Glycemic durability of rosiglitazone, metformin, or glyburide monotherapy

Effect of pioglitazone on the drivers of cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes and its associated mortality and morbidity are continuing to increase across the world. People with type 2 diabetes typically have a cluster of risk factors for cardiovascular disease, including hyperglycaemia, hypertension and lipid abnormalities, which contribute to the high cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in these patients. Targets for glycosylated haemoglobin, lipids and blood pressure are becoming more stringent, and most patients will require multiple therapies to maximally reduce cardiovascular risk. In a large randomised, controlled, long-term cardiovascular outcomes study pioglitazone showed durable glycaemic control, a powerful insulin-sparing effect and changes in the lipid profile associated with reduced cardiovascular risk. This article reviews these metabolic findings in the context of previous randomised, controlled studies for pioglitazone and discusses whether the integration of this agent into the treatment regimen of appropriate patient groups has the potential to improve cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes.

Metformin/rosiglitazone combination pill (Avandamet) for the treatment of patients with Type 2 diabetes

More than 150 million people worldwide have diabetes, the prevalence of which is increasing so rapidly that the number of adults with diabetes in the world will rise to 300 million by the year 2025. In the US, approximately 21 million people have diabetes and in some areas of the country, the prevalence is as high as 50%. The pathophysiologic hallmarks consist of insulin resistance and progressive pancreatic beta-cell dysfunction. An increased metabolic demand for insulin due to increased insulin resistance usually precedes the development of hyperglycemia. At early stages, pancreatic beta cells compensate for insulin resistance by hypersecretion of insulin. However, the period of beta-cell compensation is followed by beta-cell failure, in which the pancreas fails to secrete sufficient insulin and diabetes ensues. Biguanides and thiazolidinediones (TZDs) are two unique classes of oral antidiabetic agents that are the most commonly used medications to improve insulin sensitivity. They have no direct effect on beta-cell function, although some indirect mechanisms of actions may help to preserve beta-cell function or slow beta-cell apoptosis. Their glucose-lowering effect results from improving insulin sensitivity in a complementary fashion: metformin reduces hepatic glucose production and TZDs increase skeletal muscle glucose use. The combination of metformin and rosiglitazone in a single pill (Avandamet), was approved by the FDA in October 2002 for the treatment of diabetes. As insulin resistance is a pathophysiologic cornerstone of diabetes and cardiovascular disease, the use of Avandamet represents an optimal approach to the treatment of diabetes. This manuscript reviews the pharmacology, safety and benefits of the combination pill Avandamet.

Antidiabetic medications in overweight/obese patients with type 2 diabetes: drawbacks of current drugs and potential advantages of incretin-based treatment on body weight

The vast majority of patients with type 2 diabetes are overweight or obese. Lifestyle intervention to lose weight is recommended in most diabetic patients to improve glycaemic control and reduce associated risk factors for microvascular and macrovascular complications. Even modest weight loss can significantly improve glucose homeostasis and lessen cardiometabolic risk factors, although achieving this level of weight reduction remains difficult for many patients. Complicating the matter, many agents used to target hyperglycaemia are associated with weight gain, making management of overweight or obese patients with type 2 diabetes quite challenging. Incretin-based therapies with the new classes of glucagon-like peptide-1 mimetics (e.g. exenatide, liraglutide) and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors (e.g. sitagliptin, vildagliptin) may be of particular value in the treatment of overweight/obese type 2 diabetic patients because of their efficacy in improving glycaemic control and their favourable or neutral effects on body weight. In addition, DPP-4 inhibitors have a low risk for causing hypoglycaemia, undesirable gastrointestinal effects, or other prominent adverse effects that might limit their use. These classes of drugs hold promise for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, alone or in combination with other classes of antidiabetic agents.

Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes

BACKGROUND

Rosiglitazone is widely used to treat patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, but its effect on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality has not been determined.

METHODS

We conducted searches of the published literature, the Web site of the Food and Drug Administration, and a clinical-trials registry maintained by the drug manufacturer (GlaxoSmithKline). Criteria for inclusion in our meta-analysis included a study duration of more than 24 weeks, the use of a randomized control group not receiving rosiglitazone, and the availability of outcome data for myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes. Of 116 potentially relevant studies, 42 trials met the inclusion criteria. We tabulated all occurrences of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes.

RESULTS

Data were combined by means of a fixed-effects model. In the 42 trials, the mean age of the subjects was approximately 56 years, and the mean baseline glycated hemoglobin level was approximately 8.2%. In the rosiglitazone group, as compared with the control group, the odds ratio for myocardial infarction was 1.43 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 1.98; P=0.03), and the odds ratio for death from cardiovascular causes was 1.64 (95% CI, 0.98 to 2.74; P=0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

Rosiglitazone was associated with a significant increase in the risk of myocardial infarction and with an increase in the risk of death from cardiovascular causes that had borderline significance. Our study was limited by a lack of access to original source data, which would have enabled time-to-event analysis. Despite these limitations, patients and providers should consider the potential for serious adverse cardiovascular effects of treatment with rosiglitazone for type 2 diabetes.

Pharmacogenetics of metformin response: a step in the path toward personalized medicine

Type 2 diabetes mellitus affects 9.6% of the adults in the United States and more than 200 million people worldwide. Diabetes can be a devastating disease, but it can now be treated with nine classes of approved drugs (insulins, sulfonylureas, glinides, biguanides, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, glucagon-like peptide 1 mimetics, amylin mimetics, and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors), in addition to diet and exercise regimens. Choosing which drug to give a patient is based on efficacy and also availability, cost, safety, tolerability, and convenience. Personalized medicine promises a path for individually optimized treatment choices, but realizing this promise will require a more comprehensive characterization of disease and drug response. In this issue of the JCI, Shu et al. make significant progress by integrating diverse data supporting the hypothesis that genetic variation in organic cation transporter 1 (OCT1) affects the response to the widely used biguanide metformin (see the related article beginning on page 1422). We discuss metformin, OCT1, pharmacogenetics, and how the integrative genomics revolution is likely to change our understanding and treatment of diabetes.

Rosiglitazone RECORD study: glucose control outcomes at 18 months

AIMS

To compare glucose control over 18 months between rosiglitazone oral combination therapy and combination metformin and sulphonylurea in people with Type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

RECORD, a multicentre, parallel-group study of cardiovascular outcomes, enrolled people with an HbA(1c) of 7.1-9.0% on maximum doses of metformin or sulphonylurea. If on metformin they were randomized to add-on rosiglitazone or sulphonylurea (open label) and if on sulphonylurea to rosiglitazone or metformin. HbA(1c) was managed to < or = 7.0% by dose titration. A prospectively defined analysis of glycaemic control on the first 1122 participants is reported here, with a primary outcome assessed against a non-inferiority margin for HbA(1c) of 0.4%.

RESULTS

At 18 months, HbA(1c) reduction on background metformin was similar with rosiglitazone and sulphonylurea [difference 0.07 (95% CI -0.09, 0.23)%], as was the change when rosiglitazone or metformin was added to sulphonylurea [0.06 (-0.09, 0.20)%]. At 6 months, the effect on HbA(1c) was greater with add-on sulphonylurea, but was similar whether sulphonylurea was added to rosiglitazone or metformin. Differences in fasting plasma glucose were not statistically significant at 18 months [rosiglitazone vs. sulphonylurea -0.36 (-0.74, 0.02) mmol/l, rosiglitazone vs. metformin -0.34 (-0.73, 0.05) mmol/l]. Increased homeostasis model assessment insulin sensitivity and reduced C-reactive protein were greater with rosiglitazone than metformin or sulphonylurea (all P < or = 0.001). Body weight was significantly increased with rosiglitazone compared with sulphonylurea [difference 1.2 (0.4, 2.0) kg, P = 0.003] and metformin [difference 4.3 (3.6, 5.1) kg, P < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

In people with diabetes, rosiglitazone in combination with metformin or sulphonylurea was demonstrated to be non-inferior to the standard combination of metformin + sulphonylurea in lowering HbA(1c) over 18 months, and produces greater improvements in C-reactive protein and basal insulin sensitivity but is also associated with greater weight gain.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors as molecular targets in relation to obesity and Type 2 diabetes

The three isotypes of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) are currently perceived as major regulatory nodes (or hubs) of metabolic pathway networks, linking most prevalent diseases including Type 2 diabetes, obesity, dyslipidemia and atherosclerosis. The integrative functions of PPARs are also reflected in their ecogenetic profile, when the variants underlying pharmacogenetic interactions were also shown to modulate the effect of lifestyle factors. Despite their extensive clinical use, there are many outstanding issues, especially concerning their safety. Critical pharmacogenomic assessment is warranted for the new potent ligands of multiple PPAR isoforms as many have displayed serious side-effects in a limited number of treated subjects. Nevertheless, the advent of genomic, transcriptomic and system biology-level approaches, integrating knowledge from model systems and human biology, should greatly facilitate the transition to individualized PPAR-based therapies.

How doctors choose medications to treat type 2 diabetes: a national survey of specialists and academic generalists

OBJECTIVE

Glycemic control remains suboptimal despite the wide range of available medications. More effective medication prescription might result in better control. However, the process by which physicians choose glucose-lowering medicines is poorly understood. We sought to study the means by which physicians choose medications for type 2 diabetic patients.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We surveyed 886 physician members of either the Society of General Internal Medicine (academic generalists, response rate 30%) or the American Diabetes Association (specialists, response rate 23%) currently managing patients with type 2 diabetes. Respondents weighed the importance of 15 patient, physician, and nonclinical factors when deciding which medications to prescribe for type 2 diabetic subjects at each of three management stages (initiation, use of second-line oral agents, and insulin).

RESULTS

Respondents reported using a median of five major considerations (interquartile range 4-6) at each stage. Frequently cited major considerations included overall assessment of the patient's health/comorbidity, A1C level, and patient's adherence behavior but not expert guidelines/hospital algorithms or patient age. For insulin initiation, academic generalists placed greater emphasis on patient adherence (76 vs. 60% of specialists, P < 0.001). These generalists also identified patient fear of injections (68%) and patient desire to prolong noninsulin therapy (68%) as major insulin barriers. Overall, qualitative factors (e.g., adherence, motivation, overall health assessment) were somewhat more highly considered than quantitative factors (e.g., A1C, age, weight) with mean aggregate scores of 7.3 vs. 6.9 on a scale of 0-10, P < 0.001.

CONCLUSIONS

The physicians in our survey considered a wide range of qualitative and quantitative factors when making medication choices for hyperglycemia management. The apparent complexity of the medication choice process contrasts with current evidence-based treatment guidelines.

Inflammatory mechanisms of diabetic complications

Activation of inflammatory processes may contribute to the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus. In addition, inflammation appears to be a major mechanism responsible for vascular damage leading to the clinically well-recognized complications of diabetes. Inflammatory cytokine and chemokine mediators released from visceral fat contribute to atherosclerotic plaque formation and increased risk for myocardial infarction and stroke. Activation of growth factors and adhesion molecules may promote the movement of inflammatory cells into the renal microvasculature, predisposing to the development of diabetic nephropathy. Emerging evidence also indicates that markers of inflammation are associated with the more severe forms of diabetic retinopathy. Future approaches to the treatment of diabetic complications may involve regulation of inflammatory processes, specifically targeting factors that contribute to vascular damage.

Pharmacotherapy for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: rationale and specific agents

Type 2 diabetes, the most common form of diabetes, is characterized by abnormalities in hepatic glucose production, insulin resistance, and a progressive decline in beta-cell function over time. To treat effectively the individual with type 2 diabetes, the provider must have a thorough understanding of the underlying pathophysiology to provide treatment that precisely addresses the metabolic abnormalities. Currently, the provider who cares for subjects with type 2 diabetes can choose an antidiabetic agent from no less than eight pharmacologic classes. These classes include agents that increase insulin secretion, improve insulin action, and delay absorption of carbohydrates. The newer treatments available, specifically incretin therapy, address a previously unmet need in diabetes by modulating glucose supply. The currently available agents can be combined and combination therapy markedly improves glycemic control. This allows the provider to design regimens to specifically address underlying abnormalities. A review of all currently available agents is provided.

PPAR Ligands: Are They Potential Agents for Cardiovascular Disorders?

Peroxisome proliferator activated receptors (PPARs) are members of the nuclear hormone receptor superfamily of ligand-activated transcription factors. The PPAR subfamily consists of three members: PPARalpha, PPARgamma, and PPARbeta/delta. Fibrates are acting via PPARalpha, and they are used as lipid-lowering agents. PPARgamma agonists reduce insulin resistance and have been used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. As the knowledge of the pleiotropic effects of these agents advances, further potential indications are being revealed, including a novel role in the management of cardiovascular disorders (CVD). PPARalpha/gamma dual agonists are currently under development and hold considerable promise in the management of type 2 diabetes and provide an effective therapeutic option for treating the multifactorial components of CVD. Several experimental and clinical evidences elucidated the beneficial effects of PPAR ligands in prevention and treatment of various CVD. However, PPARalpha and PPARgamma agonists have been shown to be proinflammatory and proatherogenic in a few studies. Further, PPARgamma ligands have been noted to be involved in the pathogenesis of congestive heart failure. These controversial results obtained from a few studies created further complication in understanding the role of PPARs. The function of PPARdelta and its potential as a cardiovascular therapeutic target are currently under investigation. The present review focuses on the merits and limitations of PPAR agonists with regard to their use in CVD.

Targeting hyperglycaemia with either metformin or repaglinide in non-obese patients with type 2 diabetes: results from a randomized crossover trial

AIM

Metformin is the 'drug-of-first-choice' in obese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) due to its antihyperglycaemic and cardiovascular protective potentials. In non-obese patients with T2DM, insulin secretagogues are empirically used as first choice. In this investigator-initiated trial, we evaluated the effect of metformin vs. an insulin secretagogue, repaglinide on glycaemic regulation and markers of inflammation and insulin sensitivity in non-obese patients with T2DM.

METHODS

A single-centre, double-masked, double-dummy, crossover study during 2 x 4 months involved 96 non-obese (body mass index < or = 27 kg/m(2)) insulin-naïve patients with T2DM. At enrolment, previous oral hypoglycaemic agents (OHA) were stopped and patients entered a 1-month run-in on diet-only treatment. Hereafter, patients were randomized to either repaglinide 2 mg thrice daily followed by metformin 1 g twice daily or vice versa each during 4 months with 1-month washout between interventions.

RESULTS

End-of-treatment levels of haemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)), fasting plasma glucose, mean of seven-point home-monitored plasma glucose and fasting levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and adiponectin were not significantly different between treatments. However, body weight, waist circumference, fasting serum levels of insulin and C-peptide were lower and less number of patients experienced hypoglycaemia during treatment with metformin vs. repaglinide. Both drugs were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

In non-obese patients with T2DM, overall glycaemic regulation was equivalent with less hypoglycaemia during metformin vs. repaglinide treatment for 2 x 4 months. Metformin was more effective targeting non-glycaemic cardiovascular risk markers related to total and abdominal body fat stores as well as fasting insulinaemia. These findings may suggest the use of metformin as the preferred OHA also in non-obese patients with T2DM.

Fixed-dose combination of pioglitazone and glimepiride in the treatment of Type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes is characterized by impaired insulin sensitivity and disturbances in β-cell function. While glimepiride stimulates β-cell secretion and leads to a reduction of blood glucose levels, pioglitazone activates peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ and improves insulin resistance. Combining these two modes of action has been shown to improve glucose and lipid metabolism, and to improve the overall cardiovascular risk in patients with Type 2 diabetes. The combination of glimepiride and pioglitazone is generally well tolerated and a fixed combination may lead to an improved compliance in patients. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the clinical data that has been published on this combination, appearing to represent a convenient way to obtain therapeutic targets in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Progress in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: new pharmacologic approaches to improve glycemic control

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality that places a substantial economic and health burden on the public. Successful management of T2DM requires strict control of glycemia as well as other risk factors to prevent disease progression. Despite the availability of multiple classes of oral antidiabetic drugs and insulin, the majority of patients fail to attain or maintain tight glycemic control over time, raising their risk of serious microvascular and macrovascular complications.

SCOPE

This review briefly outlines current standards of diabetes treatment and explores several new and investigational approaches. It is based on MEDLINE literature searches (1966-August 2006) and on abstracts from the American Diabetes Association Scientific Sessions (2002-2006) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes Annual Meetings (1998-2006). Articles concerning basic science, preclinical, and clinical trial results were selected for this review based on their originality and relevance.

FINDINGS

Medical professional societies and other specialist groups have proposed a series of practical steps to enable more patients with T2DM to reach treatment goals. Among their most important recommendations is a call for new drugs to stabilize or reverse the progressive pancreatic islet-cell dysfunction that characterizes the disease. New modalities, such as incretin mimetics and DPP-4 inhibitors, are now emerging from clinical development and will provide patients with more treatment options.

CONCLUSIONS

It appears likely that early and aggressive treatment with multiple drug combinations will become more common in the management of T2DM. The new treatment modalities discussed here offer hope for improved outcomes and for meeting the considerable public health challenges posed by this complex condition. However, long-term studies are needed to determine durability of treatment effects, as well as the ultimate role of these new agents in the management of patients with T2DM.

Waking up from the DREAM of preventing diabetes with drugs

The current epidemic of diabetes makes a drug to prevent it attractive. But despite promotion of recent research evidence, Victor Montori, William Isley, and Gordon Guyatt argue that we are not there yet

Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibition with sitagliptin: a new therapy for type 2 diabetes

Sitagliptin is a once-daily, orally active, competitive and fully reversible inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase 4, the enzyme that is responsible for the rapid degradation of the incretin hormone glucagon-like peptide-1. It is the first in this new class of antihyperglycaemic agents to gain regulatory approval for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes, both as a monotherapy and for use in combination with metformin or a thiazolidinedione. In clinical trials of < or = 1-year duration, sitagliptin improves glycaemic control by reducing both fasting and postprandial glucose concentrations, leading to clinically meaningful reductions in glycosylated haemoglobin levels. It is safe and well tolerated, with a side-effect profile that is similar to that of the placebo, a low incidence of hypoglycaemia and body weight neutrality. Further clinical experience with sitagliptin will reveal its long-term durability, safety and efficacy.

Composite and surrogate outcomes in randomised controlled trials

Composite end points may mislead—and regulators allow it to happen

The peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma agonist rosiglitazone decreases bone formation and bone mineral density in healthy postmenopausal women: a randomized, controlled trial

CONTEXT

Thiazolidinediones, which are peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma agonists, are widely prescribed to patients with disorders characterized by insulin resistance. Preclinical studies suggest that peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma signaling negatively regulates bone formation and bone density. Human data on the skeletal effects of thiazolidinediones are currently available only from observational studies.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to determine whether rosiglitazone, a thiazolidinedione, inhibits bone formation.

DESIGN

The study was a 14-wk randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

SETTING

The study was conducted in the general community.

PATIENTS

Fifty healthy, postmenopausal women participated in the study.

INTERVENTION

Intervention was rosiglitazone 8 mg/d.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point was biochemical markers of bone formation, and secondary end points were a bone resorption marker and bone mineral density.

RESULTS

The osteoblast markers procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide and osteocalcin declined by 13% (P<0.005 vs. placebo) and 10% (P=0.04 vs. placebo), respectively, in the rosiglitazone group. These changes were evident by 4 wk and persisted for the duration of the study. There was no change in the serum beta-C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen, a marker of bone resorption (P=0.9 vs. placebo). Total hip bone density fell in the rosiglitazone group (mean change from baseline rosiglitazone -1.9%, placebo -0.2%; between-group difference 1.7%, 95% confidence interval 0.6-2.7, P<0.01); lumbar spine bone density fell significantly from baseline values in the rosiglitazone group (P=0.02 vs. baseline) but was not significantly different between groups (mean change from baseline rosiglitazone -1.2%, placebo -0.2%; between-group difference 1.0%, 95% confidence interval -0.2-2.3, P=0.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term therapy with rosiglitazone exerts detrimental skeletal effects by inhibiting bone formation. Skeletal end points should be included in future long-term studies of thiazolidinedione use.

Canadian Cardiovascular Society Consensus Conference recommendations on heart failure update 2007: Prevention, management during intercurrent illness or acute decompensation, and use of biomarkers

Heart failure is common, yet it is difficult to treat. It presents in many different guises and circumstances in which therapy needs to be individualized. The Canadian Cardiovascular Society published a comprehensive set of recommendations in January 2006 on the diagnosis and management of heart failure, and the present update builds on those core recommendations. Based on feedback obtained through a national program of heart failure workshops during 2006, several topics were identified as priorities because of the challenges they pose to health care professionals. New evidence-based recommendations were developed using the structured approach for the review and assessment of evidence adopted and previously described by the Society. Specific recommendations and practical tips were written for the prevention of heart failure, the management of heart failure during intercurrent illness, the treatment of acute heart failure, and the current and future roles of biomarkers in heart failure care. Specific clinical questions that are addressed include: which patients should be identified as being at high risk of developing heart failure and which interventions should be used? What complications can occur in heart failure patients during an intercurrent illness, how should these patients be monitored and which medications may require a dose adjustment or discontinuation? What are the best therapeutic, both drug and nondrug, strategies for patients with acute heart failure? How can new biomarkers help in the treatment of heart failure, and when and how should BNP be measured in heart failure patients? The goals of the present update are to translate best evidence into practice, to apply clinical wisdom where evidence for specific strategies is weaker, and to aid physicians and other health care providers to optimally treat heart failure patients to result in a measurable impact on patient health and clinical outcomes in Canada.

The fate of Beta-cells in type 2 diabetes and the possible role of pharmacological interventions

This article gives an overview of two recent trials investigating rosiglitazone, a thiazolidinedione, in its potential to prevent type 2 diabetes (T2D) and in its effectiveness in monotherapy. Thiazolidinediones are among the most important developments of recent years for combating T2D and therefore worth to revisit. The possible influence of thiazolidines in improving beta-cell function is discussed as well as the potential effects on insulin resistance and obesity. Novel, incretin-based therapies (GLP-1 analogues and DPP-4 inhibitors) and their effects on beta-cell function and beta-cell mass are also summarized and critically evaluated.