Effect of pioglitazone in combination with insulin therapy on glycaemic control, insulin dose requirement and lipid profile in patients with type 2 diabetes previously poorly controlled with combination therapy

Benefits and risks of drug combination therapy for diabetes mellitus and its complications: a comprehensive review

Diabetes is a chronic metabolic disease, and its therapeutic goals focus on the effective management of blood glucose and various complications. Drug combination therapy has emerged as a comprehensive treatment approach for diabetes. An increasing number of studies have shown that, compared with monotherapy, combination therapy can bring significant clinical benefits while controlling blood glucose, weight, and blood pressure, as well as mitigating damage from certain complications and delaying their progression in diabetes, including both type 1 diabetes (T1D), type 2 diabetes (T2D) and related complications. This evidence provides strong support for the recommendation of combination therapy for diabetes and highlights the importance of combined treatment. In this review, we first provided a brief overview of the phenotype and pathogenesis of diabetes and discussed several conventional anti-diabetic medications currently used for the treatment of diabetes. We then reviewed several clinical trials and pre-clinical animal experiments on T1D, T2D, and their common complications to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different classes of drug combinations. In general, combination therapy plays a pivotal role in the management of diabetes. Integrating the effectiveness of multiple drugs enables more comprehensive and effective control of blood glucose without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia or other serious adverse events. However, specific treatment regimens should be tailored to individual patients and implemented under the guidance of healthcare professionals.

Association of Pioglitazone With Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events, All-Cause Mortality, and Heart Failure Hospitalizations: A Systematic Review

Modern diabetic treatment has gone beyond glycemic control, with the choice of different medications to attain therapeutic targets also affected by the risk of long-term outcomes and safety profiles. The effect of diabetes on increased morbidity and mortality and its relationship to cardiovascular outcomes and coronary artery diseases have driven recent diabetes studies toward medications that improve cardiovascular outcomes and reduce all-cause mortality. This is attained by holistically treating cardiovascular complications in type 2 diabetic patients beyond glycemic control. Moreover, both diabetes and pre-diabetes are considered risk factors for both microvascular and macrovascular cardiac events. Despite the fact that initial research acknowledged fluid retention as a safety issue in pioglitazone use, clinical trial data have not presented conclusive proof of a positive or negative impact on cardiac function. This comprehensive literature review aims to evaluate the effect of pioglitazone on all-cause mortality, hospitalizations for heart failure, and major adverse cardiovascular outcomes, including the individual outcomes of non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and cardiovascular mortality.

Age, sex, disease severity, and disease duration difference in placebo response: implications from a meta-analysis of diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The placebo response in patients with diabetes mellitus is very common. A systematic evaluation needs to be updated with the current evidence about the placebo response in diabetes mellitus and the associated factors in clinical trials of anti-diabetic medicine.

METHODS

Literature research was conducted in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies published between the date of inception and June 2019. Randomized placebo-controlled trials conducted in type 1and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM/T2DM) were included. Random-effects model and meta-regression analysis were accordingly used. This meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO as CRD42014009373.

RESULTS

Significantly weight elevation (effect size (ES) = 0.33 kg, 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.61 kg) was observed in patients with placebo treatments in T1DM subgroup while significantly HbA1c reduction (ES = - 0.12%, 95% CI, - 0.16 to - 0.07%) and weight reduction (ES = - 0.40 kg, 95% CI, - 0.50 to - 0.29 kg) were observed in patients with placebo treatments in T2DM subgroup. Greater HbA1c reduction was observed in patients with injectable placebo treatments (ES = - 0.22%, 95% CI, - 0.32 to - 0.11%) versus oral types (ES = - 0.09%, 95% CI, - 0.14 to - 0.04%) in T2DM (P = 0.03). Older age (β = - 0.01, 95% CI, - 0.02 to - 0.01, P < 0.01) and longer diabetes duration (β = - 0.02, 95% CI, - 0.03 to - 0.21 × 10^-2, P = 0.03) was significantly associated with more HbA1c reduction by placebo in T1DM. However, younger age (β = 0.02, 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.03, P = 0.01), lower male percentage (β = 0.01, 95% CI, 0.22 × 10^-2, 0.01, P < 0.01), higher baseline BMI (β = - 0.02, 95% CI, - 0.04 to - 0.26 × 10^-2, P = 0.02), and higher baseline HbA1c (β = - 0.09, 95% CI, - 0.16 to - 0.01, P = 0.02) were significantly associated with more HbA1c reduction by placebo in T2DM. Shorter diabetes duration (β = 0.06, 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.10, P < 0.01) was significantly associated with more weight reduction by placebo in T2DM. However, the associations between baseline BMI, baseline HbA1c, and placebo response were insignificant after the adjusted analyses.

CONCLUSION

The placebo response in diabetes mellitus was systematically outlined. Age, sex, disease severity (indirectly reflected by baseline BMI and baseline HbA1c), and disease duration were associated with placebo response in diabetes mellitus. The association between baseline BMI, baseline HbA1c, and placebo response may be the result of regression to the mean.

PPARγ: A turning point for irritable bowel syndrome treatment

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorder with negative impacts on quality of life of patients. Although the etiology of the disease is still unclear, there are a set of mechanisms and factors involved in IBS pathogenesis. Visceral hypersensitivity, impaired gut barrier, along with minor inflammation and oxidative stress are the most important triggers for IBS induction. Activation of peroxisome proliferator activated receptor-γ (PPAR-γ) has been shown to improve gut barrier, downregulate pro-inflammatory cytokines, reduce free radical production through antioxidative mechanisms, and exert anti-nociceptive effects against somatic pain. An electronic search in PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Cochrane library was performed and relevant clinical, in vivo and in vitro articles published between 2004 and June 2020 were collected. Search terms included "Irritable Bowel Syndrome" OR "IBS" OR "visceral hypersensitivity" OR "motility dysfunction" AND "peroxisome proliferator activated receptors" OR "PPAR". Herein, the efficacy of PPARγ signaling as a potential target for IBS treatment is reviewed.

Pioglitazone Exposure Reduced the Risk of All-Cause Mortality in Insulin-Treated Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

CONTEXT

The long-term safety and benefit of pioglitazone use in combination with insulin are still uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the risks of all-cause mortality and major cardiovascular (CV) events between pioglitazone users and nonusers receiving insulin therapy.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PATIENTS

We conducted a 13-year retrospective cohort study by using data from the population-based National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan. A total of 20 376 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving insulin therapy were enrolled during 2000 to 2012. Overall, the incidence rates of all-cause mortality and CV events were compared between 2579 pioglitazone users and 2579 matched nonusers.

RESULTS

After adjustment for age, sex, comorbidities, Diabetes Complications Severity Index scores, and drugs used, mortality rates were 30.26 and 15.02 per 1000 person-years for pioglitazone nonusers and users, respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of mortality was 0.47 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38-0.58, P < 0.001) for pioglitazone users compared with nonusers. The aHRs of CV and non-CV deaths were 0.78 (95% CI: 0.51-1.19) and 0.50 (95% CI: 0.38-0.66), respectively. The aHRs of hospitalized coronary artery disease, hospitalized stroke, and incident heart failure were not significantly different between pioglitazone users and nonusers.

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide cohort study demonstrated that pioglitazone use reduced the risks of all-cause mortality and non-CV death for patients with T2DM undergoing insulin therapy.

Combating Obesity With Thermogenic Fat: Current Challenges and Advancements

Brown fat and beige fat are known as thermogenic fat due to their contribution to non-shivering thermogenesis in mammals following cold stimulation. Beige fat is unique due to its origin and its development in white fat. Subsequently, both brown fat and beige fat have become viable targets to combat obesity. Over the last few decades, most therapeutic strategies have been focused on the canonical pathway of thermogenic fat activation via the β3-adrenergic receptor (AR). Notwithstanding, administering β3-AR agonists often leads to side effects including hypertension and particularly cardiovascular disease. It is thus imperative to search for alternative therapeutic approaches to combat obesity. In this review, we discuss the current challenges in the field with respect to stimulating brown/beige fat thermogenesis. Additionally, we include a summary of other newly discovered pathways, including non-AR signaling- and non-UCP1-dependent mechanisms, which could be potential targets for the treatment of obesity and its related metabolic diseases.

Prospective of managing impaired brain insulin signalling in late onset Alzheimers disease with excisting diabetic drugs

Late onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia among elderly. The exact cause of the disease is until now unknown and there is no complete cure for the disease. Growing evidence suggest that AD is a metabolic disorder associated with impairment in brain insulin signalling. These findings enriched the scope for the repurposing of diabetic drugs in AD management. Even though many of these drugs are moving in a positive direction in the ongoing clinical studies, the extent of the success has seen to influence by several properties of these drugs since they were originally designed to manage the peripheral insulin resistance. In depth understandings of these properties is hence highly significant to optimise the use of diabetic drugs in the clinical management of AD; which is the primary aim of the present review article.

Comparison between sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and pioglitazone as additions to insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes patients: A systematic review with an indirect comparison meta-analysis

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pioglitazone (PIO) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) as additions to insulin therapy for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov through December 2016. Randomized controlled trials published in English that compared SGLT2i plus insulin (SGLT2i/INS) or PIO plus insulin (PIO/INS) with placebo plus insulin (PCB/INS) in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients were included. We compared the efficacy and safety between SGLT2i/INS and PIO/INS indirectly.

RESULTS

A total of 14 randomized controlled trials comparing 7,226 participants were included (8 SGLT2i and 6 PIO studies). SGLT2i/INS achieved similar reductions in hemoglobin A1c (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.01% [-0.1 mmol/mol], 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.25 to 0.22% [-2.7 to -2.4 mmol/mol]; P = 0.896) and fasting plasma glucose (WMD -0.90 mg/dL, 95% CI: -15.50 to 13.71 mg/dL; P = 0.904), and a similar proportion of participants achieved hemoglobin A1c <7.0% (<53.0 mmol/mol; relative risk 0.98, 95% CI: 0.73 to 1.33; P = 0.917) as compared with the PIO/INS group, with greater weight reduction (WMD -4.54 kg, 95% CI: -5.67 to -3.41 kg; P < 0.001). PIO/INS showed non-significant trends toward a higher risk of hypoglycemia (relative risk 1.15, 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.35; P = 0.102) and higher reduction of total daily insulin doses (WMD -2.45 IU/day, 95% CI: -7.30 to 2.40 IU/day; P = 0.438).

CONCLUSIONS

Both PIO and SGLT2i are feasible adjunctive oral agents to pre-existing insulin therapy in individuals with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Pioglitazone and the Risk of Bladder Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

People with type 2 diabetes are at increased risk of bladder cancer. Pioglitazone is said to increase it further, although published evidence is mixed. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine if any link between the use of pioglitazone and an increased risk of bladder cancer can be found. A comprehensive literature search was conducted through electronic databases as well as registries for data of clinical trials to identify studies that investigate the effect of pioglitazone on bladder cancer in diabetic patients. We used the risk ratio (RR) and the hazard ratio (HR) provided by the studies to illustrate the risk of occurrence of bladder cancer in the experimental group compared to that in the control group. Fourteen studies using RR and 12 studies using HR were included in the analysis. The overall RR was 1.13 with 95% CI (0.96-1.33) with low heterogeneity among the studies using RR, suggesting that no connection exists between use of pioglitazone and the risk of bladder malignancy. The summary HR was 1.07 (0.96-1.18) allowing us to affirm that there is no link between long-term use of pioglitazone and bladder cancer. Our results support the hypothesis of no difference in the incidence of bladder cancer among the pioglitazone group and the nonuser group. Our conclusion is that the explanation of hypothetically increased risk of bladder malignancy should be attributed to other factors.

FUNDING

Tchaikapharma High Quality Medicines Inc.

Effects of pioglitazone therapy on blood parameters, weight and BMI: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is one of the most common diseases worldwide and insulin insufficiency and insulin resistance are two main metabolic issues connected with it. The dyslipidemia associated with insulin resistance and T2DM is characterized by higher triglycerides (TGs), higher very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lower apo A1. Pioglitazone, a member of the thiazolidinedione class, with a proven antihyperglycemic effect, is known to positively influence insulin sensitivity and β-cell function and to have the potential to alter the lipid profile.

METHODS

The aim of our meta-analysis is to summarize and determine the influence of pioglitazone on the glycemic profile and lipoprotein metabolism as well as on weight and BMI in order to highlight the benefit of pioglitazone therapy in patients with T2DM. A comprehensive literature search was conducted through the electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, PsyInfo, eLIBRARY.ru (from 2000 until February 2016) to identify studies that investigate the effect of pioglitazone on the glycemic and lipid profile and on the weight and BMI. We chose the random-effects method as the primary analysis. Forest plots depict estimated results from the studies included in the analysis and funnel plots are used to evaluate publication bias. Sensitivity analyses were performed in order to evaluate the degree of influence of the consequent elimination of each individual study on the final result.

RESULTS

Of the 1536 identified sources only 15 randomised trials were included in the meta-analysis. Pioglitazone treatment was associated with improvement in the glycemic profile. It reduced FPG levels by a mean of 1.1-2 mmol/l and HbA1c by a mean of 0.9-1.3%. Our results reaffirmed the hypothesis that pioglitazone has a positive influence on the lipid profile of T2DM patients with increase in TC and HDL, no significant changes in LDL and notable decrease in TGs. Results also showed that pioglitazone therapy led to increase in both weight and BMI (WMD 1.755, 95% CI 0.674 to 2.837 and 1.145, 95% CI 0.389 to 1.901 respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our results prove that the PPAR γ agonist pioglitazone has the potential to be beneficial to patients with T2DM.

Insulin monotherapy compared with the addition of oral glucose-lowering agents to insulin for people with type 2 diabetes already on insulin therapy and inadequate glycaemic control

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether people with type 2 diabetes mellitus on insulin monotherapy who do not achieve adequate glycaemic control should continue insulin as monotherapy or can benefit from adding oral glucose-lowering agents to the insulin therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of insulin monotherapy compared with the addition of oral glucose-lowering agents to insulin monotherapy for people with type 2 diabetes already on insulin therapy and inadequate glycaemic control.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and reference lists of articles. The date of the last search was November 2015 for all databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled clinical trials of at least two months' duration comparing insulin monotherapy with combinations of insulin with one or more oral glucose-lowering agent in people with type 2 diabetes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias, extracted data and evaluated overall quality of the evidence using GRADE. We summarised data statistically if they were available, sufficiently similar and of sufficient quality. We performed statistical analyses according to the statistical guidelines in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 37 trials with 40 treatment comparisons involving 3227 participants. The duration of the interventions ranged from 2 to 12 months for parallel trials and two to four months for cross-over trials.The majority of trials had an unclear risk of bias in several risk of bias domains. Fourteen trials showed a high risk of bias, mainly for performance and detection bias. Insulin monotherapy, including once-daily long-acting, once-daily intermediate-acting, twice-daily premixed insulin, and basal-bolus regimens (multiple injections), was compared to insulin in combination with sulphonylureas (17 comparisons: glibenclamide = 11, glipizide = 2, tolazamide = 2, gliclazide = 1, glimepiride = 1), metformin (11 comparisons), pioglitazone (four comparisons), alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (four comparisons: acarbose = 3, miglitol = 1), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4 inhibitors) (three comparisons: vildagliptin = 1, sitagliptin = 1, saxagliptin = 1) and the combination of metformin and glimepiride (one comparison). No trials assessed all-cause mortality, diabetes-related morbidity or health-related quality of life. Only one trial assessed patients' treatment satisfaction and showed no substantial differences between the addition of either glimepiride or metformin and glimepiride to insulin compared with insulin monotherapy.Insulin-sulphonylurea combination therapy (CT) compared with insulin monotherapy (IM) showed a MD in glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of -1% (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.6 to -0.5); P < 0.01; 316 participants; 9 trials; low-quality evidence. Insulin-metformin CT compared with IM showed a MD in HbA1c of -0.9% (95% CI -1.2 to -0.5); P < 0.01; 698 participants; 9 trials; low-quality evidence. We could not pool the results of adding pioglitazone to insulin. Insulin combined with alpha-glucosidase inhibitors compared with IM showed a MD in HbA1c of -0.4% (95% CI -0.5 to -0.2); P < 0.01; 448 participants; 3 trials; low-quality evidence). Insulin combined with DPP-4 inhibitors compared with IM showed a MD in HbA1c of -0.4% (95% CI -0.5 to -0.4); P < 0.01; 265 participants; 2 trials; low quality evidence. In most trials the participants with CT needed less insulin, whereas insulin requirements increased or remained stable in participants with IM.We did not perform a meta-analysis for hypoglycaemic events because the included studies used different definitions.. In most trials the insulin-sulphonylurea combination resulted in a higher number of mild episodes of hypoglycaemia, compared to the IM group (range: 2.2 to 6.1 episodes per participant in CT versus 2.0 to 2.6 episodes per participant in IM; low-quality evidence). Pioglitazone CT also resulted in more mild to moderate hypoglycaemic episodes compared with IM (range 15 to 90 episodes versus 9 to 75 episodes, respectively; low-quality evidence. The trials that reported hypoglycaemic episodes in the other combinations found comparable numbers of mild to moderate hypoglycaemic events (low-quality evidence).The addition of sulphonylureas resulted in an additional weight gain of 0.4 kg to 1.9 kg versus -0.8 kg to 2.1 kg in the IM group (220 participants; 7 trials; low-quality evidence). Pioglitazone CT caused more weight gain compared to IM: MD 3.8 kg (95% CI 3.0 to 4.6); P < 0.01; 288 participants; 2 trials; low-quality evidence. Metformin CT was associated with weight loss: MD -2.1 kg (95% CI -3.2 to -1.1), P < 0.01; 615 participants; 7 trials; low-quality evidence). DPP-4 inhibitors CT showed weight gain of -0.7 to 1.3 kg versus 0.6 to 1.1 kg in the IM group (362 participants; 2 trials; low-quality evidence). Alpha-glucosidase CT compared to IM showed a MD of -0.5 kg (95% CI -1.2 to 0.3); P = 0.26; 241 participants; 2 trials; low-quality evidence.Users of metformin CT (range 7% to 67% versus 5% to 16%), and alpha-glucosidase inhibitors CT (14% to 75% versus 4% to 35%) experienced more gastro-intestinal adverse effects compared to participants on IM. Two trials reported a higher frequency of oedema with the use of pioglitazone CT (range: 16% to 18% versus 4% to 7% IM).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of all oral glucose-lowering agents in people with type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycaemic control who are on insulin therapy has positive effects on glycaemic control and insulin requirements. The addition of sulphonylureas results in more hypoglycaemic events. Additional weight gain can only be avoided by adding metformin to insulin. Other well-known adverse effects of oral glucose-lowering agents have to be taken into account when prescribing oral glucose-lowering agents in addition to insulin therapy.

Lipid effects and cardiovascular disease risk associated with glucose-lowering medications

Diabetes is a global epidemic, associated with a high burden of complications and 4.6 million deaths annually worldwide. As a result of decreasing levels of physical activity and increasing rates of obesity, diabetes is shifting from a disease affecting the elderly to one that affects younger patients or even children. Thus, aggressive treatment and optimal control of risk factors is the key to improve outcomes in those patients. Accumulating evidence of the cardiovascular and lipid effects of glucose-lowering medications suggest that treatment efficacy in diabetes can be further improved. This review provides an overview of the lipid effects and cardiovascular disease risk of current anti-diabetic medications and highlights opportunities and challenges in clinical practice.

Treatment Approach to Patients With Severe Insulin Resistance

In Brief Patients with severe insulin resistance require >2 units/kg of body weight or 200 units/day of insulin. Yet, many patients do not achieve glycemic targets despite using very high doses of insulin. Insulin can cause weight gain, which further contributes to worsening insulin resistance. This article describes the pharmacological options for managing patients with severe insulin resistance, including the use of U-500 insulin and newer agents in combination with insulin.

Continuation or discontinuation of pioglitazone when starting bedtime insulin in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes in an inner-city population

OBJECTIVE

We studied the impact of continuing versus discontinuing pioglitazone on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and weight when starting bedtime insulin in patients with poor glycemic control.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from a 13-month randomized control trial on 77 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), who despite maximum doses of three oral diabetes medications (metformin, sulfonylurea and pioglitazone) had HbA1C levels above 7.5%. Patients were randomized to either continuing or discontinuing pioglitazone in addition to starting and up-titrating bedtime insulin. HbA1C, FPG, and weight were assessed at baseline, 3months, 7months and 13months with the differences from baseline for the two groups compared at each of the three time points using the Wilcoxon rank sum test.

RESULTS

We found that HbA1c was significantly lower at the 7-month (p=0.01) and 13-month time points (p=0.036), and FPG was significantly lower at all three time points in the group continuing pioglitazone compared with those discontinuing pioglitazone. Continuing pioglitazone resulted in a greater increase in weight at the 3-month (p=0.002), 7-month (p=0.0001) and 13-month (p=0.00003) time points. Patients with the lowest HbA1c (<8.2%) at baseline were more likely to benefit from continuing pioglitazone than those with higher baseline HbA1c. Patients who started insulin and discontinued pioglitazone had similar HbA1c, FPG and weight at the three time points as at baseline, suggesting that pioglitazone and bedtime insulin has similar glycemic effect in this population.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that in patients with uncontrolled type 2 DM, continuing pioglitazone while concurrently starting bedtime insulin within a 13-month period led to a significant decrease in both HbA1c and FPG levels compared with those who did not receive pioglitazone; however weight increased during this period.

Pioglitazone has a dubious bladder cancer risk but an undoubted cardiovascular benefit

On 8 April 2014, a US jury ordered Takeda and Eli Lilly to pay $9 bn in punitive damages after finding that they had concealed the cancer risks associated with pioglitazone. By contrast, on 28 August 2014, the long-awaited outcome of the 10-year Kaiser Permanente Northern California study was announced. That study was specifically designed to investigate whether patients exposed to pioglitazone were at an increased risk of bladder cancer and found no association; thus, at last, the controversial issue has been resolved. A review, in retrospect, of the story of the proposed link between pioglitazone and bladder cancer reveals flaws at every stage. In 2012, a BMJ editorial, in keeping with some other contemporary reports, stated 'it can confidently be assumed that pioglitazone increases the risk of bladder cancer'. Examination of the information which led to such a statement shows that: 1) the pre-clinical findings of bladder cancer in male rats is not indicative of human risk; 2) there is no association between bladder cancer and pioglitazone in randomized controlled trials, once cases that could not plausibly be related to treatment are removed; and 3) the observational studies that have suggested a link have over-extrapolated from the data: pioglitazone-treated patients had more risk factors for bladder cancer than those not treated with pioglitazone. Meanwhile careful study of randomized controlled trials shows evidence of cardiovascular benefit from pioglitazone in Type 2 diabetes, a condition which results, more than anything, in premature cardiovascular death and morbidity.

Efficacy of pioglitazone on glycemic control and carotid intima-media thickness in type 2 diabetes patients with inadequate insulin therapy

Aims/Introduction:  The present study was designed to determine the effects of pioglitazone on glycemic control and atherosclerosis in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes on insulin therapy.

Materials and Methods:  The study was a prospective, randomized controlled trial involving 48 patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes treated with insulin. We assigned patients to oral pioglitazone titrated from 15–30 mg (n = 22) or no pioglitazone (n = 26), to be taken in addition to their glucose‐lowering drugs and other medications. Daily insulin doses and numbers were recorded during the study period.

Results:  The adjusted mean glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) values decreased significantly by 1.13 ± 1.50% and 0.55 ± 0.76% in the pioglitazone and control groups, respectively. Significant decrease of HbA_1c level was observed in the pioglitazone group compared with the control group (P < 0.05). The insulin dose lowered by 0.04 ± 0.10 units/kg/day in the pioglitazone group and increased by 0.03 ± 0.10 units/kg/day in the control group (P < 0.05). The number of insulin injections decreased by 0.1 ± 0.6 times/day in the pioglitazone group and increased by 0.2 ± 0.4 times/day in the control group (P < 0.05). The carotid intima‐media thickness estimated by B‐mode echography was carried out in both groups and decreased significantly at the end‐point only in the pioglitazone group, relative to the baseline.

Conclusions:  These findings show that pioglitazone is useful in improving glycemic control and preventing the progression of atherosclerosis in poorly‐controlled type 2 diabetics on insulin therapy. (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040‐1124.2010.00064.x, 2010)

Complementing insulin therapy to achieve glycemic control

INTRODUCTION

Most patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) will need incrementally more complex therapeutic regimens to control hyperglycemia as the disease progresses. Insulin is very effective in reducing hyperglycemia and may improve β-cell function in patients with T2DM. However, insulin therapy is associated with weight gain and increased risk of hypoglycemia. Adding other antidiabetes medications to insulin can improve glycemic control and potentially lower the required insulin dose, resulting in less weight gain and lower risk for hypoglycemia. This article summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of different classes of commonly used antidiabetes agents, with emphasis on newer classes, for use as add-on therapy to insulin in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled on insulin therapy.

METHODS

A PubMed search from July 1, 2003 to April 15, 2013 for peer-reviewed clinical and review articles relevant to insulin combination or add-on therapy in T2DM was conducted. Search terms included "insulin combination therapy," "add-on therapy diabetes," "dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors," "glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist," "sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors", "insulin metformin," "insulin sulfonylurea," and "insulin thiazolidinedione." Bibliographies from retrieved articles were also searched for relevant articles. Study design, clinical relevance, and effect on insulin combination therapy were analyzed.

RESULTS

Therapies used as add-on to insulin include agents associated with weight gain (thiazolidinediones and sulfonylureas) and/or hypoglycemia (sulfonylureas), which, therefore, may exacerbate risks already present with insulin. GLP-1 receptor agonists, DPP-4 inhibitors, and SGLT2 inhibitors improve glycemic control when added to insulin and have a low propensity for hypoglycemia and cause no change (DPP-4 inhibitors) or a reduction (GLP-1 receptor agonists, SGLT2 inhibitors) in body weight.

CONCLUSION

GLP-1 receptor agonists, DPP-4 inhibitors, and SGLT2 inhibitors improve glycemic control when combined with insulin. They also have low propensity for weight gain and hypoglycemia and so may be preferred treatment options for insulin combination when compared with traditional therapies.

Choice of therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin and a sulphonylurea: a systematic review and mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Metformin and a sulphonylurea are often used in combination for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative safety and efficacy of all available classes of antihyperglycemic therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin and sulphonylurea combination therapy.

METHODS

MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, BIOSIS Previews, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized controlled trials published in English from 1980 to November 2009. Additional citations were obtained from the grey literature and conference proceedings and through stakeholder feedback. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data and assessed risk of bias. Key outcomes of interest were hemoglobin A1c, body weight, hypoglycemia, patients' satisfaction with treatment, quality of life, long-term diabetes-related complications, withdrawals due to adverse events, serious adverse events and mortality. Mixed-treatment comparison meta-analyses were conducted to calculate mean differences between drug classes for changes in hemoglobin A1c and body weight. When appropriate, pairwise meta-analyses were used to estimate differences for other outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 33 randomized controlled trials meeting the inclusion criteria. The methodologic quality of the studies was generally poor. Insulins (basal, biphasic, bolus), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogues and thiazolidinediones (TZDs) all produced statistically significant reductions in hemoglobin A1c in combination with metformin and a sulphonylurea (-0.89% to -1.17%), whereas meglitinides and alpha-glucosidase inhibitors did not. Biphasic insulin, bolus insulin, and TZDs were associated with weight gain (1.85-5.00 kg), whereas DPP-4 inhibitors and alpha-glucosidase inhibitors were weight-neutral, and GLP-1 analogues were associated with modest weight loss. Treatment regimens containing insulin were associated with increased hypoglycemia relative to comparators, but severe hypoglycemia was rare across all treatments.

INTERPRETATION

Third-line agents for the treatment of type 2 diabetes are similar in terms of glycemic control but differ in their propensity to cause weight gain and hypoglycemia. Longer-term studies with larger sample sizes are required to determine if any of the drug classes are superior with regard to reducing diabetes-related complications.

Thiazolidinedione safety

INTRODUCTION

Thiazolidinediones (TZDs) initially showed great promise as unique receptor-mediated oral therapy for type 2 diabetes, but a host of serious side effects, primarily cardiovascular, have limited their utility. It is crucial at this point to perform a risk-benefit analysis to determine what role TZDs should play in our current treatment of type 2 diabetes and where the future of this class of drugs is headed.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides a comprehensive overview of the literature from 2000 onward reporting the known side effects of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone, with commentary on the quality of the data available, putative mechanism of each side effect and clinical significance. Finally, a perspective on the future of the TZDs as a class is provided.

EXPERT OPINION

The current TZDs are first-generation, non-specific activators of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) gamma, resulting in a wide array of deleterious side effects that currently limit their use. However, the development of highly targeted selective PPAR gamma modulators (SPPARγMs) and dual PPAR gamma/alpha agonists is on the horizon.

Thiazolidinediones and risk of heart failure in patients with or at high risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis of placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Recent meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) demonstrated a higher risk of heart failure (HF) with the use of thiazolidinediones (TZDs). However, this effect may have been diluted by including active controls. Also, it is uncertain whether the risk of HF is similar with rosiglitazone and pioglitazone.

OBJECTIVES

This study quantified the risks of HF with the use of TZDs in patients with or at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), and evaluated differential effects by type of TZD. Secondarily, we evaluated risks of peripheral edema.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo-controlled RCTs evaluating the effect of rosiglitazone or pioglitazone on investigator-reported HF and edema. Articles published before 31 December 2009 were searched in MEDLINE, The Web of Science, and Scopus, and the data were extracted by three investigators. RCTs with ≥100 patients and ≥3 months of follow-up were included. We quantified the effect of TZDs as odds ratios (ORs) by using the Mantel-Haenzel and alternative models. We further evaluated the risk of serious/severe HF, and the effect of several trial characteristics on HF risk by subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis.

RESULTS

29 trials (n = 20 254) were evaluated. TZDs were significantly associated with HF (TZD 360/6807 [5.3%] vs placebo 234/6328 [3.7%], OR 1.59; 95% CI 1.34, 1.89; p < 0.00001). The risk of HF was higher with rosiglitazone than with pioglitazone (2.73 [95% CI 1.46, 5.10] vs 1.51 [1.26, 1.81]; p = 0.06). TZDs were associated with a similar risk of serious/severe HF (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.16, 1.87; p = 0.002). Use of TZDs was also associated with edema (OR 2.04; 95% CI 1.85, 2.26; p < 0.00001). HF and edema risks were consistent using Peto and random effects models. Risks of HF were significantly high for the subgroups of trials including patients with or at high risk for type 2 DM, and for the subgroup of trials with ≥12 months of follow-up. Meta-regression analysis showed that trials with lower overall baseline risk had higher HF risks.

CONCLUSION

In placebo-controlled trials of adult patients with or at high risk for type 2 DM, TZD therapy is significantly and consistently associated with a higher risk of HF. The risk of serious/severe HF is also increased with the use of TZDs. HF risks are similar to those of meta-analyses combining active- and placebo-controlled trials. The benefit/risk profile of TZDs should be considered when treating diabetic patients with or without prior HF.

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.

Efficacy and safety of the PPARγ partial agonist balaglitazone compared with pioglitazone and placebo: a phase III, randomized, parallel-group study in patients with type 2 diabetes on stable insulin therapy

BACKGROUND

Treatment of patients with perioxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ full agonists are associated with weight gain, heart failure, peripheral oedema, and bone loss. However, the safety of partial perioxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ agonists has not been established in a clinical trial. The BALaglitazone glucose Lowering Efficacy Trial aimed to establish the glucose-lowering effects and safety parameters of the perioxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ partial agonist balaglitazone in diabetic patients on stable insulin therapy.

METHODS

Four hundred and nine subjects from three countries with type 2 diabetes on stable insulin therapy were randomized to 26 weeks of double-blind treatment with once daily doses of 10 or 20 mg balaglitazone, 45 mg pioglitazone, or matching placebo (n ≥ 99 in each group). The primary endpoint was the efficacy of balaglitazone 10 and 20 mg versus placebo on the absolute change in haemoglobin A(1c) . Secondary endpoints included levels of fasting serum glucose, and changes in body composition and bone mineral density as measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry, in comparison to pioglitazone 45 mg. This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00515632.

RESULTS

In the 10- and 20-mg balaglitazone groups, and in the 45-mg pioglitazone group, significant reductions in haemoglobin A(1c) levels were observed (−0.99, −1.11, and −1.22%, respectively; p < 0.0001) versus placebo. Fasting serum glucose was similarly reduced in all treatment arms. Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry analyses showed that, while balaglitazone at 10 mg caused weight gain and fluid retention compared to placebo, the magnitude of these effects was significantly smaller than that of pioglitazone 45 mg and balaglitazone 20mg. Balaglitazone at either dose did not appear to reduce bone mineral density, while Pioglitazone showed a trend towards a reduction.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with balaglitazone at 10 mg and 20 mg and pioglitazone at 45 mg showed clinically meaningful improvements in glucose levels and HbA(1c) . With the 10 mg dose, the benefits (glucose & HgA(1c) lowering) and untoward effects (fluid and fat accumulation) were less, results that encourage further studies of this drug candidate.

The addition of pioglitazone in type 2 diabetics poorly controlled on insulin therapy: a meta-analysis

AIM

To quantify the effect of a pioglitazone on glycemic control and lipid parameters, as well as the risk of adverse events when incorporated into the treatment regimen of patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on insulin.

METHODS

The electronic databases PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Library were searched systematically to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pioglitazone therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) inadequately controlled after treatment with insulin. Data on change of haemoglobin A1C (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), lipid parameters and risk of hypoglycemic, edema events were extracted from each study and pooled according to fixed effect model or random effect model in meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Four RCTs including 1767 patients were included. The pooled estimate of change in HbA1c from baseline was 1.22% (95% CI 1.01-1.44, p<0.001 vs. baseline) and of change in FPG from baseline was 1.63 mmol/l (95% CI 0.75-2.50, p<0.001 vs. baseline). Pioglitazone significantly increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c) level (0.2 mmol/L, 95%CI: 0.13-0.28) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) level (0.10 mol/L, 95%CI: 0.09-0.17), and lowered triglyceride (TG) level (0.05 mmol/L, 95%CI: 0.01-0.09). The odds of experiencing a hypoglycemic event in pioglitazone-treated arms was significantly higher than comparator treatments (RR=1.57, 95% CI 1.12-2.20, p<0.001). The case was the same with edema (RR=2.42, 95% CI 1.67-3.50, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study implied that in patients with type 2 DM whose control is inadequate on insulin therapy, the additional pioglitazone could significantly improve glucose metabolism and might have a positive effect on important components of the lipid profile, which may have important implications in reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease, a major long-term complication in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Besides, the adverse events (AEs) were well tolerated.

Pioglitazone for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in patients inadequately controlled on insulin

Insulin resistance and impaired beta-cell function are primary defects that occur early in the course of development of type 2 diabetes. Insulin resistance leads to hyperinsulinemia in order to maintain normal glucose tolerance. In most cases of type 2 diabetes, beta-cell dysfunction develops subsequent to the development of insulin resistance, and it is not until such beta-cell dysfunction develops that any abnormality in glucose tolerance is seen. Insulin resistance is a primary defect in type 2 diabetes. The risk of coronary heart disease is significantly increased in patients with type 2 diabetes. Cardiovascular disease causes 80% of all diabetic mortality, and in 75% of those cases, it is a result of coronary atherosclerosis. These points provide a rationale for early and aggressive management of cardiovascular risk in patients with diabetes. Thiazolidinediones represent an effective tool for targeting some features of this increased risk as they decrease insulin resistance and can prevent and/or delay diabetes progression.

Concomitant therapy with pioglitazone and insulin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes

To prevent hyperinsulinemia, which may cause atherosclerosis, thiazolidinediones (TZDs), also known as insulin sensitizers, are often added to the therapeutic regimen of patients with type 2 diabetes who are receiving insulin. The combination of insulin with pioglitazone, a TZD, reduces glycoated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) by 0.6%-2.1%. The higher the HbA(1c) baseline the larger the therapeutic reduction of HbA(1c). This combination therapy has been shown to be beneficial even in lean Japanese patients with diabetes. It should be noted that such combination therapy is much more useful when the main clinical aim is lowering not postprandial, but fasting and nocturnal glycemia. The glycemic-lowering effects of pioglitazone alone occur slowly, whereas the addition of insulin to pioglitazone often shows a dramatic glucose-lowering effect. Thus, such combination therapy increases the possibility of frequent hypoglycemia within 1 to 2 months of combining the drugs. Severe hypoglycemia in patients using this therapy is rare. Patients treated with combination therapy who show a predominant reduction of glycemia often have severe edema; in 10%-20% of patients, combination therapy leads to drug-related congestive heart failure (CHF). However, this phenomenon is usually weakened if low doses of pioglitazone which are added to insulin therapy (ie, 15 mg/day or even 7.5 mg/day for women). It is well known that pioglitazone has an anti-atherosclerotic effect, although it is unclear if hyperinsulinemia induces atherogenic changes, either directly or indirectly, by the promotion of obesity. Until now, we have not confirmed whether the anti-atherosclerotic effects of pioglitazone exceed the supposed disadvantageous action of insulin when used in combination therapy. The addition of pioglitazone tends to reduce daily insulin dosages, but study findings have not been consistent. Improvement of lipid profiles has also been weak with this combination therapy. Long-term trials are needed before any conclusions can be reached concerning atherogenic effects of treatment for type 2 diabetes. Combination therapy of even small doses of pioglitazone with insulin should be primarily used for patients who achieve insufficient reduction in glycemia with insulin monotherapy.

Risk of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis with metformin use in type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Metformin is an oral anti-hyperglycemic agent that has been shown to reduce total mortality compared to other anti-hyperglycemic agents, in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Metformin, however, is thought to increase the risk of lactic acidosis, and has been considered to be contraindicated in many chronic hypoxemic conditions that may be associated with lactic acidosis, such as cardiovascular, renal, hepatic and pulmonary disease, and advancing age.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis, and to evaluate blood lactate levels, for those on metformin treatment compared to placebo or non-metformin therapies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A comprehensive search was performed of electronic databases to identify studies of metformin treatment. The search was augmented by scanning references of identified articles, and by contacting principal investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Prospective trials and observational cohort studies in patients with type 2 diabetes of least one month duration were included if they evaluated metformin, alone or in combination with other treatments, compared to placebo or any other glucose-lowering therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis was recorded as cases per patient-years, for metformin treatment and for non-metformin treatments. The upper limit for the true incidence of cases was calculated using Poisson statistics. In a second analysis lactate levels were measured as a net change from baseline or as mean treatment values (basal and stimulated by food or exercise) for treatment and comparison groups. The pooled results were recorded as a weighted mean difference (WMD) in mmol/L, using the fixed-effect model for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Pooled data from 347 comparative trials and cohort studies revealed no cases of fatal or nonfatal lactic acidosis in 70,490 patient-years of metformin use or in 55,451 patients-years in the non-metformin group. Using Poisson statistics the upper limit for the true incidence of lactic acidosis per 100,000 patient-years was 4.3 cases in the metformin group and 5.4 cases in the non-metformin group. There was no difference in lactate levels, either as mean treatment levels or as a net change from baseline, for metformin compared to non-metformin therapies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from prospective comparative trials or from observational cohort studies that metformin is associated with an increased risk of lactic acidosis, or with increased levels of lactate, compared to other anti-hyperglycemic treatments.

Risk of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis with metformin use in type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Metformin is an oral anti-hyperglycemic agent that has been shown to reduce total mortality compared to other anti-hyperglycemic agents, in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Metformin, however, is thought to increase the risk of lactic acidosis, and has been considered to be contraindicated in many chronic hypoxemic conditions that may be associated with lactic acidosis, such as cardiovascular, renal, hepatic and pulmonary disease, and advancing age.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis, and to evaluate blood lactate levels, for those on metformin treatment compared to placebo or non-metformin therapies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A comprehensive search was performed of electronic databases to identify studies of metformin treatment. The search was augmented by scanning references of identified articles, and by contacting principal investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Prospective trials and observational cohort studies in patients with type 2 diabetes of least one month duration were included if they evaluated metformin, alone or in combination with other treatments, compared to placebo or any other glucose-lowering therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis was recorded as cases per patient-years, for metformin treatment and for non-metformin treatments. The upper limit for the true incidence of cases was calculated using Poisson statistics. In a second analysis lactate levels were measured as a net change from baseline or as mean treatment values (basal and stimulated by food or exercise) for treatment and comparison groups. The pooled results were recorded as a weighted mean difference (WMD) in mmol/L, using the fixed-effect model for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Pooled data from 347 comparative trials and cohort studies revealed no cases of fatal or nonfatal lactic acidosis in 70,490 patient-years of metformin use or in 55,451 patients-years in the non-metformin group. Using Poisson statistics the upper limit for the true incidence of lactic acidosis per 100,000 patient-years was 4.3 cases in the metformin group and 5.4 cases in the non-metformin group. There was no difference in lactate levels, either as mean treatment levels or as a net change from baseline, for metformin compared to non-metformin therapies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from prospective comparative trials or from observational cohort studies that metformin is associated with an increased risk of lactic acidosis, or with increased levels of lactate, compared to other anti-hyperglycemic treatments.

Improving cardiovascular risk--applying evidence-based medicine to glucose-lowering therapy with thiazolidinediones in patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

The management of patients with type 2 diabetes aims to reduce the elevated risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) by addressing established risk factors including hyperglycaemia, dyslipidaemia and hypertension. The thiazolidinediones are equally effective in improving glycaemic control when used in combination regimens in patients with type 2 diabetes, but have differing effects on the diabetic dyslipidaemia.

AIMS

To compare the effects of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone on inflammatory mediators associated with atherosclerosis and CVD, surrogate cardiovascular endpoints, and hard cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search of the PubMed database plus manual search of referenced papers for other relevant citations.

RESULTS

Both glitazones reduce inflammatory markers and other circulating markers of CV disease. Available data suggest that pioglitazone can delay progression of atherosclerosis in patients with type 2 diabetes, as shown by the PERISCOPE and CHICAGO studies, and that it can reduce the rate of clinical CV events as shown by PROactive. Clinical end-point data for rosiglitazone are inconclusive, providing no evidence of benefit and a possible increase in myocardial infarction.

DISCUSSION

There is a consistency of benefit with pioglitazone on markers, surrogate cardiovascular outcomes and clinical end-point trials.

CONCLUSION

Pioglitazone is the preferred thiazolidinedione to reduce cardiovascular risk in people with type 2 diabetes.

Adding pioglitazone to insulin containing regimens in type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Type 2 diabetes is treated in a stepwise manner, progressing from diet and physical activity to oral antidiabetic agents and insulin. The oral agent pioglitazone is licensed for use with insulin when metformin is contraindicated or not tolerated. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the extent to which adding pioglitazone to insulin-containing regimens produces benefits in terms of patient-relevant outcomes.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomised controlled trials comparing pioglitazone in combination with any insulin-containing regimen in comparison with the same insulin regimen alone in patients with type 2 diabetes. Outcomes investigated included HbA1c, hypoglycaemia, weight, and adverse events. Studies were selected, assessed and summarised according to standard systematic review methodology and in a meta-analysis. We included eight trials that examined the benefits of adding pioglitazone to an insulin regimen and studied a total of 3092 patients with type 2 diabetes. All studies included patients with previously inadequate glucose control. Trial duration was between 12 weeks and 34.5 months. The trials used pioglitazone doses of up to 45 mg/day. In our meta-analysis, the mean reduction in HbA1c was 0.58% (95% CI: −0.70, −0.46, p<0.00001). Hypoglycaemic episodes were slightly more frequent in the pioglitazone arms (relative risk 1.27; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.63, p = 0.06). Where reported, HDL-cholesterol tended to be increased with pioglitazone. Patients on pioglitazone tended to gain more weight than those who were not, with an average difference of almost 3 kg. Peripheral oedema was more frequent in the pioglitazone groups. None of the studies reported on fractures in women, and data on cardiovascular events were inconclusive, with most studies being too short or too small to assess these long-term outcomes.

Conclusions/Significance

When added to insulin regimens, pioglitazone confers a small advantage in terms of HbA1c in type 2 diabetes patients with previous inadequate glucose control, but at the cost of increased hypoglycaemia and weight gain. Other considerations include the risk of heart failure, fractures in women, a reduced insulin dose, and the net financial cost.

Rosiglitazone reduces liver fat and insulin requirements and improves hepatic insulin sensitivity and glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes requiring high insulin doses

BACKGROUND

Liver fat is an important determinant of insulin requirements during insulin therapy. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)-gamma agonists reduce liver fat. We therefore hypothesized that type 2 diabetic patients using exceptionally high doses of insulin might respond well to addition of a PPARgamma agonist.

METHODS

We determined the effect of the PPARgamma agonist rosiglitazone on liver fat and directly measured hepatic insulin sensitivity in 14 patients with type 2 diabetes (aged 51 +/- 3 yr, body mass index 36.7 +/- 1.1 kg/m2), who were poorly controlled (glycosylated hemoglobin A 1c (HbA 1c) 8.9 +/- 0.4%) despite using high doses of insulin (218 +/- 22 IU/d) in combination with metformin. Liver fat content (1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy), hepatic insulin sensitivity [6 h hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp (insulin 0.3 mU/kg.min) combined with [3-3H]glucose], body composition (magnetic resonance imaging), substrate oxidation rates (indirect calorimetry), clinical parameters, and liver enzymes were measured before and after rosiglitazone treatment (8 mg/d) for 8 months.

RESULTS

During rosiglitazone, HbA(1c) decreased from 8.9 +/- 0.4% to 7.8 +/- 0.3% (P = 0.007) and insulin requirements from 218 +/- 22 to 129 +/- 20 IU/d (P = 0.002). Liver fat content decreased by 46 +/- 9% from 20 +/- 3% to 11 +/- 3% (P = 0.0002). Hepatic insulin sensitivity, measured from the percent suppression of endogenous glucose production by insulin, increased from -40 +/- 7% to -89 +/- 12% (P = 0.001). The percent change in liver fat correlated with the percent decrease in HbA 1c (r = 0.53, P = 0.06), insulin dose (r = 0.66, P = 0.014), and suppression of endogenous glucose production (r = 0.76, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that rosiglitazone may be particularly effective in type 2 diabetic patients who are poorly controlled despite using high insulin doses. The mechanism is likely to involve reduced liver fat and enhanced hepatic insulin sensitivity.