Effects of nateglinide and glibenclamide on prothrombotic factors in naïve type 2 diabetic patients treated with metformin: a 1-year, double-blind, randomized clinical trial

Efficacy and Safety of DPP-4 Inhibitors and Metformin Combinations in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Objective

Several oral antidiabetic regimens are available for treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) being one of them. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing DPP4i plus metformin (Met) combination with other Met-based oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) combinations used in treating patients with T2DM.

Methods

We searched PubMed and Embase from inception until 19th April, 2022 for phase II and phase III trials in patients with T2DM on Met-based traditional OADs. The primary outcome was assessed by change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and 2-hour post-prandial blood glucose (2h-PPG). The secondary safety outcomes assessed were hypoglycemic events, serious adverse events (SAEs), cardiovascular (CV) events, and gastrointestinal (GI) events.

Results

Sixty-two trials were included in the analysis. The combination of DPP4i + Met revealed a comparable mean reduction in HbA1c levels to the glinides (Gli) + Met combination (mean difference [MD]: -0.03%, 95% CI: 0.69, -0.65), although the difference was not statistically significant. The mean HbA1c reduction with DPP4i + Met was greater than with sulfonylureas (SU) + Met (MD: -0.05, 95% CI: -0.29, 0.39), thiazolidinedione (TZD) + Met (MD: -0.69, 95% CI: -1.39, -0.02), and SU + TZD (MD: 0.21; 95% CI: -1.30, 1.71), with no statistical significance. DPP4i + Met demonstrated a non-significant lower incidence of CV events in comparison to TZD + Met (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.46, 2.45) and SU + Met (RR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.61, 2.06).

Conclusion

DPP4i in combination with Met was efficacious and had a well-tolerated safety profile compared with other traditional OADs. This combination can be considered as a suitable treatment option for patients with T2DM.

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.

Pharmacological interventions for preventing or delaying onset of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Prevention or delay of onset of type 2 diabetes in individuals at varying risk across the dysglycaemia continuum before overt diabetes becomes clinically manifest constitutes a leading objective of global disease prevention schemes. Pharmacological intervention has been suggested as a means to help prevent diabetes and reduce the global burden of this chronic condition. However, there is no credible evidence that early pharmacological intervention leads to long-term benefit in reducing diabetes-related complications or preventing early mortality, compared to treating people with diagnosed diabetes who have crossed the glycaemic threshold. In this review, we examine published evidence from trials using pharmacological agents to delay or prevent progression to diabetes. We also explore the benefit/risk impact of such therapies, safety issues and relevant off-target effects. Current evidence suggests none of the drugs currently available sustainably lower cumulative diabetes incidence, none provides a durable delay in diabetes diagnosis and none provides a convincing concomitant excess benefit for microvascular or macrovascular risk.

Relationships of plasma lipoprotein(a) levels with insulin resistance in hypertensive patients

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an emergent cardiovascular risk factor that is related to the presence and severity of cardiovascular damage in hypertensive patients. In these patients, insulin resistance is frequently detected but its relationship with plasma Lp(a) is not clear. The aim of this study was to examine the relationships between Lp(a) and variables of glucose metabolism in hypertension.

METHODS

In 527 consecutive, non-diabetic, middle-aged hypertensive patients we measured anthropometric indexes, 24-hour creatinine clearance, lipid profile including Lp(a) levels, fasting glucose, insulin and C-peptide, and calculated the Homeostatic Model Assessment (HOMA) index.

RESULTS

Lp(a) levels were significantly and progressively lower with increasing HOMA-index values. Lp(a) was inversely related to fasting glucose, insulin, and C-peptide, HOMA-index, and creatinine clearance and directly related to LDL-cholesterol. Multiple regression analysis adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, blood pressure, smoking habit, alcohol intake, renal function, lipid profile, history of cardiovascular events, and drug use showed that HOMA-index and creatinine clearance were inversely and independently associated to Lp(a) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin resistance and higher fasting insulin levels are associated with lower plasma Lp(a) in hypertensive patients. This association might be relevant in the assessment of cardiovascular risk in these patients.

The role of nateglinide and repaglinide, derivatives of meglitinide, in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is one of the most common chronic diseases worldwide, presenting a great challenge to the public health systems due to high morbidity and mortality, because of frequent micro-/macro-vascular complications. Many treatment options are now available, with different efficacy as well as mechanisms of action to improve deranged glucose metabolism. We review some of the available data on derivatives of meglitinide, namely nateglinide and repaglinide. These two compounds increase insulin secretion by a mechanism similar to the one of sulfonylureas, but with a shorter half-life. Nateglinide and repaglinide, derivatives of meglitinides, have characteristic pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties that, together with their proposed mechanism of action, make them useful for type 2 diabetes mellitus, especially when used in combination therapy.

Cardiovascular safety of sulfonylureas: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

AIM

Cardiovascular safety of sulfonylurea has been questioned by some authors. This article aims at collecting all available data on this issue from randomized trials.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed including all trials with a duration of at least 6 months, comparing a sulfonylurea with a non-sulfonylurea agent in type 2 diabetes. Major cardiovascular events (MACE) and mortality were retrieved and combined to calculate Mantel-Haenzel odds ratio (MH-OR).

RESULTS

Of the 115 selected trials, 62 reported information on MACE, and 30 reported at least one event. MH-OR for sulfonylurea was 1.08 [0.86-1.36], p = 0.52 (1.85 [1.20-2.87], p = 0.005, in the five trials vs. DPP4 inhibitors, no significant differences vs. other comparators). The MH-OR for myocardial infarction and stroke was 0.88 [0.75-1.04], p = 0.13 and 1.28 [1.03-1.60], p = 0.026, respectively. Mortality was significantly increased with sulfonylureas (MH-OR: 1.22 [1.01-1.49], p = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

In type 2 diabetes, the use of sulfonylureas is associated with increased mortality and a higher risk of stroke, whereas the overall incidence of MACE appears to be unaffected. Significant differences in cardiovascular risk could be present in direct comparisons with specific classes of glucose-lowering agents, such as DPP4 inhibitors, but this hypothesis needs to be confirmed in long-term cardiovascular outcomes trials. The results of this meta-analysis need to be interpreted with caution, mainly because of limitations in trial quality and under-reporting of information on cardiovascular events and mortality. However, the cardiovascular safety of sulfonylureas cannot be considered established unless it is evaluated in long-term cardiovascular outcomes trials.

Investigation of the mechanism(s) involved in decreasing increased fibrinogen activity in hyperglycemic conditions using L-lysine supplementation

INTRODUCTION

Fibrinogen is a plasma glycoprotein that participates in the hemostasis system. Its malfunction has been reported as a consequence of diabetic complications. In this study, the inhibitory effect of L-Lysine (Lys) on the nonenzymatic glycation of fibrinogen was investigated in both in vitro and in vivo conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fibrinogen was incubated with glucose in the presence or absence of Lys. Then, its structure was studied by fluorescence spectroscopy, circular dichroism, and electrophoresis. The Clauss method was used to determine fibrinogen activity. In addition, one of the two groups of type 2 diabetic patients receiving ordinary treatment was additionally treated with Lys for 3 months. Fibrinogen activity and some other parameters were evaluated in their plasma.

RESULTS

The results indicated increases in the activity of glycated fibrinogen in both of the in vivo and in vitro experiments. Advanced glycation end products were increased by time, as shown using fluorometry in both the plasma of the diabetic patients and the incubation medium of protein with glucose. The circular dichroism spectra showed some changes in the fibrinogen secondary and tertiary structures after glycation. The electrophoretic mobility of the glycated fibrinogen changed and the cross-link formation between the fibrinogen subunits due to glycation was observed. Lys inhibited all of the mentioned fibrinogen changes both in the in vitro experiments and after its administration to the diabetic patients.

CONCLUSION

Lys, as an inhibitor of protein glycation, improved fibrinogen's structure and function, both in vitro and in vivo.

Pramlintide and the treatment of diabetes: a review of the data since its introduction

INTRODUCTION

Postprandial glucose excursions negatively affect glycemic control and markers of cardiovascular health. Pramlintide, an amylinomimetic, is approved for treatment of elevated postprandial glucose levels in type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search of PubMed was conducted to locate articles (up to January 2011) pertaining to original preclinical and clinical research and reviews of amylin and pramlintide. Additional sources were selected from reference lists within articles obtained through the original literature search and from the internet. This article describes the known effects of endogenous amylin and the pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy of pramlintide. Drug-drug interactions and safety and tolerability are also reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

Pramlintide significantly reduces hemoglobin A(1c) and body weight in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Newer research is focusing on weight loss effects of pramlintide and pramlintide plus metreleptin in nondiabetic obese individuals. Preliminary results of these studies are discussed.

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.

Combination of nateglinide with thiazolidinediones in Type 2 diabetes

Insulin sensitivity and insulin secretion are reciprocally related such that insulin resistance is adapted by increased insulin secretion to maintain normal glucose and lipid homeostasis. Treatment of Type 2 diabetes should aim to restore and sustain the normal relationship between insulin sensitivity and secretion. Nateglinide is a rapid-onset, short-acting insulin-secretion enhancer that restores early-phase insulin secretion, reduces postprandial glucose excursions and prevents long-term hyperinsulinemia. Given its mechanism of action, it is evident that nateglinide would be more effective when used in combination with an insulin sensitizer, such as the thiazolidinediones. Thiazolidinediones do not stimulate insulin release and, therefore, are potentially suitable candidates for combination therapy with an insulin-secretion enhancer, such as nateglinide. Combination therapy of thiazolidinediones with nateglinide is effective, carries low risk of hypoglycemia and is suitable for patients with moderate renal impairment, although weight gain and edema are common side effects. Further studies are needed to determine whether nateglinide in combination with thiazolidinediones will help clinicians better achieve their treatment goals in targeting Type 2 diabetes. Moreover, comparative studies between nateglinide and medications targeting postprandial glycemia, such as dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 analogues, are necessary. This article summarizes data concerning the mechanism of action, efficacy and safety of therapy with nateglinide and thiazolidinediones as monotherapy and in combination treatment, and aims at a better understanding of the substrate defects their synergy hopes to defy.

Safety and efficacy of nateglinide/metformin combination therapy in the treatment of type 2 diabetes

The increasing prevalence of type 2 diabetes provides impetus for both development of new drugs to improve glycemic control and for reconsideration of treatment strategies with existing agents. Combination therapy with complementary drug classes that act on different aspects of glycemic control has been a particularly effective strategy. This work reviews the published literature reporting efficacy and safety/tolerability of nateglinide, a rapid-onset insulinotropic agent with a predominant effect to reduce postprandial glucose, when combined with metformin, a first-line agent that suppresses hepatic glucose production and thereby reduces fasting plasma glucose. The nateglinide/metformin combination has consistently been found to be both efficacious and well tolerated, whether given as initial combination therapy in drug-naïve patients or when added to metformin monotherapy. Maximum efficacy (Δ glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA_1c]= −1.4% to −1.9%, sustained for up to 2 years of treatment) was seen in studies of drug-naïve patients in whom pharmacotherapy was initiated with the combination of nateglinide and metformin, and modest reductions in HbA_1c (Δ = −0.5% to −1.2%, sustained for up to 24 weeks) were found when nateglinide was added to ongoing metformin monotherapy.

Conclusion: the combination of nateglinide and metformin provides a sustained degree of glycemic control not achievable with either agent given as monotherapy.

Metabolic effect of repaglinide or acarbose when added to a double oral antidiabetic treatment with sulphonylureas and metformin: a double-blind, cross-over, clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the metabolic effects of acarbose and repaglinide in type 2 diabetic patients who are being treated with a sulphonylurea-metformin combination therapy. The primary endpoint of the study was to evaluate which add-on treatment between acarbose and repaglinide is more efficacious in reducing PPG. The second endpoint was to evaluate which of these two treatment is more efficacious in the global management of glucose homeostasis in the enrolled patients.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

After a 4-week run-in period with a sulphonylurea-metformin combination, 103 patients were randomised to receive in addition either repaglinide, up to 6 mg/day (2 mg three times a day) or acarbose, up to 300 mg/day (100 mg three times a day) with forced titration (independently of their glycaemic control, unless side-effects developed due to the drug dosage) for 15 weeks. The treatment was then crossed-over for further 12 weeks until the 27th week. We assessed body mass index (BMI), glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), fasting plasma insulin (FPI), postprandial plasma insulin (PPI), homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) index, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglycerides (Tg), at baseline and at 1, 2, 15 and 27 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Seven patients did not complete the study, comprising one patient who was lost to follow-up and a further six through side-effects (two in week 1, one in week 15 and three after cross-over) Side-effects were classified as nausea (one in acarbose group), gastrointestinal events (four in acarbose group), and hypoglycaemia (one in repaglinide group). After 15 weeks of therapy, the repaglinide-treated patients experienced a significant decrease in HbA(1c) (-1.1%, p < 0.05), FPG (-9.5%, p < 0.05), and PPG (-14.9%, p < 0.05), when compared to the baseline values. However, the same treatment was associated with a significant increase in body weight (+2.3%, p < 0.05), BMI (+3.3%, p < 0.05) and FPI (+22.5%, p < 0.05); The increase was reversed during the cross-over phase. After 15 weeks of therapy, the acarbose-treated patients experienced a significant decrease in body weight (-1.9%, p < 0.05), BMI (-4.1%, p < 0.05), HbA(1c) (-1.4%, p < 0.05), FPG (-10.7%, p < 0.05), PPG (-16.2%, p < 0.05), FPI (-16.1%, p < 0.05), PPI (-26.9%, p < 0.05), HOMA index (-30.1%, p < 0.05), when compared to the baseline values. All these changes were reversed during the cross-over study phase, except those relating to HbA(1c), FPG and PPG. The only changes that significantly differed when directly comparing acarbose- and repaglinide-treated patients were those relating to FPI (-16.1% vs. +22.5%, respectively, p < 0.05) and HOMA index (-30.1% vs. +2.7%, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In addition from having a similar effect to repaglinide on PPG, acarbose appeared to have a more comprehensive positive effect on glucose metabolism compared to repaglinide in this relatively small sample of type 2 diabetic patients when used as add-on therapy to sulphonylureas and metformin.