Efficacy and Safety of Sitagliptin Added to Insulin in Japanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: The EDIT Randomized Trial

Aims

To clarify the efficacy and safety of adding sitagliptin to insulin therapy in Japanese patients with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

Study Design and Methods

This was a 24-week, prospective, randomized, open-labeled, controlled trial. Patients with T2DM who were suboptimally controlled despite receiving at least twice daily injection of insulin were enrolled in the study. The patients were randomized to continuation of insulin treatment (Insulin group) or addition of sitagliptin 50 to 100 mg daily to insulin treatment (Ins+Sita group). The primary outcome was change in HbA1c at week 24.

Results

Adding sitagliptin to insulin significantly reduced HbA1c from 7.9 ± 1.0% at baseline to 7.0 ± 0.8% at week 24 (P <0.0001), while there was no significant change in HbA1c in the Insulin group (7.8 ± 0.7% vs. 7.8 ± 1.1%, P = 0.32). The difference in HbA1c reduction between the groups was 0.9% (95% confidence interval, 0.4 to 1.5, P = 0.01). There was no significant weight gain in either group. Incidence of hypoglycemia was significantly reduced in the Ins+Sita group compared with the Insulin group. Treatment satisfaction was improved in the Ins+Sita group. Baseline HbA1c level and beta cell function were associated with the magnitude of reduction in HbA1c in the Ins+Sita group.

Conclusion

Adding sitagliptin to insulin reduced HbA1c without weight gain or increase in hypoglycemia, and improved treatment satisfaction in Japanese patients with T2DM who were suboptimally controlled despite at least twice daily injection of insulin.

Trial Registration

The University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000004678     

沙格列汀联合二甲双胍对2型糖尿病的疗效与安全性分析

目的:探讨沙格列汀联合二甲双胍对2型糖尿病的疗效与安全性。方法:选取200例2型糖尿病患者,按随机数字表法分为两组,沙格列汀组(102例)口服沙格列汀联合二甲双胍治疗,阿卡波糖组(98例)口服阿卡波糖联合二甲双胍治疗。通过观察并记录治疗前后糖代谢情况与体重指数水平,SF-36量表各项评分,治疗期间不良反应情况,评价沙格列汀联合二甲双胍对2型糖尿病的疗效与安全性。结果:治疗后,两组HbAlc,BMI,FBG,2hPBG水平均明显下降(P0.05),且沙格列汀组患者HbAlc,BMI,FBG,2 hPBG水平明显低于阿卡波糖组(P0.05);治疗后3个月两组患者SF-36表各项评分均明显提高(P0.05),但两组间差异没有统计学意义(P0.05);随访期间,两组不良反应率相比,差异没有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:沙格列汀联合二甲双胍可以明显控制患者血糖水平,减轻患者体重,提高患者生活质量用药安全性好,值得临床推广使用。     

Efficacy and Safety of Ideglira in Older Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Objective: The efficacy and safety of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) in older patients has not yet been reported. This analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IDegLira in patients aged ≥65 years.Methods: A post hoc analysis compared results of patients aged ≥65 versus <65 years from DUAL II, III, and V. These were 26-week, phase 3, randomized, twoarm parallel, treat-to-target trials in patients already taking injectable glucose-lowering agents. We evaluated 311 patients aged <65 and 87 patients aged ≥65 years from DUAL II, 326 patients <65 years and 112 patients ≥65 years from DUAL III, and 412 patients <65 years and 145 patients ≥65 years from DUAL V. Patients were randomized to IDegLira or insulin degludec (DUAL II), IDegLira or unchanged glucagon-like peptide 1–receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) (DUAL III), or IDegLira or IGlar U100 (DUAL V).Results: In patients ≥65 years, hemoglobin A1C decreased to a greater extent with IDegLira than with comparators (estimated treatment differences, -1.0% &lsqb;-1.5; -0.6]_{95% confidence interval &lsqb;CI]}, -0.8% &lsqb;-1.0; -0.5]_{95% CI}, and -0.9% &lsqb;-1.3; -0.6]95%CI) for DUAL II, V, and III, respectively; all P<.001). These mirrored results of patients <65 years of age. Hypoglycemia rates were lower with IDegLira versus basal insulin and higher versus unchanged GLP-1RA (estimated rate ratios, 0.5 &lsqb;0.2; 1.6]_{95% CI} &lsqb;P = .242]; 0.3 &lsqb;0.1; 0.5]_{95% CI} &lsqb;P<.001], and 11.8 &lsqb;3.3; 42.8]_{95% CI} &lsqb;P<.001] for DUAL II, V, and III, respectively).Conclusion: Patients aged ≥65 years on basal insulin or GLP-1RA can improve glycemic control with IDegLira, and it is well tolerated overall.Abbreviations: A1C = hemoglobin A1C; AE = adverse event; CI = confidence interval; Degludec = insulin degludec; EOT = end of trial; ETD = estimated treatment difference; FPG = fasting plasma glucose; GLP-1RA = glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist; IDegLira = insulin degludec/liraglutide; IGlar U100 = insulin glargine 100 U/mL; SU = sulfonylurea; T2D = type 2 diabetes     

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Antidiabetic Drug Regimens Added to Metformin Monotherapy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Network Meta-Analysis

Introduction

When first line therapy with metformin is insufficient for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), the optimal adjunctive therapy is unclear. We assessed the efficacy and safety of adjunctive antidiabetic agents in patients with inadequately controlled T2D on metformin alone.

Materials and Methods

A search of MEDLINE and CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov, regulatory websites was performed. We included randomized controlled trials of 3–12 months duration, evaluating Food and Drug Administration or European Union approved agents (noninsulin and long acting, once daily basal insulins) in patients experiencing inadequate glycemic control with metformin monotherapy (≥1500 mg daily or maximally tolerated dose for ≥4 weeks). Random-effects network meta-analyses were used to compare the weighted mean difference for changes from baseline in HbA1c, body weight (BW) and systolic blood pressure (SBP), and the risk of developing hypoglycemia, urinary (UTI) and genital tract infection (GTI).

Results

Sixty-two trials evaluating 25 agents were included. All agents significantly reduced HbA1c vs. placebo; albeit not to the same extent (range, 0.43% for miglitol to 1.29% for glibenclamide). Glargine, sulfonylureas (SUs) and nateglinide were associated with increased hypoglycemia risk vs. placebo (range, 4.00–11.67). Sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 analogs, miglitol and empagliflozin/linagliptin significantly reduced BW (range, 1.15–2.26kg) whereas SUs, thiazolindinediones, glargine and alogliptin/pioglitazone caused weight gain (range, 1.19–2.44kg). SGLT2 inhibitors, empagliflozin/linagliptin, liraglutide and sitagliptin decreased SBP (range, 1.88–5.43mmHg). No therapy increased UTI risk vs. placebo; however, SGLT2 inhibitors were associated with an increased risk of GTI (range, 2.16–8.03).

Conclusions

Adding different AHAs to metformin was associated with varying effects on HbA1c, BW, SBP, hypoglycemia, UTI and GTI which should impact clinician choice when selecting adjunctive therapy.     

Four-Year Durability of Initial Combination Therapy with Sitagliptin and Metformin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Clinical Practice; COSMIC Study

Objectives

We investigated the efficacy of initial combination therapy with sitagliptin and metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes for 4 years in clinical practice.

Methods

Between 2009 and 2010, we reviewed 1,178 patients with type 2 diabetes (HbA_1c ≥7.5% or 58 mmol/mol) prescribed initial combination therapy with sitagliptin and metformin. After excluding 288 patients without a second follow-up, 890 individuals (age, 58.0 ± 12.5 years; BMI, 25.4 ± 3.5 kg/m²; HbA_1c, 8.6 ± 1.1%) were followed up with every 3–6 months for 4 years. Homeostasis model assessments for insulin resistance and β-cell function (HOMA-β) were recorded at baseline. The response criterion was HbA_1c reduction by ≥0.8% from baseline or attainment of the target HbA_1c (≤7.0% or 53 mmol/mol). At the end of every year of treatment, changes in HbA_1c from the baseline were assessed.

Results

After 1 year, 72.2% of patients with initial combination therapy had responded, defined as HbA_1c reduction ≥0.8% or attainment of the target HbA_1c ≤7.0%. After 4 years, 35.4% of the patients still showed a response, with an HbA_1c level of 7.0 ± 0.9%. A high HbA_1c level at baseline was the most significant independent predictor of the long-term response (P<0.001). In addition, low HOMA-β was a significant predictor of a greater reduction in HbA_1c. This treatment was generally well tolerated over the 4-year follow-up period, without any serious adverse events.

Conclusions

This real-world follow-up study shows a persistent glucose-reducing effect of initial combination therapy with sitagliptin and metformin for up to 4 years.     

醋甲唑胺治疗2 型糖尿病的临床疗效及安全性观察

目的:评价青光眼治疗药物醋甲唑胺用于2型糖尿病治疗的有效性及安全性。方法:选择我院2型糖尿病初诊患者64例,随机分为两组,其中醋甲唑胺治疗组32例,对照药物二甲双胍32例。观察并比较两组患者治疗前后血糖及糖化血红蛋白水平变化,以及肝肾功能、血尿常规等安全性指标。结果:与治疗前比较,两组患者治疗后糖化血红蛋白水平均下降,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05);但治疗后两组间糖化血红蛋白水平比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);两组治疗前后肝功肾功等生化指标之间比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);两组用药安全性比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:醋甲唑胺与二甲双胍具有相似的降血糖疗效,可作为新的治疗糖尿病的二线药物选择性使用。     

Safety and Efficacy of Exenatide in Combination with Insulin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

ObjectiveTo evaluate the 1-year efficacy and safety of treatment with exenatide in combination with insulin (a use not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration).MethodsElectronic medical records of 3 private-practice endocrinologists were reviewed to identify patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving insulin who subsequently began exenatide therapy. Patients’ baseline hemoglobin A1c (A1C) levels, weights, lipid profiles, blood pressures, and medication utilization were compared with corresponding data obtained after a minimal duration of 12 months.ResultsWe identified 134 patients with T2DM initiating exenatide therapy in combination with insulin between April 2005 and April 2006. One-year follow-up information was available for 124 patients. Exenatide use resulted in a significant 0.87% reduction in A1C (P < .001), despite a 45% discontinuation of premeal insulin use (P < .001), a 9-U reduction in mean premeal insulin doses (P = .0066), a reduction in the median number of daily insulin injections from 2 to 1 (P = .0053), and a 59% discontinuation rate of sulfonylurea use (P = .0088). Exenatide use was associated with a mean weight loss of 5.2 kg (P < .001), with 72% of evaluable patients losing weight. Forty-eight patients (36%) discontinued exenatide therapy during the first year, primarily attributable to gastrointestinal intolerance. Fourteen patients (10%) experienced hypoglycemia, most of which was mild.ConclusionExenatide in combination with insulin in patients with T2DM was associated with significant reductions in A1C and weight after 1 year of therapy. This was offset, however, by an exenatide discontinuation rate of 36%, primarily due to adverse gastrointestinal effects. (Endocr Pract. 2008;14:285-292)     

Novel Gut-Based Pharmacology of Metformin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Metformin, a biguanide derivate, has pleiotropic effects beyond glucose reduction, including improvement of lipid profiles and lowering microvascular and macrovascular complications associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). These effects have been ascribed to adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK) activation in the liver and skeletal muscle. However, metformin effects are not attenuated when AMPK is knocked out and intravenous metformin is less effective than oral medication, raising the possibility of important gut pharmacology. We hypothesized that the pharmacology of metformin includes alteration of bile acid recirculation and gut microbiota resulting in enhanced enteroendocrine hormone secretion. In this study we evaluated T2DM subjects on and off metformin monotherapy to characterize the gut-based mechanisms of metformin. Subjects were studied at 4 time points: (i) at baseline on metformin, (ii) 7 days after stopping metformin, (iii) when fasting blood glucose (FBG) had risen by 25% after stopping metformin, and (iv) when FBG returned to baseline levels after restarting the metformin. At these timepoints we profiled glucose, insulin, gut hormones (glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), peptide tyrosine-tyrosine (PYY) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) and bile acids in blood, as well as duodenal and faecal bile acids and gut microbiota. We found that metformin withdrawal was associated with a reduction of active and total GLP-1 and elevation of serum bile acids, especially cholic acid and its conjugates. These effects reversed when metformin was restarted. Effects on circulating PYY were more modest, while GIP changes were negligible. Microbiota abundance of the phylum Firmicutes was positively correlated with changes in cholic acid and conjugates, while Bacteroidetes abundance was negatively correlated. Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes representation were also correlated with levels of serum PYY. Our study suggests that metformin has complex effects due to gut-based pharmacology which might provide insights into novel therapeutic approaches to treat T2DM and associated metabolic diseases.

Trial Registration:

www.ClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01357876","term_id":"NCT01357876"}}NCT01357876     

Cost-Effectiveness of Empagliflozin and Metformin Combination Versus Standard Care as First-Line Therapy in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

ObjectiveSodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors have been shown to reduce cardiovascular events but are currently not used as the first-line therapy. This study was conducted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line empagliflozin plus metformin versus metformin monotherapy among Australians with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and existing cardiovascular disease (CVD).MethodsA Markov model with 1-year cycles and a 5-year time horizon was constructed to simulate the occurrence of recurrent cardiovascular events among Australians aged 50 to 84 years with T2DM and CVD. Efficacy results were derived from the Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients-Removing Excess Glucose trial. Costs and utilities were drawn from published sources. The evaluation adopted both health care and societal perspectives, with the latter ascribing the Australian government’s “value of statistical life year” (A$213 000) to each year lived by a person. Future outcomes were discounted at 5% annually. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to enhance the robustness of conclusions.ResultsCompared with metformin monotherapy, first-line empagliflozin plus metformin reduced overall cardiovascular events by 0.82% and overall deaths by 7.72% over 5 years. There were 0.2 years of life saved per person and 0.16 quality-adjusted life years gained, at a net health care cost of A$4408. These equated to incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of A$22 076 per year of life saved and A$28 244 per quality-adjusted life year gained. The gains in the value of statistical life year equated to A$42 530 per person, meaning that from a societal perspective, the intervention was cost-saving.ConclusionFirst-line empagliflozin plus metformin may represent a cost-effective strategy for the management of T2DM and CVD in Australia.     

Metformin Reduces Thyroid Cancer Risk in Taiwanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Background

Whether metformin may affect thyroid cancer risk has not been studied. This study investigated the association between metformin use and thyroid cancer risk in Taiwanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Methods

The reimbursement databases of all diabetic patients from 1996 to 2009 were retrieved from the National Health Insurance. An entry date was set at 1 January 2006 and 1,414,723 patients with type 2 diabetes were followed for thyroid cancer incidence until the end of 2009. Incidences for ever-users, never-users and subgroups of metformin exposure using tertile cutoffs for cumulative duration of therapy and cumulative dose were calculated and adjusted hazard ratios were estimated by Cox regression. Additional sensitivity analyses were conducted.

Results

There were 795,321 ever-users and 619,402 never-users, with respective numbers of incident thyroid cancer of 683 (0.09%) and 1,614 (0.26%), and respective incidence of 24.09 and 87.33 per 100,000 person-years. The overall fully adjusted hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) was 0.683 (0.598–0.780), and all categories of the dose-response parameters showed significantly lower risk with P-trends <0.0001. The protective effect of metformin on thyroid cancer incidence was also supported by sensitivity analyses, disregarding age (<50 or ≥50 years) and sex; and was not affected by excluding users of insulin, sulfonylurea, and insulin and/or sulfonylurea respectively, by previous diagnosis of other cancers or by potential detection examinations that might lead to differential diagnosis of thyroid cancer.

Conclusions

This study provides evidence for the first time that metformin use in patients with type 2 diabetes may reduce the risk of thyroid cancer.     

Diabetes Duration and the Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Glargine Versus Comparator Treatment in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of diabetes duration on efficacy and safety in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) using insulin glargine versus comparator (oral antidiabetic drugs [OADs], dietary changes, or other insulins).MethodsData were pooled from randomized controlled clinical trials conducted in adults with T2DM with at least 24-week treatment with insulin glargine or a comparator, where predefined insulin titration algorithms were utilized to achieve fasting plasma glucose (FPG) concentrations of ≤ 100 mg/dL. Glycated hemoglobin A1C (A1C), FPG, and insulin dose and safety (hypoglycemia) outcomes were analyzed.ResultsNine studies were included in the analysis of 2,930 patients. Patients with shorter duration of diabetes were more likely to have greater reductions in A1C compared with those who had longer-duration disease (P < .0001). Disease duration did not affect change in FPG concentrations (P = .9017), but lower weight-adjusted insulin dose was correlated with longer-duration disease (P < .0001). Patients with longer-duration diabetes had increased risks of symptomatic hypoglycemia, confirmed hypoglycemia (self-monitored blood glucose < 50 mg/dL and < 70 mg/dL), and nocturnal hypoglycemia (all P < .001). No significant relationship was found between severe hypoglycemia and duration of diabetes. However, treatment with insulin glargine lowered A1C values more effectively than comparator treatments with fewer hypoglycemic episodes.ConclusionPatients with shorter-duration T2DM better achieved target A1C levels and had less hypoglycemia than those with longer disease duration. Insulin glargine was associated with reduced A1C and fewer hypoglycemic events than comparators, regardless of disease duration. (Endocr Pract. 2014;20:120-128)     

西格列汀治疗对初发2 型糖尿病患者血浆vaspin 水平的影响

目的：观察西格列汀治疗对初发2 型糖尿病（T2DM）患者血浆丝氨酸蛋白酶抑制物（vaspin）水平的影响,探讨其与胰岛素抵 抗的关系。方法：60 例初发2 型糖尿病患者使用西格列汀治疗12 周,采用酶联免疫法测定正常人及T2DM患者使用西格列汀治 疗前后的血浆vaspin 水平, 分析血浆vaspin水平与体重指数(BMI)、腰臀比(WHR)、胰岛素抵抗指数(HOMA- IR )、胰岛素分泌指 数(HOMA- IS )、空腹血糖（FPG）、餐后2 小时血糖（2hPG）、糖化血红蛋白（HbA1C）、甘油三酯（TG）、总胆固醇（TC）、高密度脂蛋 白胆固醇（HDL-C）和低密度脂蛋白胆固醇（LDL-C）等的关系。结果：2 型糖尿病组血浆vaspin 水平高于对照组（P＜ 0.05）;2 型糖 尿病组经西格列汀治疗12 周后BMI、WHR、HbA1c、FPG 、2hPG、TG和HOMA-IR 显著下降（P＜0.05）,而HOMA-IS 显著升高 （P＜0.05）,同时西格列汀治疗后血浆vaspin 水平也显著降低（P＜0.01）,且vaspin 水平的降低与HOMA-IR 的改变呈明显正相 关。胰岛素抵抗指数及体重指数是影响血浆vaspin水平的独立相关因素。结论：西格列汀治疗能有效改善2 型糖尿病患者糖脂代 谢和胰岛素敏感性,降低血浆vaspin 水平。     

Effects of Colesevelam,Rosiglitazone, or Sitagliptin on Glycemic Control and Lipid Profile in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Inadequately Controlled by Metformin Monotherapy

ObjectiveTo evaluate the glycemic effect of colesevelam, rosiglitazone, or sitagliptin when added to metformin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and to examine the effects of these antidiabetes agents on lipid and lipoprotein levels.MethodsThis 16-week, open-label pilot study conducted between May 2007 and April 2008 at 20 sites in the United States, 7 sites in Mexico, and 6 sites in Colombia, enrolled adults with inadequately controlled type 2 DM (glycated hemoglobin [HbA_1c], 7.0%-10.0%) on a stable metformin regimen (1500-2550 mg daily for ≥ 3 months). At Week 0, participants were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to open-label colesevelam hydrochloride, 3.75 g daily; openlabel rosiglitazone maleate, 4 mg daily; or open-label sitagliptin phosphate, 100 mg daily, in addition to existing metformin therapy. The primary efficacy variable was the change in HbA_1c from baseline to Week 16 with last (postbaseline) observation carried forward.ResultsIn total, 169 participants were randomly assigned to treatment groups (colesevelam, n = 57; rosiglitazone, n = 56; and sitagliptin, n = 56), and 141 participants (83.4%) completed the study. Least-squares mean reductions in HbA_1c from baseline were observed in all groups at Week 16 last observation carried forward (colesevelam, -0.3% [P <.031]; rosiglitazone: -0.6% [P <.001]; sitagliptin: -0.4% [P <.009]) At study end, 10 of 56 participants (17.9%) in the colesevelam group, 19 of 54 (35.2%) in the rosiglitazone group, and 15 of 55 (27.3%) in the sitagliptin group achieved HbA_1c < 7.0%. Colesevelam significantly reduced mean low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol levels relative to baseline (11.6%), whereas levels were significantly increased with rosiglitazone and sitagliptin at Week 16 last observation carried forward (7.8% and 7.7%, respectively). Twenty-two of 52 participants (42.3%) in the colesevelam group, 12 of 51 (23.5%) in the rosiglitazone group, and 13 of 53 (24.5%) in the sitagliptin group achieved LDL cholesterol < 100 mg/dL at Week 16 last observation carried forward.ConclusionAll 3 antidiabetes agents significantly improved glycemic control, but only colesevelam also significantly reduced LDL-cholesterol levels in patients with type 2 DM. (Endocr Pract. 2010;16:53-63)     

西格列汀、罗格列酮分别联合二甲双胍治疗老年2型糖尿病的疗效观察

目的:观察并对比二肽基肽酶-Ⅳ抑制剂西格列汀、胰岛素增敏剂罗格列酮分别联合降糖药物二甲双胍治疗老年2型糖尿病(T2DM)的临床疗效.方法:入选2010年4月-2012年10月间我科收治的老年T2DM患者70例,并随机单盲分为A(n=36)、B(n=34)两组,A组患者予西格列汀+二甲双胍方案,B组予罗格列酮+二甲双胍方案,服药12周后对比两组血糖水平、临床疗效并药物不良反应.结果:①两组患者服药12周后,血糖指标均较治疗前明显下降(P＜0.05),A组患者2hPG水平明显低于B组水平(P＜0.05).②A组患者显效率(50.0％)、总体有效率(91.7％)略高于B组(38.2％、85.3％),差异不具有统计学意义(P＞0.05).③两组患者均未出现严重药物不良反应,两组不良反应发生率(19.4％vs.26.5％)无统计学差异(P＞0.05).结论:两种用药方案均是治疗老年T2DM的有效方案,西格列酮+二甲双胍方案较之罗格列酮+二甲双胍方案在临床疗效中具备比较优势,尤其是对降低餐后血糖优势明显.     

Outcomes Associated With Insulin Therapy Disruption After Hospital Discharge Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus who Had Used Insulin Before and During Hospitalization

ObjectiveTo evaluate outcomes associated with insulin therapy disruption after hospital discharge in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had used insulin before and during hospitalization.MethodsIn this observational, retrospective analysis of medical records obtained from a coordinated health system in the United States, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had used insulin 30 days before and during hospitalization were included. Clinical and cost outcomes were compared between patients who continued insulin therapy and those who had disrupted insulin therapy after hospital discharge.ResultsIn total, 2160 records were analyzed (851 patients with continued insulin therapy and 1309 patients with disrupted insulin therapy). Mean baseline glycated hemoglobin A_1c levels were 8.56% and 7.73% in patients who continued insulin therapy and patients who disrupted insulin therapy, respectively (P <.001), suggesting that patients who discontinued insulin therapy had better glycemic control at baseline. Continued insulin therapy was associated with an expected greater reduction in glycated hemoglobin A_1c (P <.001); similar hypoglycemia rates; lower risks of all-cause hospital readmission, diabetesrelated readmission, and all-cause emergency department visits; and improved survival. Continued insulin therapy was associated with $3432 lower total medical service costs than disrupted therapy over the 6-month postdischarge period.ConclusionEnsuring adherence to insulin therapy in patients who require insulin therapy after hospitalization should be a priority for postdischarge patient care programs. However, the clinical implications of this study are limited by the fact that it could not be determined whether all patients required insulin therapy after hospital discharge. (Endocr Pract. 2012;18:651-659)     

大剂量胰岛素联合西格列汀对老年2 型糖尿病患者的疗效

目的:研究大剂量胰岛素联合西格列汀对老年2型糖尿病患者的疗效。方法:选择2012年1月~2015年12月在我院进行诊治的老年2型糖尿病患者82例,随机分为两组,观察组采用大剂量胰岛素联合西格列汀治疗,对照组采用大剂量胰岛素治疗,两组均治疗3个月。比较两组治疗前后的甘油三酯、总胆固醇、低密度脂蛋白和高密度脂蛋白水平,餐后2 h血糖、空腹血糖、糖化血红蛋白,胰岛素抵抗指数、胰岛素分泌指数、每日胰岛素总量和低血糖发生次数。结果:对照组治疗前后的血脂水平无明显差异(P0.05),观察组治疗后的甘油三酯、总胆固醇和低密度脂蛋白明显降低(P0.05),高密度脂蛋白明显升高(P0.05);治疗后,两组的餐后2 h血糖、空腹血糖、糖化血红蛋白均明显降低(P0.05),且观察组降低更为明显(P0.05);对照组治疗前后的胰岛素抵抗指数、胰岛素分泌指数和每日胰岛素总量均无明显差异(P0.05),观察组治疗后的胰岛素抵抗指数和每日胰岛素总量均明显降低(P0.05),胰岛素分泌指数明显升高(P0.05);两组治疗前后低血糖发生次数和身体质量指数均无明显差异(P0.05)。结论:大剂量胰岛素联合西格列汀能有效控制老年2型糖尿病患者的血糖水平,改善胰岛β细胞功能,减少胰岛素用量,是一种安全有效的治疗方法。     

Metformin Therapy and Risk of Cancer in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Systematic Review

Aims/Hypothesis

Diabetes treatments were related with either an increased or reduced risk of cancer. There is ongoing debate about a potential protective action of metformin. To summarize evidence on the association between metformin and risk of cancer and cancer mortality in patients with diabetes.

Methods

Data source: MEDLINE and EMBASE (January 1966-April 2012). We selected randomized studies comparing metformin and other hypoglycaemic agents and observational studies exploring the association between exposure to metformin and cancer. Outcomes were cancer mortality, all malignancies and site-specific cancers.

Results

Of 25307 citations identified, 12 randomized controlled trials (21,595 patients) and 41 observational studies (1,029,389 patients) met the inclusion criteria. In observational studies there was a significant association of exposure to metformin with the risk of cancer death [6 studies, 24,410 patients, OR:0.65, 95%CI: 0.53-0.80], all malignancies [18 studies, 561,836 patients, OR:0.73, 95%CI: 0.61-0.88], liver [8 studies, 312,742 patients, OR:0.34; 95%CI: 0.19-0.60] colorectal [12 studies, 871,365 patients, OR:0.83, 95%CI: 0.74–0.92], pancreas [9 studies, 847,248 patients, OR:0.56, 95%CI: 0.36–0.86], stomach [2 studies, 100701 patients, OR:0.83, 95%CI: 0.76–0.91], and esophagus cancer [2 studies, 100694 patients, OR:0.90, 95%CI: 0.83–0.98]. No significant difference of risk was observed in randomized trials. Metformin was not associated with the risk of: breast cancer, lung cancer, ovarian cancer, uterus cancer, prostate cancer, bladder cancer, kidney cancer, and melanoma.

Conclusions/Interpretation

Results suggest that Metformin might be associated with a significant reduction in the risk of cancer and cancer-related mortality. Randomized trials specifically designed to evaluate the efficacy of metformin as an anticancer agent are warranted.     

Efficacy and Safety of Dulaglutide in Hispanic/Latino Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in the Award Clinical Program

Objective: The aim of this post hoc analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly dulaglutide in Hispanic/Latino patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in phase 3 AWARD trials 1 to 6.Methods: Hispanic/Latino data at Week 26 were pooled across studies for each dulaglutide dose to analyze the change from baseline in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), percent to HbA1c goal, and adverse events (AEs). Change from baseline in HbA1c, change from baseline in weight and hypoglycemia were analyzed by Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic/Latino subgroups for each study.Results: Of the 3,136 patients randomized to dulaglutide 1.5 or 0.75 mg, 949 were reported as having Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. Baseline characteristics were similar for Hispanic/Latino and overall populations, except there were slightly more Hispanic/Latino females and weight was slightly lower for Hispanic/Latino patients. Hispanic/Latino patients receiving dulaglutide 1.5 mg had a reduction in HbA1c of 1.25% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.35, -1.15); dulaglutide 0.75 mg had a reduction of 1.07% (95% CI: -1.18, -0.96). Reductions in HbA1c and percent to goal HbA1c <7% and ≤6.5% were similar between Hispanic/Latino patients and the overall population. Weight change and hypoglycemia were similar between Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic/Latino subgroups for all studies. Treatment-emergent AEs were consistent with the overall population.Conclusion: Dulaglutide improved glycemic control with the potential for weight loss in Hispanic/Latino patients with T2D. Dulaglutide was well tolerated and had a low risk of hypoglycemia when used without insulin secretagogues or insulin. In the Hispanic/Latino population, dulaglutide efficacy and safety was consistent with that of the overall population.Abbreviations:AE = adverse eventAWARD = Assessment of Weekly AdministRation of dulaglutide in DiabetesBID = twice dailyCARMELA = The Cardiovascular Risk Factor Multiple Evaluation of Latin AmericaCI = confidence intervalGLP-1 RA = glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonistHbA1c = glycosylated hemoglobinT2D = type 2 diabetes