The influence of glipizide on early insulin release and glucose disposal before and after dietary regulation in diabetic patients with different degrees of hyperglycaemia

Insulin secretagogues for prevention or delay of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its associated complications in persons at increased risk for the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The projected rise in the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) could develop into a substantial health problem worldwide. Whether insulin secretagogues (sulphonylureas and meglitinide analogues) are able to prevent or delay T2DM and its associated complications in people at risk for the development of T2DM is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of insulin secretagogues on the prevention or delay of T2DM and its associated complications in people with impaired glucose tolerance, impaired fasting blood glucose, moderately elevated glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) or any combination of these.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the reference lists of systematic reviews, articles and health technology assessment reports. We asked investigators of the included trials for information about additional trials. The date of the last search of all databases was April 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a duration of 12 weeks or more comparing insulin secretagogues with any pharmacological glucose-lowering intervention, behaviour-changing intervention, placebo or no intervention in people with impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, moderately elevated HbA1c or combinations of these.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors read all abstracts and full-text articles/records, assessed quality and extracted outcome data independently. One review author extracted data which were checked by a second review author. We resolved discrepancies by consensus or the involvement of a third review author. For meta-analyses we used a random-effects model with investigation of risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effect estimates. We carried out trial sequential analyses (TSAs) for all outcomes that could be meta-analysed. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence by using the GRADE instrument.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs with 10,018 participants; 4791 participants with data on allocation to intervention groups were randomised to a second- or third-generation sulphonylurea or a meglitinide analogue as monotherapy and 29 participants were randomised to a second-generation sulphonylurea plus metformin. Three trials investigated a second-generation sulphonylurea, two trials investigated a third-generation sulphonylurea and one trial a meglitinide analogue. A total of 4873 participants with data on allocation to control groups were randomised to a comparator group; 4820 participants were randomised to placebo, 23 to diet and exercise, and 30 participants to metformin monotherapy. One RCT of nateglinide contributed 95% of all participants. The duration of the intervention varied from six months to five years. We judged none of the included trials as at low risk of bias for all 'Risk of bias' domains.All-cause and cardiovascular mortality following sulphonylurea (glimepiride) treatment were rarely observed (very low-quality evidence). The RR for incidence of T2DM comparing glimepiride monotherapy with placebo was 0.75; 95% CI 0.54 to 1.04; P = 0.08; 2 trials; 307 participants; very low-quality evidence. One of the trials reporting on the incidence of T2DM did not define the diagnostic criteria used. The other trial diagnosed T2DM as two consecutive fasting blood glucose values ≥ 6.1 mmol/L. TSA showed that only 4.5% of the diversity-adjusted required information size was accrued so far. No trial reported data on serious adverse events, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), non-fatal stroke, congestive heart failure (HF), health-related quality of life or socioeconomic effects.One trial with a follow-up of five years compared a meglitinide analogue (nateglinide) with placebo. A total of 310/4645 (6.7%) participants allocated to nateglinide died compared with 312/4661 (6.7%) participants allocated to placebo (hazard ratio (HR) 1.00; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.17; P = 0.98; moderate-quality evidence). The two main criteria for diagnosing T2DM were a fasting plasma glucose level ≥ 7.0 mmol/L or a 2-hour post challenge glucose ≥ 11.1 mmol/L. T2DM developed in 1674/4645 (36.0%) participants in the nateglinide group and in 1580/4661 (33.9%) in the placebo group (HR 1.07; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.15; P = 0.05; moderate-quality evidence). One or more serious adverse event was reported in 2066/4602 (44.9%) participants allocated to nateglinide compared with 2089/4599 (45.6%) participants allocated to placebo. A total of 126/4645 (2.7%) participants allocated to nateglinide died because of cardiovascular disease compared with 118/4661 (2.5%) participants allocated to placebo (HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.38; P = 0.60; moderate-quality evidence). Comparing participants receiving nateglinide with those receiving placebo for the outcomes MI, non-fatal stroke and HF gave the following event rates: MI 116/4645 (2.5%) versus 122/4661 (2.6%), stroke 100/4645 (2.2%) versus 110/4661 (2.4%) and numbers hospitalised for HF 85/4645 (1.8%) versus 100/4661 (2.1%) - (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.14; P = 0.27). The quality of the evidence was moderate for all these outcomes. Health-related quality of life or socioeconomic effects were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate whether insulin secretagogues compared mainly with placebo reduce the risk of developing T2DM and its associated complications in people at increased risk for the development of T2DM. Most trials did not investigate patient-important outcomes.

Kinetics-effect relations of insulin-releasing drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes: brief overview

Sulfonylureas and glinides have similar mechanisms of action but differ in receptor affinity and binding sites and in absorption and elimination rates. This promotes differences in potency, rate of onset, and duration of action. While prominent in single-dose studies, these differences have less importance during long-term sulfonylurea treatment: at ordinary dosages, rapid- and short-acting (glipizide) and slow- and long-acting (glyburide) sulfonylureas maintained continuously effective plasma levels and similar 24-h glucose control. Moreover, there was no difference in patient outcome between the first-generation sulfonylurea chlorpropamide and the second-generation glyburide in the U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study. However, the risk of long-lasting and hence dangerous hypoglycemia is higher with these two long-acting sulfonylureas. Conversely, this risk should be low with the short-acting glinides, but seemingly at the expense of less effective glucose control. The most important kinetics-effect relations are that hyperglycemia delays sulfonylurea absorption and that the sulfonylurea dose-response curve is bell shaped; continuous sulfonylurea exposure over a certain level (e.g., 10 mg glipizide) impairs rather than improves insulin and glucose responses to sulfonylurea (downregulation). Accordingly, a vicious circle may be established: unrelenting hyperglycemia may promote sulfonylurea dose increase, which increases hyperglycemia, promoting further dose increase and eventually therapeutic failure.

Effects of glimepiride on insulin secretion and sensitivity in patients with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The exact mechanism of the efficacy of glimepiride in the achievement of glycemic control has not yet been clearly defined.

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to examine the influence of glimepiride on insulin secretion and sensitivity in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) of recent onset.

METHODS

This 24-week, open-label, controlled trial was conducted at the Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Veterans Affairs Medical Center (Phoenix, Arizona). Study participants were aged 32 to 75 years and had recent-onset (established by a short duration of symptoms 6 weeks to 6 months prior to the study) type 2 DM, or were age-matched healthy volunteers (control group). In the diabetic patients, glimepiride tablets were administered orally, initially at 2 mg once daily in the morning, with the dosage increased by 1 mg every 2 weeks until fasting plasma glucose (FPG) decreased to 6.7 mmol/L; the dosage was then maintained for the remainder of the 24-week study period. Oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) were conducted in the control group and before treatment and at 24 weeks after the achievement and maintenance of glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin <7.0%) in the diabetic group. For OGTT, plasma insulin and glucose levels were determined after the subjects fasted overnight and then at every 15 minutes for 2 hours after glucose challenge.

RESULTS

Fourteen diabetic men (mean [SEM] age, 50 [6] years; range, 32-75 years) and 10 male healthy controls (mean [SD] age, 48 [5] years; range, 30-68 years) were enrolled. In the DM group, FPG decreased significantly after treatment ( P<0.001); fasting plasma insulin was markedly elevated before treatment (P<0.001 vs controls) and decreased after treatment ( P<0.01) but did not normalize; first-phase insulin secretion was markedly inhibited before treatment ( P<0.001 vs controls) and normalized after treatment ( P<0.001) total insulin secretion significantly improved after treatment ( P<0.01) but did not normalize. Finally, the pretreatment insulin sensitivity index decreased significantly (P<0.01) after treatment and normalized in 6 of 14 patients (42.9%) with type 2 DM.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, glimepiride achieved desirable glycemic control in patients with recent-onset type 2 DM through improvement in insulin secretion and sensitivity.

Control of postprandial hyperglycemia: optimal use of short-acting insulin secretagogues

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to compare the efficacy of acute premeal administration of glipizide versus nateglinide in controlling postprandial hyperglycemia in subjects with non-insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A total of 20 subjects (10 female, 10 male) with non-insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes were admitted overnight to the General Clinical Research Center on four occasions. In random order, 10 mg glipizide (30 min premeal), 120 mg nateglinide (15 min premeal), 10 mg glipizide plus nateglinide (30 and 15 min premeal, respectively), or placebo pills (30 and 15 min premeal) were administered in a double-blind fashion before a standardized breakfast. Blood was drawn for analysis of glucose, insulin, and C-peptide at -0.05, 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 4 h relative to the meal.

RESULTS

The subjects were aged 56 +/- 2 years and were moderately obese (BMI 31 +/- 1 kg/m(2)), with a mean HbA(1c) of 7.4 +/- 0.4%. The peak postprandial glucose excursion above baseline was higher with placebo (6.1 +/- 0.5 mmol/l) than glipizide (4.3 +/- 0.6 mmol/l, P = 0.002), nateglinide (4.2 +/- 0.4 mmol/l, P = 0.001), or glipizide plus nateglinide (4.1 +/- 0.5 mmol/l, P = 0.001). The area under the curve for the glucose excursion above baseline was also higher with placebo (14.1 +/- 1.8 mmol/h. l) compared with glipizide (6.9 +/- 2.4 mmol/h. l, P = 0.002), nateglinide (9.7 +/- 2 mmol/h. l, P = 0.004), or glipizide plus nateglinide (5.6 +/- 2.2 mmol/h. l, P < 0.001). Peak and integrated glucose excursions did not differ significantly between glipizide and nateglinide. However, by 4 h postmeal, plasma glucose levels were significantly higher with nateglinide (9 +/- 0.9 mmol/l) compared with the premeal baseline (7.8 +/- 0.6 mmol/l, P = 0.04) and compared with the 4-h postprandial glucose level after administration of glipizide (7.6 +/- 0.6 mmol/l, P = 0.02). Integrated postprandial insulin levels were higher with glipizide (1,556 +/- 349 pmol/h. l) than nateglinide (1,364 +/- 231 pmol/h. l; P = 0.03). Early insulin secretion, as measured by insulin levels at 30 min postmeal, did not differ between glipizide and nateglinide.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute premeal administration of nateglinide or glipizide has equal efficacy in controlling postbreakfast hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes when each drug is administered at the optimum time before the meal. Glipizide causes a more pronounced and sustained postmeal insulin secretory response compared with nateglinide. Glipizide facilitates the return to near-fasting glucose levels at 4 h postmeal, but with the possible risk of increased frequency of postmeal hypoglycemia in drug-naive patients. The clinical decision to use glipizide versus nateglinide should be based on factors other than the control of postprandial hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes.

Glimepiride improves both first and second phases of insulin secretion in type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of glimepiride on insulin sensitivity and secretion in subjects with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

After a 2-week washout from prior sulfonylurea therapy, 11 obese subjects with type 2 diabetes underwent euglycemic and hyperglycemic clamp studies before and during glimepiride therapy.

RESULTS

Glimepiride resulted in a 2.4-mmol/l decrease in fasting plasma glucose (P = 0.04) that was correlated with reductions in postabsorptive endogenous glucose production (EGP) (16.4 +/- 0.6 vs. 13.5 +/- 0.5 micro mol. kg(-1). min(-1), P = 0.01) (r = 0.21, P = 0.01). Postabsorptive EGP on glimepiride was similar to that of control subjects (12.8 +/- 0.9 micro mol. kg(-1). min(-1), NS). Fasting plasma insulin (66 +/- 18 vs. 84 +/- 48 pmol/l, P = 0.05), and first-phase (19 +/- 8 vs. 32 +/- 11 pmol/l, P = 0.04) and second-phase incremental insulin responses to glucose (48 +/- 23 vs. 72 +/- 32 pmol/l, P = 0.02) improved with glimepiride therapy. Insulin sensitivity did not change with treatment (4.6 +/- 0.7 vs. 4.3 +/- 0.7 micro mol. kg(-1). min(-1). pmol(-1)) and remained below that of control subjects (8.1 +/- 1.8 micro mol. kg(-1). min(-1). pmol(-1), P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study demonstrates that glimepiride improves both first and second phases of insulin secretion, but not insulin sensitivity, in individuals with type 2 diabetes.

Pharmacotherapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE

To review the drug treatments and some of the popular, nontraditional remedies now available for type 2 diabetes mellitus, as well as selected investigational agents; to describe each medication's place in the overall approach to treatment.

DATA SOURCES

English-language journals, abstracts, review articles, and newspaper accounts.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In the past five years, there has been tremendous progress in the pharmacotherapy of diabetes, particularly type 2 diabetes. Several new agents have entered the clinical arena, and many more are in the late stages of investigation leading to approval. Sulfonylureas stimulate the production and release of insulin; these drugs must be used in patients with an intact pancreas. The meglitinides are nonsulfonylurea agents that are also insulin secretagogues. Unlike the sulfonylureas, repaglinide appears to require the presence of glucose to close the adenosine triphosphate-sensitive potassium channels and induce calcium influx. Metformin reduces hepatic glucose production in some patients and increases peripheral glucose utilization, but its use is hampered by a high percentage of adverse reactions. Disaccharidase inhibitors effectively compensate for the defective early-phase insulin release by slowing the production of sugars from carbohydrates. Thiazolidinediones appear to activate peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma, which is involved in the metabolism of lipids. Short-acting insulin and the role of weight-loss agents are also discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

The availability of new options for diabetes therapy provides a chance for successful therapy in a larger number of patients. However, it is important to consider how much true benefit these new forms of treatment will have on the diabetic community. The best choice for a patient remains controversial.

Is there a concentration-effect relationship for sulphonylureas?

Sulphonylureas have remained the mainstay of oral therapy for type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus (NIDDM). They stimulate insulin release from pancreatic beta cells. Pharmacokinetic differences between the various sulphonylureas are of clinical importance in terms of the time to onset of action, timing of drug administration in relation to food intake, magnitude and duration of the glucose-lowering effect and the risk of serious hypoglycaemia. Recent studies with improved analytical sensitivity have shown that the elimination half-life of glibenclamide is longer than previously thought and that 2 metabolites of glibenclamide have significant hypoglycaemic activity. Furthermore, single dose studies in healthy volunteers using an integrated pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model have identified clear concentration-effect relationships for both glibenclamide and its metabolites after oral and intravenous administration. Under multiple dose conditions, kinetic-dynamic relations have been identified with shorter-acting drugs in dosages that give discontinuous sulphonylurea exposure. However, at continuous exposure, i.e. sustained 24-hour therapeutic concentrations in plasma, there is evidence indicating the development of tolerance, which may be caused by downregulation of beta cell sensitivity. As more sophisticated concentration-effect studies appear, it has become evident that currently recommended maximum daily doses of many sulphonylureas are too high.

Relationship between hypoglycaemic response and plasma concentrations of BTS 67 582 in healthy volunteers

The relationships between blood glucose, plasma insulin and plasma BTS 67 582 concentrations were studied in a randomised, placebo-controlled, four-way crossover study involving 16 healthy male volunteers aged between 19 and 43 years. Single oral doses of 125, 250 and 500 mg BTS 67 582 were studied. Fasting blood samples were taken pre-dose and half-hourly for 8 h post-dose. Mean peak plasma concentrations of BTS 67 582 were 518, 1076 and 2435 ng ml-1 for doses of 125, 250 and 500 mg, respectively. Mean maximum reductions in blood glucose were 1.13, 1.59 and 1.78 mmol l-1, and mean maximum increases in plasma insulin were 26, 14 and 21 muu ml-1 for the three doses, respectively. Changes in incremental area under the curve (AUC) of blood glucose were correlated with changes in plasma BTS 67 582 AUC. The maximum reduction in blood glucose was correlated with the peak plasma BTS 67 582 concentration. No correlations between plasma insulin and plasma BTS 67 582 concentrations were observed. Anticlockwise hysteresis was evident in concentration-effect curves, but less evident following subtraction of placebo data, and was mainly due to an underlying downward trend in fasted blood glucose levels with time evident under placebo treatment. This suggests that hypoglycaemic effects were related to systemic BTS 67 582 concentrations, suggesting that active metabolites of the drug do not make a major contribution to acute hypoglycaemic effects. A log-linear model described the relationship between blood glucose and plasma BTS 67 582 concentrations for 14 of the 16 volunteers.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Enhancement of drug absorption by antacids. An unrecognised drug interaction

Antacids are widely used for many disorders. The potential of antacids to interact with other concomitantly ingested drugs is well recognised. These interactions usually result in reduced or delayed absorption of the affected drug. However, this is not always the case. In contrast to aluminium hydroxide, magnesium hydroxide and sodium bicarbonate can enhance the absorption of some drugs. For example, magnesium hydroxide can increase the rate and sometimes even the extent of absorption of certain nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (e.g. tolfenamic acid, mefenamic acid and ibuprofen), sulphonylurea antidiabetic agents [e.g. glipizide, glibenclamide (glyburide) and tolbutamide] and the oral anticoagulant dicoumarol (bishydroxycoumarin). These weakly acidic drugs are nonionised at gastric pH, but are sparingly water soluble. Elevation of the gastric pH by administration of magnesium hydroxide or sodium bicarbonate increases the solubility and absorption of such sparingly water soluble agents. Chelate formation may be involved in the increased absorption of dicoumarol by magnesium hydroxide. In combination antacids containing both aluminium hydroxide and magnesium hydroxide, the absorption enhancing effect of magnesium hydroxide seems to be counterbalanced by the opposing effects of aluminium hydroxide. The clinical significance of increased drug absorption is not clear. However, accelerated and enhanced absorption of analgesic drugs may be beneficial when rapid pain relief is desired. In contrast, an unexpectedly increased hypoglycaemic or anticoagulant effect may be potentially dangerous. Therefore, a knowledge of the potential effect of antacids on the absorption of other drugs is clinically important.

The acute effect of preprandial exogenous and endogenous sulphonylurea-stimulated insulin secretion on postprandial glucose excursions in patients with type 2 diabetes

Sulphonylureas improve glucose tolerance by stimulating insulin secretion. Whether improved glucose tolerance results from enhanced early insulin release or greater total insulin secretion is not clear. Insulin response to a test meal in Type 2 diabetic subjects with and without a single dose (2.5 mg) of oral and intravenous glipizide were, therefore, measured. Intravenous glipizide enhanced early insulin release more than oral glipizide (134% and 80% vs control; p < 0.01), whereas total insulin release was equally improved (78% and 54% vs control; p < 0.01). Despite slight differences in insulin release, there was no difference in glucose tolerance (median area under concentration curve (AUC); 66.6 vs 61.9 mmol x min l-1; NS). The test meal was repeated after a bolus of intravenous insulin at the beginning of the meal. This allowed comparison of the effect of exogenous and endogenous insulin supply on postprandial glucose excursions. In spite of an early and fivefold larger rise in serum insulin after intravenous administration of the hormone than after intravenous glipizide (725% vs 134%; p < 0.01), postprandial glucose was no better than after glipizide (median AUC; 87.8 vs 66.6 mmol x min l-1; NS). In contrast, glucose tolerance was better after oral glipizide compared to intravenous insulin (median AUC; 61.9 vs 87.8 mmol x min l-1; p < 0.05). In conclusion, the total amount of insulin secreted seems more important than the timing of the insulin release for the postprandial glucose tolerance in Type 2 diabetic subjects. Neither endogenous nor peripheral premeal supply of insulin could normalize postprandial glucose excursions in patients with Type 2 diabetes.

Long-term effects of glipizide on insulin secretion and blood glucose control in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus

Of 23 patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM), whose fasting blood glucose had not reached less than or equal to 6.0 mmol.l-1 after 10 weeks of dietary regulation, 15, who had had a weight reduction of -2.8 kg by dietary control, did achieve a fasting blood glucose less than or equal to 6.0 mmol.l-1 after addition of less than or equal to 20 mg glipizide daily. They had a sustained (greater than or equal to 2 years) increase in meal-induced insulin secretion (32% increase in postprandial C-peptide AUC), and a sustained reduction in postprandial hyperglycaemia (34% reduction in AUC). Ten of the patients took a mean daily dose less than 5 mg (4.8 mg) and had a sustained increase in insulin secretion rate (increased C-peptide slope). The 15 patients had no elevation of basal insulin secretion and no impairment of weight reduction. The remaining 8 subjects, who showed little or no weight reduction on dietary control, had little or no reduction in fasting blood glucose despite long-term treatment with 20 mg glipizide daily, a less sustained increase in meal-induced insulin secretion, a smaller reduction of postprandial hyperglycaemia, and an increase in body weight. On diagnosis the 8 subjects did not differ from the other 15 subjects in age, body weight, blood glucose, HbA1c, C-peptide or insulin, nor in their glucose and insulin responses to a test dose of glipizide; the main reason for the apparent drug failure appeared to be deficient compliance with dietary regulation rather than a primary inability to respond to sulphonylurea treatment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Effect of sulphonylurea on glucose-stimulated insulin secretion in healthy and non-insulin dependent diabetic subjects: a dose-response study

The effect of a rapid-acting sulphonylurea, glipizide, on the dose-response relationship between the beta-cell response (insulin and C-peptide secretion) and the ambient plasma glucose concentration was examined in 12 healthy and 6 non-insulin-dependent diabetic subjects. The subjects participated in two sets of experiments which were performed in random order: (A) four hyperglycaemic clamp studies, during which the plasma glucose concentration was raised for 120 min by 1 (only in healthy subjects), 3, 7, and 17 mmol/l; and (B) the same four hyperglycaemic clamp studies preceded by ingestion of 5 mg glipizide. All subjects participated in a further study, in which glipizide was ingested and the plasma glucose concentration was maintained at the basal level. In control subjects in the absence of glipizide, the first-phase plasma insulin response (0-10 min) increased progressively with increasing plasma glucose concentration up to 10 mmol/l, above which it tended to plateau. Glipizide augmented the first-phase insulin response without changing the slope of the regression line relating plasma insulin to glucose concentrations. The second-phase plasma insulin response (20-120 min) increased linearly with increasing hyperglycaemia (r = 0.997). Glipizide alone increased the plasma insulin response by 180 pmol/l. A similar increase in plasma insulin response following glipizide was observed at each hyperglycaemic step, indicating that glipizide did not affect the sensitivity of the beta-cell to glucose. First-phase insulin secretion was reduced in the type 2 (non-insulin-dependent) diabetic patients, and was not influenced by glipizide.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Sulphonylurea antidiabetic drugs. An update of their clinical pharmacology and rational therapeutic use

Apart from the amelioration of symptoms, a major aim of the treatment of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM, type 2 diabetes) should be the prevention of cardiovascular complications. These are associated with the chronic hyperglycaemia that is characteristic of NIDDM, and the risk of complications is already increased in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). For these reasons, and because hyperglycaemia appears to be a self-perpetuating condition, treatment should be introduced as early as possible and should be aimed at normalisation of blood glucose. To enable early detection and intervention, screening is necessary. As diet regulation alone rarely suffices to normalise blood glucose, addition of sulphonylurea drugs is indicated in many cases. If introduced in the IGT phase, sulphonylureas drugs combined with diet regulation may postpone the development of IGT to manifest NIDDM, and may reduce the increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Sulphonylureas stimulate insulin release, possibly via interaction with receptors in the pancreatic B cells. In addition, such treatment enhances the reduced insulin action. This might be a primary effect but is also a consequence of the increased access to insulin and the subsequent reduction of hyperglycaemia. Sulphonylureas may enhance insulin availability by reducing insulin clearance. Effects on blood lipids are probably secondary phenomena. Fast and short acting sulphonylureas may improve the impaired meal-induced acute insulin release. If combined with weight-reducing diet regulation and introduced early, such treatment can maintain (near) normal blood glucose levels and an improved insulin action for several years without increasing basal insulin secretion, without chronic hyperinsulinaemia, and without weight increase. If not combined with diet regulation, sulphonylurea therapy is likely to fail. If introduced when NIDDM is advanced, the efficacy of these drugs is limited, with secondary failures developing at a rate of 5 to 10% per year. Continuous (24-hour-a-day) exposure to drug treatment could possibly desensitise the B cell to sulphonylurea stimulation. 'Second-generation' sulphonylurea drugs have a higher potency than 'first-generation' drugs, but this need not signify a greater clinical efficacy. The effect of several of these drugs may be increased if they are ingested half an hour before meal(s). Short acting sulphonylureas may be safer than long acting ones, which seem more likely to cause long lasting and fatal hypoglycaemia, at least in elderly patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)