Characteristics of type 2 diabetic patients responding to voglibose administration as an adjunct to sulfonylurea

Voglibose: an alpha glucosidase inhibitor

Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a morbid disease worldwide, with increasing incidence as time passes. It has macro-vascular and micro-vascular complications. The main cause of these complications is poorly controlled postprandial hyperglycaemia. Alpha glucosidase inhibitors, namely acarbose, voglibose and miglitol, are available for therapy. Voglibose is well tolerated and effective in comparable doses among these drugs. This article highlights the important features of voglibose.

Efficacy of vildagliptin on glucose fluctuation in Japanese type 2 diabetic patients with ongoing sulfonylurea based oral glycemic agent therapy

AIM

To investigate whether vildagliptin, one of the dipeptidylpeptide-4 (DDP-4) inhibitors, improves not only glycemic control but also glycemic fluctuation when added to ongoing sulfonylurea (SU) based oral hypoglycemic agents (OHA) therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

A total of 19 patients with T2DM were recruited from outpatients. Vildagliptin was initiated with a dose of 100mg per day in the patients who had inadequate glycemic control and glycemic fluctuation with ongoing SU based OHA therapy. Glycemic excursion was defined by seven-point self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) on three days at baseline and 12 weeks after vildagliptin-combined therapy, as well as HbA1c levels. M-value and J-index were calculated to evaluate glycemic excursion.

RESULTS

Addition of vildagliptin to ongoing SU based OHA therapy significantly decreased HbA1c values from 8.2 ± 3.8% at baseline to 7.3 ± 0.8% at 12-week. The average of blood glucose profiles was significant improved. As a result, M-value was significantly corrected from 20.9 ± 14.4 to 12.2 ± 13.5 and J-index from 55.1 ± 25.5 to 39.1 ± 19.8.

CONCLUSIONS

Vildagliptin when added to ongoing SU based OHA therapy for 12 weeks significantly improved glycemic fluctuation as well as glycemic control in Japanese patients with T2DM.

Nateglinide and acarbose for postprandial glucose control after optimizing fasting glucose with insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

Basal insulin treatment is frequently used in type 2 diabetes, but the successful control of postprandial glucose is challenging. We compared the effect of preferential postprandial glucose targeting drugs for postprandial glucose control after optimizing fasting glucose with basal insulin.

METHODS

This study was performed in 58, insulin naïve type 2 diabetes. After fasting glucose was optimized by insulin glargine, nateglinide or acarbose was initiated and then crossed over after second wash out period. 75 g oral glucose tolerance test and 7 point self monitoring blood glucose for 3 days at the end of each period was performed.

RESULTS

Both drugs effectively reduced postprandial glucose levels compared with the insulin glargine monotherapy. No significant differences were found between nateglinide and acarbose in terms of mean glucose level, standard deviation of glucose levels, mean average glucose excursion and average daily risk range. Homeostasis model analysis (HOMA)% β, corrected insulin response and insulin-to-glucose ratio were significantly higher in the responder group compared with the non-responder. There was no episode of severe hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Nateglinide and acarbose are equally effective in type 2 diabetes for postprandial glucose excursions during basal insulin treatment. The markers of beta cell function might be used for predicting response. (Clinical trial reg. no. NCT 00437918, clinicaltrial.gov.).

A review of treatment response in type 2 diabetes: assessing the role of patient heterogeneity

The response to treatment for type 2 diabetes typically varies among individuals within a study population. This variation is known as heterogeneity of treatment response. We conducted a comprehensive literature review to identify factors that account for heterogeneity of treatment response in patients treated for type 2 diabetes. Three databases (PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library) were searched for articles published in the last 10 years describing investigations of factors associated with treatment response and outcomes among people with type 2 diabetes receiving pharmacological treatment. Of the 43 articles extracted and summarized, 35 (81%) discussed clinical factors, 31 (72%) described sociodemographic factors and 17 (40%) reported on comorbidity or behavioural factors. Clinical factors identified included baseline glycated hemoglobin A1c or fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels, insulin response or sensitivity, C-peptide, body composition, adipose tissue proteins, lipid profile, plasma albumin levels and duration of disease or insulin treatment. Other factors identified included age, sex, race, socioeconomic status and comorbidities. This review identified the following research gaps: use of multiple definitions for response, few patient-reported measures and lack of evidence regarding whether factors were associated with treatment response for only specific medications or across pharmacological therapies. Furthermore, identification of factors associated with type 2 diabetes treatment response was generally a secondary objective in the research reviewed. Understanding which patient subgroups are more likely to respond to treatment and identifying factors associated with response may result in targeted treatment decisions and alter the interpretation of efficacy or effectiveness of results. In conclusion, accounting for these factors in clinical trials and when making clinical treatment decisions may improve therapy selection and individual patient outcomes.

Efficacy and tolerability of vildagliptin as an add-on to glimepiride in Japanese patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIM

To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of vildagliptin, a potent and selective dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, as add-on to glimepiride in Japanese patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who were inadequately controlled.

METHODS

This 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared vildagliptin 50mg twice-daily (n=102) with placebo (n=100) when added to a stable dose of glimepiride (>or=1mg/d).

RESULTS

Treatment groups were balanced at baseline (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)], 7.9%; fasting plasma glucose, 163.8 mg/dL). During treatment HbA(1c) decreased progressively with vildagliptin, but remained unchanged with placebo. The adjusted mean change (AMDelta) at endpoint was -1.0+/-0.1 and -0.1+/-0.1% in vildagliptin- and placebo-treated patients (between-group Delta=-1.0+/-0.1%, P<0.001). A greater proportion of vildagliptin-treated patients had HbA(1c) <or=6.5% compared to placebo-treated patients (45% vs. 3%, P<0.001). The AMDelta FPG was -20.9+/-2.8 mg/dL with vildagliptin compared to 6.3+/-2.8 mg/dL with placebo (between-group Delta=-27.2+/-3.9 mg/dL, P<0.001). Patients in vildagliptin and placebo groups reported similar incidences of adverse events (AEs) (59.8% vs. 57.0%), serious AEs (0% vs. 2.0%), suspected drug-related AEs (21.6% vs. 23.0%), and discontinuation due to AEs (1.0% vs. 3.0%). Hypogylcaemia was reported in two (vildagliptin) and one (placebo) patient.

CONCLUSION

Vildagliptin is effective and well tolerated as an add-on to glimepiride in Japanese patients with T2DM.

A review of the response to oral antidiabetes agents in patients with type 2 diabetes

In patients with type 2 diabetes, a progressive decline in glycemic control exacerbates the microvascular (retinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy) and macrovascular (cardiovascular disease, stroke, and peripheral arterial disease) complications associated with this disease. In a consensus statement, the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes stated that the main goal of antidiabetes therapy is to achieve glycemic control, defined as a glycated hemoglobin of < 7%, although goals should be individualized to each patient, especially in patients at highest risk of cardiovascular disease events. However, because type 2 diabetes is a progressive disease, the response to oral antidiabetes (OAD) agents declines over time and the majority of patients are unable to maintain glycemic control, thus necessitating additional therapy. This requirement for additional antidiabetes therapies as the disease progresses suggests that more aggressive and earlier use of synergistic therapies may help achieve and prolong glycemic control. This review examines the efficacy of OAD therapies to address the unmet need for prompt and maintained glycemic control to the recommended goal in patients with type 2 diabetes, the factors that can affect the glycemic response to the various classes of OAD agents, and ways in which the management of hyperglycemia can be improved in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus with orally administered agents: advances in combination therapy

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the effects and clinical benefit provided by combining various orally administered antidiabetic drugs (OADs) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and to examine the advantages of single-tablet combinations with respect to targeting hyperglycemia and adherence.

METHODS

A review of randomized controlled trials that studied OAD combinations for the treatment of type 2 diabetes was conducted by using search terms in PubMed.

RESULTS

Reported data have documented that OAD combination therapies have additional benefits over monotherapy in terms of glycemic efficacy. Results from randomized controlled trials on a range of OAD combinations have demonstrated differences in safety and efficacy. The use of single-tablet OAD combinations has been shown to improve adherence in patients.

CONCLUSION

The development of single-tablet OAD combinations that can address all aspects of glycemia with a favorable tolerability profile has the potential to help patients manage their glycemic control more effectively and to minimize the risk of long-term diabetes-related complications. In addition, single-tablet combinations of agents offer improved convenience for patients as well as potential cost benefits. Thus, they represent an important treatment option for type 2 diabetes.