Effects on the incidence of cardiovascular events of the addition of pioglitazone versus sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin (TOSCA.IT): a randomised, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: The best treatment option for patients with type 2 diabetes in whom treatment with metformin alone fails to achieve adequate glycaemic control is debated. We aimed to compare the long-term effects of pioglitazone versus sulfonylureas, given in addition to metformin, on cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: TOSCA.IT was a multicentre, randomised, pragmatic clinical trial, in which patients aged 50-75 years with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy (2-3 g per day) were recruited from 57 diabetes clinics in Italy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), by permuted blocks randomisation (block size 10), stratified by site and previous cardiovascular events, to add-on pioglitazone (15-45 mg) or a sulfonylurea (5-15 mg glibenclamide, 2-6 mg glimepiride, or 30-120 mg gliclazide, in accordance with local practice). The trial was unblinded, but event adjudicators were unaware of treatment assignment. The primary outcome, assessed with a Cox proportional-hazards model, was a composite of first occurrence of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or urgent coronary revascularisation, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned participants with baseline data available and without any protocol violations in relation to inclusion or exclusion criteria). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00700856. FINDINGS: Between Sept 18, 2008, and Jan 15, 2014, 3028 patients were randomly assigned and included in the analyses. 1535 were assigned to pioglitazone and 1493 to sulfonylureas (glibenclamide 24 [2%], glimepiride 723 [48%], gliclazide 745 [50%]). At baseline, 335 (11%) participants had a previous cardiovascular event. The study was stopped early on the basis of a futility analysis after a median follow-up of 57·3 months. The primary outcome occurred in 105 patients (1·5 per 100 person-years) who were given pioglitazone and 108 (1·5 per 100 person-years) who were given sulfonylureas (hazard ratio 0·96, 95% CI 0·74-1·26, p=0·79). Fewer patients had hypoglycaemias in the pioglitazone group than in the sulfonylureas group (148 [10%] vs 508 [34%], p<0·0001). Moderate weight gain (less than 2 kg, on average) occurred in both groups. Rates of heart failure, bladder cancer, and fractures were not significantly different between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: In this long-term, pragmatic trial, incidence of cardiovascular events was similar with sulfonylureas (mostly glimepiride and gliclazide) and pioglitazone as add-on treatments to metformin. Both of these widely available and affordable treatments are suitable options with respect to efficacy and adverse events, although pioglitazone was associated with fewer hypoglycaemia events. FUNDING: Italian Medicines Agency, Diabete Ricerca, and Italian Diabetes Society.

Rationale and design of the Early Sleeve gastrectomy In New Onset Diabetic Obese Patients (ESINODOP) trial.

No randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have yet evaluated the bariatric surgery's efficacy and safety in patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The aim of this multicenter RCT is to compare bariatric surgery, particularly laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), with conventional medical therapy (CMT) in obese patients (body mass index between 30 and 42 kg/m2) newly diagnosed with T2DM and without any diabetes-related complications at any stage. A total of 100 eligible patients will be randomized at a 1:1 ratio to undergo one of the two planned treatments and will be followed for at least 6 years after randomization. The main objective of the ESINODOP trial is to investigate the efficacy of LSG compared with CMT alone in inducing and maintaining a remission of T2DM (defined as HbA1c levels ≤6.0 %, without active pharmacologic therapy after 1 year). The remission of T2DM will also be evaluated with the criteria provided by the American Diabetes Association (ADA), and the additional parameters such as adverse event rates, micro- and macrovascular complications, weight loss, gastrointestinal hormones, and quality of life will be compared. The study started on September 2015 and the planned recruitment period is 3 years. Patient recruitment and follow-up take place in the two diabetology and nutrition centers participating in the study, which are performed on a national basis. The ESINODOP trial is designed with the intent of comparing the efficacy of CMT alone to that of CMT in conjunction with LSG performed at the time of diabetes diagnosis in mildly obese diabetic patients. Currently, patients with these characteristics are not eligible for bariatric/metabolic surgery.

Comparison of Insulin Lispro Protamine Suspension with NPH Insulin in Pregnant Women with Type 2 and Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes.

Insulin therapy is still the gold standard in diabetic pregnancy. Insulin lispro protamine suspension is an available basal insulin analogue. Aim. To study pregnancy outcomes of women with type 2 and gestational diabetes mellitus when insulin lispro protamine suspension or human NPH insulin was added to medical nutrition therapy and/or short-acting insulin. Methods. In this retrospective study, for maternal outcome we recorded time and mode of delivery, hypertension, glycaemic control (fasting blood glucose and HbA1c), hypoglycemias, weight increase, and insulin need. For neonatal outcome birth weight and weight class, congenital malformations was recorded and main neonatal complications. Two-tail Student's t-test and chi-square test were performed when applicable; significant P < 0.05. Results. Eighty-nine pregnant women (25 with type 2 diabetes and 64 with gestational diabetes mellitus; 53 under insulin lispro protamine suspension and 36 under human NPH insulin) were recruited. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were quite similar between the two therapeutic approaches; however, insulin need was higher in NPH. At the end of pregnancy, eight women with gestational diabetes continued to use only basal insulin analogue. Conclusions. Pregnancy outcome in type 2 and gestational diabetes mellitus with insulin lispro protamine suspension was similar to that with NPH insulin, except for a lower insulin requirement.

Telecare Provides comparable efficacy to conventional self-monitored blood glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes titrating one injection of insulin glulisine-the ELEONOR study.

BACKGROUND: We compared telecare and conventional self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) programs for titrating the addition of one bolus injection of insulin glulisine in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on oral hypoglycemic agents for ≥3 months who were first titrated with basal insulin glargine. METHODS: This randomized, multicenter, parallel-group study included 241 patients (mean screening glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)], 8.8% [73 mmol/mol]). In the run-in phase, any antidiabetes medication, except for metformin, was discontinued. Metformin was then up-titrated to 2 g/day (1 g twice daily) until study completion. Following run-in, all patients started glargine for 8-16 weeks, targeting fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≤5.6 mmol/L using conventional SMBG. Patients with FPG ≤7 mmol/L added a glulisine dose at the meal with the highest postprandial plasma glucose excursion, titrated to target 2-h postprandial plasma glucose level <7.8 mmol/L using telecare or SMBG for 24 weeks. Patients with FPG >7 mmol/L at week 16 were withdrawn from the study. RESULTS: After glargine titration, 224 patients achieved FPG ≤7 mmol/L, without any difference between telecare and SBMG groups (mean±SD, 6.2±0.8 vs. 6.0±0. 9 mmol/L, respectively). HbA(1c) levels were lower following titration and were similar for telecare and SMBG (7.9±0.9% vs. 7.8±0.9% [63 vs. 62 mmol/mol], respectively). Adding glulisine further reduced HbA(1c) in both groups (-0.7% vs. -0.7%); 45.2% and 54.8% (P=0.14), respectively, of patients achieved HbA(1c) ≤7.0% (≤53 mmol/mol). Weight change and hypoglycemia were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients adding one dose of glulisine at the meal with the highest postprandial plasma glucose excursion to titrated basal glargine achieved comparable improvements in glycemic control irrespective of traditional or telecare blood glucose monitoring.

Implementing a guideline for the treatment of type 2 diabetics: results of a cluster-randomized controlled trial (C-RCT).

BACKGROUND: In Italy many diabetics still lack adequate care in general practice. We assessed the effectiveness of different strategies for the implementation of an evidence-based guideline for the management of non-complicated type 2 diabetes among General Practitioners (GPs) of Lazio region. METHODS: Three-arm cluster-randomised controlled trial with GPs as units of randomisation (clusters). 252 GPs were randomised either to an active strategy (training module with administration of the guideline), or to a passive dissemination (administration of the guideline only), or to usual care (control). Data on prescriptions of tests and drugs were collected by existing information systems, whereas patients' data came from GPs' databases. Process outcomes were measured at the cluster level one year after the intervention. Primary outcomes concerned the measurement of glycosilated haemoglobin and the commissioning of micro- and macrovascular complications assessment tests. In order to assess the physicians' drug prescribing behaviour secondary outcomes were also calculated. RESULTS: GPs identified 6395 uncomplicated type 2 patients with a high prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors. Data on GPs baseline performance show low proportions of glycosilated haemoglobin assessments. Results of the C-RCT analysis indicate that the active implementation strategy was ineffective relating to all primary outcomes (respectively, OR 1.06 [95% IC: 0.76-1.46]; OR 1.07 [95% IC: 0.80-1.43]; OR 1.4 [95% IC:0.91-2.16]. Similarly, passive dissemination of the guideline showed no effect. CONCLUSION: In our region compliance of GPs with guidelines was not enhanced by a structured learning programme. Implementation through organizational measures appears to be essential to induce behavioural changes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN80116232.