Miglitol: a review of its therapeutic potential in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Miglitol, the first pseudomonosaccharide alpha-glucosidase inhibitor, smooths postprandial peak plasma glucose levels and thus improves glycaemic control, which is reflected in a reduced glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level. This oral antihyperglycaemic agent is indicated for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Miglitol is generally well tolerated and, unlike the sulphonylurea agents, is not associated with bodyweight gain or hypoglycaemia when administered as monotherapy. The drug is systemically absorbed but is not metabolised and is rapidly excreted via the kidneys. Clinical trials with miglitol (usually 50 or 100 mg 3 times daily) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus consistently demonstrated a significant improvement in glycaemic control for periods of 6 to 12 months. There were also marked reductions in postprandial serum insulin levels, although miglitol generally had no effect on fasting insulin levels. In comparative studies miglitol had similar efficacy to acarbose, but at lower therapeutic doses (50 and 100 mg 3 times daily, respectively). In addition, although sulphonylurea agents provided superior reductions in HbA1c levels, miglitol provided similar or superior reductions in fasting and postprandial plasma glucose levels. In combination with other oral antidiabetic agents or insulin, miglitol improved glycaemic control in patients in whom metabolic control was suboptimal despite dietary and pharmacological intervention. Most adverse events associated with miglitol treatment involve disturbances of the gastrointestinal tract (most common effects are flatulence, abdominal pain and diarrhoea). These symptoms are usually dose dependent, mild to moderate in severity, occur at the onset of treatment, decline with time and resolve promptly on discontinuation of the drug or with dosage adjustment. As monotherapy, miglitol is not associated with hypoglycaemia, but concomitant use with other oral antidiabetic agents may necessitate dosage adjustment of the other agents. Miglitol had no significant effects on renal, cardiovascular, respiratory or haematological parameters in long term studies. No dosage adjustments are required in elderly patients, in those with hepatic impairment or in those with mild to moderate renal insufficiency. Conclusions: In long term, well designed trials miglitol reduces fasting and postprandial plasma glucose levels, thus improving glycaemic control, which is reflected in a reduced HbA1c level in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Most adverse events associated with miglitol involve disturbances of the gastrointestinal tract. This agent is a useful first-line therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus insufficiently controlled by diet alone and as second-line or as adjuvant therapy in those insufficiently controlled with diet and sulphonylurea agents. Miglitol may prove particularly beneficial in elderly patients and those with hepatic impairment or mild to moderate renal impairment, in whom other oral antidiabetic agents are contraindicated or need to be used with caution.     

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.     

Troglitazone: a review of its use in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Troglitazone is the first of a new group of oral antidiabetic drugs, the thiazolidinediones, and is indicated for the treatment of patients with type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Troglitazone acts by enhancing the effects of insulin at peripheral target sites and, unlike the sulphonylurea drugs, is not associated with hypoglycaemia when administered as monotherapy. Clinical trials with troglitazone (usually 200 to 600 mg/day) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus consistently showed marked improvement in glycaemic control, as well as reductions in fasting serum insulin, C-peptide and triglyceride levels. Comparative studies with either glibenclamide (glyburide) or metformin indicated similar glycaemic control with troglitazone or these agents. Serum insulin levels were lower with troglitazone than with glibenclamide. Clinical trials of up to approximately 2 years' duration showed that glycaemic control is maintained with troglitazone on a long term basis. In general, troglitazone is well tolerated by the majority of patients. However, discontinuation of troglitazone because of elevated liver enzyme levels occurs in approximately 2% of patients receiving the drug, and frequent monitoring of liver enzymes is required (e.g. at least 11 times during the first year of therapy). Among patients who started troglitazone therapy in 1998 (after the incorporation of a boxed warning and increased monitoring requirements in the product labelling), the estimated risk of liver-related death is approximately 1 in 100,000. CONCLUSIONS: Troglitazone improves the ability of target cells to respond to insulin. The drug has been shown to improve glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus when used as monotherapy or in combination with other oral antidiabetic drugs or insulin, and its efficacy is similar to that of glibenclamide or metformin. Although troglitazone is generally well tolerated, close monitoring of liver enzyme function is required to minimise the rare occurrence of serious hepatic dysfunction. Drug acquisition and liver function monitoring costs, as well as potential adverse effects, are important factors that may ultimately determine the precise place of troglitazone in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Nevertheless, as the first member of a new class of oral antidiabetic agents, the thiazolidinediones, troglitazone offers an effective treatment option in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus through its action of improving insulin sensitivity.     

Insulin aspart: a review of its use in the management of type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus

Insulin aspart, a rapid-acting human insulin analogue, provides more rapid absorption than regular human insulin after subcutaneous administration. In most randomised, nonblind clinical trials in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, insulin aspart administered immediately before meals resulted in significantly lower mean glycosylated haemoglobin A(1c ) (HbA(1c)) levels than regular human insulin (usually administered 30 minutes before a meal). Insulin aspart also significantly improved postprandial glycaemic control compared with regular human insulin. The efficacy of insulin aspart was similar to that of insulin lispro when administered to patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus via continuous subcutaneous infusion in a randomised, nonblind trial. Preliminary data from randomised, nonblind trials suggest insulin aspart had a trend towards lower HbA(1c) levels compared with regular human insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Biphasic insulin aspart [30% soluble (rapid-acting) and 70% protamine-bound insulin aspart (BIAsp30)] generally provided significantly better postprandial glucose control than a similar mixture of biphasic regular human insulin (BHI30) in a randomised, nonblind trial in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus. However, the long-term efficacy of BIAsp30 was similar to that of BHI30 after 2 years in a randomised, nonblind trial in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus reported greater treatment satisfaction with insulin aspart or BIAsp30 than with regular human insulin or BHI30. The overall incidence of hypoglycaemia with insulin aspart was lower than, or similar to, that of regular human insulin. Moreover, insulin aspart tended to be associated with a lower occurrence of nocturnal hypoglycaemia and severe hypoglycaemic events than regular human insulin. CONCLUSION: The standard preparation of insulin aspart has the potential to better mimic the physiological response to meals than regular human insulin. Insulin aspart when combined with a suitable basal insulin improved overall glycaemic control and led to a similar or lower number of hypoglycaemic episodes compared with a similar regular human insulin regimen. Insulin aspart was generally as effective and well tolerated as insulin lispro when administered by continuous subcutaneous infusion in a single comparative trial. The efficacy of biphasic insulin aspart has been documented in a small number of trials. Both insulin aspart and biphasic insulin aspart provide for flexible and convenient administration. Insulin aspart is now well established as an effective and convenient means of providing glycaemic control which offers clinical and practical advantages over regular human insulin.     

Insulin glargine

Insulin glargine is an extended-action biosynthetic human insulin. It precipitates in the neutral environment of subcutaneous tissue and is thus gradually absorbed into the bloodstream. The addition of small amounts of zinc to the formulation further delays absorption. In small euglycaemic clamp studies, the onset of action of insulin glargine was shown to be later, the duration of action longer and the time-action profile flatter than that of Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and healthy volunteers. Four large clinical trials of up to 28 weeks' duration have shown that a single bedtime dose of insulin glargine, in combination with preprandial short-acting insulin, is as effective or more effective than once or twice daily NPH plus short-acting insulin in improving glycaemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. In 3 large comparative trials, insulin glargine decreased glycosylated haemoglobin and/or fasting blood glucose levels to a similar extent to that seen with NPH insulin in patients with insulin-dependent or non-insulin-dependent type 2 diabetes mellitus, either as monotherapy or in combination with oral hypoglycaemic agents. Insulin glargine appears to be well tolerated. A lower incidence of hypoglycaemia, especially at night, was reported in most trials with insulin glargine when compared with NPH insulin.     

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.     

Insulin glargine: a review of its therapeutic use as a long-acting agent for the management of type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus

Insulin glargine is a recombinant human insulin analogue produced by DNA technology using a nonpathogenic strain of Escherichia coli. Two modifications of human insulin result in a stable molecule which is soluble in slightly acidic conditions (pH 4.0) and precipitates in the neutral pH of subcutaneous tissue. Because of these properties, absorption of insulin glargine is delayed and the analogue provides a fairly constant, basal insulin supply without peaks in plasma insulin levels for approximately 24 hours, similar to that achieved by a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Insulin glargine is indicated as a once daily subcutaneous injection to provide basal glycaemic control in adults and children aged >6 years with type 1 diabetes mellitus and in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Fasting plasma glucose and fasting blood glucose levels generally improved to a greater extent in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus receiving insulin glargine than patients who administered Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin. In patients with type 1 or 2 disease, glycosylated haemoglobin levels were slightly reduced and to a similar extent with insulin glargine and NPH insulin. Most clinical trials in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus demonstrated a lower incidence of hypoglycaemia, especially nocturnal hypoglycaemia, compared with NPH insulin. One of the most common adverse events with insulin glargine treatment was injection site pain which, in some studies, occurred more frequently than in patients receiving NPH insulin. In all cases the symptoms were mild and treatment discontinuation was not required. Otherwise, the drug is well tolerated and does not appear to be immunogenic. CONCLUSIONS: Insulin glargine once a day provides basal control of glycaemia for approximately 24 hours without inducing peaks in plasma insulin levels in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus. In long term, well designed trials insulin glargine once daily improved glycaemic control at least as effectively as NPH insulin given once or twice daily. The drug was well tolerated and in most studies the incidence of nocturnal hypoglycaemia was significantly less in patients treated with insulin glargine compared with patients receiving NPH insulin. Therefore, insulin glargine is likely to be a useful addition to the armamentarium of insulin therapy by establishing basal glycaemic control with once daily administration and a reduced risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia.     

Defining the role of insulin lispro in the management of postprandial hyperglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

The role of postprandial hyperglycaemia in contributing to the risk of both micro- and macrovascular complications in patients with diabetes mellitus is being increasingly recognized. In type 2 diabetes, there is a progressive shift in the relative contributions of postprandial and fasting hyperglycaemia to the overall glycaemic control as the disease progresses. For patients with fairly good glycaemic control (glycosylated haemoglobin [HbA(1c)] <8.5%), postprandial hyperglycaemia makes a relatively greater contribution to the overall glycaemic load than fasting hyperglycaemia, but in patients with poorer control, the relative contribution of the two states to the overall glycaemic load is reversed. This finding, coupled with epidemiological evidence that elevated postprandial glucose concentration is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), and is associated with a greater CVD risk than elevated fasting glucose, points to the need to monitor and target postprandial glucose, as well as fasting glucose and HbA(1c) levels, when optimizing insulin therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes. When insulin therapy becomes necessary in patients with type 2 diabetes who can no longer be controlled with oral antihyperglycaemic therapy, use of short-acting insulin analogues with a rapid onset of action and capable of controlling postprandial glycaemic excursions when injected immediately before a meal, has advantages over regular human insulin in that they provide a more favourable time-action profile that mimics normal physiological insulin secretion. Among the available rapid-acting insulin analogues, insulin lispro has been shown to reduce postprandial glucose concentrations to a significantly greater degree than regular human insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes. Moreover, premixed combinations of insulin lispro with the longer acting analogue neutral insulin lispro protamine suspension in 25% : 75% or 50% : 50% combinations are significantly more effective in lowering postprandial blood glucose concentrations than premixed regular human insulin plus neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) 30% : 70%. The premixed insulin lispro combinations offer the advantage of fewer daily injections than intensive insulin therapy, and the convenience of not having to mix insulin preparations manually. Although it has yet to be conclusively established that targeting postprandial hyperglycaemia reduces CVD risk, the potential benefits of improved postprandial and interprandial hyperglycaemia favour the use of newer insulin analogues, such as insulin lispro and insulin lispro mixes, over conventional insulin therapy, whenever insulin therapy becomes necessary in patients with type 2 diabetes.     

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.     

Insulin in type 2 diabetes: a useful alternative despite limited assessment based on surrogate endpoints

(1) There are few clinical trials comparing combination therapy with a sulphonylurea and metformin after oral antidiabetic monotherapy fails to provide adequate glycaemic control. The UKPDS study suggested that this combination had a negative impact on mortality. (2) The assessment of insulin therapy in patients in whom oral antidiabetic therapy fails is based solely on surrogate endpoints: mainly HbA1c (glycated haemoglobin), bodyweight, and the frequency of hypoglycaemia. (3) In a comparative randomised trial involving patients whose glucose levels were no longer controlled by a sulphonylurea, the addition of metformin or a daily injection of insulin isophane (NPH) was similarly effective in reducing HbA1c levels. However, metformin caused less weight gain. (4) There are no randomised controlled trials comparing the addition of insulin versus a sulphonylurea when ongoing metformin monotherapy is inadequate. (5) Randomised comparative trials show that, when glycaemia is no longer controlled by a sulphonylurea plus metformin, adding a daily insulin injection is more effective in lowering HbA1c levels than the addition of acarbose and as effective as adding a glitazone. The adjunction of insulin appears to have a better risk-benefit balance than an oral three-drug regimen. (6) Several randomised controlled trials have shown that the addition of an oral antidiabetic to ongoing insulin therapy reduces HbA1c levels in patients with type 2 diabetes. The addition of metformin is also beneficial in terms of body weight changes. (7) Nine randomised controlled trials involving patients whose glycaemia was inadequately controlled by a sulphonylurea, alone or in combination with metformin, have compared the addition of a bedtime injection of insulin isophane versus replacement of the oral antidiabetics by several daily insulin injections. The two strategies had a similar impact on HbA1c (-1.5% to -2.5%), but patients experienced less weight gain when the oral antidiabetics were continued and a single insulin injection was added. (8) The few available comparative trials fail to show which oral treatment (a sulphonylurea, metformin, or a combination of the two) has the best risk-benefit balance when combined with a bedtime injection of insulin isophane. (9) Insulin isophane is the first-choice insulin for combination therapy with an oral antidiabetic. In comparative trials, when combined with an oral antidiabetic, insulin glargine was no more effective than insulin isophane in terms of HbA1c levels or weight gain. Insulin glargine seems to provoke less hypoglycaemia but, in the absence of adequate follow-up, its long-term adverse effects are not known. (10) When a bedtime insulin injection plus an oral antidiabetic fail to control hyperglycaemia, indirect comparisons support the use of several daily insulin injections plus metformin, or three injections of an ultrarapid insulin analogue plus a sulphonylurea.     

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.     

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.     

Recent developments and emerging therapies for type 2 diabetes mellitus

Most patients with type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus require pharmacotherapy, initially as monotherapy and subsequently in combination, as adjuncts to diet and exercise. Exogenous insulin is ultimately required in a substantial proportion, reflecting the progressive natural history of the disease. Sulphonylureas and biguanides have been employed for over 4 decades as oral antidiabetic agents, but they have a limited capacity to provide long term glycaemic control and can cause serious adverse effects. Thus, more efficacious and tolerable antidiabetic agents are required. Recent years have witnessed the introduction of agents with novel modes of action, that is, the alpha-glucosidase inhibitors acarbose and miglitol (which reduce postprandial hyperglycaemia) and the first of the thiazolidinedione insulinsensitising drugs--troglitazone and rosiglitazone. Although the former has been withdrawn in some countries due to adverse effects, another 'glitazone' pioglitazone is expected to be approved in the near future. Other recently introduced drugs include glimepiride and the meglitinide insulin secretagogue, repaglinide. Attention is also focusing increasingly on combination therapy using insulin together with sulphonylureas, metformin or troglitazone. Rapid-acting insulin analogues are now being used as alternatives to conventional insulins; their role in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus is presently uncertain but reports of a reduced frequency of hypoglycaemia are encouraging. The development of new drugs aims to counter the principal metabolic defects of the disorder, respectively, relative insulin deficiency and insulin resistance. Novel classes of rapid-acting secretagogues under evaluation include the morphilinoguanide BTS 67582 and the meglitinides mitiglinide (KAD 1229) and senaglinide (A-4166). Succinate ester derivatives represent a potential novel approach to improving beta-cell function through enhancement of insulin biosynthesis and secretion. Enhancement of nutrient-induced insulin secretion is a mechanism with several putative targets within the beta-cell; potentiators of insulin secretion include glucagon-like peptide-1 and its analogues, phosphodiesterase inhibitors and the imidazoline derivative PMS 812 (S 21663). The amylin agonist pramlintide slows gastric emptying and suppression of glucagon secretion. Non-thiazolidinedione insulin-sensitising agents include the gamma-receptor agonist G 1262570X (GG 570) and D-chiro-inositol. Insulin analogues with prolonged action and inhaled insulin preparations are also under investigation. Insulin-mimetic agents include organic vanadium compounds. Whether newer agents will offer clinically relevant efficacy and tolerability advantages over existing therapies remains to be determined.     

Sitagliptin

Sitagliptin, an oral dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor, improves glycaemic control by inhibiting DPP-4 inactivation of the incretin hormones glucagon-like peptide-1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide. This increases active incretin and insulin levels, and decreases glucagon levels and post-glucose-load glucose excursion. In large, well designed phase III trials in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, sitagliptin 100 or 200mg once daily alone or in combination with other antihyperglycaemics was associated with significant improvements relative to placebo in overall glycaemic control and indices for insulin response and beta-cell function. Improvements from baseline in mean glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) were significantly greater with sitagliptin monotherapy than with placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes. As add-on therapy in patients with suboptimal glycaemic control despite oral antihyperglycaemic treatment, sitagliptin improved HbA(1c) to a significantly greater extent than placebo when added to metformin or pioglitazone and was noninferior to glipizide when added to metformin. Sitagliptin was well tolerated when administered alone or in combination with other antihyperglycaemics, with an adverse event profile similar to that shown with placebo. The incidence of hypoglycaemia with sitagliptin was similar to that with placebo and, in combination with metformin, lower than that with glipizide. Sitagliptin had a generally neutral effect on bodyweight.     

A review of clinical experience with the prandial glucose regulator, repaglinide, in the treatment of type 2 diabetes

Repaglinide is a novel insulin secretagogue that was developed as a prandial glucose regulator for the treatment of people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. It is used flexibly, taken prior to meals, in order to limit subsequent postprandial blood glucose excursions as well as the dependent basal blood glucose concentration. In theory, the pharmacological profile of repaglinide is well suited for this role. Taken at mealtimes, its relatively rapid-onset and short-duration of action counteract a fundamental pathophysiological aspect of this disease: attenuation of the prandial insulin response. The predominantly hepatic elimination profile and a lack of drug-drug interactions with repaglinide are also properties well suited for patients with Type 2 diabetes. Importantly, the pharmacokinetic properties of repaglinide, are expected to reduce the risk of hypoglycaemia in comparison to the conventional insulin secretagogues (sulphonylureas). A reduced risk of hypoglycaemia carries the advantage that patients are not obliged to consume meals at regular intervals supplemented by snacks, so caloric restriction is feasible and lifestyle not compromised. These theoretical advantages have now been largely borne-out by clinical studies and empirical experience. Placebo-controlled studies have consistently demonstrated the antidiabetic efficacy of repaglinide, with improvements having been shown in all indicators of glycaemic control. Double-blind, active-comparator studies have shown repaglinide to have an antidiabetic efficacy that is at least equivalent to sulphonylureas, even when food intake and dosing intervals were controlled according to the requirements of sulphonylureas. Pooled data from these studies have shown that the risk of severe hypoglycaemia is reduced by 60% (p = 0.03) when repaglinide is used in preference to sulphonylureas. There is also evidence that the blood glucose threshold at which symptoms of hypoglycaemia are perceived by patients may be better preserved during treatment with repaglinide than with sulphonylureas. Studies examining flexible prandial dosing with repaglinide have shown that good glycaemic control and a low risk of hypoglycaemia are achievable goals that are independent of the meal (and, hence, dosing) pattern chosen by the patient. Furthermore, when used in this way, repaglinide has not been associated with weight gain. In combination therapy, repaglinide has been shown to act in synergy with both metformin and troglitazone. The possibility of a 'new' basal-bolus regimen combining repaglinide and exogenous (neutral protamine hagedorn) NPH insulin strategy has also been investigated.     

Optimising therapy for insulin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus

The purpose of this article is to provide a guide to the optimal use of insulin in type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Based on pathophysiological considerations and a knowledge of drug actions, an individualised, targeted strategy is selected for obtaining good metabolic control without compromising well-being and quality of life. The treatment should target hyperglycaemia along with other risk factors. Insulin is indicated when adequate glycaemia can no longer be obtained with diet and oral antihyperglycaemic agents. Commonly, the oral drugs are replaced by insulin, but preferably they should be used in combination with insulin. This approach can lead to improved glycaemic control, a reduced insulin dose and counteraction of insulin-associated bodyweight gain. There may also be less hypoglycaemia with combination insulin/oral therapy as compared with insulin monotherapy, as well as other benefits. Optimisation of oral drug therapy should be attempted before initiating insulin. A combination of insulin with a sulphonylurea agent is commonly used: the adjunctive effect of the sulphonylurea is dependent on pancreatic beta cell function. The combination of insulin with metformin or a thiazolidinedione is more logical as insulin resistance is targeted directly. Bedtime insulin plus metformin conferred the most benefits among several options investigated in a randomised 1-year study. The combination of insulin with acarbose is a further option when there is significant postprandial hyperglycaemia. It is recommended to start with a medium- to long-acting insulin preparation at bedtime or premixed insulin before the evening meal. Changes in insulin administration can be subsequently introduced as needed, e.g. use of twice-daily premixed insulin, multiple injections of rapid-acting insulin or insulin analogues. There are many options, but limited clinical data are available to support a number of the regimens.     

预混胰岛素血糖控制不佳糖尿病加用阿卡波糖的疗效观察

目的：观察预混胰岛素血糖控制不佳的糖尿病患者加用阿卡波糖的疗效。方法：将60例预混胰岛素血糖控制不佳的糖尿病患者随机分为加用阿卡波糖治疗组（30例）和对照组（30例）,治疗3个月,比较治疗效果。结果：阿卡波糖组患者的空腹、餐后2h血糖及糖化血红蛋白明显下降,优于对照组。结论：阿卡波糖可作为预混胰岛素血糖控制不佳糖尿病的治疗方法之一。     

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.     

Insulin aspart: a review of its use in the management of type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus

Insulin aspart (NovoRapid, NovoLog) is a short-acting insulin analogue, which has a faster onset and shorter duration of action than regular human insulin. Insulin aspart administered immediately before meals provided significantly greater improvements in glycosylated haemoglobin and better postprandial glycaemic control than regular human insulin administered 30 minutes before meals, when used in a basal-bolus regimen with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, in randomised, nonblind studies in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. In patients with type 2 diabetes, insulin aspart provided similar glycaemic control to regular human insulin, administered in a basal-bolus regimen with NPH insulin. Small studies suggest that the use of insulin aspart in combination with oral hypoglycaemic agents may be beneficial. Insulin aspart, administered by continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) provided better glycaemic control than insulin aspart multiple daily injection regimens in patients with type 1 (but not type 2) diabetes, and had similar efficacy to CSII with insulin lispro or regular human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Limited studies show insulin aspart to be effective in children, adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes. Insulin aspart had a tolerability profile similar to that of regular human insulin in clinical trials. The incidence of major or nocturnal hypoglycaemic events reported in patients receiving insulin aspart was lower than that of regular human insulin in several studies.In conclusion, insulin aspart, administered immediately before meals in a basal-bolus regimen with NPH insulin, provided better long-term glycaemic control than regular human insulin administered 30 minutes before meals in patients with type 1 diabetes, and was as effective as regular human insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes. A significantly lower risk of hypoglycaemia was seen in several trials. Insulin aspart CSII provided better glycaemic control than insulin aspart multiple daily subcutaneous injection (MDI) in patients with type 1 (but not type 2) diabetes and had similar efficacy to CSII with insulin lispro or regular human insulin in type 1 diabetes. Insulin aspart is an effective and well tolerated alternative to regular human insulin and insulin lispro for the maintenance of glycaemic control in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes.