A multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel comparison, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pioglitazone add-on therapy in type 2 diabetic patients treated with metformin and dapagliflozin.

AIM: To investigate the efficacy and safety of pioglitazone compared to placebo when added to metformin plus dapagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a multicentre study, with a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design, 249 Korean patients with T2DM suboptimally managed on metformin and dapagliflozin were assigned to receive either pioglitazone (15 mg daily) or placebo for 24 weeks, followed by a 24-week pioglitazone extension. Primary outcomes included changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), with secondary outcomes assessing insulin resistance, adiponectin levels, lipid profiles, liver enzymes, body weight and waist circumference. RESULTS: Pioglitazone administration resulted in a significant reduction in HbA1c levels (from 7.80% ± 0.72% to 7.27% ± 0.82%) compared with placebo (from 7.79% ± 0.76% to 7.69% ± 0.86%, corrected mean difference: -0.42% ± 0.08%; p < 0.01) at 24 weeks. Additional benefits from pioglitazone treatment included enhanced insulin sensitivity, increased adiponectin levels, raised high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and reduced liver enzyme levels, resulting in improvement in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease liver fat score. Despite no serious adverse events in either group, pioglitazone therapy was modestly but significantly associated with weight gain and increased waist circumference. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive pioglitazone treatment in T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin and dapagliflozin demonstrates considerable glycaemic improvement, metabolic benefits, and a low risk of hypoglycaemia. These advantages must be weighed against the potential for weight gain and increased waist circumference.

Effects of dapagliflozin compared with glimepiride on body composition in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin: The BEYOND study.

AIMS: To evaluate the effect of dapagliflozin on body composition such as total body fat (BF) mass, abdominal visceral adipose tissue (VAT), and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) areas compared with glimepiride in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a 52-week, multicentre, randomized, parallel-group, open-label, Phase IV (NCT02564926) study. Patients with inadequate glycaemic control (glycated haemoglobin ≥7.0% and <10.0%) on metformin monotherapy (≥1000 mg/day) were randomized 1:1 to receive dapagliflozin 10 mg/day or glimepiride 1-2 mg/day for 12 months as an add-on to metformin. Baseline and end of study body composition evaluations included dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and abdominal computed tomography scans. RESULTS: Of 124 enrolled patients from 14 centres, 121 received study treatment (dapagliflozin: 60; glimepiride: 61) and 106 (85.5%) completed the study. Over 52 weeks, the dapagliflozin group showed the following differences versus the glimepiride group: -2.59 kg BF mass, -1.94% BF%, -17.55 cm2 VAT area, -18.39 cm2 SAT area, -0.46% glycated haemoglobin, -18.25 mg/dl fasting blood glucose, -3.7 kg weight, -2.21 cm waist circumference, -1.37 kg/m2 body mass index, -6.81 mmHg systolic blood pressure and +657.71 ng/ml in adiponectin; all were statistically significant. Both groups had similar incidences of adverse events; however, hypoglycaemic events were mainly (12 of 15) reported in the glimepiride group. CONCLUSION: Dapagliflozin reduced total BF mass, abdominal VAT and SAT areas, and showed better glycaemic control than glimepiride. Being safe and well-tolerated, dapagliflozin appears to be a more favourable alternative to sulphonylureas as add-on therapy after metformin monotherapy failure in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes.

Efficacy and safety of monotherapy with enavogliflozin in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Results of a 12-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

AIMS: The study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of enavogliflozin, a newly developed sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, with placebo in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 7.0-10.0%, entered a 2-week placebo run-in period, and were randomized to receive once-daily enavogliflozin (0.1, 0.3 or 0.5 mg) or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline at week 12. RESULTS: Overall, 194 patients were included in the full analysis set [placebo, n = 46; enavogliflozin (0.1 mg, n = 49; 0.3 mg, n = 50; 0.5 mg, n = 49)]. Patients receiving 0.1, 0.3 and 0.5 mg enavogliflozin showed significantly reduced HbA1c compared with those receiving placebo at week 12 (-0.79%, -0.89%, -0.92% and -0.08%, respectively; p < .001 vs. placebo). Mean changes in fasting plasma glucose from baseline at week 12 were -30.5, -31.1, -35.0 and 4.9 mg/dl in patients receiving enavogliflozin doses and placebo, respectively. The proportion of patients achieving HbA1c <7.0% at week 12 was significantly higher in the three enavogliflozin groups than in the placebo group (42.9%, 44.0%, 61.2% and 17.4%, respectively). A higher proportion of patients showed HbA1c reduction by >0.5% after receiving enavogliflozin doses than those receiving placebo (61.2%, 72.0%, 65.3% and 26.1%, respectively). There were no significant differences in incidences of adverse events of hypoglycaemia and genital infection between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily enavogliflozin monotherapy for 12 weeks is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment for Korean patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination therapy with gemigliptin (50 mg) and rosuvastatin compared with monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidaemia (BALANCE): A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, controlled, phase 3 trial.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of gemigliptin and rosuvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidaemia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 33 hospitals in Korea participated in this randomized, double-blind trial of diabetic patients with dyslipidaemia. A total of 290 participants were randomly assigned at a 1:1:1 ratio to receive an FDC of gemigliptin (50 mg) and rosuvastatin (20 mg) (GEMI/ROSU FDC group), gemigliptin (50 mg) (GEMI group) or rosuvastatin (20 mg) (ROSU group). Rosuvastatin was up-titrated from 5 to 20 mg/d throughout the study period. Primary efficacy measures were changes in HbA1c and LDL-C from baseline to Week 24 between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups and between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups, respectively. Secondary efficacy measures were changes in HbA1c and LDL-C between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups and between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups, respectively. RESULTS: After 24 weeks of treatment, a significant reduction in HbA1c from baseline was noted in the GEMI/ROSU FDC group (-0.81% of LS mean; P < 0.0001 vs ROSU group), in addition to a significant reduction in LDL-C concentration (-51.9% of LS mean percentage changes, P < 0.0001 vs GEMI group). HbA1c was significantly reduced from baseline in both the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups, but the reduction in HbA1c was significantly greater in the GEMI group than in the GEMI/ROSU FDC group, despite receiving the same dose of gemigliptin. The decrease in LDL-C over time was similar between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups. There were no significant differences in adverse events among the groups. CONCLUSION: The FDC of gemigliptin and rosuvastatin is safe and is effective in reducing both blood glucose and LDL-C levels; thus, it could be a good therapeutic choice for type 2 diabetic patients with dyslipidaemia.

A 52-week extension study of switching from gemigliptin vs sitagliptin to gemigliptin only as add-on therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled with metformin alone.

We investigated the long-term efficacy and safety of gemigliptin and the efficacy and safety of gemigliptin treatment after once-daily treatment with sitagliptin 100 mg, in patients with type 2 diabetes. This was a 28-week extension of a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel study of gemigliptin or sitagliptin added to ongoing metformin therapy. After randomization to sitagliptin 100 mg qd (S), gemigliptin 25 mg bid (G1) or gemigliptin 50 mg qd (G2) and after completing 24 weeks of treatment, 118 patients switched from gemigliptin 25 mg bid to 50 mg qd (G1/G2), 111 patients continued gemigliptin 50 mg qd (G2/G2) and 106 patients switched from sitagliptin 100 mg qd to gemigliptin 50 mg qd (S/G2). All 3 treatments reduced glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) (S/G2,-0.99% [95% CI -1.25%, -0.73%]; G1/G2, -1.11% [95% CI -1.33%, -0.89%]; G2/G2, -1.06% [95% CI -1.28%, -0.85%]). The percentage of patients achieving HbA1c < 6.5% was 27.6% in the G1/G2 group at both Week 24 and Week 52, and ranged from 27.3% to 32.7% in the G2/G2 group (difference in proportions, 5% [95% CI -6%, 17%]), while it increased from 6.8% to 27.3% from Week 24 to Week 52 in the S/G2 group (difference in proportions, 20% [95% CI 7%, 34%]). Addition of gemigliptin 50 mg qd to metformin was shown to be efficacious for 52 weeks. Switching from sitagliptin 100 mg to gemigliptin 50 mg showed consistent glyacemic control over the previous treatment.

Efficacy and safety of aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during the first cycle of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy in Korean patients with a broad range of tumor types.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a 3-day aprepitant regimen for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) during the first cycle of non-anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide (AC)-based moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) based on government guidelines in Korean patients. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase IV trial (NCT01636947) enrolled adult South Korean patients with a broad range of tumor types who were scheduled to receive a single dose of ≥1 MEC agent. Patients were randomized to a 3-day regimen of aprepitant (aprepitant regimen) or placebo (control regimen) on top of ondansetron plus dexamethasone. The primary and key secondary efficacy endpoints were the proportions of subjects who achieved no vomiting and complete response (CR) during the overall phase. RESULTS: Of the 494 randomized subjects, 480 were included in the modified intent-to-treat population. Response rates for no vomiting and CR in the overall phase were numerically higher for the aprepitant regimen compared with the control regimen groups, but failed to reach statistical significance (no vomiting 77.2 vs 72.0%; p = 0.191; CR 73.4 vs 70.4%; p = 0.458). Both the aprepitant and control regimens were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: A 3-day aprepitant regimen was numerically better but not statistically superior to a control regimen with respect to the achievement of no vomiting or CR during the overall phase in a non-AC MEC Korean population based on government reimbursement guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01636947 ( https://clinicaltrials.Gov/ct2/show/NCT01636947 ).

Reduction in microalbuminuria by calcium channel blockers in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension-A randomized, open-label, active-controlled, superiority, parallel-group clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that renoprotection with calcium channel blockers (CCBs) may differ. This study aimed to compare the anti-proteinuric effect of different CCBs in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: A multicentre, randomized, open-label, active-controlled study was performed in seven centres in Korea. A total of 74 patients with T2D and microalbuminuria treated with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers were randomized to a cilnidipine 10 mg treatment (n=38) or amlodipine 5 mg treatment (n=36). RESULTS: Urine albumin to creatinine ratio (ACR) reduction was similar between the two groups at 12 weeks (-53.0±123.2 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -35.7±83.6 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.29) or 24 weeks (-57.3±106.9 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -20.0±110.4 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.24). In a subgroup analysis, cilnidipine treatment showed a larger ACR reduction than amlodipine treatment at 12 weeks (-84.7±106.8 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -9.5±79.2 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.01) and 24 weeks (-84.0±111.7 mg/g in cilnidipine group and 14.6±119.4 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.008), particularly in patients with a longer duration of diabetes more than 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Cilnidipine did not show any additional anti-albuminuric effect compared with amlodipine in patients with T2D and microalbuminuria treated with an RAS blocker. However, the anti-albuminuric effect of cilnidipine might differ according to the duration of diabetes.

Effects of Elastic Band Resistance Training on Glucose Control, Body Composition, and Physical Function in Women With Short- vs. Long-Duration Type-2 Diabetes.

This study examined whether the existing duration of type-2 diabetes influenced patient responses to progressive resistance training. Twenty-six women with type-2 diabetes were stratified into short- (3 ± 2 years; n = 12) or long-standing (10 ± 3 years; n = 14) disease groups. Patients participated in a high daily or high weekly frequency elastic band resistance training program that consisted of 2 daily sessions, 5 d·wk for 12 weeks. Glucose control, body composition, and physical function were evaluated pre- and posttraining. No significant diabetes duration × training interactions were detected for blood markers of glucose control (p > 0.05); however, there were significant main effects of training driven by comparable improvements in both cohorts (hemoglobin A1c, -13 to 18%; fasting glucose, -23 to 31%; postprandial glucose, -36 to 40%; insulin, -34 to 40%; C-peptide, -38 to 51%; p ≤ 0.05). Anthropometrics and body composition were also favorably modified in both the groups after training (weight, -5 to 9%; body mass index, -6 to 9%; waist-to-hip ratio, -3 to 5%; percent fat, -14 to 20%; p ≤ 0.05). Likewise, indices of physical function improved in both the groups after training (bicep curl repetitions, +15-33%; sit-and-stand repetitions, +45-47%; p ≤ 0.05). A few exceptions were noted in which patients with long-standing disease demonstrated greater pre-to-post gains (p ≤ 0.05) in grip strength (+11-13%) and peak exercise time (+19%) and load (+21%) during graded exercise, whereas those with shorter disease duration did not. Overall, these data suggest that patients with a long history of diabetes respond positively to resistance training and in a manner comparable to their recently diagnosed counterparts. Therefore, current inactivity in patients with long-standing disease should not deter from beginning an exercise program.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II clinical trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of oral DA-1229 in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who have inadequate glycaemic control with diet and exercise.

BACKGROUND: DA-1229 is a novel, potent and selective dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-IV) inhibitor that is orally bioavailable. We aimed to evaluate the optimal dose, efficacy and safety of DA-1229, in Korean subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus suboptimally controlled with diet and exercise. METHODS: We enrolled 158 patients (mean age, 53 years and a mean BMI, 25.6 kg/m(2) ). The mean baseline fasting plasma glucose level, HbA1c and duration of diabetes were 8.28 mmol/L, 7.6% (60 mmol/mol) and 3.9 years, respectively. After 2 or 6 weeks of an exercise and diet program followed by 2 weeks of a placebo period, the subjects were randomized into one of four groups for a 12-week active treatment period: placebo, 2.5, 5 or 10 mg of DA-1229. RESULTS: All three doses of DA-1229 significantly reduced HbA1c from baseline compared to the placebo group (-0.09 in the placebo group vs. -0.56, -0.66 and -0.61% in 2.5, 5 and 10-mg groups, respectively) but without any significant differences between the doses. Insulin secretory function, as assessed by homeostasis model assessment ß-cell, the insulinogenic index, 2-h oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) C-peptide and post-OGTT C-peptide area under the curve (AUC)0-2h, significantly improved with DA-1229 treatment. The incidence of adverse events was similar between the treatment groups and DA-1229 did not affect body weight or induce hypoglycaemic events. CONCLUSIONS: DA-1229 monotherapy (5 mg for 12 weeks) improved HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose level, OGTT results and ß-cell function. This drug was well tolerated in Korean subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anagliptin in drug-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anagliptin in drug-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes in a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled study. A total of 109 patients were randomized to 100 mg (n=37) or 200 mg (n=33) anagliptin twice daily or placebo (n=39). The primary objective was to alter HbA1c levels from baseline at a 24-week endpoint. The overall baseline mean age and body mass index were 56.20 ± 9.77 years and 25.01 ± 2.97 kg/m(2), respectively, and the HbA1c level was of 7.14 ± 0.69 %. Anagliptin at 100 mg and 200 mg produced significant reductions in HbA1c (-0.50 ± 0.45 % and -0.51 ± 0.55%, respectively), and the placebo treatment resulted in an increase in HbA1c by 0.23 ± 0.62 %. Both doses of anagliptin produced significant decreases in fasting plasma glucose (-0.53 ± 1.25 mmol/L and -0.72 ± 1.25 mmol/L, respectively) and the proinsulin/insulin ratio (-0.04 ± 0.15 and -0.07 ± 0.18, respectively) compared with placebo. No meaningful body weight changes from baseline were observed in three groups. Plasma dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 activity was significantly inhibited after 24 weeks of anagliptin treatment, and >75% and >90% inhibitions were observed during the meal tolerance tests with 100 mg and 200 mg anagliptin, respectively. The incidences of adverse or serious adverse events were similar among the three study groups. Twice-daily anagliptin therapy effectively inhibited DPP-4 activity and improved glycemic control and was well-tolerated in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Real-World Outcomes of Individualized Targeted Therapy with Insulin Glargine 300 Units/mL in Insulin-Naïve Korean People with Type 2 Diabetes: TOBE Study.

INTRODUCTION: The TOujeo BEyond glucose control (TOBE) study evaluated clinical outcomes with insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) in insulin-naïve Korean people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in a real-world setting. METHODS: This 24-week, prospective, non-interventional, multicenter, open-label, single-arm, observational study included adults aged ≥ 20 years with T2DM suboptimally controlled with oral hypoglycemic agents and/or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists who require basal insulin. Eligible participants were assigned to either general target glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c < 7%) or individualized target groups as per physician's discretion considering guidelines and participants' characteristics. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving the HbA1c target (individualized or general) at 24 weeks. RESULTS: Among 369 participants, 19.5% (72/369) of participants achieved the HbA1c target at week 24; 37.5% (33/88) in the individualized and 13.9% (39/281) in the general target group. In both target groups, similar reductions in fasting plasma glucose and body weight were observed, with low incidence of hypoglycemia, and T2DM duration was significantly shorter in participants who did versus those who did not achieve the target HbA1c (individualized target group: 9.6 ± 8.0 versus 13.1 ± 8.4 years, P = 0.0454; general target group: 10.2 ± 8.6 versus 12.8 ± 7.4 years, P = 0.0378). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that initiation of insulin therapy with Gla-300 in people with T2DM using an individualized approach is more effective in achieving an HbA1c target. Moreover, earlier initiation of insulin therapy in people with suboptimally controlled T2DM may increase the success rate of glycemic control. A graphical abstract is available with this article.

Despite various efforts in managing diabetes, individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) encounter numerous challenges to achieve good glycemic control. The major cause is failure to initiate insulin therapy in a timely manner, primarily because of the fear of hypoglycemia. Insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) has smooth and prolonged activity resulting in stable and sustained glycemic control, thus reducing the risk of hypoglycemia. Studies on efficacy and safety of Gla-300 in various populations have been published globally. However, there are limited real-world studies in Asian populations. This study evaluated effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 in Korean people with T2DM who were not on insulin prior to this study but were taking oral glucose-lowering medications. The participants were assigned to two groups: general glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) target (HbA1c < 7%) and individualized HbA1c target according to the participant's characteristics. Results showed that Gla-300 helped to achieve the glycemic target more effectively using an individualized approach. In both groups, similar reductions in fasting plasma glucose and body weight were observed, with low incidence of hypoglycemia. People who achieve glycemic target had a shorter duration of T2DM than those who did not achieve their glycemic target. This suggests that earlier insulin initiation may be a better approach and may increase the success rate of insulin therapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Alogliptin-Pioglitazone Combination for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Poorly Controlled with Metformin: A Multicenter, Double-Blind Randomized Trial.

Background: Guidelines for switching to triple combination therapy directly after monotherapy failure are limited. This study investigated the efficacy, long-term sustainability, and safety of either mono or dual add-on therapy using alogliptin and pioglitazone for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who did not achieve their target glycemic range with metformin monotherapy. Methods: The Practical Evidence of Antidiabetic Combination Therapy in Korea (PEAK) was a multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trial. A total of 214 participants were randomized to receive alogliptin+pioglitazone (Alo+Pio group, n=70), alogliptin (Alo group, n=75), or pioglitazone (Pio group, n=69). The primary outcome was the difference in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels between the three groups at baseline to 24 weeks. For durability, the achievement of HbA1c levels <7% and <6.5% was compared in each group. The number of adverse events was investigated for safety. Results: After 24 weeks of treatment, the change of HbA1c in the Alo+Pio, Alo, and Pio groups were -1.38%±0.08%, -1.03%±0.08%, and -0.84%±0.08%, respectively. The Alo+Pio group had significantly lower HbA1c levels than the other groups (P=0.0063, P<0.0001) and had a higher proportion of patients with target HbA1c achievement. In addition, insulin sensitivity and ß-cell function, lipid profiles, and other metabolic indicators were also improved. There were no significant safety issues in patients treated with triple combination therapy. Conclusion: Early combination triple therapy showed better efficacy and durability than the single add-on (dual) therapy. Therefore, combination therapy with metformin, alogliptin, and pioglitazone is a valuable early treatment option for T2DM poorly controlled with metformin monotherapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Metformin and Atorvastatin Combination Therapy vs. Monotherapy with Either Drug in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Dyslipidemia Patients (ATOMIC): Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: It is well known that a large number of patients with diabetes also have dyslipidemia, which significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination drugs consisting of metformin and atorvastatin, widely used as therapeutic agents for diabetes and dyslipidemia. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group and phase III multicenter study included adults with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels >7.0% and <10.0%, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >100 and <250 mg/dL. One hundred eighty-five eligible subjects were randomized to the combination group (metformin+atorvastatin), metformin group (metformin+atorvastatin placebo), and atorvastatin group (atorvastatin+metformin placebo). The primary efficacy endpoints were the percent changes in HbA1c and LDL-C levels from baseline at the end of the treatment. Results: After 16 weeks of treatment compared to baseline, HbA1c showed a significant difference of 0.94% compared to the atorvastatin group in the combination group (0.35% vs. -0.58%, respectively; P<0.0001), whereas the proportion of patients with increased HbA1c was also 62% and 15%, respectively, showing a significant difference (P<0.001). The combination group also showed a significant decrease in LDL-C levels compared to the metformin group (-55.20% vs. -7.69%, P<0.001) without previously unknown adverse drug events. Conclusion: The addition of atorvastatin to metformin improved HbA1c and LDL-C levels to a significant extent compared to metformin or atorvastatin alone in diabetes and dyslipidemia patients. This study also suggested metformin's preventive effect on the glucose-elevating potential of atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, insufficiently controlled with exercise and diet. Metformin and atorvastatin combination might be an effective treatment in reducing the CVD risk in patients with both diabetes and dyslipidemia because of its lowering effect on LDL-C and glucose.

The Efficacy and Tolerability of Irbesartan/Amlodipine Combination Therapy in Patients With Essential Hypertension Whose Blood Pressure Were not Controlled by Irbesartan Monotherapy.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of irbesartan (IRB) and amlodipine (AML) combination therapy in patients with essential hypertension whose blood pressure (BP) was not controlled by IRB monotherapy. METHODS: Two multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III studies were conducted in Korea (the I-DUO 301 study and the I-DUO 302 study). After a 4-week run-in period with either 150 mg IRB (I-DUO 301 study) or 300 mg IRB (I-DUO 302 study), patients with uncontrolled BP (ie, mean sitting systolic BP [MSSBP] ≥140 mmHg to <180 mmHg and mean sitting diastolic BP <110 mmHg) were randomized to the placebo, AML 5 mg, or AML 10 mg group. A total of 428 participants were enrolled in the 2 I-DUO studies. In the I-DUO 301 study, 271 participants were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive either IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, or IRB 150 mg/placebo. In the I-DUO 302 study, 157 participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive IRB/AML 300/5 mg or IRB 300 mg/placebo. The primary endpoint was the change in MSSBP from baseline to week 8. Tolerability was assessed according to the development of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and clinically significant changes in physical examination, laboratory tests, pulse, and 12-lead electrocardiography. FINDINGS: In I-DUO 301, the mean (SD) changes of MSSBP at week 8 from baseline were -14.78 (12.35) mmHg, -21.47 (12.78) mmHg, and -8.61 (12.19) mmHg in the IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, and IRB 150 mg/placebo groups, respectively. In I-DUO 302, the mean (SD) changes of MSSBP at week 8 from baseline were -13.30 (12.47) mmHg and -7.19 (15.37) mmHg in the IRB/AML 300/5 mg and IRB 300 mg/placebo groups, respectively. In both studies, all combination groups showed a significantly higher reduction in MSSBP than the IRB monotherapy groups (P < 0.001 for both). TEAEs occurred in 10.00%, 10.99%, and 12.22% of participants in the IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, and IRB 150 mg/placebo groups, respectively, in I-DUO 301 and in 6.33% and 10.67% of participants in the IRB/AML 300/5 mg and IRB 300 mg/placebo groups, respectively, in I-DUO 302, with no significant between-group differences. Overall, there was one serious adverse event throughout I-DUO study. IMPLICATIONS: The combination of IRB and AML has superior antihypertensive effects compared with IRB alone over an 8-week treatment period, with placebo-like tolerability. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05476354 (I-DUO 301), NCT05475665 (I-DUO 302).

The effects of caloric restriction on fetuin-A and cardiovascular risk factors in rats and humans: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The liver-secreted protein fetuin-A is associated with insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes and atherosclerosis. We examined the effect of caloric restriction (CR) on fetuin-A levels and concomitant changes in hepatic steatosis and cardiovascular risk factors in rats and humans. DESIGN AND SUBJECTS: We performed a randomized, controlled clinical trial to examine circulating fetuin-A levels and cardiovascular risk parameters including visceral fat area (VFA), atherogenic lipid profile, inflammatory markers, adipokines levels and brachial artery endothelial function in 76 overweight women with type 2 diabetes before and after 12 weeks of CR. In addition, the effects of CR on hepatic steatosis and fetuin-A mRNA expression were evaluated in Otuska Long Evans Tokushima Fatty (OLETF) rats, an animal model of obesity and type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: Circulating fetuin-A levels were significantly decreased after 12 weeks of CR and were accompanied by improvements in VFA, blood pressure, glucose, lipid profiles and liver function. The CR group also showed a significant decrease in apolipoprotein B, leptin and insulin resistance compared to those in the control group, although endothelial function was not different. Multiple regression analysis showed that the changes in fetuin-A levels were independently associated with CR and changes in hsCRP and adiponectin (R² = 0·156). Moreover, CR significantly reduced hepatic steatosis and fetuin-A expression, as well as weight, glucose, total cholesterol and triglyceride levels, in OLETF rats. CONCLUSION: Caloric restriction significantly reduced the hepatic expression of fetuin-A and its circulating levels and improved several cardiovascular risk factors in obese rats and humans with type 2 diabetes.

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of a Single-Pill Combination of Olmesartan/Amlodipine/Hydrochlorothiazide in Korean Patients with Hypertension and Cardiovascular Risk Factors.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with hypertension and additional cardiovascular risk factors pose a challenge by requiring more intensive blood pressure (BP) control. Single-pill combination (SPC) therapy can benefit these patients by improving medication adherence. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter observational study assessed the real-world safety and effectiveness of an SPC containing olmesartan, amlodipine, and hydrochlorothiazide (O/A/H) in South Korean patients with hypertension and cardiovascular risk factors. BP control rates, defined as the percentage of patients achieving systolic BP (SBP) < 130 mmHg and diastolic BP (DBP) < 80 mmHg for intensive BP control, and < 140 mmHg and < 90 mmHg, respectively, for standard BP control, were investigated across various cardiovascular risk groups, along with changes in SBP and DBP from baseline to week 24. RESULTS: The most prevalent cardiovascular risk factor was age (≥ 45 years in men, ≥ 55 years in women, 86.1%), followed by cardiovascular diseases (64.4%), dyslipidemia (53.7%), body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2 (53.5%), and diabetes mellitus (DM) (46.3%). Switching to O/A/H showed significant BP reduction, with a mean change of - 17.8 mmHg/- 9.3 mmHg in SBP/DBP within 4 weeks. The intensive BP control rate was 41.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 39.5, 43.4), and the standard BP control rate was 73.3% (95% CI 71.5, 75.1), with better control rates in the risk age group (43.1% and 74.1%, respectively) and cardiovascular disease group (42.0% and 73.8%, respectively). The DM group had relatively lower control rates (37.5% for intensive control and 69.4% for standard control). Common adverse drug reactions included dizziness (2.91%), hypotension (1.51%), and headaches (0.70%). CONCLUSION: The SPC therapy of O/A/H caused a rapid and sustained reduction in SBP/DBP in patients' hypertension and additional cardiovascular risk factors. The therapy was safe and well tolerated. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: KCT0003401 ( https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do/20795 ).

Effects of pinitol on glycemic control, insulin resistance and adipocytokine levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Pinitol is thought to mediate insulin action and improve insulin resistance. We evaluated the effects of pinitol on glycemic control, insulin resistance and adipocytokine levels in type 2 diabetic patients. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A total of 66 patients with type 2 diabetes who had been taking oral hypoglycemic agents for at least 3 months were enrolled and randomized to receive pinitol (n = 33) or matching placebo (n = 33). All subjects took 1,200 mg pinitol or placebo and maintained their current oral hypoglycemic agents throughout the study. RESULTS: Mean HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, and HOMA-IR were significantly lowered more in patients taking pinitol than in those given a placebo. Patients who had an HbA1c over 8.0% showed a greater reduction (p < 0.01) than those who had an HbA1c below 8.0% (p =0.16). In addition, in the group of patients with a HOMA-IR over 2.5, there was a significant decrease in HbA1c compared to that in the group of patients with a HOMA-IR below 2.5. There were no differences in the changes in adiponectin, FFA and CRP between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Pinitol can mediate insulin action to improve glycemic control and insulin sensitivity in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, especially in patients with insulin resistance.

Effect of Dapagliflozin as an Add-on Therapy to Insulin on the Glycemic Variability in Subjects with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (DIVE): A Multicenter, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Randomized Study.

Background: Glycemic variability is associated with the development of diabetic complications and hypoglycemia. However, the effect of sodium-glucose transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors on glycemic variability is controversial. We aimed to examine the effect of dapagliflozin as an add-on therapy to insulin on the glycemic variability assessed using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: In this multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized study, 84 subjects received 10 mg of dapagliflozin (n=41) or the placebo (n=43) for 12 weeks. CGM was performed before and after treatment to compare the changes in glycemic variability measures (standard deviation [SD], mean amplitude of glycemic excursions [MAGEs]). Results: At week 12, significant reductions in glycosylated hemoglobin (-0.74%±0.66% vs. 0.01%±0.65%, P<0.001), glycated albumin (-3.94%±2.55% vs. -0.67%±2.48%, P<0.001), and CGM-derived mean glucose (-41.6±39.2 mg/dL vs. 1.1±46.2 mg/dL, P<0.001) levels were observed in the dapagliflozin group compared with the placebo group. SD and MAGE were significantly decreased in the dapagliflozin group, but not in the placebo group. However, the difference in ΔSD and ΔMAGE failed to reach statistical significance between two groups. No significant differences in the incidence of safety endpoints were observed between the two groups. Conclusion: Dapagliflozin effectively decreased glucose levels, but not glucose variability, after 12 weeks of treatment in participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus receiving insulin treatment. The role of SGLT2 inhibitors in glycemic variability warrants further investigations.

A Multicentre, Multinational, Open-Label, 52-Week Extension Study of Gemigliptin (LC15-0444) Monotherapy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

The purpose of this extension study was to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of gemigliptin 50 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Patients with T2DM who had completed the initial 24-week study comparing gemigliptin monotherapy with placebo were eligible to enrol. In the open-label, 28-week extension study, all enrolled patients received gemigliptin, regardless of the treatment received during the initial 24-week study period. The mean reduction±standard deviation (SD) in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) observed after 24 weeks of treatment (-0.6%±1.1%) was further decreased for the gemi-gemi group and the mean change in HbA1c at week 52 from baseline was -0.9%±1.2% (P<0.0001). For the pbo-gemi group, HbA1c decreased after they were switched to gemigliptin, and the mean change in HbA1c at week 52 from baseline was -0.7%±1.2% (P<0.0001). Furthermore, the overall incidence of adverse events demonstrated that gemigliptin was safe and well tolerated up to 52 weeks.