Repaglinide, a carbamoylmethyl benzoic acid derivative, is the first of a new class of oral antidiabetic agents designed to normalise postprandial glucose excursions in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Like the sulphonylureas, repaglinide reduces blood glucose by stimulating insulin release from pancreatic beta-cells, but differs from these and other antidiabetic agents in its structure, binding profile, duration of action and mode of excretion. In clinical trials of up to 1-year's duration, repaglinide maintained or improved glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. In comparative, 1-year, double-blind, randomised trials (n = 256 to 544), patients receiving repaglinide (0.5 to 4mg before 3 daily meals) achieved similar glycaemic control to that in patients receiving glibenclamide (glyburide) < or = 15 mg/day and greater control than patients receiving glipizide < or = 15 mg/day. Changes from baseline in glycosylated haemoglobin and fasting blood glucose levels were similar between patients receiving repaglinide and glibenclamide in all studies; however, repaglinide was slightly better than glibenclamide in reducing postprandial blood glucose in I short term study (n = 192). Patients can vary their meal timetable with repaglinide: the glucose-lowering efficacy of repaglinide was similar for patients consuming 2, 3 or 4 meals a day. Repaglinide showed additive effects when used in combination with other oral antidiabetic agents including metformin, troglitazone, rosiglitazone and pioglitazone, and intermediate-acting insulin (NPH) given at bedtime. In 1-year trials, the most common adverse events reported in repaglinide recipients (n = 1,228) were hypoglycaemia (16%), upper respiratory tract infection (10%), rhinitis (7%), bronchitis (6%) and headache (9%). The overall incidence of hypoglycaemia was similar to that recorded in patients receiving glibenclamide, glipizide or gliclazide (n = 597) [18%]; however, the incidence of serious hypoglycaemia appears to be slightly higher in sulphonylurea recipients. Unlike glibenclamide, the risk of hypoglycaemia in patients receiving repaglinide was not increased when a meal was missed in 1 trial. In conclusion, repaglinide is a useful addition to the other currently available treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Preprandial repaglinide has displayed antihyperglycaemic efficacy at least equal to that of various sulphonylureas and is associated with a reduced risk of serious hypoglycaemia. It is well tolerated in a wide range of patients, including the elderly, even if a meal is missed. Furthermore, glycaemic control is improved when repaglinide is used in combination with metformin. Thus, repaglinide should be considered for use in any patient with type 2 diabetes mellitus whose blood glucose cannot be controlled by diet or exercise alone, or as an adjunct in patients whose glucose levels are inadequately controlled on metformin alone.     

Oral antidiabetic agents: current role in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a progressive and complex disorder that is difficult to treat effectively in the long term. The majority of patients are overweight or obese at diagnosis and will be unable to achieve or sustain near normoglycaemia without oral antidiabetic agents; a sizeable proportion of patients will eventually require insulin therapy to maintain long-term glycaemic control, either as monotherapy or in conjunction with oral antidiabetic therapy. The frequent need for escalating therapy is held to reflect progressive loss of islet beta-cell function, usually in the presence of obesity-related insulin resistance. Today's clinicians are presented with an extensive range of oral antidiabetic drugs for type 2 diabetes. The main classes are heterogeneous in their modes of action, safety profiles and tolerability. These main classes include agents that stimulate insulin secretion (sulphonylureas and rapid-acting secretagogues), reduce hepatic glucose production (biguanides), delay digestion and absorption of intestinal carbohydrate (alpha-glucosidase inhibitors) or improve insulin action (thiazolidinediones). The UKPDS (United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study) demonstrated the benefits of intensified glycaemic control on microvascular complications in newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes. However, the picture was less clearcut with regard to macrovascular disease, with neither sulphonylureas nor insulin significantly reducing cardiovascular events. The impact of oral antidiabetic agents on atherosclerosis--beyond expected effects on glycaemic control--is an increasingly important consideration. In the UKPDS, overweight and obese patients randomised to initial monotherapy with metformin experienced significant reductions in myocardial infarction and diabetes-related deaths. Metformin does not promote weight gain and has beneficial effects on several cardiovascular risk factors. Accordingly, metformin is widely regarded as the drug of choice for most patients with type 2 diabetes. Concern about cardiovascular safety of sulphonylureas has largely dissipated with generally reassuring results from clinical trials, including the UKPDS. Encouragingly, the recent Steno-2 Study showed that intensive target-driven, multifactorial approach to management, based around a sulphonylurea, reduced the risk of both micro- and macrovascular complications in high-risk patients. Theoretical advantages of selectively targeting postprandial hyperglycaemia require confirmation in clinical trials of drugs with preferential effects on this facet of hyperglycaemia are currently in progress. The insulin-sensitising thiazolidinedione class of antidiabetic agents has potentially advantageous effects on multiple components of the metabolic syndrome; the results of clinical trials with cardiovascular endpoints are awaited. The selection of initial monotherapy is based on a clinical and biochemical assessment of the patient, safety considerations being paramount. In some circumstances, for example pregnancy or severe hepatic or renal impairment, insulin may be the treatment of choice when nonpharmacological measures prove inadequate. Insulin is also required for metabolic decompensation, that is, incipient or actual diabetic ketoacidosis, or non-ketotic hyperosmolar hyperglycaemia. Certain comorbidities, for example presentation with myocardial infarction during other acute intercurrent illness, may make insulin the best option. Oral antidiabetic agents should be initiated at a low dose and titrated up according to glycaemic response, as judged by measurement of glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration, supplemented in some patients by self monitoring of capillary blood glucose. The average glucose-lowering effect of the major classes of oral antidiabetic agents is broadly similar (averaging a 1-2% reduction in HbA1c), alpha-glucosidase inhibitors being rather less effective. Tailoring the treatment to the individual patient is an important principle. Doses are gradually titrated up according to response. However, the maximal glucose-lowering action for sulphonylureas is usually attained at appreciably lower doses (approximately 50%) than the manufacturers' recommended daily maximum. Combinations of certain agents, for example a secretagogue plus a biguanide or a thiazolidinedione, are logical and widely used, and combination preparations are now available in some countries. While the benefits of metformin added to a sulphonylurea were initially less favourable in the UKPDS, longer-term data have allayed concern. When considering long-term therapy, issues such as tolerability and convenience are important additional considerations. Neither sulphonylureas nor biguanides are able to appreciably alter the rate of progression of hyperglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. Preliminary data suggesting that thiazolidinediones may provide better long-term glycaemic stability are currently being tested in clinical trials; current evidence, while encouraging, is not conclusive. Delayed progression from glucose intolerance to type 2 diabetes in high-risk individuals with glucose intolerance has been demonstrated with troglitazone, metformin and acarbose. However, intensive lifestyle intervention can be more effective than drug therapy, at least in the setting of interventional clinical trials. No antidiabetic drugs are presently licensed for use in prediabetic individuals.     

Cardiovascular Risk Factors Associated with Insulin Resistance

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus have a greater risk of cardiovascular disease than nondiabetic individuals. These patients are often insulin resistant and have an associated clustering of risk factors that contribute to cardiovascular disease. The risk factors include dyslipidemia, hypertension, altered hemostasis, and chronic inflammation. A primary objective in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus is normalization of blood glucose levels; however, some of the oral drugs used to control blood glucose levels have significant effects on these risk factors. In this article, we review the current data involving the modification of these cardiovascular risk factors by the biguanide (metformin), the thiazolidinediones (troglitazone, rosiglitazone, and pioglitazone), the alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (miglitol, acarbose), and the insulin secretagogs (glyburide [glibenclamide], glipizide, chlorpropamide, tolbutamide, tolazamide, glimepiride, repaglinide, and nateglinide). Generally, the thiazolidinediones improve hemostasis and endothelial function and reduce blood pressure, while having variable effects on dyslipidemia. Metformin improves dyslipidemia and altered hemostasis and decreases plasma C-reactive protein levels with little or no effect on blood pressure. Data on the effects of the alpha-glucosidase inhibitors and insulin secretagogs are sparse; however, these drugs appear to have little or no effect on cardiovascular risk factors.     

Management of diabetes mellitus medications in the nursing home

Nursing home staff are well aware of the increasing number of residents who experience diabetes mellitus. These residents consume an inordinate amount of resources and often have major disabilities and co-morbidities. Although nonpharmacological therapies, such as consistent carbohydrate intake and increased activity levels, are always indicated in diabetes management, pharmacological therapies are often necessary to prevent the acute complications of diabetes and delay some of the long-term complications. Residents with type 2 diabetes may be managed with oral antidiabetic agents and insulin, whereas residents with type 1 diabetes will always require insulin. Oral antidiabetic agents include insulin secretagogues, which stimulate endogenous insulin secretion and are most effective in leaner persons with type 2 diabetes. Metformin is another oral antidiabetic agent; this decreases inappropriate hepatic glucose release and is most effective in obese residents with high fasting blood glucose levels. The thiazolidinediones, also called glitazones, are insulin sensitisers that enable peripheral tissues to utilise insulin more effectively. The alpha-glucosidase inhibitors delay intestinal absorption of ingested carbohydrates. In addition to oral antidiabetic agents, insulin is frequently used in diabetes management. Insulin is always indicated in type 1 diabetes and is often necessary for residents with type 2 diabetes to optimise glycaemic control. Insulin can be rapid, fast, intermediate or long acting. In addition, basal insulin is now available. These insulins can be combined with each other and, in type 2 diabetes, with oral antidiabetic agents. In order to use pharmacological therapies appropriately, the glycaemic patterns of nursing home residents should be identified, using capillary blood glucose monitoring. Once these patterns have been identified, nonpharmacological therapies can be used, usually in conjunction with the many oral antidiabetic agents and various insulins available, to optimise glycaemic control in each resident.     

Role of antioxidants, essential fatty acids, carnitine, vitamins, phytochemicals and trace elements in the treatment of diabetes mellitus and its chronic complications

Nowadays, the treatment of diabetes mellitus is based on the variable use and combination of diet, antidiabetic oral agents (metformin, sulphanylureas, glynides, acarbose and thiazolidinediones) and insulin or its analogs, depending on the type of diabetes and the needs of the patient. The prevention and treatment of chronic micro- and macrovascular complications, on the other hand, is based on the achievement and maintenance of an optimal glycaemic control and requires the combined use of adjunctive therapy such as antihypertensive drugs and cholesterol-lowering medications. Furthermore, several herbal preparations and dietary supplements, such as antioxidants, essential fatty acids, lipid metabolism activators, vitamins and trace elements, are advertised and prescribed to patients as a useful adjuvant to a diabetic diet and conventional medications in order to improve glycaemic control and reduce the impact of chronic complications. In this regard, we have attempted to review the current concepts dealing with the usefulness of these complementary therapies in treating diabetic patients.     

Troglitazone in Type II Diabetes Mellitus

Troglitazone, a new antihyperglycemic agent, is approved for use alone, with oral sulfonylureas, or with insulin in the treatment of type II diabetes mellitus. Rather than stimulating insulin secretion, it enhances insulin sensitivity. Potential advantages of troglitazone over oral sulfonylureas include decreased endogenous insulin concentrations, decreased exogenous insulin requirements, reduced hypoglycemic risk, and convenient once/day administration. The effect on morbidity and mortality from lowering endogenous and exogenous insulin concentrations remains to be determined. Troglitazone also has potential disadvantages. It induces cytochrome P450 isoenzyme 3A4, although few drug interactions have been identified to date. Serum transaminases must be monitored routinely because of rarely reported cases of idiosyncratic hepatocellular injury. In addition, the cost of troglitazone is much higher than that of other oral antihyperglycemic agents or insulin. Given the available information, troglitazone has limited benefit over oral sulfonylureas or metformin as monotherapy or in combination with oral sulfonylureas. Until additional combination and comparative studies have been done, the agent should be reserved for patients with poor glycemic control receiving high daily doses of insulin.     

Antidiabetic drugs present and future: will improving insulin resistance benefit cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes mellitus?

Results from the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study showed that intensive treatment of type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus, with sulphonylureas or insulin, significantly reduced microvascular complications but did not have a significant effect on macrovascular complications after 10 years. Insulin resistance plays a key role in type 2 diabetes mellitus and is linked to a cluster of cardiovascular risk factors. Optimal treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus should aim to improve insulin resistance and the associated cardiovascular risk factors in addition to achieving glycaemic control. Treatment with sulphonylureas or exogenous insulin improves glycaemic control by increasing insulin supplies rather than reducing insulin resistance. Metformin and the recently introduced thiazolidinediones have beneficial effects on reducing insulin resistance as well as providing glycaemic control. There is evidence that, like metformin, thiazolidinediones also improve cardiovascular risk factors such as dyslipidaemia and fibrinolysis. Whether these differences will translate into clinical benefit remains to be seen. The thiazolidinediones rosiglitazone and pioglitazone have been available in the US since 1999 (with pioglitazone also being available in Japan). Both products are now available to physicians in Europe.     

The Role of Troglitazone in Treating the Insulin Resistance Syndrome

Insulin resistance is characterized by impaired responsiveness to endogenous or exogenous insulin and often results in the insulin resistance syndrome, a clustering of cardiovascular risk factors that includes abdominal obesity, hypertension, dyslipidemia, glucose intolerance, and hyperinsulinemia. Although the mechanism responsible for insulin resistance has not been completely defined, it is likely due to defective insulin receptor signaling and results in decreased use of glucose. Troglitazone, the first in a new class of drugs, directly decreases insulin resistance by improving insulin-mediated glucose disposal and reduces plasma insulin concentrations. Glycemic control achieved with troglitazone monotherapy is equivalent to that with sulfonylurea and metformin, and when combined with these agents offers additional plasma glucose reduction. Studies are necessary to determine the effect of thiazolidinediones on morbidity and mortality of patients with type 2 diabetes and insulin resistance.     

Meglitinide analogues in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a complex heterogenous metabolic disorder in which peripheral insulin resistance and impaired insulin release are the main pathogenetic factors. The rapid response of the pancreatic beta-cells to glucose is already markedly disturbed in the early stages of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The consequence is often postprandial hyperglycaemia, which seems to be extremely important in the development of secondary complications, especially macrovascular disease. Therefore one of the main aims of treatment is to minimise blood glucose oscillations and attain near-normal glycosylated haemoglobin levels. Meglitinide analogues belong to a new family of insulin secretagogues which stimulate insulin release by inhibiting ATP-sensitive potassium channels of the beta-cell membrane via binding to a receptor distinct from that of sulphonylureas (SUR1/KIR 6.2). The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of repaglinide, the first drug of these new antihyperglycaemic agents on the market, and of nateglinide, which will be available soon, differ markedly from the currently used sulphonylureas [mainly glibenclamide (glyburide) and glimepiride]. Repaglinide and nateglinide are absorbed rapidly, stimulate insulin release within a few minutes, are rapidly metabolised in the liver and are mainly excreted in the bile. Therefore, following preprandial administration of these drugs, insulin is more readily available during and just after the meal. This leads to a significant reduction in postprandial hyperglycaemia without the danger of hypoglycaemia between meals. The short action of these compounds and biliary elimination makes repaglinide and nateglinide especially suitable for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who would like to have a more flexible lifestyle, need more flexibility because of unplanned eating behaviour (e.g. geriatric patients) or in whom one of the other first-line antidiabetic drugs, i.e. metformin, is strictly contraindicated (e.g. nephropathy with creatinine clearance < or = 50 ml/min). Meglitinide analogues act synergistically with metformin and thiazolidinediones (pioglitazone and rosiglitazone) and can be also combined with long-acting insulin (NPH insulin at bedtime). Therefore, these drugs enrich the palette of antidiabetic drugs and make the treatment more flexible and better tolerated, which both add to better metabolic control and support the empowerment and compliance of the patient. However, this will only be the case if the patient and the diabetes care team are trained for this new therapeutic schedule and the healthcare system is able to pay for these rather expensive drugs.     

Nateglinide

Nateglinide is a novel D-phenylalanine derivative that inhibits ATP-sensitive K+ channels in pancreatic beta-cells in the presence of glucose and thereby stimulates the prandial release of insulin. Nateglinide reduces fasting and mealtime blood glucose levels in animals, healthy volunteers, and patients with type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus, and produces prompt prandial insulin responses with return to baseline insulin levels between meals. In randomised, double-blind 24-week studies in patients with type 2 diabetes, oral nateglinide 120 mg 3 times daily before meals improved glycaemic control significantly relative to placebo. Nateglinide 120 mg plus metformin 500 mg, both 3 times daily, conferred greater glycaemic improvement than either drug given alone, and nateglinide 60 or 120 mg 3 times daily plus metformin 1 g twice daily was superior to metformin plus placebo. Nateglinide 120 mg 3 times daily significantly reduced hyperglycaemia relative to placebo in a 16-week double-blind study in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Combination therapy with troglitazone 600 mg daily produced significantly better glycaemic control than either drug given as monotherapy. Mild hypoglycaemia was the most frequently reported adverse event (1.3% of patients) after treatment with nateglinide 120 mg 3 times daily in a 16-week clinical study. No clinically significant abnormalities in laboratory results, ECGs, vital signs or physical examination findings have been noted in patients taking the drug.     

Repaglinide : a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Repaglinide (Prandin), NovoNorm, GlucoNorm, an oral insulin secretagogue, was the first meglitinide analogue to become available for use in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The drug lowers postprandial glucose excursions by targeting early-phase insulin release, an effect thought to be important in reducing long-term cardiovascular complications of diabetes. Repaglinide provided similar overall glycaemic control to that achieved with glibenclamide (glyburide), as assessed by glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) and fasting blood glucose levels, and was generally well tolerated in well designed clinical trials. Its rapid onset and relatively short duration of action allow for flexible meal schedules. Two modelled US cost-effectiveness analyses projected lifetime costs and outcomes for a hypothetical cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes. Both analyses projected long-term complications using data on HbA(1c) level changes from short-term clinical trials. Repaglinide plus rosiglitazone was dominant over rosiglitazone in one analysis, and repaglinide plus metformin was dominant over nateglinide plus metformin in the other. A similar Canadian analysis showed a favourable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (相似文献   

Pharmacology and clinical experience with repaglinide

Repaglinide (NovoNorm^®) is a novel oral antidiabetic agent, the first of a new class of insulin secretagogues known as the prandial glucose regulators to be approved for use in patients with Type 2 diabetes. Prandial glucose regulation is aimed at restoring the first-phase insulin response that follows consumption of a meal, which is missing in patients with Type 2 diabetes. After repaglinide administration, the resulting insulin profile reflects that of healthy individuals more closely, providing tighter glycaemic control and reducing the risk of hypoglycaemic events. Repaglinide is quickly absorbed and rapidly eliminated through biliary excretion, making it suitable for use in patients with renal impairment. It appears in the bloodstream within 15 to 30 min of dosing, stimulating short-term insulin release from the pancreatic b-cells by binding to a unique site on the β-cell membrane. Rapid elimination ensures that postprandial insulin levels quickly return to preprandial levels as the high prandial glucose level subsides. Repaglinide is given on a ‘one meal, one tablet; no meal, no tablet’ basis. It is particularly effective in patients who have not previously been treated with an oral antidiabetic agent, significantly reducing glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) levels by 1.6%. It also offers increased mealtime flexibility and safety, compared with other oral antidiabetic agents. As a result of the short plasma half-life and lack of accumulation of repaglinide with repeated dosing, the risk of between-meal and nocturnal hypoglycaemia is substantially reduced compared with other oral antidiabetic agents. Repaglinide acts synergistically with metformin, consistently improving glycaemic control in patients who were insufficiently controlled by metformin alone. Results from recent studies have shown similar synergistic effects with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH)-insulin or troglitazone.     

Pharmacology and clinical experience with repaglinide

Repaglinide (NovoNorm((R))) is a novel oral antidiabetic agent, the first of a new class of insulin secretagogues known as the prandial glucose regulators to be approved for use in patients with Type 2 diabetes. Prandial glucose regulation is aimed at restoring the first-phase insulin response that follows consumption of a meal, which is missing in patients with Type 2 diabetes. After repaglinide administration, the resulting insulin profile reflects that of healthy individuals more closely, providing tighter glycaemic control and reducing the risk of hypoglycaemic events. Repaglinide is quickly absorbed and rapidly eliminated through biliary excretion, making it suitable for use in patients with renal impairment. It appears in the bloodstream within 15 to 30 min of dosing, stimulating short-term insulin release from the pancreatic beta-cells by binding to a unique site on the beta-cell membrane. Rapid elimination ensures that postprandial insulin levels quickly return to preprandial levels as the high prandial glucose level subsides. Repaglinide is given on a 'one meal, one tablet; no meal, no tablet' basis. It is particularly effective in patients who have not previously been treated with an oral antidiabetic agent, significantly reducing glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) levels by 1.6%. It also offers increased mealtime flexibility and safety, compared with other oral antidiabetic agents. As a result of the short plasma half-life and lack of accumulation of repaglinide with repeated dosing, the risk of between-meal and nocturnal hypoglycaemia is substantially reduced compared with other oral antidiabetic agents. Repaglinide acts synergistically with metformin, consistently improving glycaemic control in patients who were insufficiently controlled by metformin alone. Results from recent studies have shown similar synergistic effects with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH)-insulin or troglitazone.     

Hepatotoxicity with thiazolidinediones: is it a class effect?

Decreased insulin sensitivity plays a major role in various human diseases. particularly type 2 diabetes mellitus, and is associated with a higher risk of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular complications. Thiazolidinediones, more commonly termed glitazones, are the first drugs to specifically target muscular insulin resistance. They have proven efficacy for reducing plasma glucose levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with diet alone, sulphonylureas, metformin or insulin. In addition, they are associated with some improvement of the cardiovascular risk profile. However, troglitazone, the first compound approved by the Food and Drug Administration in the US, proved to be hepatotoxic and was withdrawn from the market after the report of several dozen deaths or cases of severe hepatic failure requiring liver transplantation. It remains unclear whether or not hepatotoxicity is a class effect or is related to unique properties of troglitazone. Rosiglitazone and pioglitazone, two other glitazones, appear to have similar efficacy with regard to blood glucose control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus as compared with troglitazone. In controlled clinical trials, the incidence of significant (> or =3 x upper limit of normal) increases in liver enzyme levels (ALT in particular) was similar with rosiglitazone or pioglitazone as compared with placebo, whereas troglitazone was associated with a 3-fold greater incidence. In contrast to the numerous case reports of acute liver failure in patients receiving troglitzone, only a few case reports of hepatotoxicity have been reported in patients treated with rosiglitazone until now, with a causal relationship remaining uncertain. Furthermore, no single case of severe hepatotoxicity has been reported yet with pioglitazone. It should be mentioned that troglitazone, unlike pioglitazone and rosiglitazone, induces the cytochrome P450 isoform 3A4, which is partly responsible for its metabolism, and may be prone to drug interactions. Importantly enough, obesity, insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes mellitus are associated with liver abnormalities, especially non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, independent of any pharmacological treatment. This association obviously complicates the selection of patients who are good candidates for a treatment with glitazones as well as the monitoring of liver tests after initiation of therapy with any thiazolidinedione compound. While regular monitoring of liver enzymes is still recommended and more long term data are desirable, current evidence from clinical trials and postmarketing experience in the US supports the conclusion that rosiglitazone and pioglitazone do not share the hepatotoxic profile of troglitazone.     

Potential role of oral thiazolidinedione therapy in preserving beta-cell function in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Worsening glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus relates to a decline in beta-cell function, associated with impaired negative feedback regulation of insulin release. Insulin resistance, the 'traditional' cornerstone defect of type 2 diabetes, leads to an array of adverse effects on beta cells, including hypertrophy, apoptosis and those caused by lipotoxicity and glucotoxicity. In particular, increased levels of free fatty acids and their metabolites are thought to diminish both insulin synthesis and glucose-stimulated insulin secretion. Thiazolidinediones are synthetic peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma agonists that decrease insulin resistance but, as in vitro and in vivo studies suggest, may have direct beneficial effects on pancreatic beta cells. Troglitazone, for example, demonstrated improvements in insulin secretory capacity in isolated pancreatic islets from Wistar rats and a hamster beta-cell line. In vivo studies reveal thiazolidinediones promote beta-cell survival and regranulation as well as maintenance of beta-cell mass and reduction in amyloid deposition. Clinical evidence for thiazolidinediones is largely derived from comparative trials, mainly against sulfonylureas and metformin. Data at 2 years from a number of trials are now available and establish the positive effects of thiazolidinediones on glycaemic control. Empirical evidence showing decreases in fasting plasma insulin levels with pioglitazone and rosiglitazone indicate thiazolidinediones also improve insulin sensitivity. A possible effect of thiazolidinediones on normalising asynchronous insulin secretion, as assessed in a short-term placebo-controlled study, is less established. However, recent and ongoing clinical studies are focusing attention on verifying animal and other data, which support the notion that thiazolidinediones have beneficial effects on beta-cell function. These clinical studies have shown thiazolidinediones capable of preventing or delaying the development of type 2 diabetes in a high-risk population; restoring the first-phase insulin response; and improving secretory responses to oscillations in plasma glucose levels. Many of these effects appear to be independent of improvements in insulin sensitivity. Other research efforts are examining the potential cardiovascular protective effects of thiazolidinediones. Available data imply thiazolidinediones are associated with cardiovascular risk reduction, although results from large, clinical outcome trials, currently in progress, are still needed. Improved understanding of the role that declining beta-cell function has in the development of type 2 diabetes has drawn attention to the need for hypoglycaemic agents that can address this process. Emerging evidence suggests thiazolidinediones offer specific benefits for preventing or delaying the decline in beta-cell function and, thereby, a substrate for early intervention efforts aimed at lowering the worldwide burden of type 2 diabetes.     

New insights into antidiabetic drugs: Possible applications in cancer treatment

Globally at 2014, it was estimated that there was 347 million people with diabetes in which 90 percent of them were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Although the association between diabetes mellitus and cancer risk was found about 100 years ago, the issue is not still clear. Many studies especially cohort and case–control studies have suggested a higher risk of cancer in patients with diabetes mainly in those with type 2 diabetes. Insulin concentration is high in these patients, and due to its mitogenic effects, it may be a possible hypotheses for higher risk of cancer in diabetic patients. Therefore, antidiabetic drugs, which are involved in insulin secretion and sensitivity, may have beneficial effects in cancer treatment. Several groups of drugs with different mechanisms of action, mostly prescribed orally, are used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus including, insulin sensitizers (thiazolidinediones), insulin secretagogues (sulfonylureas), and biguanides. In this review, the possible effects of antidiabetic drugs (biguanides, thiazolidinediones, and sulfonylureas) and some of their mechanisms for overcoming cancer will be discussed.     

Treatment of type 2 diabetes: inadequate assessment of oral antidiabetic combinations

(1) Metformin and glibenclamide are the only oral antidiabetics with a proven impact on the complications of type 2 diabetes. (2) Treatment with one of these drugs often fails to achieve the recommended target in HbA1c level (below 7%). (3) Only one randomised trial has assessed the preventive efficacy of a combination of oral antidiabetics when hyperglycaemia persists despite treatment with a glucose-lowering sulphonylurea. The trial showed that combining metformin and a glucose-lowering sulphonylurea is associated with a higher mortality than therapy with a sulphonylurea alone. (4) Despite this result, most clinical guidelines recommend the metformin + glucose-lowering sulphonylurea combination when oral antidiabetic monotherapy fails. (5) In the absence of convincing data supporting any particular strategy, all options should be discussed with patients including continuing with oral antidiabetic monotherapy, or starting insulin.     

不同降糖药物对2型糖尿病患者心电图QT离散度的影响

目的:探讨胰岛素、格列本脲、二甲双胍对2型糖尿病患者心电图QT离散度(QTd)的影响。方法:观察318例使用不同降糖药物治疗的2型糖尿病患者(胰岛素组129例,格列本脲组110例,二甲双胍组79例)及33例健康体检者(正常对照组)心电图QTd和校正QT离散度(QTcd)的组间差异。结果:格列本脲组心电图QTd和QTcd显著高于其他3组(P<0.05),胰岛素组QTd、QTcd显著高于二甲双胍组和正常对照组(P<0.05),二甲双胍组和正常对照组间QTd、QTcd无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论:格列本脲和胰岛素可能会增加2型糖尿病患者心电图QTd、QTcd。