Indonesia DIA-RAMADAN Study: A Real-life, Prospective and Observational of Gliclazide MR in Type-2 Diabetes Patients During Ramadan Fasting.

BACKGROUND: Sulfonylureas (SUs) have been widely used in many countries for T2DM treatment. Gliclazide is one of the SUs with the lowest risk of hypoglycemia; however, the safety and effectiveness of gliclazide MR during Ramadan has not yet been reported in Indonesia. This study aimed to assess safety, efficacy, and tolerability of gliclazide modified release (MR) during Ramadan fasting. METHODS: The study was a part of DIA-RAMADAN study, a prospective observational study with subjects of T2DM patients aged >18 years, who had either controlled or sub-optimally controlled blood glucose level, performed Ramadan fasting. Subjects had been treated with gliclazide MR for at least 90 days prior the study, and were examined for their body mass index (BMI), fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and HbA1c levels 6 to 8 weeks before Ramadan (V0) and 4 to 6 weeks after the end of Ramadan (V1). RESULTS: Out of 198 subjects participating in the study, there were only two subjects (1.0%) who reported symptomatic HEs (either confirmed or not confirmed) and no severe HEs had been reported. There were no significant changes in HbA1c and FPG levels (p>0.05). Interestingly, there was a reduction of bodyweight (-0.4kg) from pre- to post-Ramadan (p < 0.001). Almost no subjects reported discontinuation of gliclazide MR throughout the entire study; however, there was one subject who reported a change of diabetic treatment into diet only. CONCLUSION: gliclazide MR is safe, well tolerated and can maintain glycemic control effectively for Indonesian patients with T2DM who perform Ramadan fasting.

Smile: saluto-metabolic interventions for life enhancement.

The article highlights the need to follow a multifactorial, comprehensive approach while managing diabetes. Apart from glycaemic control, blood pressure, lipid, weight and platelet management are equally important if one is to ensure optimal therapeutic outcomes. The mnemonic SMILE (salute-metabolic interventions for life enhancement) includes all evidence-based therapies which help in improving metabolic health, and in preventing morbidity and mortality. It allows evenhanded addressal of all vasculo metabolic parameters, so as to bring SMILEs on faces of all persons involved in diabetes.

Glargine insulin/gliclazide MR combination therapy is more effective than premixed insulin monotherapy in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily insulin glargine plus gliclazide modified release combination therapy versus twice-daily premixed insulin monotherapy in Chinese type 2 diabetic patients insufficiently controlled by oral antidiabetic agents. METHODS: In a 12-week, multicenter, randomized, parallel-group clinical trial, patients with poor glycaemic control (fasting plasma glucose ≥ 7.0 mmol/L and 7.5% < haemoglobin A1c ≤ 10%) on oral antidiabetic drugs were randomized to the treatment groups for combination therapy (n = 52) or monotherapy (n = 53). Continuous glucose monitoring was carried out over two 72-h periods, at the beginning and the end of the study, and the data were used to calculate the 24-h mean blood glucose, mean amplitude of glycaemic excursions, standard deviation of blood glucose, and the mean of daily differences. RESULTS: The mean haemoglobin A1c decrease from baseline to study end was significant for both treatment groups (combination therapy: -1.23 ± 0.92%; insulin monotherapy: -1.02 ± 1.04%); moreover, the combination therapy group showed a significantly more robust haemoglobin A1c decrease (p = 0.0308). Both therapies significantly reduced the 24-h mean blood glucose (both, p < 0.001), but neither produced a significant effect on glycaemic variability, calculated as mean amplitude of glycaemic excursions, standard deviation of blood glucose, and mean of daily differences. In addition, the effects on rates of hypoglycaemic episodes were similar between the two therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic agents attained greater benefit from once-daily insulin glargine plus gliclazide modified release regimen than from a twice-daily premixed insulin regimen.

Management of Diabetes and Hypertension within the Gulf Region: Updates on Treatment Practices and Therapies.

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of death globally, driven by the high rates of risk factors, such as diabetes and hypertension. As the prevalence of these risk factors is particularly high in the Gulf region, better diagnosis and management of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and hypertension has the potential to dramatically reduce adverse cardiovascular outcomes for individuals in that part of the world. This article provides a summary of presentations made during the EVIDENT summit, a virtual symposium on Evidence in Diabetes and Hypertension, held in September 2021, including a review of the various guidelines for both T2D and hypertension, as well as recent findings relevant to the safety and efficacy for therapies relating to these conditions. Of relevance to the Gulf region, the risk of hypoglycaemia with sulfonylureas during Ramadan was reviewed. For the management of T2D, sulfonylureas have been a long-standing medication used to achieve glycaemic control; however, differences have emerged between early and later generations, with recent studies suggesting improvements in the safety profiles of late-generation sulfonylureas. For patients with hypertension, incremental therapy changes are recommended to reduce the risk of cardiovascular complications that are associated with increasing blood pressure. For first-line therapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), such as perindopril, have been demonstrated to reduce the risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. The addition of calcium channel blockers and diuretics to ACEi has been shown to be effective in patients with poorly controlled hypertension. The different renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors are reviewed, and the benefit of combination therapies, including amlodipine and indapamide in patients with difficult-to-control hypertension, is investigated. The benefits of lifestyle modifications for these patients are also discussed, with important clinical considerations that are expected to inform patient management in daily clinical practice.

Evaluation of the effectiveness and tolerability of gliclazide modified release 60 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes observing fasting during Ramadan in Pakistan: An analysis from the global DIA-RAMADAN study.

AIM: To assess safety and effectiveness of gliclazide MR 60 mg in people with controlled or suboptimal controlled T2DM treated with breakable gliclazide MR 60 mg formulation. METHOD: This study data has been extracted from an international, observational study conducted in nine Asian and Middle Eastern countries. Total 220 patients with T2DM were recruited from Pakistan. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients reporting at least 1 symptomatic HE, whereas secondary endpoints were changes in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) %, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) mg/dL, and body weight (kg) and proportion of patients reporting any HE (confirmed or severe), between inclusion visit (V0) and end of the study visit (V1). RESULTS: During Ramadan, 3.6% (n = 8/220) patients had experienced at least one symptomatic HEs. A significant (p-value < 0.001) reduction was observed in HbA1c: (mean [SD]) (-0.4 [0.9] %), and body weight (-0.7 [4.8] kg). Thirteen adverse events (AEs) unrelated to gliclazide MR were reported during the study pre-Ramadan and post-Ramadan periods. CONCLUSION: This study shows safety and effectiveness profile of gliclazide MR 60 mg by emphasizing on the low risk of HEs, effective glycaemic control and body weight reduction in T2DM patients, who are inclined to fasting during Ramadan.

The Position of Gliclazide in the Evolving Landscapes and Disease Continuum of T2DM: A Collaborative Delphi Survey-Based Consensus from India.

INTRODUCTION: This Delphi study aims to provide evidence-based expert opinion on the usage and current position of gliclazide in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management in India. METHODS: The single interaction modified Delphi-based methodology was used to collect opinions on gliclazide usage and its position in diabetes management from 338 endocrinologists/diabetologists who have had clinical experience with gliclazide. Participants, using a 9-point scale, were asked to rate eight statements comprising a total of 52 items on the related topics. RESULTS: The Delphi consensus suggests that in drug-naïve patients with T2DM, intolerant to metformin or in whom metformin is contraindicated, dual therapy of gliclazide/gliclazide-modified release (MR) should be considered along with a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitor if glycated hemoglobin A1c level is greater than 7.5% and with insulin if the A1c level is greater than 9%. If the patients are inadequately controlled with metformin (A1c greater than 6.5% after 3 months of therapy), gliclazide/gliclazide-MR shall be added on to the treatment regimen to achieve greater and sustained reductions in A1c levels. However, it was not preferred over other antidiabetic classes in such clinical settings except alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (AGI). Early addition of gliclazide/gliclazide-MR shall be preferred over the up-titration of metformin beyond half-maximal dose for effective management of T2DM. Gliclazide/gliclazide-MR can be used safely in patients with diabetes and cardiovascular and chronic kidney disease. It can be used in older patients with T2DM as it does not have active metabolites and has a low risk of hypoglycemia. CONCLUSION: The expert panel proposed consideration of monotherapy or dual therapy of gliclazide as an ideal choice in patients with T2DM because of its efficacy, long-term glycemic control, favorable renal outcomes, cardiovascular safety, and an optimal safety profile.

Role of Gliclazide MR in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes: Report of a Symposium on Real-World Evidence and New Perspectives.

In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who require additional glucose-lowering on top of first-line metformin monotherapy, sulfonylureas are the most common choice for second-line therapy followed by dipeptidyl peptidase inhibitors (DPP-4i). This article summarises presentations at a symposium entitled "Real-World Evidence and New Perspectives with Gliclazide MR" held at the International Diabetes Federation Congress in Busan, South Korea on 4 December 2019. Although guideline recommendations vary between countries, the guidelines with the highest quality ratings include sulfonylureas as one of the preferred choices as second-line therapy for T2DM. Data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have consistently demonstrated that sulfonylureas are effective glucose-lowering agents and that the risk of severe hypoglycaemia with these agents is low. In addition, both RCTs and real-world observational studies have shown no increased risk of mortality or cardiovascular disease with the use of newer-generation sulfonylureas compared with other classes of glucose-lowering treatments. However, differences between sulfonylureas do exist, with gliclazide being associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality or cardiovascular mortality compared with glibenclamide, as well as the lowest incidence of severe hypoglycaemia compared with other agents in this class. Recent real-world studies into the effectiveness and safety of gliclazide appear to confirm these findings, and publication of new data from these studies in patients with T2DM in the UK, and in Muslim patients who are fasting during Ramadan, are awaited with interest. Another study being undertaken with gliclazide is a pan-India study in patients with maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) subtypes 1, 3 and 12. Patients with these MODY subtypes respond particularly well to sulfonylurea treatment, and sulfonylureas are the first-line agents of choice in these patients. These new and ongoing studies will add to the cumulative data on the efficacy and safety of certain sulfonylureas in patients with diabetes.

A randomized controlled trial to compare the effects of sulphonylurea gliclazide MR (modified release) and the DPP-4 inhibitor vildagliptin on glycemic variability and control measured by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in Brazilian women with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: This study aims to evaluate whether there is a difference between the effects of vildagliptin and gliclazide MR (modified release) on glycemic variability (GV) in women with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) as evaluated by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). METHODS: An open-label, randomized study was conducted in T2DM women on steady-dose metformin monotherapy which were treated with 50 mg vildagliptin twice daily or 60-120 mg of gliclazide MR once daily. CGM and GV indices calculation were performed at baseline and after 24 weeks. RESULTS: In total, 42 patients (age: 61.9 ±â€¯5.9 years, baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c): 7.3 ±â€¯0.56) were selected and 37 completed the 24-week protocol. Vildagliptin and gliclazide MR reduced GV, as measured by the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE, p = 0.007 and 0.034, respectively). The difference between the groups did not reach statistical significance. Vildagliptin also significantly decreased the standard deviation of the mean glucose (SD) and the mean of the daily differences (MODD) (p = 0.007 and 0.030). CONCLUSIONS: Vildagliptin and gliclazide MR similarly reduced the MAGE in women with T2DM after 24 weeks of treatment. Further studies are required to attest differences between vildagliptin and gliclazide MR regarding glycemic variability.

Vildagliptin has the same safety profile as a sulfonylurea on bone metabolism and bone mineral density in post-menopausal women with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Several antidiabetic therapies affect bone metabolism. Sulfonylureas have the lowest impact on bone among oral antidiabetics. The objective of this study is to compare the effects of vildagliptin and gliclazide modified release (MR) on bone turnover markers (BTMs) and bone mineral density (BMD) in postmenopausal women with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: Forty-two postmenopausal women with uncontrolled T2D were randomly allocated into vildagliptin or gliclazide MR (control) groups. The primary endpoint was the change in the BTMs in months 6 and 12 compared with the baseline. The secondary endpoint was the variation in the BMD, which was assessed via dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at the lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip at baseline and month 12. RESULTS: After a 12-month treatment, the BTM serum carboxy-terminal telopeptide of type 1 collagen increased 0.001 ± 0.153 ng/mL in the vildagliptin group versus 0.008 ± 0.060 ng/mL in the gliclazide MR group (p = 0.858). The serum osteocalcin, serum amino-terminal propeptide of procollagen type I and urinary amino-terminal telopeptide of type 1 collagen remained stable in both groups, and there was no statistically significant difference between the effect of vildagliptin and gliclazide MR on these variables. The lumbar spine BMD did not change in the vildagliptin or gliclazide MR groups after a 12-month treatment (0.000 ± 0.025 g/cm2 versus -0.008 ± 0.036, respectively, p = 0.434). Furthermore, there was a similar lack of change in the femoral neck and total hip BMD values in both treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Bone turnover markers and BMD remained unchanged after a 12-month treatment in both groups, which suggests that vildagliptin has the same safety profile as gliclazide MR on bone metabolism. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01679899.