Continuous glucose monitoring system in free-living healthy subjects: results from a pilot study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The Continuous Glucose Monitoring System (CGMS) (Medtronic Minimed, Northridge, CA) provides an opportunity to better understand abnormalities in glucose metabolism in both healthy subjects and those with diabetes. The aims of our study were to assess the reliability of CGMS compared to self-monitoring of blood glucose (BG) and to analyze the graphs obtained in a sample of healthy free-living subjects in order to establish the suitability of CGMS in physiological studies. METHODS: Eighteen healthy adults, 12 women and six men, were enrolled in this study. Each subject performed 24-h CGMS and inserted 24 glycemic values, measured through a glucose meter, during their common daily activities. Three subjects were excluded from the analysis since they did not meet accuracy criteria. None of the participants received any advice as regard diet and physical activity. Means and standard deviations were used to summarize quantitative data. Normal distribution of data was tested with the Shapiro-Wilk W test. Differences over time and association between glucose levels with other variables were evaluated with linear regression models for repeated measures. RESULTS: We did not find statistically significant differences between CGMS measures and meter readings. In the subjects studied the mean glucose levels increase according to age, and we found a mean increase in glucose concentration of 0.50 mg/dL for every year of age. As regards gender, men presented a 4.63% higher mean glucose concentration than women. A 1.16% higher glucose concentration for every unit (kg/m(2)) of body mass index (BMI) was observed in both groups. All subjects presented glucose concentrations within the established range of normal glucose levels for 91% of the total duration of CGMS. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that long-term studies on larger groups of healthy subjects performing CGMS would be useful in order to better understand if BMI, daily stressors due to work or psychological stress, or other factors can influence daily BG variability and if these nonpathological alterations are related to development of glucose metabolism disorders.

Rosiglitazone therapy improves insulin resistance parameters in overweight and obese diabetic patients intolerant to metformin.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have directly compared rosiglitazone and metformin effects on adipocytokines. The aim was to observe the possible effects of rosiglitazone and metformin on glycemic control, insulin sensitivity, plasma leptin (pL), adiponectin (ADN), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), and resistin (R) in overweight and obese diabetic patients intolerant to metformin. METHODS: Six hundred and ninety-four consecutive overweight and obese type 2 diabetic patients were evaluated and 56 patients were intolerant to metformin at maximum dosage. We added rosiglitazone to metformin in these intolerant patients (RM) and we compared them with 61 patients treated with metformin (M) in a single-blind placebo-controlled trial. We evaluated body mass index (BMI), glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting plasma insulin (FPI), pL, ADN, TNF-alpha, and R at baseline and after 3 and 6 months. Furthermore, we calculated insulin resistance index (HOMA-index) using FPG and FPI. RESULTS: Glycated hemoglobin, FPG, FPI, and HOMA-index results were lower than baseline values in RM and M groups. Glycated hemoglobin and HOMA-index values were significantly lower in RM group compared to M group at 6 months. Plasma leptin, ADN, TNF-alpha, and R were significantly improved in RM group compared to M group at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: No BMI change was observed, probably because rosiglitazone was added to metformin, that could mitigate the body increase of rosiglitazone. Rosiglitazone improved glycemic control and insulin resistance-correlated parameters when added to intolerant metformin patients. These data suggest that rosiglitazone may be the drug of choice for the treatment of overweight and obese type 2 diabetic patients.

Metalloproteinase-2 and -9 in diabetic and nondiabetic subjects during acute coronary syndromes.

The authors hypothesized that matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-2, -9, and tissue inhibitor metalloproteinase (TIMP)-1, -2 would be abnormal in acute coronary syndromes (ACSs). MMP-2, -9, and TIMP-1, -2 plasma levels were measured in diabetic patients with ACSs compared to nondiabetic patients with ACSs. A total of 46 diabetic and 78 nondiabetic patients with ACSs were enrolled. The following parameters were measured: body mass index (BMI), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting plasma insulin (FPI), homeostasis model assessment index (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), triglycerides (Tg), lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1), homocysteine (Hct), fibrinogen (Fg), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and plasma levels of MMP-2, MMP-9, TIMP-1, and TIMP-2. Significant HbA1c, FPG, FPI, HOMA index, DBP, Tg, Hct, and Fg increases were present in the diabetic group with ACSs, whereas hs-CRP was lower in these patients compared to nondiabetic patients with ACSs. MMP-9, TIMP-1, and TIMP-2 plasma levels were higher in diabetic patients with ACSs compared to nondiabetic patients with ACSs. MMP-9, TIMP-1, and TIMP-2 plasma levels were increased in diabetic patients with ACSs, which may reflect abnormal extracellular matrix metabolism in diabetes during acute event.

Blood pressure control and inflammatory markers in type 2 diabetic patients treated with pioglitazone or rosiglitazone and metformin.

The aim of the study was to assess the effects of the combination of metformin plus pioglitazone or rosiglitazone on glucose and blood pressure in type 2 diabetic patients with metabolic syndrome, as well as its tolerability in those patients. In this 12-month, multicentric, double-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial, all patients began with metformin. Patients were randomized for self-administration of either pioglitazone or rosiglitazone for 12 months. We assessed body mass index (BMI), glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)], fasting and postprandial plasma glucose and insulin levels [FPG, PPG, FPI and PPI, respectively] and homeostasis model assessment [HOMA] index) and systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP, respectively), at baseline and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of treatment, as well as high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), nitrites/nitrates and adiponectin (ADN) at baseline and at 12 months of treatment. Significant HbA(1c) decreases were obtained after 9 (p<0.05) and 12 (p<0.01) months in both groups. After 9 and 12 months, mean FPG and PPG levels were decreased in both groups (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). We observed decreases in FPI and PPI at 9 and 12 months (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively) compared to the baseline values in both groups. Furthermore, HOMA index improvement over the baseline value was obtained only at 12 months (p<0.05) in both groups. SBP and DBP improved significantly (p<0.05, for each) in both groups after 12 months. hs-CRP decreased significantly (p<0.05) in both groups after 12 months; nitrites/nitrates and ADN increased significantly (p<0.05, for each) in both groups after 12 months. The combination of thiazolinediones and metformin is associated with a slight but significant improvement in the long-term blood pressure control of these patients, and with an improvement in the anti-inflammatory state, both of which are related to a similar reduction in insulin-resistance.

Matrix metalloproteinase-2, -9, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 in patients with hypertension.

There are conflicting data in the literature regarding the expression pattern of the vascular matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) system and their inhibitors (TIMPs) in human hypertension. The authors hypothesized that MMP-2, MMP-9, and TIMP-1 would be abnormal in hypertension, reflecting alterations in extracellular matrix (ECM) turnover. The authors measured plasma levels and activities of MMP-2, MMP-9, and TIMP-1 in 44 hypertensive patients and 44 controls. MMP-2 levels and activity were significantly higher in hypertensive group (p < .0001). Significant increase was also observed for MMP-9 level and activity (p < .0001) and for TIMP-1 (p < .0001) in hypertensive patients. Plasma levels and activities of MMP-2, MMP-9, and TIMP-1 are increased in hypertensive patients, which may reflect abnormal ECM metabolism.

Telmisartan and irbesartan therapy in type 2 diabetic patients treated with rosiglitazone: effects on insulin-resistance, leptin and tumor necrosis factor-alpha.

The aim of our study was to investigate the metabolic effect of telmisartan and irbesartan in subjects treated with rosiglitazone, a well-known insulin-sensitizing drug, in order to clarify the direct metabolic effects of the two former drugs. Patients were enrolled, evaluated, and followed at 3 Italian centers. We evaluated 188 type 2 diabetic patients with metabolic syndrome (94 males and 94 females in total; 49 males and 46 females, aged 56+/-5, treated with telmisartan; and 45 males and 48 females, aged 55+/-4, treated with irbesartan). All had been diabetic for at least 6 months, and glycemic control by the maximum tolerated dietary changes and maximum tolerated dose of oral hypoglycemic agents had been attempted and failed in all cases. All patients took a fixed dose of rosiglitazone, 4 mg/day. We administered telmisartan (40 mg/day) or irbesartan (150 mg/day) in a randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical manner. We evaluated body mass index (BMI), glycemic control (HbA1c fasting plasma glucose and insulin levels [FPG, and FPI, respectively], and homeostasis model assessment [HOMA] index), lipid profile (total cholesterol [TC], low density lipoprotein-cholesterol [LDL-C], high density lipoprotein-cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides [TG]), systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), and leptin during the 12 months of this treatment. No BMI change was observed after 6 or 12 months in either group. Significant decreases in HbAlc and FPG were observed after 6 months in the telmisartan group, and after 12 months in both groups. The decrease in HbA1c and FPG at 12 months was statistically significant only in the telmisartan group. A significant decrease in FPI was observed at 12 months in both groups, and this decrease was significantly greater in the telmisartan group. Significant decreases in the HOMA index were observed at 6 and 12 months in both groups, and the decrease in the HOMA index after 12 months was significantly greater in the telmisartan group than in the irbesartan group. Significant changes in SBP, DBP, TC, and LDL-C were observed after 6 and 12 months in both groups. Significant decreases in TNF-alpha and leptin levels were observed after 6 months in the telmisartan group, and after 12 months in both groups. In conclusion, in this study of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome, telmisartan seemed to result in a greater improvement in glycemic and lipid control and metabolic parameters related to metabolic syndrome compared to irbesartan. These observed metabolic effects of different angiotensin type 1 receptor blockers could be relevant when choosing a therapy to correct metabolic derangement of patients affected by metabolic syndrome and diabetes.

Effects of 1 year of treatment with pioglitazone or rosiglitazone added to glimepiride on lipoprotein (a) and homocysteine concentrations in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Although the metabolic effects of the thiazolidinediones have been well studied, there is a lack of comparative data on their effects on certain cardiovascular risk factors, such as elevated plasma levels of lipoprotein (a) (Lp[a]) and homocysteine (Hcy). OBJECTIVE: This study compared the effects of pioglitazone or rosiglitazone added to glimepiride on a range of lipid parameters, focusing on Lp(a) and Hcy, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and the metabolic syndrome. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, controlled, double-blind study in patients with type 2 diabetes and the metabolic syndrome (hypertension [>or=130/85 mm Hg]) and triglyceridemia (>or=150 mg/dL). In addition to glimepiride 4 mg/d, patients received pioglitazone 15 mg QD or rosiglitazone 4 mg QD for 1 year. The primary efficacy variables were change from baseline in body mass index (BMI), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)), Lp(a), and Hey. Secondary efficacy measures were changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) concentrations, fasting and postprandial insulin concentrations (FPI and PPI, respectively), the Homeostasis Model Assessment index, and the lipid profile (total cholesterol [TC], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides). All these parameters were measured after a 12-hour fast every 3 months for 1 year. Tolerability was assessed based on reported adverse events and laboratory abnormalities at each study visit. RESULTS: Ninety-one white patients with type 2 diabetes and the metabolic syndrome were enrolled, and 87 completed the study (43 men, 44 women; mean [SD] age, 53 [6] years; mean weight, 68.4 [3.3] kg). Mean baseline values for BMI and HbA(1c) were 24.3 (0.8) kg/m(2) and 8.1 % (0.8 %), respectively. At the end of 1 year, both treatment groups had significant increases from baseline in BMI (4.9% glimepiride + pio glitazone, 6.2% glimepiride + rosiglitazone; P < 0.05). Glimepiride + pioglitazone was associated with the following percent improvements from baseline in measures of glycemic control: -17.1% in HbA(1c), -19.3% in FPG, -17.8% in PPG, -40.1% in FPI, and -22.6% in PPI (all, P < 0.01). The corresponding percent improvements from baseline with glimepiride + rosiglitazone were -16.3%, -19.9%, -15.0%, -44.8%, and -22.1% (all, P < 0.01). There were no significant differences between treatment groups in any of these parameters. The pioglitazone group had significant improvements from baseline in TC (-11.1%), LDL-C (-12.0%), HDL-C (15.0%), and triglycerides (-22.4%) [corrected] (all, P < 0.05), whereas the rosiglitazone group had significant increases in TC (14.9%), LDL-C (16.5%), and triglycerides (17.9%) (all, P < 0.05); the difference between pioglitazone and rosiglitazone was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The change from baseline in Lp(a) was significant in the pioglitazone group, both relative to baseline and compared with the rosiglitazone group (-19.7% vs 0.5%, respectively; P < 0.05 vs baseline and vs rosiglitazone). Changes from baseline in Hey were significant in both the pioglitazone and rosiglitazone groups (-20.2% and -25.0%, respectively; P < 0.05), with no significant difference between groups. Both treatments were well tolerated, and no patients had significant changes in transaminases. CONCLUSIONS: In these patients with type 2 diabetes and the metabolic syndrome, the combinations of glimepiride with pioglitazone and glimepiride with rosiglitazone produced significant improvements in measures of glycemic control, plasma lipids, and homocysteinemia. One year of treatment with the pioglitazone combination was associated with significantly reduced plasma Lp(a) levels compared with the rosiglitazone combination.

Long-term effects of glimepiride or rosiglitazone in combination with metformin on blood pressure control in type 2 diabetic patients affected by the metabolic syndrome: a 12-month, double-blind, randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Some evidence suggests that antihyperglycemic drugs might have a small but clinically significant beneficial effect on blood pressure in patients with diabetes mellitus. Based on a literature search, few direct comparisons of different antihyperglycemic treatments on blood pressure have been reported. OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of the present study was to compare the effect of long-term (12-month) combination treatment with glimepiride or rosiglitazone plus metformin on blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM-2) and the metabolic syndrome. Secondary end points were glycemic control and improvement in insulin sensitivity. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind study was conducted at 2 centers in Italy. Patients aged > or =18 years with DM-2 and the metabolic syndrome and poor glycemic control (insulin resistance) with monotherapy with the maximum tolerated dose of an antihyperglycemic agent (eg, a sulfonylurea, metformin) were enrolled. All patients received 12 months of oral treatment with metformin 500 mg TID plus glimepiride 2 mg QD (G + M) or rosiglitazone 4 mg QD (R + M). Blood pressure, heart rate (HR), and body mass index (BMI); plasma levels of fasting and postprandial glucose and insulin (FPG, PPG, FPI, and PPI, respectively) and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)); and homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) index were determined at 0 (baseline), 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment. Adverse effects (AEs) were assessed using spontaneous reporting, patient interview, and laboratory analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients were enrolled in the study; 95 completed it (48 men, 47 women; mean age, 54 years [range, 47-58 years]; G + M, 47 patients; R + M, 48 patients). Four patients did not complete the study due to noncompliance (2 patients in the R + M group), protocol violation (1 patient in the G + M group), and loss to follow-up (1 patient in the G + M group). Mean blood pressure values were not significantly improved in the G + M group at any time point, whereas these values were significantly improved at 12 months in the R + M group. Mean BMI, HbA(1c), FPG, and PPG were significantly decreased from baseline in both groups at 12 months (all, P < or = 0.05). Mean FPI, PPI, and HOMA index were significantly improved at 12 months only in the R + M group (all, P < or = 0.05 vs baseline); these changes were not found in the G + M group. No significant changes in HR were found. Headache and flatulence were reported in both groups (G + M, 2 patients each; R + M, 1 and 2 patients, respectively), but these AEs were mild and transient. In the R + M group, liver enzyme levels were increased to 1.5-fold the upper limit of normal in 3 patients, but were normalized by study end. CONCLUSIONS: In this study in patients with DM-2 and the metabolic syndrome, long-term (12-month) combination treatment with R + M, but not G + M, was associated with a significant improvement in blood pressure control. Improvements in glycemic control and insulin resistance-related parameters were found at 9 months with R + M, compared with 12 months with G + M. Both treatments were well tolerated.

Antithrombotic effects of rosiglitazone-metformin versus glimepiride-metformin combination therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the differential effect on coagulation and fibrinolysis parameters of combination therapy with glimepiride-metformin and with rosiglitazone-metformin beyond their effect on glucose metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome. DESIGN: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Two university-affiliated medical centers in Italy. PATIENTS: Ninety-five patients with type 2 diabetes for at least 6 months without glycemic control by diet and oral hypoglycemic agents to their maximum tolerated dosage and who also had metabolic syndrome. INTERVENTION: All 95 patients received metformin 1500 mg/day. In a randomized manner, 47 patients received glimepiride 2 mg/day and 48 patients received rosiglitazone 4 mg/day. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Body mass index (BMI), glycemic control, and coagulation and fibrinolysis parameters were evaluated at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment. Compared with baseline values, significant decreases in BMI, fasting plasma glucose, postprandial plasma glucose, and hemoglobin A1c were observed at 12 months in both the glimepiride and rosiglitazone groups (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). Decreases in fasting plasma insulin and postprandial plasma insulin were observed at 12 months (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively) compared with baseline values in the rosiglitazone group. Furthermore, improvement in the Homeostasis Model Assessment index was observed only at 9 and 12 months (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively) compared with baseline in the rosiglitazone group. Significant improvement in plasminogen activator inhibitor (PAI)-1 was present in the rosiglitazone group after 9 months (p<0.05), and significant PAI-1 improvement was observed in the glimepiride and rosiglitazone groups after 12 months (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The rosiglitazone-metformin combination significantly improved the long-term control of all insulin resistance-related parameters compared with the glimepiride-metformin combination. However, both combinations were associated with a slight but statistically significant improvement in PAI-1 value, related to a similar reduction in insulin resistance.

A comparison of the effects of pioglitazone and rosiglitazone combined with glimepiride on prothrombotic state in type 2 diabetic patients with the metabolic syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of glimepiride plus pioglitazone or plus rosiglitazone in diabetic patients with the metabolic syndrome on coagulation and fibrinolysis parameters. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: 91 type 2 diabetic patients with the metabolic syndrome participated. All patients took a fixed dose of glimepiride, 4 mg/day. We administered pioglitazone (15 mg/day) or rosiglitazone (4 mg/day) in a randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical study. We compared body mass index (BMI), glycemic control, coagulation and fibrinolysis parameters, and heart rate (HR) during 12 months of this treatment. RESULTS: A total of 87 completed the study (pioglitazone n=45 or rosiglitazone n=42). Body mass index increased after 12 months compared to baseline (p<0.05) in both groups. A significant decrease in glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) was observed after 9 (p<0.05), and 12 (p<0.01) months in both groups. After 9 and 12 months, mean fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) levels were lower in both groups (p<0.05 and 0.01, respectively), as were fasting plasma insulin (FPI) and postprandial plasma insulin (PPI) (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). An improvement in the homeostasis model assessment index (HOMA index) was seen at 9 and 12 months (p<0.05 and 0.01, respectively) compared to the baseline value in both groups. Plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) was significant lower (p<0.05) in both groups after 12 months compared to the baseline values. No changes in tissue-plasminogen activator (t-PA) and fibrinogen (Fg) were seen during the study nor were there any changes in transaminases. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the addition of a thiazolinedione to glimepiride treatment in type 2 diabetic subjects with the metabolic syndrome is associated with a slight but significant reduction of PAI-1 value, related to a similar reduction in insulinresistance.

Comparison of fluvastatin + fenofibrate combination therapy and fluvastatin monotherapy in the treatment of combined hyperlipidemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and coronary heart disease: a 12-month, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes risk is often complicated by a mixed hyperlipoproteinemia not sufficiently controlled by a single antihyperlipidemic drug; however, there are some concerns about the safety of combined statin and fibrate treatments. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety profile of fluvastatin + fenofibrate combination therapy and those of fluvastatin monotherapy in the treatment of combined hyperlipidemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), and coronary heart disease (CHD) (ie, high risk for cardiovascular disease [CVD]). METHODS: This 12-month, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial was conducted at the University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy. Patients aged 18 to 80 years with combined hyperlipidemia, type 2 DM, and CHD were randomly assigned to receive combination therapy with extended-release fluvastatin 80 mg + micronized fenofibrate 200 mg or monotherapy with extended-release fluvastatin 80 mg. All treatments were given in tablet form, once daily with the evening meal, for 12 months. Lipid variables (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], total cholesterol [TC], and triglycerides [TG]) at 6 and 12 months were the primary efficacy variables, and glycemic status (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)], fasting plasma glucose, and postprandial plasma glucose levels) at 6 and 12 months was the secondary efficacy variable. Tolerability was assessed using physical examination, including vital-sign assessment, body-weight measurement, electrocardiography, adverse events, and laboratory tests. A pharmacoeconomic analysis of both treatment regimens was also carried out using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: A total of 48 patients (24 men, 24 women; mean [SD] age, 60 [5] years) were enrolled. After 6 months, all primary efficacy variables, except for TG level, showed significant improvements from baseline only in the combination-therapy group (changes: LDL-C, -25%; HDL-C, +12%; and TC, -19%; all, P < 0.05 vs baseline). After 12 months, lipid variables showed significant improvements over baseline in both groups (all, P < 0.05), except for TG in the monotherapy group. Significant changes in LDL-C, HDL-C, and TG were found in the combination-therapy group (-35%, +34%, -32%, respectively) versus the monotherapy group (-25%, +14%, -17%, respectively; all, P < 0.05 between groups). The change from baseline in HbA(1c) level was significant with combination therapy (-12% vs -7%; P < 0.05). Both treatments were well tolerated, with no significant differences in the incidences of adverse events between the 2 groups. The ICER showed that each 1% decrease in LDL-C level achieved with the fenofibrate + fluvastatin combination added a cost of 14.97 Euros/y (US 12.25 US dollars/y), and each 1% increase in HDL-C level added a cost of 7.48 Euros/y (6.12/y US dollars), over the cost of monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In this selected sample of patients with combined hyperlipidemia, type 2 DM, and CHD, the combination of extended-release fluvastatin + micronized fenofibrate was associated with a more improved lipid profile than fluvastatin monotherapy, and was a well-tolerated and cost-effective therapeutic choice to treat these patients at high risk for CVD.

Comparison of the effects of telmisartan and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system on blood pressure control, glucose metabolism, and the lipid profile in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and mild hypertension: a 12-month, randomized, double-blind study.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) provide effective blood pressure control. Whereas none of the ARBs appear to affect glucose homeostasis, some ARBs have been associated with a decrease in cholesterolemia. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to evaluate blood pressure control glucose homeostasis, and the plasma lipid profile in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and mild hypertension during 12 months of treatment with the ARB telmisartan or nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS). METHODS: In this double-blind trial, patients taking oral hypoglycemic agents were randomized to receive telmisartan 40 mg or nifedipine GITS 20 mg once daily for 12 months. At the time of enrollment, patients were given advice on diet (1400-1600 kcal/d) and exercise (stationary bicycle for > or =30 min, 4 d/wk). Assessments of systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure, body mass index (BMI), fasting plasma glucose concentrations, glycosylated hemoglobin, fasting plasma insulin concentrations, the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, and the lipid profile were performed at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of treatment. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen patients were divided into 2 age- and sex-matched treatment groups (58 men, 58 women; mean [SD] age, 52.5 [5] years). All patients were in good general health at baseline; had achieved adequate glycemic control with diet and oral hypoglycemic agents; were taking antihypercholesterolemic drugs; and had no evidence of macroangiopathy, microalbuminuria, or neuropathy. There were significant reductions from baseline in seated trough SBP after 12 months of treatment with both telmisartan and nifedipine GITS (from 139 [4] to 132 [4] mm Hg and from 140 [4] to 130 [4] mm Hg, respectively; both, P < 0.01). No change in BMI or glucose metabolism was observed with either treatment. After 12 months, there were significant improvements in concentrations of total cholesterol (TC) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) with telmisartan (-9% and -11.5%, respectively; both, P < 0.01) compared with nifedipine GITS (-2% and -1.5%). CONCLUSIONS: In this selected sample of patients with type 2 diabetes and mild hypertension, both telmisartan and nifedipine GITS produced significant reductions in blood pressure. Telmisartan was associated with a slight but statistically significant improvement in plasma TC and LDL-C concentrations compared with nifedipine GITS.

Metabolic effects of pioglitazone and rosiglitazone in patients with diabetes and metabolic syndrome treated with glimepiride: a twelve-month, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial.

BACKGROUND: Glimepiride is approved as monotherapy and in combination with metformin or with insulin, whereas the combination of glimepiride with other antihyperglycemic drugs is under investigation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the differential effect on glucose and lipid variables and tolerability of the combination of glimepiride plus pioglitazone or rosiglitazone in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and metabolic syndrome. METHODS: This 12-month, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial was conducted at 3 study sites in Italy. We assessed patients with type 2 DM (duration, > or =6 months) and with metabolic syndrome. All patients were required to have poor glycemic control with, or to have experienced > or =1 adverse effect (AE) with, diet and oral hypoglycemic agents such as sulfonylureas or metformin, both given up to the maximum tolerated dose. All patients received a fixed oral dose of glimepiride, 4 mg/d divided into 2 doses, self-administered for 12 months. Patients also were randomized to receive oral pioglitazone (15 mg once daily) (G + P group) or oral rosiglitazone (4 mg once daily) (G + R group), self-administered for 12 months. We assessed body mass index (BMI), glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)], fasting and postprandial plasma glucose and insulin levels [FPG, PPG, FPI, and PPI, respectively], and homeostasis model assessment index), lipid profile (total cholesterol [TC], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides [TG]), and lipoprotein variables (apolipoprotein [apo] A-I and apo B) at baseline and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment. Treatment tolerability was assessed at each study visit using a thorough interview of patients, and comparisons of clinical and laboratory values to baseline levels. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients were enrolled in the study; 87 patients completed it (G + P group: 24 women, 21 men; mean [SD] age, 53 [6] years; G + R group: 20 women, 22 men; mean [SD] age, 54 [5] years). Patients in the G + P and G + R groups experienced significant increases in mean BMI at 12 months compared with baseline (4.92% and 6.17%, respectively; both, P < 0.05). The combination of glimepiride with pioglitazone or rosiglitazone significantly improved glycemic control in the study patients. At 12 months, we observed a 1.3% improvement in mean values for plasma HbA(1c) concentration (P < 0.01) 19.3% in FPG (P < 0.01), 16.3% in PPG (P < 0.01), 42.4% in FPI ), and 23.3% in PPI (P <0.05); no significant differences were found between treatment groups. Although the G + P group experienced a significant improvement at 12 months in almost all variables of lipid metabolism from baseline (TC, - 11%; LDL-C, -12%; HDL-C, 15%; and apo B, - 10.6% [all, P , 0.05]), the G + R group experienced a significant increase in mostly the lipid risk factors for cardiovascular disease (TC, 14.9%; LDL-C, 16.5%; TG, 17.9%; and apo B, 10.3% [all, P , 0.05]). Overall, no statistically significant changes in plasma aminotransferase activities were observed. Of the 87 patients who completed the study, 6.7% (3/45) of patients in the G + P group and 11.9% (5/42) of patients in the G + R group had transient, mild to moderate AEs that did not cause withdrawal from the trial. CONCLUSION: In this study of patients with type 2 DM and metabolic syndrome who did not respond adequately to, or experienced AEs with, diet and either a sulfonylurea or metformin previously, the combination of glimepiride plus pioglitazone was associated with a significant improvement in lipid and lipoprotein variables, whereas the combination of glimepiride plus rosiglitazone appears to not have had any clinically significant effect on lipid metabolism.

A randomized, double-blind, comparative therapy evaluating sitagliptin versus glibenclamide in type 2 diabetes patients already treated with pioglitazone and metformin: a 3-year study.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated if triple oral therapy can be useful in improving glycemic control compared with metformin monotherapy and with a metformin and pioglitazone combination. Furthermore, we also compared a triple metformin+pioglitazone+glibenclamide combination with a metformin+pioglitazone+sitagliptin one. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: After a 2-year run-in therapy-augmenting phase with metformin and pioglitazone, 453 overweight, type 2 diabetes patients were randomized to 1 year of sitagliptin versus 1 year of glibenclamide to evaluate, as the primary outcome, the variation of ß-cell function both in a fasting state and after an euglycemic hyperinsulinemic and hyperglycemic clamp. As secondary outcomes we evaluated glycemic control and insulin resistance. RESULTS: Both the triple therapy combinations were more effective in reducing glycated hemoglobin compared with metformin monotherapy and with dual therapy metformin+pioglitazone. Fasting plasma insulin level and the homeostasis model assessment insulin resistance index were significantly increased by triple therapy with glibenclamide and decreased by the one with sitagliptin. Although sitagliptin did not change the homeostasis model assessment ß-function index, this value was significantly increased by glibenclamide. The fasting plasma proinsulin level was decreased by sitagliptin. Triple therapy with sitagliptin greatly improved ß-cell function measures compared with the glibenclamide one and also compared with metformin monotherapy and with the metformin+pioglitazone combination. CONCLUSIONS: Dual combination therapy is more effective than monotherapy in improving glycemic control. When double therapy is not enough to reach an adequate glycemic control, sitagliptin should be preferred to glibenclamide as the third agent because of its positive effect on ß-cells.

Variation in inflammatory markers and glycemic parameters after 12 months of exenatide plus metformin treatment compared with metformin alone: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of exenatide on some inflammatory markers and to quantify the effect of exenatide on ß-cell function. DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Seven hospitals in Italy. PATIENTS: A total of 174 white treatment-naive adults with type 2 diabetes and a glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) level higher than 7.5%. INTERVENTION: After an open-label run-in period of 8 ± 2 months with metformin, patients were randomized to take exenatide (5 µg twice/day for the first 4 weeks, 10 µg twice/day thereafter) or a placebo volume equivalent for 12 months. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Body mass index, HbA(1c), fasting plasma glucose, postprandial plasma glucose, fasting plasma insulin (FPI), homeostasis model assessment insulin resistance index, homeostasis model assessment ß-cell function index (HOMA-ß), fasting plasma proinsulin (FPPr), proinsulin-to-fasting plasma insulin ratio (Pr:FPI ratio), C-peptide, glucagon, vaspin, chemerin, and resistin were evaluated at baseline, at randomization, and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Patients also underwent a combined euglycemic, hyperinsulinemic, and hyperglycemic clamp with subsequent arginine stimulation to assess insulin sensitivity and insulin secretion. HbA(1c) was significantly improved with exenatide plus metformin compared with placebo plus metformin. Exenatide plus metformin was also significantly more effective than placebo plus metformin in increasing HOMA-ß C-peptide, and all measures of ß-cell function after the euglycemic hyperinsulinemic and hyperglycemic clamp. We observed that exenatide plus metformin also reduced resistin compared with placebo plus metformin. No variations in vaspin and chemerin were noted in group-to-group comparisons. We observed a significant correlation between M value increase, an index of insulin sensitivity, and a decrease in inflammatory parameters in the exenatide plus metformin group. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of exenatide plus metformin was more effective than metformin alone in improving glycemic control, ß-cell function, and inflammatory parameters.

Effects of sitagliptin or metformin added to pioglitazone monotherapy in poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.

The aim of the study was to compare the effects of the addition of sitagliptin or metformin to pioglitazone monotherapy in poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus patients on body weight, glycemic control, beta-cell function, insulin resistance, and inflammatory state parameters. One hundred fifty-one patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (glycated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)] >7.5%) in therapy with pioglitazone 30 mg/d were enrolled in this study. We randomized patients to take pioglitazone 30 mg plus sitagliptin 100 mg once a day, or pioglitazone 15 mg plus metformin 850 mg twice a day. We evaluated at baseline and after 3, 6, 9, and 12 months these parameters: body weight, body mass index, HbA(1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), fasting plasma insulin (FPI), homeostasis model assessment insulin resistance index (HOMA-IR), homeostasis model assessment beta-cell function index, fasting plasma proinsulin (Pr), Pr/FPI ratio, adiponectin, resistin (R), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. A decrease of body weight and body mass index was observed with metformin, but not with sitagliptin, at the end of the study. We observed a comparable significant decrease of HbA(1c), FPG, and PPG and a significant increase of homeostasis model assessment beta-cell function index compared with baseline in both groups without any significant differences between the 2 groups. Fasting plasma insulin, fasting plasma Pr, Pr/FPI ratio, and HOMA-IR values were decreased in both groups even if the values obtained with metformin were significantly lower than the values obtained with sitagliptin. There were no significant variations of ADN, R, or TNF-alpha with sitagliptin, whereas a significant increase of ADN and a significant decrease of R and TNF-alpha values were recorded with metformin. A significant decrease of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein value was obtained in both groups without any significant differences between the 2 groups. There was a significant correlation between HOMA-IR decrease and ADN increase, and between HOMA-IR decrease and R and TNF-alpha decrease in pioglitazone plus metformin group after the treatment. The addition of both sitagliptin or metformin to pioglitazone gave an improvement of HbA(1c), FPG, and PPG; but metformin led also to a decrease of body weight and to a faster and better improvement of insulin resistance and inflammatory state parameters, even if sitagliptin produced a better protection of beta-cell function.

Pioglitazone metabolic effect in metformin-intolerant obese patients treated with sibutramine.

OBJECTIVE: Metformin is the drug of choice to treat obese type 2 diabetes patients because it reduces either insulin-resistance and body weight. We aimed to comparatively test the efficacy and tolerability of pioglitazone and sibutramine in metformin-intolerant obese type 2 diabetic patients treated with sibutramine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five hundred and seventy-six consecutive Caucasian obese type 2 diabetic patients were evaluated during a 12-months period and fifty-two patients were resulted intolerant to metformin at maximum dosage (3,000 mg/day). All intolerant patients to metformin received a treatment with pioglitazone (45 mg/day) and sibutramine (10 mg/day) and they were compared with fifty-three patients treated with metformin (3,000 mg/day) and sibutramine (10 mg/day) for 6 months in a single-blind controlled trial. We assessed body mass index, waist circumference, glycated hemoglobin, Fasting Plasma glucose, postprandial plasma glucose, fasting plasma insulin, postprandial plasma insulin, lipid profile, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and heart rate at baseline and after 3, and 6 months. RESULTS: No body mass index change was observed at 3, and 6 months in pioglitazone + sibutramine group, while a significant reduction of body mass index and waist circumference was observed after 6 months in metformin + sibutramine group (p<0.05). A significant decrease of glycated hemoglobin, Fasting Plasma glucose, postprandial plasma glucose, fasting plasma insulin, postprandial plasma insulin and HOMA index was observed after 3, and 6 months in both groups (p<0.05, and p<0.01, respectively). A significant Tg reduction was present after 6 months (p<0.05) in both groups respect to the baseline values. No systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and heart rate change was obtained after 3, and 6 months in both groups. CONCLUSION: Pioglitazone and sibutramine combination appears to be a short-term equally efficacious and well-tolerated therapeutic alternative respect to metformin-intolerant obese type 2 diabetic patients treated with sibutramine.

Effect of doxazosin on C-reactive protein plasma levels and on nitric oxide in patients with hypertension.

Inflammation has been hypothesized to play a role in the development of hypertension. The high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) is a well-studied marker of systemic inflammation that has a predictive power with regard to the development of hypertension. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that hs-CRP plasma levels are altered in hypertension. Moreover, the study was to assess whether chronic antihypertensive treatment with doxazosin would normalize hs-CRP and nitrites/nitrates. We measured plasma levels of hs-CRP and nitrites/nitrates in 44 normotensive subjects and in 44 patients with hypertension before and after doxazosin therapy for 4 months. hs-CRP plasma levels were significantly higher (P < 0.007) in untreated hypertensive group compared to controls. Significant decrease was observed for hs-CRP (P < 0.05) in hypertensive patients after antihypertensive treatment. Nitrites/nitrates were significantly lower (P < 0.0001) in the untreated hypertensive group compared to controls. A significant increase was observed for nitrites/nitrates (P < 0.05) in hypertensive patients after antihypertensive treatment. These results suggest that doxazosin treatment exerts anti-inflammatory effects in addition to its antihypertensive properties in hypertensive patients.