Alogliptin-Pioglitazone Combination Therapy: A Rational Approach to Treating Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Initiating therapy in patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes: Combination therapy vs a stepwise approach

There is clear evidence that achieving glycaemic targets reduces the risk of developing complications as a result of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Many patients, however, continue to have suboptimal glycaemic control because of issues that include unclear advice on how to achieve these targets as well as clinical inertia. The two management approaches recommended for patients newly diagnosed with T2D are stepwise and combination therapy, each of which has advantages and disadvantages. Stepwise therapy may result in good patient adherence and allow greater individualization of therapy, and minimization of side effects and cost, and so may be appropriate for patients who are closer to goal. Stepwise therapy, however, may also lead to frequent delays in achieving glycaemic goals and longer exposure to hyperglycaemia. Combination therapy, which is now emerging as an important therapy option, has a number of potential advantages over stepwise therapy, including reduction in clinical inertia and earlier and more frequent achievement of glycated haemoglobin goals by targeting multiple pathogenic mechanisms simultaneously, which may more effectively delay disease progression. Compared with stepwise therapy, the disadvantages of combination therapy include reduced patient adherence resulting from complex, multi-drug regimens, difficulty determining the cause of poor efficacy and/or side effects, patient refusal to accept disease, and higher cost. Fixed-dose and fixed-ratio combinations are novel therapeutic approaches which may help address several issues of treatment complexity and patient burden associated with combination therapy comprising individual drugs. The choice of which drugs to administer and the decision to use stepwise vs combination therapy, however, should always be made on an individualized basis.

Efficacy and safety of pioglitazone added to alogliptin in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, comparative study

A phase IV, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, comparative study was conducted in Japanese subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who had inadequate glycaemic control, despite treatment with alogliptin in addition to diet and/or exercise therapy. Subjects with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentrations of 6.9-10.5% were randomized to receive 16 weeks' double-blind treatment with pioglitazone 15 mg, 30 mg once daily or placebo added to alogliptin 25 mg once daily. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline at the end of treatment period (week 16). Both pioglitazone 15 and 30 mg combination therapy resulted in a significantly greater reduction in HbA1c than alogliptin monotherapy [-0.80 and -0.90% vs 0.00% (the least squares mean using analysis of covariance model); p < 0.0001, respectively]. The overall incidence rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar among the treatment groups. Pioglitazone/alogliptin combination therapy was effective and generally well tolerated in Japanese subjects with T2DM and is considered to be useful in clinical settings.