Effect of sulphonylurea therapy on plasma insulin, intact and 32/33 split proinsulin in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Effect of exenatide, sitagliptin, or glimepiride on β-cell secretory capacity in early type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Agents that augment GLP-1 effects enhance glucose-dependent β-cell insulin production and secretion and thus are hoped to prevent progressive impairment in insulin secretion characteristic of type 2 diabetes (T2D). The purpose of this study was to evaluate GLP-1 effects on β-cell secretory capacity, an in vivo measure of functional β-cell mass, early in the course of T2D.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled trial in 40 subjects with early T2D who received the GLP-1 analog exenatide (n = 14), the dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitor sitagliptin (n = 12), or the sulfonylurea glimepiride (n = 14) as an active comparator insulin secretagogue for 6 months. Acute insulin responses to arginine (AIRarg) were measured at baseline and after 6 months of treatment with 5 days of drug washout under fasting, 230 mg/dL (glucose potentiation of arginine-induced insulin release [AIRpot]), and 340 mg/dL (maximum arginine-induced insulin release [AIRmax]) hyperglycemic clamp conditions, in which AIRmax provides the β-cell secretory capacity.

RESULTS

The change in AIRpot was significantly greater with glimepiride versus exenatide treatment (P < 0.05), and a similar trend was notable for the change in AIRmax (P = 0.1). Within each group, the primary outcome measure, AIRmax, was unchanged after 6 months of treatment with exenatide or sitagliptin compared with baseline but was increased with glimepiride (P < 0.05). α-Cell glucagon secretion (AGRmin) was also increased with glimepiride treatment (P < 0.05), and the change in AGRmin trended higher with glimepiride than with exenatide (P = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

After 6 months of treatment, exenatide or sitagliptin had no significant effect on functional β-cell mass as measured by β-cell secretory capacity, whereas glimepiride appeared to enhance β- and α-cell secretion.

Elevated intact proinsulin levels are indicative of Beta-cell dysfunction, insulin resistance, and cardiovascular risk: impact of the antidiabetic agent pioglitazone

BACKGROUND

Insulin resistance (IR) and deterioration of beta-cell secretion are main features in the development of type 2 diabetes, which is reflected in increasing serum intact proinsulin levels in later disease stage. Introduction of stable assays that are able to distinguish between intact proinsulin and its specific and unspecific cleavage products has resulted in the finding that serum intact proinsulin values can serve as a direct marker for beta-cell dysfunction, are a highly specific indicator of IR, and can predict cardiovascular risk.

METHOD

Determination of fasting intact proinsulin may be used to monitor and optimize antidiabetic therapeutic approaches. Our study group has been involved in a variety of clinical studies investigating drug effects on beta-cell secretory capacity, IR, and intact proinsulin levels. One focus was on the impact of insulin-sensitizing therapy with pioglitazone on the pancreatic beta-cell load.

RESULTS

Treatment with pioglitazone resulted in significant decreases in elevated proinsulin levels in type 2 diabetes patients. This effect was independent from glycemic control.

CONCLUSIONS

Measurement of fasting intact proinsulin values allows a staging of beta-cell dysfunction and evaluation of IR, thus providing an interesting diagnostic tool for both selection of appropriate therapy and monitoring of treatment success.

Proinsulin levels in patients with pancreatic diabetes are associated with functional changes in insulin secretion rather than pancreatic beta-cell area

INTRODUCTION

Hyperproinsulinaemia has been reported in patients with type 2 diabetes. It is unclear whether this is due to an intrinsic defect in β-cell function or secondary to the increased demand on the β-cells. We investigated whether hyperproinsulinaemia is also present in patients with secondary diabetes, and whether proinsulin levels are associated with impaired β-cell area or function.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-three patients with and without diabetes secondary to pancreatic diseases were studied prior to pancreatic surgery. Intact and total proinsulin levels were compared with the pancreatic β-cell area and measures of insulin secretion and action.

RESULTS

Fasting concentrations of total and intact proinsulin were similar in patients with normal, impaired (including two cases of impaired fasting glucose) and diabetic glucose tolerance (P=0.58 and P=0.98 respectively). There were no differences in the total proinsulin/insulin or intact proinsulin/insulin ratio between the groups (P=0.23 and P=0.71 respectively). There was a weak inverse association between the total proinsulin/insulin ratio and pancreatic β-cell area (r(2)=0.14, P=0.032), whereas the intact proinsulin/insulin ratio and the intact and total proinsulin levels were unrelated to β-cell area. However, a strong inverse relationship between homeostasis model assessment index of β-cell function and both the total and the intact proinsulin/insulin ratio was found (r(2)=0.55 and r(2)=0.48 respectively). The association of insulin resistance (IR) with intact proinsulin was much weaker than the correlation with fasting insulin.

CONCLUSIONS

Hyperproinsulinaemia is associated with defects in insulin secretion rather than a reduction in β-cell area. The weak association between intact proinsulin and IR argues against the usefulness of this parameter in clinical practice.

Limitations of the HOMA-B score for assessment of beta-cell functionality in interventional trials-results from the PIOglim study

BACKGROUND

Drugs with unspecific stimulating effects on beta-cell secretion increase the homeostasis model assessment (HOMA)-B score, indicating improved beta-cell "function." We investigated whether the beta-cell protection provided by adding pioglitazone (PIO) to glimepiride (GLIM) in comparison to up-titrating the GLIM dose alone is reflected by appropriate changes in several measures of beta-cell function, including HOMA-B score.

METHODS

This double-blind, parallel prospective 6-month study was performed with 82 patients (47 men, 35 women; age, 61 +/- 9 years; duration of disease, 5.3 +/- 4.4 years; body mass index, 32.6 +/- 6.0 kg/m(2); hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c], 7.3 +/- 0.7%) with GLIM monotherapy (1-3 mg). They were randomized to receive a GLIM + PIO combination with up-titration (2 mg + 30 mg/4 mg + 30 mg/4 mg + 4 mg) or to remain on GLIM (up-titration 4/5/6 mg). Observation parameters determined at baseline and end point included HOMA-B, HOMA-IR, HbA1c, glucose, insulin, and intact proinsulin.

RESULTS

There was a slight increase in the HOMA-B score in the GLIM group but not in the GLIM + PIO arm (baseline/end point: for GLIM, 71 +/- 48/88 +/- 64; for PIO + GLIM, 74 +/- 56/69 +/- 52). Improvements in the other observation parameters were predominantly detected in the PIO + GLIM group (HbA1c, 7.20 +/- 0.61%/6.36 +/- 0.90%; HOMA-IR, 7.0 +/- 4.5/4.1 +/- 2.1; intact proinsulin, 12.4 +/- 10.3/7.6 +/- 4.8 pmol/L [all P < 0.05 vs. baseline]) compared with the GLIM group (HbA1c, 7.45 +/- 0.69%/7.15 +/- 0.97% [P < 0.05]; HOMA-IR, 7.4 +/- 4.5/7.5 +/- 4.3 [not significant]; intact proinsulin, 17.3 +/- 21.6/16.3 +/- 15.5 pmol/L [not significant]).

CONCLUSIONS

The PIO + GLIM combination led to overall improvement of laboratory biomarkers for beta-cell function, except for HOMA-B. Glimepiride up-titration had no such effects but increased the HOMA-B score. HOMA-B seems to provide misleading results when used as a diagnostic tool in patients treated with sulfonylurea drugs. A corrective term for consideration of proinsulin in the HOMA-B equation may address this limitation.

A one-year study comparing the efficacy and safety of rosiglitazone and glibenclamide in the treatment of type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND AND AIM

This study was designed to compare the efficacy of rosiglitazone and glibenclamide in individuals with type 2 diabetes over a 12-month period.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 598 patients were randomized to double-blind treatment for 52 weeks with rosiglitazone 4 mg/d (n=200), rosiglitazone 8 mg/d (n=191) or glibenclamide (n=207; dose adjusted up to 15 mg/d over the first 12 weeks according to clinical response). Changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting insulin and its precursor peptides, and lipids were measured and safety was evaluated. Significant reductions in HbA1c levels at 52 weeks compared with baseline were seen in all treatment groups (rosiglitazone 4 mg/d=-0.3%, P=0.0003; rosiglitazone 8 mg/d=-0.5%, P<0.0001; glibenclamide=-0.7%, P<0.0001). Mean FPG levels were also significantly reduced in all treatment groups (rosiglitazone 4 mg/d=-1.4 mmol/l; rosiglitazone 8 mg/d=-2.3 mmol/l; glibenclamide=-1.7 mmol/l; P<0.0001 vs. baseline for all treatments). Rosiglitazone therapy reduced plasma insulin, proinsulin, split proinsulin and free fatty acid levels compared with glibenclamide. Rosiglitazone improved insulin resistance while a worsening was seen with glibenclamide. Total:high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratios were reduced with glibenclamide and unchanged with rosiglitazone. All treatments were generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of rosiglitazone 8 mg/d in improving glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes is comparable to that of glibenclamide. However, rosiglitazone reduced insulin resistance and proinsulin levels whereas glibenclamide use was associated with an increase in fasting insulin and proinsulin. This suggests that in the long term, rosiglitazone may protect the beta-cell whereas glibenclamide is likely to increase the burden.

IRIS II study: intact proinsulin is confirmed as a highly specific indicator for insulin resistance in a large cross-sectional study design

BACKGROUND

The cross-sectional IRIS-II study tried to assess the prevalence of insulin resistance and macrovascular disease in orally treated patients with Type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

In total, 4,270 patients were enrolled into the study (2,146 male, 2,124 female; mean +/- SD age 63.9 +/- 11.1 years; body mass index 30.1 +/- 5.5 kg/m2; duration of disease 5.4 +/- 5.6 years; hemoglobin A1c 6.8 +/- 1.3%). The study consisted of a single morning visit with completion of a standardized questionnaire and collection of a fasting blood sample.

RESULTS

The mean intact proinsulin value was 11.4 +/- 12.4 pmol/L (normal range < 10 pmol/L). Homeostasis model assessment resulted in 1,147 insulin-sensitive patients (26.9%) and 3,123 patients (73.1%) with insulin resistance. Of the latter patients 1,465 (34.3% of all patients) had also elevated intact proinsulin values, while 1,658 (38.8%) had no proinsulin elevation. In contrast, 1,042 (24.4%) of the insulin-sensitive patients had normal intact proinsulin, and only 105 (2.4%) had elevated intact proinsulin concentrations (chi2 test P < 0.0001). A specificity of 93.2% (sensitivity 46.9%) was calculated for elevated intact proinsulin as an indirect marker for insulin resistance. Of the 1,451 patients treated with sulfonylurea 52% had elevated intact proinsulin values and increased prevalence of cardiovascular complications (odds ratio 1.45).

CONCLUSION

Type 2 patients with elevated fasting intact proinsulin values can be regarded as being insulin resistant. The results confirm that fasting intact proinsulin is a suitable measure for beta-cell dysfunction and insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes and may be used to support therapeutic decisions.

Role of intact proinsulin in diagnosis and treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Insulin resistance in patients with type 2 diabetes is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. While this can be partly explained by an impairment of direct insulin action on the endothelial cell, an independent contribution can be assigned also to the secretory dysfunction of the beta-cell. If the demand for insulin triggered by insulin resistance is arriving at a certain threshold, an insufficiency of the cleavage capacity of beta-cell carboxypeptidase H leads to an increased secretion of intact proinsulin in addition to the desired insulin molecule. Proinsulin, however, has been demonstrated to be an independent cardiovascular risk factor by stimulating plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 secretion and blocking fibrinolysis. A recently introduced intact proinsulin assay is able to distinguish between intact proinsulin and its specific and non-specific cleavage products. This assay allows for a pathophysiological staging of type 2 diabetes based on beta-cell secretion. It could be confirmed by a large epidemiological study (IRIS-2, 4,265 patients) that intact proinsulin is a highly specific marker for insulin resistance. It could also be shown in other studies that successful resistance treatment with insulin or glitazones led to a decrease in elevated proinsulin levels and, thus, to a decrease of cardiovascular risk, while the levels remained high during sulfonylurea therapy. Therefore, patients with increased fasting intact proinsulin values should be treated with a therapy focusing on insulin resistance. Assessment of beta-cell function by determination of intact proinsulin may facilitate the selection of the most promising therapy and may also serve to monitor treatment success in the further course of the disease.

Fasting intact proinsulin is a highly specific predictor of insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

In later stages of type 2 diabetes, proinsulin and proinsulin-like molecules are secreted in increasing amounts with insulin. A recently introduced chemiluminescence assay is able to detect the uncleaved "intact" proinsulin and differentiate it from proinsulin-like molecules. This investigation explored the predictive value of intact proinsulin as an insulin resistance marker.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In total, 48 patients with type 2 diabetes (20 women and 28 men, aged 60 +/- 9 years [means +/- SD], diabetes duration 5.1 +/- 3.8 years, BMI 31.2 +/- 4.8 kg/m2, and HbA1c 6.9 +/- 1.2%) were studied by means of an intravenous glucose tolerance test and determination of fasting values of intact proinsulin, insulin, resistin, adiponectin, and glucose. Insulin resistance was determined by means of minimal model analysis (MMA) (as the gold standard) and homeostatis model assessment (HOMA).

RESULTS

There was a significant correlation between intact proinsulin values and insulin resistance (MMA P<0.05 and HOMA P<0.01). Elevation of intact proinsulin values above the reference range (>10 pmol/l) showed a very high specificity (MMA 100% and HOMA 92.9%) and a moderate sensitivity (MMA 48.6% and HOMA 47.1%) as marker for insulin resistance. Adiponectin values were slightly lower in the insulin resistant group, but no correlation to insulin resistance could be detected for resistin in the cross-sectional design.

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated intact proinsulin seems to indicate an advanced stage of beta-cell exhaustion and is a highly specific marker for insulin resistance. It might be used as arbitrary marker for the therapeutic decision between secretagogue, sensitizer, or insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes.

Different effects of acarbose and glibenclamide on proinsulin and insulin profiles in people with Type 2 diabetes

AIM

In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study, we compared the effect of acarbose (A) and glibenclamide (G) on post-prandial (pp) and 24-h profiles of proinsulin and insulin.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus insufficiently controlled with diet alone were randomised to receive acarbose, 100 mg thrice daily, glibenclamide, 1 mg thrice daily, or placebo. Before and after 16 weeks of treatment, 24-h profiles of proinsulin, insulin and glucose (fasting, 1 h after breakfast and every 3-h for a 24-h period) were measured under metabolic ward conditions with standardised meals.

RESULTS

With acarbose, a reduced 24-h level of proinsulin was observed compared with glibenclamide (AUC 1096 +/- 118 vs. 1604 +/- 174 pmol/l per h, P<0.05) at 16 weeks. The breakfast increment of proinsulin was lower with acarbose than glibenclamide (6.8 vs. 19.3 pmol/l, P<0.05) as was the level at that time (37.3 +/- 5.3 vs. 56.4 +/- 7.5 pmol/l, P<0.05). A lower AUC of insulin after treatment was also observed with acarbose than glibenclamide (7.9 +/- 0.9 vs. 14.8 +/- 4.5 nmol/l per h, P<0.05), as also for 1-h increment (81 +/- 26, vs. 380 +/- 120 pmol/l, P<0.01) and 1-h level (325 +/- 30 vs. 621 +/- 132 pmol/l, P<0.01). Acarbose reduced 1-h breakfast glucose increment (baseline 6.3 +/- 0.6, 16-week 3.5 +/- 0.6 mmol/l, P<0.01) and 1-h glucose level (18.1 +/- 1.1 and 14.5 +/- 1.3 mmol/l, P<0.01), whereas glibenclamide did not (6.6 +/- 0.7 vs. 5.4 +/- 0.6 mmol/l and 18.9 +/- 1.5 vs. 15.3 +/- 1.3 mmol/l).

CONCLUSIONS

Measurement of circadian excursions of proinsulin and insulin reveals distinct differences in meal-time proinsulin and insulin increment and level between acarbose and glibenclamide whereas fasting levels of these insulin fractions remained unaffected.

Effects and serum levels of glibenclamide and its active metabolites in patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To study the effects and serum levels of glibenclamide (Gb) and its active metabolites in patients on chronic Gb medication on different daily doses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifty patients with type 2 diabetes on regular Gb therapy (1.75-14.0 mg daily). Blood samples were taken immediately before and 90 min after regular Gb intake. A standardized breakfast was served 30 min after drug intake. Serum insulin and proinsulin levels were determined by ELISA methods without cross-reactivities. Serum drug levels were determined by HPLC. Fischer's R to Z-test (correlation coefficients) and paired Student t-tests were used when comparing values within the entire group and unpaired non-parametric Mann-Whitney tests were used when comparing high and low dose levels. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

There were significant correlations between daily Gb dose, on the one hand, and, on the other, HbAlc (r = 0.55), Delta-insulin (r = - 0.59) and Delta-proinsulin (r = - 0.52) levels. Significant correlations between Gb therapy duration and insulin (r = - 0.40) and proinsulin (r = - 0.34) secretion and between Gb dose and ratio proinsulin/insulin (RPI) at both time points (r = 0.32 and 0.30) were also found. The RPI was lower after Gb intake. In patients on > or = 10.5 mg steady state serum metabolite levels (Ml and Ml + M2) were higher (29(0-120) and 33 (0-120) ng/ml) than those of Gb itself (18(0-64) ng/ml). A great inter-subject variability in Gb levels at both time points was seen.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that, in patients on chronic medication, Gb is capable of stimulating both insulin and proinsulin secretion; the effect on insulin release is relatively greater. The effect was more pronounced in patients on a low Gb dose, either because of less impaired beta-cells in those receiving low doses, or due to reduced sulphonylurea sensitivity in those on high dosage (down-regulation). In patients on a daily dose of 10.5 mg or more, serum metabolite levels of clinical relevance were demonstrated; the metabolites may contribute to hypoglycaemic events.

Effects of antihyperglycaemic therapies on proinsulin and relation between proinsulin and cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes

AIM

To assess the effect of oral antihyperglycaemic therapy on fasting proinsulin and the relation between proinsulin levels and cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

One hundred and sixty-five patients with type 2 diabetes, fasting blood glucose concentration (FBG) > or = 6.7 mmol/l, were recruited from five diabetes outpatient clinics in primary health care. Diet and antihyperglycaemic medication, aiming at FBG < 6.7 mmol/l, was maintained for 6 months after completed dose titration in a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial with metformin (M), glibenclamide (G) and primary combination of both drugs (MG). The study compared M, G and MG in low dose (MGL) and also different high-dose regimens, i.e. G added to M (M/G), M added to G (G/M) and primary combination (MGH). Outcome measures were fasting proinsulin, glycaemia, body mass index, blood pressure, lipids, insulin and C-peptide.

RESULTS

Lower proinsulin levels were found when therapy was initiated with metformin (M vs. G, p = 0.013 and M/G vs. G/M, p = 0.033). M and G were equally effective on glucose levels. In the group as a whole FBG decreased from (mean +/- s.d.) 10.2 +/- 2.7 to 7.0 +/- 1.2 mmol/l with no change in proinsulin. Proinsulin was associated with cardiovascular risk factors, linking high proinsulin to an atherogenic risk marker profile. Mean proinsulin change from baseline was inconsistently associated with markers of insulin resistance. Meal-stimulated glucose (net AUC) decreased after treatment only in those with low baseline proinsulin levels.

CONCLUSION

It may be advantageous to initiate oral antihyperglycaemic therapy with metformin rather than with sulphonylurea. High proinsulin levels are associated with an atherogenic-risk marker profile and an impaired therapeutic postprandial glucose response after treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes. Proinsulin change after therapy is inconsistently associated with markers of insulin resistance and unrelated to fasting blood glucose reduction.

Specific insulin and proinsulin in normal glucose tolerant first-degree relatives of NIDDM patients

In order to identify early abnormalities in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) we determined insulin (using an assay that does not cross-react with proinsulin) and proinsulin concentrations. The proinsulin/insulin ratio was used as an indicator of abnormal beta-cell function. The ratio of the first 30-min increase in insulin to glucose concentrations following the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT; I30-0/G30-0) was taken as an indicator of insulin secretion. Insulin resistance (R) was evaluated by the homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) method. True insulin and proinsulin were measured during a 75-g OGTT in 35 individuals: 20 with normal glucose tolerance (NGT) and without diabetes among their first-degree relatives (FDR) served as controls, and 15 with NGT who were FDR of patients with NIDDM. The FDR group presented higher insulin (414 pmol/l vs 195 pmol/l; P = 0.04) and proinsulin levels (19.6 pmol/l vs 12.3 pmol/l; P = 0.03) post-glucose load than the control group. When these groups were stratified according to BMI, the obese FDR (N = 8) showed higher fasting and post-glucose insulin levels than the obese NGT (N = 9) (fasting: 64.8 pmol/l vs 7.8 pmol/l: P = 0.04, and 60 min post-glucose: 480.6 pmol/l vs 192 pmol/l: P = 0.01). Also, values for HOMA (R) were higher in the obese FDR compared to obese NGT (2.53 vs 0.30; P = 0.075). These results show that FDR of NIDDM patients have true hyperinsulinemia (which is not a consequence of cross-reactivity with proinsulin) and hyperproinsulinemia and no dysfunction of a qualitative nature in beta-cells.

Elevated ratio of summed serum proinsulin to insulin response after oral glucose load in type 2 diabetes decreases following sulfonylurea treatment

We showed previously that the disproportionate elevation of serum proinsulin at fasting and after glucose ingestion in Type 2 diabetes is reduced to nearly normal after improvement of glycemic control by diet therapy. In this study, we investigated the effect of sulfonylurea (SU) treatment on serum proinsulin levels and proinsulin/insulin ratio (PI/I) during oral glucose tolerance test in patients with Type 2 diabetes. Thirteen diabetic patients (age 56 +/- 9 years, body mass index 22.4 +/- 1.9 kg/m2, mean +/- SD) were examined by 75 g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) before and after glycemic control by SU therapy. Mean interval of two OGTTs was 126 days. Serum proinsulin was measured by the radioimmunoassay using a human proinsulin-specific antiserum. When glycemic control improved after SU therapy (mean fasting plasma glucose 11.5 and 6.0 mmol/l, before and after SU treatment), fasting insulin, proinsulin and PI/I ratio did not change significantly. Insulin response during OGTT markedly increased after SU therapy. Summed value of insulin (sigma I) increased from 634 to 1064 pmol/l after SU (P < 0.01), whereas summed proinsulin (sigma PI) did not change significantly (146 and 159 pmol/l), resulting in a significant decrease in sigma PI/sigma I (23.6-15.1%, P < 0.05). We conclude that the disproportionate elevation of proinsulin during OGTT in patients with Type 2 diabetes can be reduced after glycemic control by SU treatment, chiefly by a selective increase in insulin response.