Long-term efficacy and tolerability of add-on pioglitazone therapy to failing monotherapy compared with addition of gliclazide or metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes

Metformin for preventing the progression of chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Metformin has been used in the management of diabetes for decades. It is an effective, low-cost intervention with a well-established safety profile. Emerging evidence suggests that metformin targets a number of pathways that lead to chronic kidney damage, and long-term use may, therefore, slow the rate of kidney function decline and chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of metformin therapy on kidney function decline in patients with CKD with or without diabetes mellitus and assess the safety and dose tolerability in this population.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 19 July 2023 with assistance from an Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that reported kidney-related outcomes with a minimum duration of 12 months delivery of the metformin intervention and whose eligibility criteria included adult participants with either i) a diagnosis of CKD of any aetiology and/or ii) those with a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. Comparisons included placebo, no intervention, non-pharmacological interventions, other antidiabetic medications or any other active control. Studies that included patients on any modality of kidney replacement therapy were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently carried out data extraction using a standard data extraction form. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included 11 studies reporting on 8449 randomised participants. Studies were conducted in patient populations with Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease (ADPKD) (four studies) or diabetes mellitus (seven studies). Six studies compared metformin with no active control, four studies compared metformin with active controls (rosiglitazone, glyburide, pioglitazone, or glipizide), and one study included treatment arms that randomised to either metformin, diet and lifestyle modifications, or other antidiabetic therapies. The risk of bias in included studies varied; two studies were abstract-only publications and were judged to have a high risk of bias in most domains. Other included publications were judged to have a low risk of bias in most domains. Across comparisons, GRADE evaluations for most outcomes were judged as low or very low certainty, except for those relating to side effects, tolerance, and withdrawals, which were judged as moderate certainty. The evidence suggests that compared to placebo, metformin may result in i) a slightly smaller decline in kidney function (3 studies, 505 participants: MD 1.92 mL/min, 95% CI 0.33 to 3.51; I2 = 0%; low certainty), ii) very uncertain effects on the incidence of kidney failure (1 study, 753 participants: RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.17 to 8.49), iii) little or no effect on death (3 studies, 865 participants: RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.32; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty), iv) little or no effect on the incidence of serious adverse events (3 studies, 576 participants: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.72; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty), and v) likely higher incidence of intolerance leading to study withdrawal than placebo (4 studies, 646 participants: RR 2.19, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.27; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty). The certainty of the evidence for proteinuria was very uncertain. Compared to other active controls (rosiglitazone, glyburide, pioglitazone, or glipizide), metformin i) demonstrated very uncertain effects on kidney function decline, ii) may result in little or no difference in death (3 studies, 5608 participants: RR 0.95 95% CI 0.63 to 1.43; I2 = 0%; low certainty), iii) probably results in little or no difference in intolerance leading to study withdrawal (3 studies, 5593 participants: RR 0.92, 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.08; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty), iv) probably results in little or no difference in the incidence of serious adverse events (2 studies, 5545 participants: RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.71; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty), and v) may increase the urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (2 studies, 3836 participants: MD 14.61, 95% CI 8.17 to 21.05; I2 = 0%; low certainty). No studies reported the incidence of kidney failure.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the lack of RCTs reporting on the effects of metformin on kidney function, particularly in patients with CKD. Future research in this field requires adequately powered RCTs comparing metformin to placebo or standard care in those with CKD. Seven ongoing studies were identified in this review, and future updates, including their findings, may further inform the results of this review.

2022 update to the position statement by Primary Care Diabetes Europe: a disease state approach to the pharmacological management of type 2 diabetes in primary care

Type 2 diabetes and its associated comorbidities are growing more prevalent, and the complexity of optimising glycaemic control is increasing, especially on the frontlines of patient care. In many countries, most patients with type 2 diabetes are managed in a primary care setting. However, primary healthcare professionals face the challenge of the growing plethora of available treatment options for managing hyperglycaemia, leading to difficultly in making treatment decisions and contributing to treatment and therapeutic inertia. This position statement offers a simple and patient-centred clinical decision-making model with practical treatment recommendations that can be widely implemented by primary care clinicians worldwide through shared-decision conversations with their patients. It highlights the importance of managing cardiovascular disease and elevated cardiovascular risk in people with type 2 diabetes and aims to provide innovative risk stratification and treatment strategies that connect patients with the most effective care.

Effects of pioglitazone on cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

In 2019, the Italian Society of Diabetology and the Italian Association of Clinical Diabetologists nominated an expert panel to develop guidelines for drug treatment of type 2 diabetes. After identifying the effects of glucose-lowering agents on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), all-cause mortality, and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) as critical outcomes, the experts decided to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of pioglitazone with this respect.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A MEDLINE database search was performed to identify RCTs, up to June 1st, 2021, with duration≥52 weeks, in which pioglitazone was compared with either placebo or active comparators. The principal endpoints were MACE and HHF (restricted for RCT reporting MACEs within their outcomes), all-cause mortality (irrespective of the inclusion of MACEs among the pre-specified outcomes). Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (MH-OR) with 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) was calculated for all the endpoints considered. Eight RCTs were included in the analysis for MACEs and HF (5048 and 5117 patients in the pioglitazone and control group, respectively), and 24 in that for all-cause mortality (10,682 and 9674 patients). Pioglitazone neither significantly increased nor reduced the risk of MACE, all-cause mortality, and HHF in comparison with placebo/active comparators (MH-OR: 0.90, 95% CI 0.78-1.03, 0.91, 95% CI 0.77, 1.09, and 1.16, 95% CI 0.73, 1.83, respectively). Pioglitazone was associated with a significant reduction of MACE in patients with prior cardiovascular events (MH-OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed no significant effects of pioglitazone on incident MACE, all-cause mortality, and HHF.

A disease state approach to the pharmacological management of Type 2 diabetes in primary care: A position statement by Primary Care Diabetes Europe

Type 2 diabetes and its associated comorbidities are growing more prevalent, and the complexity of optimising glycaemic control is increasing, especially on the frontlines of patient care. In many countries, most patients with type 2 diabetes are managed in a primary care setting. However, primary healthcare professionals face the challenge of the growing plethora of available treatment options for managing hyperglycaemia, leading to difficultly in making treatment decisions and contributing to therapeutic inertia. This position statement offers a simple and patient-centred clinical decision-making model with practical treatment recommendations that can be widely implemented by primary care clinicians worldwide through shared-decision conversations with their patients. It highlights the importance of managing cardiovascular disease and elevated cardiovascular risk in people with type 2 diabetes and aims to provide innovative risk stratification and treatment strategies that connect patients with the most effective care.

Mechanisms and Characteristics of Sulfonylureas and Glinides

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a complex progressive endocrine disease characterized by hyperglycemia and life-threatening complications. It is the most common disorder of pancreatic cell function that causes insulin deficiency. Sulfonylurea is a class of oral hypoglycemic drugs. Over the past half century, these drugs, together with the subsequent non-sulfonylureas (glinides), have been the main oral drugs for insulin secretion.

OBJECTIVE

Through in-depth study, the medical profession considers it as an important drug for improving blood sugar control.

METHODS

The mechanism, characteristics, efficacy and side effects of sulfonylureas and glinides were reviewed in detail.

RESULTS

Sulfonylureas and glinides not only stimulated the release of insulin from pancreatic cells, but also had many extrapanular hypoglycemic effect, such as reducing the clearance rate of insulin in liver, reducing the secretion of glucagon, and enhancing the sensitivity of peripheral tissues to insulin in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSION

Sulfonylureas and glinides are effective first-line drugs for the treatment of diabetes mellitus. Although they have the risk of hypoglycemia, weight gain and cardiovascular disease, their clinical practicability and safety can be guaranteed as long as they are reasonably used.

Metformin and second- or third-generation sulphonylurea combination therapy for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The number of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is increasing worldwide. The combination of metformin and sulphonylurea (M+S) is a widely used treatment. Whether M+S shows better or worse effects in comparison with other antidiabetic medications for people with T2DM is still controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of metformin and sulphonylurea (second- or third-generation) combination therapy for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the search of a recent systematic review from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). The updated search included CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP. The date of the last search was March 2018. We searched manufacturers' websites and reference lists of included trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and health technology assessment reports. We asked investigators of the included trials for information about additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) randomising participants 18 years old or more with T2DM to M+S compared with metformin plus another glucose-lowering intervention or metformin monotherapy with a treatment duration of 52 weeks or more.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors read all abstracts and full-text articles and records, assessed risk of bias and extracted outcome data independently. We used a random-effects model to perform meta-analysis, and calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effect estimates. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE instrument.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 RCTs randomising 28,746 people. Treatment duration ranged between one to four years. We judged none of these trials as low risk of bias for all 'Risk of bias' domains. Most important events per person were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, serious adverse events (SAE), non-fatal stroke (NFS), non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) and microvascular complications. Most important comparisons were as follows:Five trials compared M+S (N = 1194) with metformin plus a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue (N = 1675): all-cause mortality was 11/1057 (1%) versus 11/1537 (0.7%), risk ratio (RR) 1.15 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 2.67); 3 trials; 2594 participants; low-certainty evidence; cardiovascular mortality 1/307 (0.3%) versus 1/302 (0.3%), low-certainty evidence; serious adverse events (SAE) 128/1057 (12.1%) versus 194/1537 (12.6%), RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.11); 3 trials; 2594 participants; very low-certainty evidence; non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) 2/549 (0.4%) versus 6/1026 (0.6%), RR 0.57 (95% CI 0.12 to 2.82); 2 trials; 1575 participants; very low-certainty evidence.Nine trials compared M+S (N = 5414) with metformin plus a dipeptidyl-peptidase 4 inhibitor (N = 6346): all-cause mortality was 33/5387 (0.6%) versus 26/6307 (0.4%), RR 1.32 (95% CI 0.76 to 2.28); 9 trials; 11,694 participants; low-certainty evidence; cardiovascular mortality 11/2989 (0.4%) versus 9/3885 (0.2%), RR 1.54 (95% CI 0.63 to 3.79); 6 trials; 6874 participants; low-certainty evidence; SAE 735/5387 (13.6%) versus 779/6307 (12.4%), RR 1.07 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.18); 9 trials; 11,694 participants; very low-certainty evidence; NFS 14/2098 (0.7%) versus 8/2995 (0.3%), RR 2.21 (95% CI 0.74 to 6.58); 4 trials; 5093 participants; very low-certainty evidence; non-fatal MI 15/2989 (0.5%) versus 13/3885 (0.3%), RR 1.45 (95% CI 0.69 to 3.07); 6 trials; 6874 participants; very low-certainty evidence; one trial in 64 participants reported no microvascular complications were observed (very low-certainty evidence).Eleven trials compared M+S (N = 3626) with metformin plus a thiazolidinedione (N = 3685): all-cause mortality was 123/3300 (3.7%) versus 114/3354 (3.4%), RR 1.09 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.40); 6 trials; 6654 participants; low-certainty evidence; cardiovascular mortality 37/2946 (1.3%) versus 41/2994 (1.4%), RR 0.78 (95% CI 0.36 to 1.67); 4 trials; 5940 participants; low-certainty evidence; SAE 666/3300 (20.2%) versus 671/3354 (20%), RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.93 to 1.11); 6 trials; 6654 participants; very low-certainty evidence; NFS 20/1540 (1.3%) versus 16/1583 (1%), RR 1.29 (95% CI 0.67 to 2.47); P = 0.45; 2 trials; 3123 participants; very low-certainty evidence; non-fatal MI 25/1841 (1.4%) versus 21/1877 (1.1%), RR 1.21 (95% CI 0.68 to 2.14); P = 0.51; 3 trials; 3718 participants; very low-certainty evidence; three trials (3123 participants) reported no microvascular complications (very low-certainty evidence).Three trials compared M+S (N = 462) with metformin plus a glinide (N = 476): one person died in each intervention group (3 trials; 874 participants; low-certainty evidence); no cardiovascular mortality (2 trials; 446 participants; low-certainty evidence); SAE 34/424 (8%) versus 27/450 (6%), RR 1.68 (95% CI 0.54 to 5.21); P = 0.37; 3 trials; 874 participants; low-certainty evidence; no NFS (1 trial; 233 participants; very low-certainty evidence); non-fatal MI 2/215 (0.9%) participants in the M+S group; 2 trials; 446 participants; low-certainty evidence; no microvascular complications (1 trial; 233 participants; low-certainty evidence).Four trials compared M+S (N = 2109) with metformin plus a sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor (N = 3032): all-cause mortality was 13/2107 (0.6%) versus 19/3027 (0.6%), RR 0.96 (95% CI 0.44 to 2.09); 4 trials; 5134 participants; very low-certainty evidence; cardiovascular mortality 4/1327 (0.3%) versus 6/2262 (0.3%), RR 1.22 (95% CI 0.33 to 4.41); 3 trials; 3589 participants; very low-certainty evidence; SAE 315/2107 (15.5%) versus 375/3027 (12.4%), RR 1.02 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.37); 4 trials; 5134 participants; very low-certainty evidence; NFS 3/919 (0.3%) versus 7/1856 (0.4%), RR 0.87 (95% CI 0.22 to 3.34); 2 trials; 2775 participants; very low-certainty evidence; non-fatal MI 7/890 (0.8%) versus 8/1374 (0.6%), RR 1.43 (95% CI 0.49 to 4.18; 2 trials); 2264 participants; very low-certainty evidence; amputation of lower extremity 1/437 (0.2%) versus 1/888 (0.1%); very low-certainty evidence.Trials reported more hypoglycaemic episodes with M+S combination compared to all other metformin-antidiabetic agent combinations. Results for M+S versus metformin monotherapy were inconclusive. There were no RCTs comparing M+S with metformin plus insulin. We identified nine ongoing trials and two trials are awaiting assessment. Together these trials will include approximately 16,631 participants.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is inconclusive evidence whether M+S combination therapy compared with metformin plus another glucose-lowering intervention results in benefit or harm for most patient-important outcomes (mortality, SAEs, macrovascular and microvascular complications) with the exception of hypoglycaemia (more harm for M+S combination). No RCT reported on health-related quality of life.

Differential Effects of Thiazolidinediones and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors on Insulin Resistance and β-Cell Function in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Comparisons of the glycemic durability between thiazolidinediones (TZDs) and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors remain insufficient. This study aimed to find clues for the differences in glycemic durability between TZDs and DPP-4 inhibitors by comparing the insulin resistance and β-cell function among patients using these agents.

METHODS

A total of 241 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with either pioglitazone (a TZD) or DPP-4 inhibitors as combination therapy with metformin for at least 1 year were analyzed. A propensity score based on the patients' baseline characteristics and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) was used to match them. Indices for insulin resistance and secretory function of β-cells, namely the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) or β-cells (HOMA-β), were calculated and compared. Multiple regression analysis was performed to find the independent variables correlated with β-cell function or insulin resistance.

RESULTS

Evaluation of the data from 168 matched patients with T2DM showed that TZD users had significantly better insulin sensitivity compared with DPP-4 inhibitor users (HOMA-IR 2.3 ± 1.9 vs. 3.5 ± 3.2, p = 0.003). Conversely, DPP-4 inhibitor users secreted more insulin than TZD users (HOMA-β 45.7 ± 31.6 vs. 61.4 ± 49.5, p = 0.016). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that these agents were independently associated with both insulin resistance and β-cell function.

CONCLUSION

TZD users showed significantly better insulin sensitivity, whereas DPP-4 inhibitor users secreted more insulin from β-cells under similar glycemic control.

Effectiveness and Safety of Hydroxychloroquine compared to Teneligliptin in uncontrolled T2DM patients as add-on Therapy

Objectives

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) 400 mg is approved by the Drug Controller General of India (DCGI) and recommended by the Research Society for the Study of Diabetes in India (RSSDI) clinical practice recommendations 2017 as add-on therapy after metformin and sulfonylurea in Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM) patients. The aim of this observational study is to compare the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine 400 mg and teneligliptin 20 mg when used as add-on therapy in Indian Type 2 DM patients who were inadequately controlled (HbA1c ≥7.5%) with metformin 1000 mg and glimepiride 2 mg combination.

Methodology

This study is a prospective observational study to be conducted in 2 diabetic centres of Patna city between October 2017 and May 2018 involving 180 patients followed up for 6 months. One group (N=90) of patients received hydroxychloroquine 400 mg + metformin 1000 mg + glimepiride 2 mg, the other group (N=90) received teneligliptin 20 mg + metformin 1000 mg + glimepiride 2 mg. Efficacy was assessed by fasting blood glucose (FBG), post prandial blood glucose (PPBG) and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction. Safety was evaluated by the number of hypoglycaemic events and changes in serum creatinine levels. Home based glucose monitoring was used to detect the hypoglycaemic events. Patients who had any type of retinopathy/maculopathy were excluded.

Results

Mean age of entire population was 66±8 years with mean 6±2 years of DM with 102 males. Mean body weight was 71±12 kg. Baseline HbA1c was 8.1±0.3 in the hydroxychloroquine group and 8.2±0.2 in the teneligliptin group.At 24 weeks there were statistically significant reductions in mean HbA1c in the hydroxychloroquine group (1.1±0.3) as compared to the teneligliptin group (0.82±0.3) (P≤0.001). The mean FBG and PPBG was 169±18 mg/dl and 232±18 mg/dl respectively in hydroxychloroquine group which was reduced to 121±15 mg/dl and 161±19 mg/dl at the end of 24 weeks. In the teneligliptin group, FBG and PPBG was 171±16 mg/dl and 239±21 mg/dl at baseline, which was reduced to 121±15 mg/dl and 161±19 mg/dl respectively in same period of time (P≤ 0.005). There were 4 incidences of hypoglycaemic events in the hydroxychloroquine group (4.4%) and 6 in the teneligliptin group (6.67%). No patients required medical assistance for hypoglycaemic events. There was no statistically significant change in body weight in both the groups. No marked changes in creatinine levels were found in patients in both the groups.

Conclusion

In conclusion, treatment with hydroxychloroquine 400 mg for 24 weeks reduces glycaemic parameters more aggressively than teneligliptin 20 mg in Indian type 2 diabetes patients.

Insulin and glucose-lowering agents for treating people with diabetes and chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is the commonest cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Both conditions commonly co-exist. Glucometabolic changes and concurrent dialysis in diabetes and CKD make glucose-lowering challenging, increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. Glucose-lowering agents have been mainly studied in people with near-normal kidney function. It is important to characterise existing knowledge of glucose-lowering agents in CKD to guide treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and safety of insulin and other pharmacological interventions for lowering glucose levels in people with diabetes and CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 February 2018 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs looking at head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in people with diabetes and CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, and quality of data and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four studies (128 records, 13,036 participants) were included. Nine studies compared sodium glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to placebo; 13 studies compared dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors to placebo; 2 studies compared glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists to placebo; 8 studies compared glitazones to no glitazone treatment; 1 study compared glinide to no glinide treatment; and 4 studies compared different types, doses or modes of administration of insulin. In addition, 2 studies compared sitagliptin to glipizide; and 1 study compared each of sitagliptin to insulin, glitazars to pioglitazone, vildagliptin to sitagliptin, linagliptin to voglibose, and albiglutide to sitagliptin. Most studies had a high risk of bias due to funding and attrition bias, and an unclear risk of detection bias.Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 1092 participants: MD -0.29%, -0.38 to -0.19 (-3.2 mmol/mol, -4.2 to -2.2); I2 = 0%), fasting blood glucose (FBG) (5 studies, 855 participants: MD -0.48 mmol/L, -0.78 to -0.19; I2 = 0%), systolic blood pressure (BP) (7 studies, 1198 participants: MD -4.68 mmHg, -6.69 to -2.68; I2 = 40%), diastolic BP (6 studies, 1142 participants: MD -1.72 mmHg, -2.77 to -0.66; I2 = 0%), heart failure (3 studies, 2519 participants: RR 0.59, 0.41 to 0.87; I2 = 0%), and hyperkalaemia (4 studies, 2788 participants: RR 0.58, 0.42 to 0.81; I2 = 0%); but probably increase genital infections (7 studies, 3086 participants: RR 2.50, 1.52 to 4.11; I2 = 0%), and creatinine (4 studies, 848 participants: MD 3.82 μmol/L, 1.45 to 6.19; I2 = 16%) (all effects of moderate certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may reduce weight (5 studies, 1029 participants: MD -1.41 kg, -1.8 to -1.02; I2 = 28%) and albuminuria (MD -8.14 mg/mmol creatinine, -14.51 to -1.77; I2 = 11%; low certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may have little or no effect on the risk of cardiovascular death, hypoglycaemia, acute kidney injury (AKI), and urinary tract infection (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether SGLT2 inhibitors have any effect on death, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), hypovolaemia, fractures, diabetic ketoacidosis, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.62%, -0.85 to -0.39 (-6.8 mmol/mol, -9.3 to -4.3); I2 = 59%) but may have little or no effect on FBG (low certainty evidence). DPP-4 inhibitors probably have little or no effect on cardiovascular death (2 studies, 5897 participants: RR 0.93, 0.77 to 1.11; I2 = 0%) and weight (2 studies, 210 participants: MD 0.16 kg, -0.58 to 0.90; I2 = 29%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may have little or no effect on heart failure, upper respiratory tract infections, and liver impairment (low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether DPP-4 inhibitors have any effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, GLP-1 agonists probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.53%, -1.01 to -0.06 (-5.8 mmol/mol, -11.0 to -0.7); I2 = 41%; moderate certainty evidence) and may reduce weight (low certainty evidence). GLP-1 agonists may have little or no effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether GLP-1 agonists reduce FBG, increase gastrointestinal symptoms, or affect the risk of pancreatitis (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether glitazones have any effect on HbA1c, FBG, death, weight, and risk of hypoglycaemia (very low certainty evidence).Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin probably reduces hypoglycaemia (2 studies, 551 participants: RR 0.40, 0.23 to 0.69; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin may have had little or no effect on HbA1c, FBG, weight, and eGFR (low certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, it is uncertain if sitagliptin has any effect on death or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty).For types, dosages or modes of administration of insulin and other head-to-head comparisons only individual studies were available so no conclusions could be made.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents in diabetes and CKD is limited. SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists are probably efficacious for glucose-lowering and DPP-4 inhibitors may be efficacious for glucose-lowering. Additionally, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce BP, heart failure, and hyperkalaemia but increase genital infections, and slightly increase creatinine. The safety profile for GLP-1 agonists is uncertain. No further conclusions could be made for the other classes of glucose-lowering agents including insulin. More high quality studies are required to help guide therapeutic choice for glucose-lowering in diabetes and CKD.

Rahim AA, Eliana F, Shrestha HK, Chaudhary S, Ngugi N, Mbanya JC, Aye TT, Latt TS, Akanov ZA, Syed AR, Tandon N, Unnikrishnan AG, Madhu SV, Jawa A, Chowdhury S, Bajaj S, Das AK. Consensus Recommendations on Sulfonylurea and Sulfonylurea Combinations in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus - International Task Force

For decades, sulfonylureas (SUs) have been important drugs in the antidiabetic therapeutic armamentarium. They have been used as monotherapy as well as combination therapy. Focus on newer drugs and concerns about the risk of severe hypoglycemia and weight gain with some SUs have led to discussion on their safety and utility. It has to be borne in mind that the adverse events associated with SUs should not be ascribed to the whole class, as many modern SUs, such as glimepiride and gliclazide modified release, are associated with better safety profiles. Furthermore, individualization of treatment, using SUs in combination with other drugs, backed with careful monitoring and patient education, ensures maximum benefits with minimal side effects. The current guidelines, developed by experts from Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, promote the safe and smart use of SUs in combination with other glucose-lowering drugs.

Pioglitazone and risk of mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes: results from a European multidatabase cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Estimate and compare the risk of mortality in patients whose antidiabetic therapy is modified to include pioglitazone compared with an alternative antidiabetic medication at the same stage of disease progression.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Pooled analysis of clinical data collected from primary and/or secondary care settings in four European countries: Finland, The Netherlands, Sweden and the UK .

PARTICIPANTS

56 337 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus first prescribed pioglitazone between 2000 and 2011, and 56 337 patients never prescribed pioglitazone matched by treatment stage, history of diabetes, diabetes complications and cardiovascular disease, and year of cohort entry using exact and propensity score matching. Patients were followed-up for a mean of 2.90 (SD 2.21) and 2.83 (SD 2.37) years in the pioglitazone-exposed and non-pioglitazone-exposed groups, respectively.

OUTCOMES

All-cause mortality ascertained from clinical or registry data. Mortality was a planned secondary outcome in a study primarily studying the association of pioglitazone use with bladder cancer risk.

RESULTS

The crude overall mortality rate per 10 000 patient years was 206 (95% CI 199 to 213) in the pioglitazone-exposed group and 448 (95% CI 438 to 458) in the non-pioglitazone-exposed group. The crude HR comparing pioglitazone to alternative antidiabetic exposure was 0.46 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.48). This reduced in magnitude to 0.67 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.70) following further adjustment for matching variables, propensity scores, age, gender and time-dependent variables representing use of alternative antidiabetic drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large observational cohort study of patients with type 2 diabetes, pioglitazone exposure was associated with a statistically significant decrease in the risk of all-cause mortality across four European countries. Results should be interpreted with caution due to the potential for residual confounding.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance.

Pharmacology and therapeutic implications of current drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a global epidemic that poses a major challenge to health-care systems. Improving metabolic control to approach normal glycaemia (where practical) greatly benefits long-term prognoses and justifies early, effective, sustained and safety-conscious intervention. Improvements in the understanding of the complex pathogenesis of T2DM have underpinned the development of glucose-lowering therapies with complementary mechanisms of action, which have expanded treatment options and facilitated individualized management strategies. Over the past decade, several new classes of glucose-lowering agents have been licensed, including glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. These agents can be used individually or in combination with well-established treatments such as biguanides, sulfonylureas and thiazolidinediones. Although novel agents have potential advantages including low risk of hypoglycaemia and help with weight control, long-term safety has yet to be established. In this Review, we assess the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety profiles, including cardiovascular safety, of currently available therapies for management of hyperglycaemia in patients with T2DM within the context of disease pathogenesis and natural history. In addition, we briefly describe treatment algorithms for patients with T2DM and lessons from present therapies to inform the development of future therapies.

Addition of sulphonylurea to metformin does not relevantly change body weight: a prospective observational cohort study (ZODIAC-39)

AIM

To investigate changes in body weight trajectories after the addition of individual sulphonylureas (SUs) to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study, in a primary care setting in the Netherlands. Patients aged ≥18 years with type 2 diabetes who were included in the ZODIAC cohort between 1998 and 2012 and who received metformin monotherapy at inclusion (n = 29 195), and had used metformin as monotherapy for at least 1 year before receiving dual therapy through the addition of an SU for at least 1 year were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was within-drug yearly change in body weight after receiving add-on therapy with individual SUs during 5 years of follow-up. The secondary outcome was within-drug yearly change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Annual changes in weight and HbA1c were estimated with linear mixed models, adjusted for age, gender and diabetes duration.

RESULTS

A total of 2958 patients were included. No significant weight changes were observed within and between any of the individual SUs after treatment intensification (p = 0.24). In addition, no significant difference in weight between the add-on therapy combinations was observed (p = 0.26). The average HbA1c the year before intensification was 7.2% (55 mmol/mol) and dropped below 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) the year after.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 2 diabetes treated in primary care, strict glycaemic control can be maintained with SUs used as add-on therapy to metformin, without the offset of relevant weight changes.

Comparison of Vildagliptin and Pioglitazone in Korean Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled with Metformin

BACKGROUND

We compared the efficacies of vildagliptin (50 mg twice daily) relative to pioglitazone (15 mg once daily) as an add-on treatment to metformin for reducing glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

The present study was a multicenter, randomized, active-controlled investigation comparing the effects of vildagliptin and pioglitazone in Korean patients receiving a stable dose of metformin but exhibiting inadequate glycemic control. Each patient underwent a 16-week treatment period with either vildagliptin or pioglitazone as an add-on treatment to metformin.

RESULTS

The mean changes in HbA1c levels from baseline were -0.94% in the vildagliptin group and -0.6% in the pioglitazone group and the difference between the treatments was below the non-inferiority margin of 0.3%. The mean changes in postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) levels were -60.2 mg/dL in the vildagliptin group and -38.2 mg/dL in the pioglitazone group and these values significantly differed (P=0.040). There were significant decreases in the levels of total, low density lipoprotein, high density lipoprotein (HDL), and non-HDL cholesterol in the vildagliptin group but increases in the pioglitazone group. The mean change in body weight was -0.07 kg in the vildagliptin group and 0.69 kg in the pioglitazone group, which were also significantly different (P=0.002).

CONCLUSION

As an add-on to metformin, the efficacy of vildagliptin for the improvement of glycemic control is not inferior to that of pioglitazone in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes. In addition, add-on treatment with vildagliptin had beneficial effects on PPG levels, lipid profiles, and body weight compared to pioglitazone.

Important differences in the durability of glycaemic response among second-line treatment options when added to metformin in type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study

IMPORTANCE

There is limited information about the durability of glycaemic control when different oral glucose-lowering therapies (GLTs) are used as add-on treatments to metformin (MET) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

OBJECTIVE

To compare time to treatment failure between different classes of oral GLT when used as second line (add-on) treatments to MET monotherapy at HbA1c ≥ 7.5%.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective cohort study on 20,070 patients who were newly treated with a sulphonylurea (SU), dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor or thiazolidinedione (TZD) following MET therapy failure (2007-2014). Patients' data was sourced from UK General Practices via The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database. The risk of dual therapy failure was compared between three treatment groups: MET + SU (reference group, n = 15,508), MET + DPP-4 inhibitor (n = 3,080) and MET + TZD (n = 1,482). Follow-up was until treatment substitution or intensification with a 3rd GLT, or for up to 5 years (totalling 46,430 person-years). Propensity score weighting and Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were employed.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Risk of dual therapy failure was compared between treatment groups while adjusting for baseline covariates.

RESULTS

Unadjusted survival analysis showed the incidence of dual therapy failure at 1 year was 15% with SU, 23% with DPP-4 inhibitor and 8% with TZD. Corresponding failure rates at 2 years were 26, 38 and 12%, respectively. Adjusted multivariate models showed that, compared to the SU group, adding a DPP-4 inhibitor was associated with an increased risk of treatment failure (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR, 1.58; 95% CI: 1.48-1.68), while adding a TZD was associated with a reduced hazard (aHR, 0.45; 95% CI: 0.41-0.50). Baseline parameters associated with an increased hazard of intensification included HbA1c, diabetes duration, gender, smoking status and the use of statins.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In routine clinical practice, adding a DPP-4 inhibitor to MET is associated with an increased, earlier requirement for treatment intensification compared to adding an SU or TZD. Adding a TZD to MET resulted in the most durable glycaemic response. Key messages The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality has suggested that the durability of glycaemic response after treatment intensification is best investigated using well-designed long-term observational studies. In routine clinical practice, among patients with T2DM receiving a second line glucose lowering treatment as add-on to MET, the addition of a Thiazolidinediones is associated with the most durable glycaemic response, followed by a Sulfonylurea and then a DPP-4 inhibitor. Factors associated with earlier dual therapy failure included concomitant use of statin therapy, being female, a smoker, those with longer diabetes duration and higher baseline HbA1c levels. The addition of a Thiazolidinediones was associated with significant weight gain (1.8 kg, p < 0.001), while add-on DPP-4 inhibitor produced a significant weight reduction (-1.8 kg, p < 0.001). A very small reduction in body weight was observed with the SU (-0.2 kg, p < 0.001).

Association of APOE polymorphisms with diabetes and cardiometabolic risk factors and the role of APOE genotypes in response to anti-diabetic therapy: results from the AIDHS/SDS on a South Asian population

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene polymorphisms have been examined extensively in multiple global populations particularly due to their crucial role in lipid metabolism and cardiovascular disease. However, the overall contribution of APOE polymorphisms in type 2 diabetes (T2D) and coronary artery disease (CAD) in South Asians is still under-investigated. The objectives of this investigation were: 1) to evaluate the distribution of APOE polymorphisms in a large diabetic case-control sample from South Asia, 2) to examine the impact of APOE polymorphisms on quantitative risk factors of T2D and CAD, and 3) to explore the contribution of APOE genotypes in the response to anti-diabetic therapy.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

A total of 3564 individuals (1956 T2D cases and 1608 controls) used in this study were part of the Asian Indian Diabetic Heart Study/Sikh Diabetes Study (AIDHS/SDS). We assessed the association of APOE polymorphisms with T2D, CAD and cardiometabolic traits using logistic and linear regression analysis.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in the distribution of APOE genotypes were observed between T2D and CAD cases and controls. The APOE4 genotype carriers had moderately higher diastolic blood pressure (BP) (p=0.022), and lower HDL-cholesterol (p=0.026) compared to E4 non-carriers. Overall, the APOE genotype was not a significant predictor of cardiometabolic disease in this population. Further stratification of data from diabetic patients by APOE genotypes and anti-hyperglycemic agents revealed a significant (~23%) decrease in 2-hour glucose (p=0.004) and ~7% decrease in systolic BP (p<0.001) among APOE4 carriers compared to non-carriers on metformin and sulphonylurea (SU) combination therapy, and no such differences were seen in patients on other agents. Our preliminary findings point to the need for evaluating population-specific genetic variation and its interactions with therapeutic effects.

Effects of sulfonylureas on lipids in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies suggested that dyslipidemia was potentially associated with anti-diabetic medications of sulfonylureas (SUs). The results were, however, inconsistent. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the effects of SUs on the level of lipids in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases for RCTs that addressed the effects of second- and/or third-generation SUs used in T2DM patients on lipids profiles with study duration of at least 12 weeks. Two reviewers independently screened literature, collected data, and assessed methodological quality of included studies. The meta-analysis was performed by using the RevMan5.1 software.

RESULTS

A total of 59 RCTs were included, of which 52 were included for final meta-analysis. The results suggested that SUs statistically increased the levels of FFA (SMD = 0.24, 95%CI 0.06 to 0.42) and TG (MD = 0.06, 95%CI 0.02 to 0.10), but decreased HDL-C (MD = -0.07, 95%CI -0.11 to -0.04) and LDL-C (MD = -0.11, 95%CI -0.17 to -0.04); but the SUs had no effect on TC (MD = 0.01, 95%CI -0.05 to 0.08), ApoA1 (MD = 0.01, 95%CI -0.03 to 0.04), and Apo B (MD = -0.01, 95%CI -0.05 to 0.03). When compared to metformin, SUs could increase TC and LDL-C; compared to glinides, SUs increased TC and lowered HDL-C; compared to thiazolidinediones, SUs reduced TC, LDL-C, HDL-C, and increase TG.

CONCLUSIONS

SUs have a small effect on lipids, although they may statistically increase the level of FFA and TG, and decrease LDL-C and HDL-C.

Polemics of pioglitazone: an appraisal in 2015

Pioglitazone is an inexpensive and effective oral drug for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes. It addresses insulin resistance, one of the core pathophysiological defects in Type 2 diabetes, at both the adipose tissue and skeletal muscle level. As a majority of Type 2 diabetics classically exhibit higher insulin resistance, pioglitazone may strike exactly at the Achilles heel in this core pathogenesis. However, with the emerging association of bladder cancer with pioglitazone, French and German regulators were the first to ban or restrict pioglitazone use in 2011. The Indian regulators also suspended pioglitazone, although this ban was revoked within a month. Recently, a 10-year longitudinal study commissioned by US FDA found no association between bladder cancer and pioglitazone. Nevertheless, this controversy created a huge outcry in the medical fraternity. This review article is an overview of the development of this topic and an attempt to provide perspective on this contemporary issue.

Hydroxyoctadecadienoic acids: Oxidised derivatives of linoleic acid and their role in inflammation associated with metabolic syndrome and cancer

Linoleic acid (LA) is a major constituent of low-density lipoproteins. An essential fatty acid, LA is a polyunsaturated fatty acid, which is oxidised by endogenous enzymes and reactive oxygen species in the circulation. Increased levels of low-density lipoproteins coupled with oxidative stress and lack of antioxidants drive the oxidative processes. This results in synthesis of a range of oxidised derivatives, which play a vital role in regulation of inflammatory processes. The derivatives of LA include, hydroxyoctadecadienoic acids, oxo-​octadecadienoic acids, epoxy octadecadecenoic acid and epoxy-keto-octadecenoic acids. In this review, we examine the role of LA derivatives and their actions on regulation of inflammation relevant to metabolic processes associated with atherogenesis and cancer. The processes affected by LA derivatives include, alteration of airway smooth muscles and vascular wall, affecting sensitivity to pain, and regulating endogenous steroid hormones associated with metabolic syndrome. LA derivatives alter cell adhesion molecules, this initial step, is pivotal in regulating inflammatory processes involving transcription factor peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor pathways, thus, leading to alteration of metabolic processes. The derivatives are known to elicit pleiotropic effects that are either beneficial or detrimental in nature hence making it difficult to determine the exact role of these derivatives in the progress of an assumed target disorder. The key may lie in understanding the role of these derivatives at various stages of development of a disorder. Novel pharmacological approaches in altering the synthesis or introduction of synthesised LA derivatives could possibly help drive processes that could regulate inflammation in a beneficial manner. Chemical Compounds: Linoleic acid (PubChem CID: 5280450), 9- hydroxyoctadecadienoic acid (PubChem CID: 5312830), 13- hydroxyoctadecadienoic acid (PubChem CID: 6443013), 9-oxo-​octadecadienoic acid (PubChem CID: 3083831), 13-oxo-​octadecadienoic acid (PubChem CID: 4163990), 9,10-epoxy-12-octadecenoate (PubChem CID: 5283018), 12,13-epoxy-9-keto-10- trans -octadecenoic acid (PubChem CID: 53394018), Pioglitazone (PubChem CID: 4829).

Evaluation of the long-term durability and glycemic control of fasting plasma glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin for pioglitazone in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

This study applied a pharmacodynamic model-based approach to evaluate the long-term durability and glycemic control of pioglitazone in comparison with other oral glucose-lowering drugs in Japanese type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Japanese T2DM patients were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-end point study and received pioglitazone with or without other oral glucose-lowering drugs (excluding another thiazolidinedione [TZD]) (n=293) or oral glucose-lowering drugs excluding TZD (n=294). Treatment was adjusted to achieve glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <6.9%, and samples for fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and HbA1c were collected over 2.5-4 years. A simultaneous cascading indirect response model structure was applied to describe the time course of FPG and HbA1c. HbA1c levels were described using both an FPG-dependent and an FPG-independent function. To account for titration, drug effects for both treatment groups were implemented using a time-dependent Emax model.

RESULTS

Pioglitazone was superior in both time to maximum effect and the magnitude of reduction achieved in FPG and HbA1c. A greater reduction in median FPG (-21 mg/dL vs. -9 mg/dL) was observed with pioglitazone (P<0.05). Maximum drug effect for FPG was predicted to occur earlier (11 months) for pioglitazone than for the control group (14 months). The simulated additional reduction in FPG and HbA1c achieved with pioglitazone was predicted to be maintained beyond the currently observed study duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Pioglitazone was found to result in improved glycemic control and durability compared with control treatment. This model-based approach enabled the quantification of differences in FPG and HbA1c for both treatment groups and simulation to evaluate longer-term durability on FPG and HbA1c.

Observational and clinical trial findings on the comparative effectiveness of diabetes drugs showed agreement

OBJECTIVES

This study compares an observational study of diabetes treatment effectiveness to randomized controlled trials to assess their convergent validity.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Multivariate models were developed using observational data to describe change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c; % unit) and weight (kilograms) after addition of a second-line oral diabetes drug to metformin monotherapy. Randomized trials of these scenarios were systematically identified. The models were used to simulate each trial, and simulated and actual results were compared by linear regression and meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-two randomized trials of second-line diabetes oral therapy were identified. For all outcomes and drugs studied, simulation and actual results correlated (P < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between meta-analyzed randomized and simulated results for effect on HbA1c. For effect on weight, results were qualitatively comparable, but for sulfonylureas, the simulated weight gain was nominally greater than seen in the randomized controlled trials.

CONCLUSION

An observational study of diabetes drug effectiveness showed convergent validity with randomized data. This supports cautious use of the observational research to draw conclusions about drug effectiveness in populations not studied in clinical trials. This approach may be useful in other situations where observational and randomized data need integration.

Achieving glycemic control in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes: a critical comparison of current options

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is increasing in the elderly. Because of the unique characteristics of elderly people with T2DM, therapeutic strategy and focus should be tailored to suit this population. This article reviews the guidelines and studies related to older people with T2DM worldwide. A few important themes are generalized: 1) the functional and cognitive status is critical for older people with T2DM considering their life expectancy compared to younger counterparts; 2) both severe hypoglycemia and persistent hyperglycemia are deleterious to older adults with T2DM, and both conditions should be avoided when determining therapeutic goals; 3) recently developed guidelines emphasize the avoidance of hypoglycemic episodes in older people, even in the absence of symptoms. In addition, we raise the concern of glycemic variability, and discuss the rationale for the selection of current options in managing this patient population.

Dapagliflozin compared with other oral anti-diabetes treatments when added to metformin monotherapy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

AIMS

Indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was used to estimate the effect of dapagliflozin, a new agent with a novel mechanism of action (SGLT-2 inhibition), relative to other anti-diabetes therapies after 1 year of treatment.

METHODS

A systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) of RCTs involving anti-diabetes treatments added to metformin were conducted. RCTs enrolling subjects with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy were included. Comparators included dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, thiazolidinediones (TZDs), sulphonylureas, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogues and dapagliflozin. Outcomes of interest were mean change from baseline HbA1c, weight and systolic blood pressure, and incidence of hypoglycaemia.

RESULTS

From 4270 abstracts, six RCTs were included in the primary analysis; no RCTs involving GLP-1 analogues met primary inclusion criteria. All RCTs were actively controlled with sulphonylureas. The mean change in HbA1c from baseline was similar across comparators. The treatment effect (95% credible interval) of dapagliflozin on HbA1c was -0.08% (-0.25, 0.10) relative to DPP-4 inhibitors, -0.02% (-0.24, 0.21) relative to TZDs and 0.00% (-0.16, 0.16) relative to sulphonylureas. Non-sulphonylureas showed significantly lower risk of hypoglycaemia relative to sulphonylureas. Dapagliflozin had a significant effect on weight change: the relative difference was -2.74 kg (-5.35, -0.10) compared with DPP-4 inhibitors, and -4.67 kg (-7.03, -2.35) compared with sulphonylureas. Systolic blood pressure was not meta-analysed due to infrequent reporting.

CONCLUSION

Compared with DPP-4 inhibitors, TZDs and sulphonylureas, dapagliflozin offers similar HbA1c control after 1 year, with similar or reduced risk of hypoglycaemia and the additional benefit of weight loss, when added to metformin.

Do thiazolidinediones still have a role in treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus?

Thiazolidinediones have been introduced in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) since the late 1990s. Although troglitazone was withdrawn from the market a few years later due to liver toxicity, both rosiglitazone and pioglitazone gained widespread use for T2DM treatment. In 2010, however, due to increased risk of cardiovascular events associated with its use, the European Medicines Agency recommended suspension of rosiglitazone use and the Food and Drug Administration severely restricted its use. Thus pioglitazone is the only thiazolidinedione still significantly employed for treating T2DM and it is the only molecule of this class still listed in the American Diabetes Association-European Association for the Study of Diabetes 2012 Position Statement. However, as for the other thiazolidinediones, use of pioglitazone is itself limited by several side effects, some of them potentially dangerous. This, together with the development of novel therapeutic strategies approved in the last couple of years, has made it questionable whether or not thiazolidinediones (namely pioglitazone) should still be used in the treatment of T2DM. This article will attempt to formulate an answer to this question by critically reviewing the available data on the numerous advantages and the potentially worrying shortcomings of pioglitazone treatment in T2DM.

Pioglitazone improves glucose metabolism and modulates skeletal muscle TIMP-3-TACE dyad in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, mechanistic study

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Pioglitazone (PIO) is a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)γ agonist insulin-sensitiser with anti-inflammatory and anti-atherosclerotic effects. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of low-dose PIO (15 mg/day) on glucose metabolism and inflammatory state in obese individuals with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, mechanistic trial was conducted on 29 patients with type 2 diabetes treated with metformin and/or sulfonylurea. They were randomised to receive PIO or placebo (PLC) for 6 months, in a 1:1 ratio. Participants were allocated to interventions by central office. All study participants, investigators and personnel performing measurements were blinded to group assignment. At baseline and after 6 months patients underwent: (1) OGTT; (2) muscle biopsy to evaluate expression of TNF-α, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteases 3 (TIMP-3) levels, TNF-α converting enzyme (TACE) expression and enzymatic activity; (3) euglycaemic-hyperinsulinaemic clamp; (4) measurement of plasma high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), plasminogen activator inhibitor type-1 (PAI-1), TNF-α, IL-6, monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1), adiponectin and fractalkine (FRK). The interventions were PIO 15 mg/day vs placebo and the main outcomes measured were absolute changes in whole-body insulin sensitivity, insulin secretion and inflammatory state.

RESULTS

Fifteen participants were randomized to receive PIO and 14 participants were randomized to receive PLC. Eleven participants completed the study in the PIO group and nine participants completed the study in the PLC group and were analysed. Fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c decreased modestly (p < 0.05) after PIO and did not change after PLC. M/I (insulin-stimulated whole-body glucose disposal), adipose tissue insulin resistance (IR) index, insulin secretion/IR (disposition) index and insulinogenic index improved significantly after PIO, but not after PLC. Circulating MCP-1, IL-6, FRK, hsCRP and PAI-1 levels decreased in PIO- as compared with PLC-treated patients, while TNF-α did not change. TNF-α protein expression and TACE enzymatic activity in muscle were significantly reduced by PIO but not PLC. Adiponectin levels increased significantly after PIO as compared with PLC treatment. Given that the mean TACE enzymatic activity level at baseline in the PIO group was 0.29 ± 0.07 (fluorescence units [FU]), and at end of study decreased to 0.05 vs 0.14 in the PLC group, the power to reject the null hypothesis that the population means of the PIO and PLC groups are equal after 6 months is greater than 0.80. Given that M/I was 2.41 ± 0.35 μmol kg(-1) min(-1) (pmol/l)(-1) at baseline and increased by 0.55 in the PIO and 0.17 in the PLC groups, the power to reject the null hypothesis that the population means of the PIO and PLC groups are equal after 6 months is greater than 0.85. The type I error probability associated with this test of this null hypothesis is 0.05. No serious adverse events occurred in either group.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Low-dose PIO (15 mg/day) improves glycaemic control, beta cell function and inflammatory state in obese patients with type 2 diabetes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical.Trial.gov NCT01223196.

FUNDING

This study was funded by TAKEDA.

Progression to insulin for patients with diabetes mellitus on dual oral antidiabetic therapy using the US Department of Defense Database

AIM

To compare 'progression to insulin' for three cohorts on oral antidiabetic medication combinations: metformin/sulphonylurea (Met/SU), metformin/thiazolidinedione (Met/TZD) and sulphonylurea/thiazolidinedione (SU/TZD).

METHODS

Retrospective cohort analysis design was used. The subjects were US nationwide members of military and their families. A total of 5608 patients who were on antidiabetic monotherapy for at least 1 year before adding a second agent to their medication regimen between October 2001 and September 2008 participated in this study. Mean age ranged from 64 to 71 years among the cohorts. Cox regression compared the progression to insulin, adjusting for demographics, months of follow-up and co-morbidities [measured with Chronic Disease Score (CDS)].

RESULTS

By the end of the 2- to 6-year follow-up period, 14.3% of the Met/TZD cohort, 23.6% of the Met/SU cohort and 28.2% of the SU/TZD cohort had insulin added to their regimen. Those in the Met/SU cohort had a 1.8 times higher probability of progression to insulin than those in the Met/TZD cohort [odds ratio (OR) = 1.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.51-2.14), and those in the SU/TZD cohort had a 2.5 times higher probability of progression to insulin than those in the Met/TZD cohort (OR = 2.51, 95% CI = 2.04-3.08).

CONCLUSION

When sensitizers were paired (Met/TZD), a lower percentage of patients progressed to insulin during the study period, as opposed to patients who used a combination of a secretagogue with a sensitizer (SU/TZD or Met/SU).

Pioglitazone and risk of bladder cancer: a meta-analysis of controlled studies

AIMS

Pioglitazone, a thiazolidinedione, was approved for treatment of Type 2 diabetes. However, several observational studies suggest an association of pioglitazone with an increased risk of bladder cancer in patients with diabetes. Therefore, we sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the magnitude of this association and the quality of the supporting evidence.

METHODS

Electronic databases were queried to identify controlled studies of pioglitazone that measured the risk of bladder cancer.

RESULTS

Six studies involving 215 142 patients using pioglitazone were included, with a median period of follow-up of 44 months. The hazard of developing bladder cancer was significantly higher in patients using pioglitazone (hazard ratio 1.23; 95% CI 1.09-1.39; I² = 0%) compared with control groups. The risk of bias was moderate across the six studies. Considering an incidence rate of 20.8 per 100 000 person years, the number needed to harm was five additional cases of bladder cancer per 100 000 person years.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with pioglitazone have a slight increased risk of bladder cancer compared to general population. Patient involvement and weighing treatment benefits versus risks should be discussed with patient toward shared decision. Patients with type 2 diabetes with risk factors, such as family history, smoking, or exposure to certain forms of chemotherapy may need to consider other anti-hyperglycemic agents. Also, pioglitazone should be discontinued in type 2 diabetes patients with newly diagnosed bladder cancer.

Pleiotropic effects of thiazolidinediones: implications for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Thiazolidinediones (TZDs) are insulin-sensitizing antidiabetes agents that act through the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ to cause a durable improvement in glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Although less well recognized, TZDs also exert a protective effect on β-cell function. In addition to their beneficial effects on glucose homeostasis, TZDs-especially pioglitazone-exert a number of other pleiotropic effects that make them ideal agents as monotherapy or in combination with other oral agents, glucagon-like peptide-1 analogs, or insulin. Pioglitazone improves endothelial dysfunction, reduces blood pressure, corrects diabetic dyslipidemia, and reduces circulating levels of inflammatory cytokines and prothrombotic factors. Pioglitazone also redistributes fat and toxic lipid metabolites in muscle, liver, β cells, and arteries, and deposits the fat in subcutaneous adipocytes where it cannot exert its lipotoxic effects. Consistent with these antiatherogenic effects, pioglitazone reduced major adverse cardiac event endpoints (ie, mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke) in the Prospective Pioglitazone Clinical Trial in Macrovascular Events and in a meta-analysis of all other published pioglitazone trials. Pioglitazone also mobilizes fat out of the liver, improving liver function and histologic abnormalities in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Pioglitazone also reduces proteinuria, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with a reduced glomerular filtration rate. These benefits must be weighed against the side effects of the drug, including weight gain, fluid retention, atypical fractures, and, possibly, bladder cancer. When low doses of pioglitazone are used (eg, 7.5-30 mg/d) with gradual titration, and physician recognition of the potential side effects are applied, the risk-to-benefit ratio is very favorable. Despite having similar effects on glycemic control, pioglitazone and rosiglitazone appear to have different effects on cardiovascular outcomes. Rosiglitazone has been associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, and its use in the United States is restricted because of cardiovascular safety concerns.

Efficacy and tolerability of taspoglutide versus pioglitazone in subjects with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with sulphonylurea or sulphonylurea-metformin therapy: a randomized, double-blind study (T-emerge 6)

AIMS

This study compared the efficacy and tolerability of taspoglutide versus pioglitazone in subjects with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with sulphonylurea ± metformin.

METHODS

In this double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group trial, 760 subjects (49% male, age 56.4 years, diabetes duration 8.8 years, body mass index 32.7 kg/m(2) and haemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] 8.3%) were randomized (1 : 1 : 1) to subcutaneous injections of taspoglutide 10 or 20 mg once weekly or oral pioglitazone 45 mg daily. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c after 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Mean (±s.e.) HbA1c reductions with taspoglutide 10 (-1.18 ± 0.08%) and 20 mg (-1.36 ± 0.08%) were non-inferior to pioglitazone (-1.30 ± 0.08%) (p = 0.21 and 0.37, respectively); mean treatment differences were 0.12 (95% confidence interval: -0.03, -0.26) and -0.06 (-0.20, 0.08) for taspoglutide 10 and 20 mg versus pioglitazone. Mean (±s.e.) changes in body weight (kg) were -0.8 ± 0.3, -1.0 ± 0.3 and 3.6 ± 0.3 for taspoglutide 10 and 20 mg and pioglitazone, respectively; 8, 11 and 1% of patients achieved ≥5% weight loss. A higher incidence of adverse events (AEs) occurred with taspoglutide, predominantly gastrointestinal disturbances and injection-site reactions, resulting in higher rates of discontinuation versus pioglitazone. No treatment differences in serious AEs were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Taspoglutide offered good glycaemic control similar to pioglitazone, while achieving beneficial weight loss rather than weight gain, but was associated with more AEs. Due to the higher than expected discontinuation rates, mainly because of gastrointestinal intolerability, the taspoglutide clinical programme was stopped.

Metformin: an old but still the best treatment for type 2 diabetes

The management of T2DM requires aggressive treatment to achieve glycemic and cardiovascular risk factor goals. In this setting, metformin, an old and widely accepted first line agent, stands out not only for its antihyperglycemic properties but also for its effects beyond glycemic control such as improvements in endothelial dysfunction, hemostasis and oxidative stress, insulin resistance, lipid profiles, and fat redistribution. These properties may have contributed to the decrease of adverse cardiovascular outcomes otherwise not attributable to metformin's mere antihyperglycemic effects. Several other classes of oral antidiabetic agents have been recently launched, introducing the need to evaluate the role of metformin as initial therapy and in combination with these newer drugs. There is increasing evidence from in vivo and in vitro studies supporting its anti-proliferative role in cancer and possibly a neuroprotective effect. Metformin's negligible risk of hypoglycemia in monotherapy and few drug interactions of clinical relevance give this drug a high safety profile. The tolerability of metformin may be improved by using an appropiate dose titration, starting with low doses, so that side-effects can be minimized or by switching to an extended release form. We reviewed the role of metformin in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes and describe the additional benefits beyond its glycemic effect. We also discuss its potential role for a variety of insulin resistant and pre-diabetic states, obesity, metabolic abnormalities associated with HIV disease, gestational diabetes, cancer, and neuroprotection.

The effects of pioglitazone on biochemical markers of bone turnover in the patients with type 2 diabetes

Aim. To investigate whether pioglitazone had detrimental effects on biochemical markers of bone turnover in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Methods. Seventy patients with T2DM were included in this study. The patients remained on their previous antihyperglycemic therapies during the trial. Pioglitazone was then added on their regimen for 3 months. Results. After 3 months of treatment with pioglitazone, the levels of fasting blood glucose and HbA1c were significantly decreased (7.9 ± 1.5 mmol/L versus 9.1 ± 1.6 mmol/L and 7.1 ± 1.0% versus 8.2 ± 1.4%, resp., P < 0.01), compared with baseline in the overall patients. Serum concentrations of P1NP and BAP were significantly decreased from baseline (45.0 ± 20.0  μ g/L versus 40.6 ± 17.9  μ g/L and 13.23 ± 4.7  μ g/L versus 12.3 ± 5.0  μ g/L, resp., P < 0.01) in female group, but not in male group. The serum levels of OC and CTX were unchanged in both female and male subgroups. In addition, the levels of serum BAP and P1NP were significantly decreased after pioglitazone treatment in postmenopausal subgroup, comparing with baseline. Conclusion. Pioglitazone inhibits bone formation and does not seem to affect bone resorption. Postmenopausal female patients rather than premenopausal or male patients are particularly vulnerable to this side effect of pioglitazone.

Effect of pill burden on dosing preferences, willingness to pay, and likely adherence among patients with type 2 diabetes

PURPOSE

To quantify willingness-to-pay (WTP) for reducing pill burden and dosing frequency among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and to examine the effect of dosing frequency and pill burden on likely medication adherence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Participants were US adults with T2DM on oral antihyperglycemic therapy. Each patient completed an online discrete-choice experiment (DCE) with eight choice questions, each including a pair of hypothetical medication profiles. Each profile was defined by reduction in average glucose (AG), daily dosing, chance of mild-to-moderate stomach problems, frequency of hypoglycemia, weight change, incremental risk of congestive heart failure (CHF), and cost. Patients were asked to rate their likely adherence to the profiles presented in each question. Choice questions were based on a predetermined experimental design. Choice data were analyzed using random-parameters logit. Likely treatment adherence was analyzed using a Heckman two-stage model.

RESULTS

Of the 1,114 patients who completed the survey, 90 had lower dosing burden (<5 pills/day taken once/day or as needed) for all medications, and 1,024 had higher dosing burden (≥5 pills/day or more than once/day). Reduction in AG was valued most highly by patients. Hypoglycemia, chance of mild-to-moderate stomach problems, weight change, incremental risk of CHF, and daily dosing were less valued. Patients with higher current dosing burden had lower WTP for more convenient dosing schedules than patients with lower current dosing burden. Changes in dosing and cost impacted likely adherence. The magnitude of the impact of dosing on likely adherence was higher for patients with lower current dosing burden than for patients with higher current dosing burden.

CONCLUSION

Patients with T2DM were willing to pay for improvements in efficacy, side effects, and dosing. Patients' WTP for more convenient dosing depended on current dosing burden, as did the effect of these attributes on likely adherence.

Efficacy of various antidiabetic agents as add-on treatments to metformin in type 2 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and Aim. Diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease that has a great impact on patients and society. Metformin monotherapy is capable of maintaining a target glycemic control only for a short term. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of combination therapy of metformin with any antidiabetic agents in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. Methods. Reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of combination therapy of metformin with various antidiabetic agents in T2DM failing metformin alone were identified. Results. Eight studies were identified in our paper. Thiazolidinediones (TZDs) were as effective as dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors (DPP IV inhs) in reducing HbA1c value (pooled mean difference −0.03%; 95% CI −0.16 to 0.10%). In comparison between TZDs and sulphonylureas (SUs), TZDs reduced fasting plasma insulin (FPI) more effectively than SUs (pool mean difference −5.72 μU/mL; 95% CI −8.21 to −3.22 μU/mL, P < 0.00001), but no significant differences were detected in the effects on HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (pooled mean difference −2.19 mg/dL; 95% CI −11.32 to 6.94 mg/dL, P = 0.64). Conclusions. Our study showed that TZDs reduced FPG better than did DPP IV inhs and decreased FPI more than did SUs.

Pioglitazone is a valid alternative to rosiglitazone

In 2000, two new thiazolidinediones, pioglitazone and rosiglitazone, were approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Administered as monotherapy or in combination with other antihyperglycemic agents, they represented an effective option for achieving or maintaining good glycemic control in patients with T2DM. Despite their efficacy, there was increasing concern regarding the potential of an increased cardiovascular risk with rosiglitazone. This resulted in the suspension of rosiglitazone from the European market by the European Medicines Agency in September 2010. This article focuses on the various steps that led to this important decision, and discusses a possible alternative for the treatment of patients receiving rosiglitazone.

Metabolomics reveals reduction of metabolic oxidation in women with polycystic ovary syndrome after pioglitazone-flutamide-metformin polytherapy

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a variable disorder characterized by a broad spectrum of anomalies, including hyperandrogenemia, insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, body adiposity, low-grade inflammation and increased cardiovascular disease risks. Recently, a new polytherapy consisting of low-dose flutamide, metformin and pioglitazone in combination with an estro-progestagen resulted in the regulation of endocrine clinical markers in young and non-obese PCOS women. However, the metabolic processes involved in this phenotypic amelioration remain unidentified. In this work, we used NMR and MS-based untargeted metabolomics to study serum samples of young non-obese PCOS women prior to and at the end of a 30 months polytherapy receiving low-dose flutamide, metformin and pioglitazone in combination with an estro-progestagen. Our results reveal that the treatment decreased the levels of oxidized LDL particles in serum, as well as downstream metabolic oxidation products of LDL particles such as 9- and 13-HODE, azelaic acid and glutaric acid. In contrast, the radiuses of small dense LDL and large HDL particles were substantially increased after the treatment. Clinical and endocrine-metabolic markers were also monitored, showing that the level of HDL cholesterol was increased after the treatment, whereas the level of androgens and the carotid intima-media thickness were reduced. Significantly, the abundance of azelaic acid and the carotid intima-media thickness resulted in a high degree of correlation. Altogether, our results reveal that this new polytherapy markedly reverts the oxidant status of untreated PCOS women, and potentially improves the pro-atherosclerosis condition in these patients.

Which is the eligible patient to be treated with pioglitazone? The expert view

Pioglitazone has an important role in the treatment of patients with Type 2 diabetes. The drug can help patients to achieve sustained glycemic control and may delay the requirement for insulin. Pioglitazone may provide benefits beyond its effects on glycemia, with data suggesting it may confer anti-atherosclerotic and cardioprotective properties. Attention should be given to possible side effects relating to class effects of TZD, and selection of appropriate patients to be prescribed pioglitazone will enable optimum benefits to be derived from pioglitazone treatment.

Management of patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

The number of treatment options in the diabetes arena has grown dramatically in a short period of time, with a corresponding increase in the breadth and depth of literature from which physicians and diabetes organizations make evidence-based decisions. Thus, the purpose of this article is to provide an up-to-date review of the literature describing current treatment options and guidelines available for the management of type 2 diabetes and prevention of its complications.

METHODS

Pubmed searches were conducted for recent literature pertaining to the prevention of complications in type 2 diabetes. Comprehensive search terms were devised to identify articles describing micro- and macrovascular complications including nephropathy, neuropathy, retinopathy, and cardiovascular disease associated with type 2 diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

The current body of literature demonstrates that a significant reduction in the incidence of diabetic complications is achievable with early initiation and long-term maintenance of controlled blood glucose and cardiovascular risk factors. Screening for diabetic complications should be initiated early and continued at regular intervals to ensure early pharmacological intervention.

Evaluating treatment algorithms for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a perspective on the definition of treatment success

BACKGROUND

Traditional treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has focused on correcting hyperglycemia. However, T2DM is often accompanied by other conditions and risk factors, including hypertension, overweight/obesity, and dyslipidemia, that affect morbidity and mortality. A broader view toward treating the array of physiologic derangements may provide significant long-term outcomes benefits.

OBJECTIVE

This perspective paper reviews recent data regarding the pathophysiology of T2DM, evaluates current treatment recommendations/algorithms, and discusses potential risks and benefits associated with the various therapeutic options and their combinations.

METHODS

Information was obtained by a search of the PubMed and Embase databases using the key words type 2 diabetes mellitus, glycosylated hemoglobin, pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes, glycemic control, antidiabetes therapy, multifactorial therapy, and treatment algorithms for the period of 1985 to 2010. A representative number of relevant articles dealing with these topics was then selected for review.

RESULTS

Three recently proposed treatment algorithms, the American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes less well-validated algorithm, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology algorithm, and the DeFronzo algorithm, were compared and contrasted. Metformin is usually the first oral agent to be used when not contraindicated because of its ability to suppress hepatic glucose production. Some recommended agents, such as sulfonylureas, drive β-cell failure even as they improve glycosylated hemoglobin. Others, such as glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and thiazolidinediones, support and enhance β-cell function. Also, some agents predispose to weight gain (eg, sulfonylureas and insulin), whereas others are weight neutral (eg, dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors) or result in weight loss (eg, GLP-1 receptor agonists, pramlintide). Finally, the impact of these agents on associated cardiovascular risk factors is varied. Agents that improve glycemic control while favorably affecting blood lipid levels and/or systemic blood pressure may lead to improvements in morbidity and mortality. Attention to the mechanisms of action and associated consequences of the numerous pharmacologic treatment choices may provide clinicians a better selection of agents in treating patients with T2DM.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians should evaluate the array of treatment options available for patients with T2DM. An aggressive regimen including metformin, a thiazolidinedione, and a GLP-1 receptor agonist may improve insulin sensitivity and enhance β-cell function. Addressing the pathophysiologic defects associated with T2DM, as well as the various associated cardiovascular risk factors, with combination therapy may slow the natural progression of the disease and development of its associated complications.

The cost-effectiveness of interventions in diabetes: a review of published economic evaluations in the UK setting, with an eye on the future

AIM

To synthesise key outcomes data from cost-effectiveness studies in diabetes, in the UK setting, and describe a narrative for the evidence-base, in order to understand the direction that future health economics research in this field could be heading.

METHODS

The peer-reviewed literature was searched at http://www.pubmed.com for health economics analyses in diabetes in the UK setting published between 1995 and 2008, using the keywords: "costs", "cost-effectiveness", "diabetes", "UK". Studies on screening for diabetes or prevention of diabetes were excluded, along with studies that looked purely at cost of diabetes treatment or monitoring.

RESULTS

There were over 350 hits on MEDLINE. A total of 23 articles were identified and reviewed. 18 studies were in type 2, two in type 1 and three studies in both types 1 and type 2 diabetes. All studies evaluated treatment from the perspective of the NHS, with the time horizons varying from 12 months to patient lifetimes. 13 studies estimated quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE). The majority of studies used health economics modelling techniques to project clinical benefit and cost outcomes beyond the context of clinical trials, with Markov-type models predominating. The United Kingdom Prospective Study of Diabetes was the most frequently cited source of clinical effectiveness and cost data. Most studies were funded by the pharmaceutical industry and evaluated more expensive products, rather than cheaper generic therapies such as human insulin and metformin monotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Treatment-to-target in patients with diabetes in the UK is generally cost-effective and sometimes cost-saving vs. standard care. Ongoing health economics analysis in diabetes is essential as new clinical data are published. Future analysis of clinical and cost outcomes in diabetes could be expected to look beyond the impact of interventions on HbA1c in isolation, as manufacturers seek to differentiate innovative products in the market. Furthermore, it is anticipated that the competitiveness in the market for interventions in diabetes will lead to future cost-effectiveness analysis taking more interest in comparisons of off-patent medication and generic, fixed-dose combination therapies.

Safety and efficacy of saxagliptin added to thiazolidinedione over 76 weeks in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

To assess the long-term efficacy and safety of saxagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with thiazolidinedione monotherapy, 565 patients were randomised to saxagliptin (2.5 mg or 5 mg) or placebo added to thiazolidinedione over 76 weeks (24-week short-term + 52-week long-term extension period) in this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial; 360 patients completed the study. At 76 weeks, adjusted mean changes from baseline HbA(1C) (repeated measures model; 95% CI) for saxagliptin 2.5 mg, 5 mg, and placebo were -0.59% (-0.75, -0.43), -1.09% (-1.26, -0.93), and -0.20% (-0.39, -0.01), respectively (post hoc and nominal p=0.0019 and p<0.0001 for saxagliptin 2.5 mg and 5 mg vs. placebo, respectively). Adverse event frequency was similar between groups. Confirmed hypoglycaemic events were 1.0% and 0% vs. 0.5% for saxagliptin 2.5 mg and 5 mg vs. placebo, respectively. Results should be interpreted with caution given the proportion of patients who discontinued or required glycaemic rescue therapy during the 76-week course of study. Saxagliptin added to thiazolidinedione provided sustained incremental efficacy vs. placebo with little hypoglycaemia for up to 76 weeks and was generally well tolerated.

Second-line therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy: a systematic review and mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although there is general agreement that metformin should be used as first-line pharmacotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes, uncertainty remains regarding the choice of second-line therapy once metformin is no longer effective. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the comparative safety and efficacy of all available classes of antihyperglycemic therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS Previews, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized controlled trials published in English from 1980 to October 2009. Additional citations were obtained from grey literature and conference proceedings and through stakeholder feedback. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Key outcomes of interest were hemoglobin A1c, body weight, hypoglycemia, quality of life, long-term diabetes-related complications, serious adverse drug events and mortality. Mixed-treatment comparison and pairwise meta-analyses were conducted to pool trial results, when appropriate.

RESULTS

We identified 49 active and non-active controlled randomized trials that compared 2 or more of the following classes of antihyperglycemic agents and weight-loss agents: sulfonylureas, meglitinides, thiazolidinediones (TZDs), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogues, insulins, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, sibutramine and orlistat. All classes of second-line antihyperglycemic therapies achieved clinically meaningful reductions in hemoglobin A1c (0.6% to 1.0%). No significant differences were found between classes. Insulins and insulin secretagogues were associated with significantly more events of overall hypoglycemia than the other agents, but severe hypoglycemia was rarely observed. An increase in body weight was observed with the majority of second-line therapies (1.8 to 3.0 kg), the exceptions being DPP-4 inhibitors, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors and GLP-1 analogues (0.6 to -1.8 kg). There were insufficient data available for diabetes complications, mortality or quality of life.

INTERPRETATION

DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 analogues achieved improvements in glycemic control similar to those of other second-line therapies, although they may have modest benefits in terms of weight gain and overall hypoglycemia. Further long-term trials of adequate power are required to determine whether newer drug classes differ from older agents in terms of clinically meaningful outcomes.