Glyburide use is associated with a greater likelihood of mortality or rehospitalization after acute coronary syndrome compared to gliclazide use in adults with type 2 diabetes: A cohort study.

AIM: To examine the likelihood of mortality or rehospitalization following acute coronary syndrome with glyburide versus gliclazide use in adults with type 2 diabetes undergoing cardiac catheterization. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used clinical data linked with administrative health data from Alberta, Canada between April 2008 and March 2021. Three methods were used to define exposure to glyburide and gliclazide in the year before catheterization. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare the likelihood of a composite outcome of 1-year mortality or rehospitalization with use of glyburide versus use of gliclazide. RESULTS: A total of 11 140 individuals with type 2 diabetes had a cardiac catheterization for acute coronary syndrome. Their mean age was 66 years and 31% were female. In the year before catheterization, 5% used glyburide and 19% used gliclazide. Any glyburide or gliclazide exposure in the year before catheterization was associated with a similar likelihood of all-cause mortality or rehospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93-1.41; p = 0.20). However, current glyburide exposure (aOR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06-1.79; p = 0.018) and long exposure to glyburide (aOR 1.37, 95% CI 1.03-1.83; p = 0.030) were associated with a higher likelihood of the composite outcome compared to current and long exposure to gliclazide, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Current and long exposure to glyburide was associated with a greater likelihood of mortality or rehospitalization following cardiac catheterization for acute coronary syndrome, when compared to similar gliclazide exposure definitions. This study adds further evidence of the need to avoid using glyburide if a sulphonylurea is required for type 2 diabetes management.

Fluoroquinolones and the risk of severe hypoglycaemia among sulphonylurea users: Population-based cohort study.

AIM: Fluoroquinolone-related hypoglycaemia is rare but may become clinically relevant in individuals at high baseline hypoglycaemic risk, such as patients with diabetes using sulphonylureas. Our population-based cohort study assessed whether fluoroquinolones are associated with an increased risk of severe hypoglycaemia compared with amoxicillin among patients treated with sulphonylureas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum linked to hospitalization and vital statistics data, we assembled a base cohort of patients who initiated second-generation sulphonylureas (1998-2020). The study cohort included patients initiating either fluoroquinolones or amoxicillin while on sulphonylureas. Using an intent-to-treat exposure definition, we assessed the 30-day risk of severe hypoglycaemia (hospitalization with or death because of hypoglycaemia) associated with fluoroquinolones compared with amoxicillin. Cox models estimated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of severe hypoglycaemia after 1:5 matching on previous sulphonylurea use and propensity scores. Secondary analyses were stratified by demographics and glycated haemoglobin. RESULTS: Overall, 143 417 patients initiated fluoroquinolones (n = 13 123) or amoxicillin (n = 130 294) while on sulphonylureas. Compared with amoxicillin, fluoroquinolones were not associated with the risk of severe hypoglycaemia (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.91-1.50). Fluoroquinolones were associated with an increased risk in patients <65 years (HR, 2.90; 95% CI, 1.41-5.97) but not in those ≥65 years (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.79-1.35) in stratified analyses. There was no evidence of effect modification by sex or glycated haemoglobin. CONCLUSIONS: In patients using second-generation sulphonylureas, fluoroquinolones were not associated with an increased risk of severe hypoglycaemia compared with amoxicillin. An increased risk among younger adults is possible.

Effects of DPP-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, SGLT-2 inhibitors and sulphonylureas on mortality, cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes: A network meta-analyses-driven approach.

AIMS: The aim of our meta-analyses was to compare the effects of glucose-lowering drugs on mortality, cardiovascular and renal endpoints for a range of type 2 diabetes (T2D) subgroups defined by their specific cardiovascular risk profile. METHODS: Meta-analyses comparing drugs within the classes of GLP-1RAs and SGLT-2 inhibitors were performed and compared to sulphonylureas and DPP-4 inhibitors with available cardiovascular outcome trials. The comparison between the different classes of glucose-lowering drugs included analyses of T2D populations with low risk and high risk for cardiovascular disease including populations with established cardiovascular disease and/or kidney disease. Outcomes included mortality, major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE), hospitalisation for heart failure (HHF) and a composite renal endpoint as applied in the underlying clinical trials. RESULTS: SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1RAs showed beneficial effects on mortality and MACE compared to the classes of DPP-4 inhibitors and sulphonylureas. SGLT-2 inhibitors were shown to be the most effective treatment in terms of HHF and kidney disease. Metformin was used as background therapy for the vast majority of participants in all included studies. Overall, the absolute effects of SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1RAs on these important outcomes were evident for patients with established or at high risk for cardiovascular disease but limited for the low-risk subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from our analyses substantiate the relevance of treatment with SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1RAs as an add-on to metformin in patients with T2D and a high risk for cardiovascular disease, and furthermore, support the recommendation for SGLT-2 inhibitor treatment in patients with T2D and heart failure or established kidney disease.

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.

Comparison of the effects of gemigliptin versus glimepiride on cardiac function in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with metformin: The gemi-heart study.

AIM: To investigate the effects of gemigliptin on cardiac function and compare the effects of gemigliptin and glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty T2D patients being treated with metformin were assigned to a gemigliptin group (50 mg daily) or a glimepiride group (2 mg daily) for 24 weeks. The preadjudicated extension period was up to 52 weeks. Glucose metabolism variables and cardiac biomarkers were measured. Echocardiography was used to evaluate cardiac functions. RESULTS: The HbA1c levels decreased significantly from 8.1% ± 0.6% to 6.8% ± 0.6% in the gemigliptin group and from 8.1% ± 0.6% to 7.0% ± 0.7% in the glimepiride group, without a between-group difference. Gemigliptin reduced insulin resistance, high sensitivity C-reactive protein and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and blood pressure, and increased adiponectin level compared with glimepiride therapy. Gemigliptin induced favourable changes in body composition. Left ventricular end-diastolic volume decreased in the gemigliptin group but increased in the glimepiride group, with a borderline between-group difference. Cardiac biomarkers did not change significantly in either group. At 52 weeks, the HbA1c levels in both groups increased slightly; 7.3% ± 0.8% in the gemigliptin group versus 7.7% ± 1.3% in the glimepiride group, without a between-group difference. CONCLUSIONS: Gemigliptin had a comparable glucose-lowering efficacy without deleterious effects on cardiac functions or on biomarkers reflective of myocardial injury or heart failure during the 24-week observation period. However, larger, longer-term studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Long-term effects of dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus glimepiride on a background of metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: Results of a 104-week extension to a 52-week randomized, phase 3 study and liver fat MRI substudy.

AIM: To report the results of a 104-week extension to a 52-week study in which dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin (DAPA+SAXA) improved glycaemic control, liver fat and metabolic variables compared with glimepiride (GLIM) in participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D) receiving background metformin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This extension to a 52-week global, multicentre, parallel-group, active-controlled, double-blind study (NCT02419612) continued randomized participants (1:1) on DAPA+SAXA (10/5 mg) plus placebo, or GLIM (1-6 mg) plus placebo, once daily. Eligible participants were aged ≥18 years, had T2D (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 58.5-91.3 mmol/mol [7.5%-10.5%]), and a body mass index of 20.0 to 45.0 kg/m2 , and were receiving metformin (MET; ≥1500 mg/d). Key outcomes were: requirement for treatment intensification, based on HbA1c ≥53 mmol/mol (7%); achieving therapeutic glycaemic response; and changes in adipose tissue and liver fat on magnetic resonance imaging in a substudy. RESULTS: Overall, 382 participants entered and 338 completed the 104-week extension period (MRI substudy, n = 82). The need for treatment intensification during the 156-week period was lower for DAPA+SAXA+MET (37.0%) than GLIM+MET (55.6%; hazard ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.68; P < 0.001). At week 156, 21.4% of DAPA+SAXA+MET versus 11.7% of GLIM+MET participants achieved therapeutic glycaemic response (HbA1c <53 mmol/mol; odds ratio 2.1, 95% CI 1.23-3.42; P = 0.006). DAPA+SAXA+MET led to greater adjusted mean reductions from baseline in liver fat and visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue volumes versus GLIM+MET at week 122 (least-squares mean difference from GLIM+MET -4.89%, -0.41 L and -0.44 L, respectively; nominal P values ≤ 0.008). Safety was consistent with that of the monocomponents. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, glycaemic control, metabolic benefits and efficacy were better maintained with DAPA+SAXA+MET than with GLIM+MET in T2D.

Changing the approach to type 2 diabetes treatment: A comparison of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sulphonylureas across the continuum of care.

Despite the importance of individualised strategies for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and the availability of alternative treatments, including glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), sulphonylureas are still widely used in practice. Clinical evidence shows that GLP-1 RAs may provide better and more durable glycaemic control than sulphonylureas, with lower risk of hypoglycaemia. Other reported benefits of GLP-1 RAs include weight loss rather than weight gain (as observed with sulphonylureas), blood pressure reduction and improvement in lipid profiles. In general, the main adverse events with GLP-1 RAs are gastrointestinal in nature. The respective modes of action of GLP-1 RAs and sulphonylureas contribute to differences in the durability of glycaemic control (related to effects on beta-cells) and effects on body weight. Moreover, the glucose-dependent mode of action of GLP-1 RAs, which favours a low incidence of hypoglycaemia, contrasts with the glucose-independent mode of action of sulphonylureas. Evidence from cardiovascular outcomes trials indicates a consistent finding of cardiovascular safety across the GLP-1 RAs and suggests a class benefit for the long-acting GLP-1 RAs in reducing three-point major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality. In contrast, potential concerns relating to an increased incidence of adverse cardiovascular events with sulphonylureas have yet to be fully resolved. Recent updates to management guidelines recommend that treatment selection for patients with T2DM should consider clinical trial evidence of cardiovascular safety. Available evidence suggests that this selection should give preference to GLP-1 RAs over sulphonylureas, especially for patients at high cardiovascular risk.

Ambulatory noninsulin treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United States, 2015 to 2019.

OBJECTIVE: To examine trends in the noninsulin drug treatment of type 2 diabetes, including first- and second-line therapies on top of metformin, from 2015 to 2019. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: We conducted a descriptive analysis of cross-sectional data using the IQVIA National Disease and Therapeutic Index, a nationally representative audit of ambulatory physician practices in the United States. We focused on the use of noninsulin pharmacological treatments for type 2 diabetes among individuals aged 35 years and older between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. The main outcome was type 2 diabetes visits where a prescription drug was used ("treatment visit"). RESULTS: Ambulatory diabetes visits decreased from 30.1 million treatment visits in 2015 to 29.5 million treatment visits in 2019. Among treatment visits where a single drug was prescribed, the use of metformin declined from 57.0% of monotherapy in 2015 to 46.0% of monotherapy in 2019, while during the same period the share of monotherapy accounted for by glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists increased from 4.3% to 8.5% and the share accounted for by sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors increased from 7.3% to 19.5%. Among treatment visits where metformin plus another drug was prescribed, the share of second-line therapy accounted for by dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors decreased from 21.9% of treatment visits in 2015 to 20.8% of treatment visits in 2019; sulphonylurea use declined from 45.2% to 32.7%, use of SGLT2 inhibitors increased from 14.5% to 21.2% and use of GLP-1 receptor agonists increased from 9.8% to 18.2%. CONCLUSIONS: Significant changes in the landscape of ambulatory care for diabetes have taken place during the past 6 years, including moderate declines in metformin monotherapy, moderate declines in second-line sulphonylurea use, and large increases in SGLT2 use. These changes underscore the dynamic nature of drug utilization for diabetes in the United States, and reflect the effects of emerging evidence, evolving clinical guidelines and evolving regulatory and payment policies.

Cardiovascular outcomes and safety with linagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, compared with the sulphonylurea glimepiride in older people with type 2 diabetes: A subgroup analysis of the randomized CAROLINA trial.

AIM: To compare the cardiovascular (CV) safety of linagliptin with glimepiride in older and younger participants in the CAROLINA trial in both prespecified and post hoc analyses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: People aged 40 to 85 years with relatively early type 2 diabetes, inadequate glycaemic control and elevated CV risk were randomly assigned to linagliptin 5 mg or glimepiride 1 to 4 mg. The primary endpoint was time to first occurrence of three-point major adverse CV events (MACE: CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke). We evaluated clinical and safety outcomes across age groups. RESULTS: Of 6033 participants, 50.7% were aged <65 years, 35.3% were aged 65 to 74 years, and 14.0% were aged ≥75 years. During the 6.3-year median follow-up, CV/mortality outcomes did not differ between linagliptin and glimepiride overall (hazard ratio [HR] for three-point MACE 0.98, 95.47% confidence interval [CI] 0.84, 1.14) or across age groups (interaction P >0.05). Between treatment groups, reductions in glycated haemoglobin were comparable across age groups but moderate-to-severe hypoglycaemia was markedly reduced with linagliptin (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.15, 0.21) with no differences among age groups (P = 0.23). Mean weight was -1.54 kg (95% CI -1.80, -1.28) lower for linagliptin versus glimepiride. Adverse events increased with age, but were generally balanced between treatment groups. Significantly fewer falls or fractures occurred with linagliptin. CONCLUSIONS: Linagliptin and glimepiride were comparable for CV/mortality outcomes across age groups. Linagliptin had significantly lower risk of hypoglycaemia and falls or fractures than glimepiride, including in "older-old" individuals for whom these are particularly important treatment considerations.

The modifying effects of adiposity on the cardiovascular safety of sulphonylureas.

AIMS: To determine whether adiposity modified the effect on the cardiovascular safety of sulphonylureas as a first-line therapy compared with metformin among patients with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we conducted a cohort study among 13 862 new sulphonylurea users matched on body mass index (BMI) and propensity score, in a 1:1 ratio, to new metformin users between April 1, 1998 and December 31, 2016. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), individual components of MACE (myocardial infarction [MI], ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular mortality), and all-cause mortality, comparing use of sulphonylureas with use of metformin, overall and within BMI categories (≤24.9 kg/m2 , 25.0-29.9 kg/m2 , ≥30 kg/m2 ). RESULTS: Compared with metformin, sulphonylureas were not associated with an increased risk of MACE either overall (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.94-1.23) or by BMI category. Similar findings were observed for MI and ischaemic stroke. By contrast, sulphonylureas were associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.04-1.48), primarily among obese patients (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.08-2.13), and not among normal-weight patients (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.72-1.39; P-interaction 0.21). Similar results were observed for all-cause mortality (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.32-1.62), where an increased risk was observed among obese patients (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.49-2.25), but not normal-weight patients (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.99-1.42; P-interaction: 0.006). CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that adiposity may have a modifying effect on the association between sulphonylureas and cardiovascular and all-cause mortality compared with metformin.

Factors associated with switching from sulphonylureas to dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors among patients with type 2 diabetes in the United States.

AIMS: Studies examining the prevalence of and factors associated with switching from sulphonylureas (SUs) to dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors in real-world settings are lacking. We assessed the factors associated with switching from SUs to DPP-4 inhibitors in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart (2009-2018). Adults with type 2 diabetes and newly prescribed at least two SUs were included and were followed for 2 years after the initiation of SU (index date). We compared the characteristics of those who switched from SUs to DPP-4 inhibitors (only; no additional antidiabetic drugs) with those who continued with SUs (without adding other antidiabetic drugs) using multivariate logistic regression. Multinomial regression analyses were also conducted to assess the factors associated with switching to different drug classes versus continuation with SUs. RESULTS: In a sample of 119 107 new SU users, 2.2% (2633) switched to DPP-4 inhibitors, 3.8% (4542) switched to antidiabetic drugs other than DPP-4 inhibitors, 68.3% (81 394) discontinued SUs but did not switch to another antidiabetic drug, 12.9% (15 345) continued with SUs and added other antidiabetic drugs, and 12.8% (15 193) continued with SUs only. Multivariate logistic regression showed that those who had significantly higher likelihood of switching were younger, female [vs. males; adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.70], and living in the south; had previous use of DPP-4 inhibitors (AOR = 1.71); were not using antidiabetic drugs at baseline; had more baseline diabetes-related emergency room visits (AOR = 1.13), depression (AOR = 1.34), post-index hypoglycaemia (AOR = 2.20), and an earlier index year; and were glyburide users (vs. glimepiride users; AOR = 1.29). CONCLUSIONS: The discontinuation rate for SUs is high. Factors associated with switching from SUs to DPP-4 inhibitors included age, sex, geographic region, baseline antidiabetic drug use, type of SU, baseline diabetes-related emergency room visits, hypoglycaemia and depression.

NEUROD1 mutation in an Italian patient with maturity onset diabetes of the young 6: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Maturity Onset Diabetes of the Young (MODY) is a monogenic, autosomal, dominant disease that results in beta-cells dysfunction with consequent hyperglycaemia. It represents a rare form of diabetes (1-2% of all the cases). Sulphonylureas (SUs) represent the first-line treatment for this form of diabetes mellitus. NEUROD1 is expressed by the nervous and the pancreatic tissues, and it is necessary for the proper development of beta cells. A neurogenic differentiation factor 1 (NEUROD1) gene mutation causes beta-cells dysfunction, inadequate insulin secretion, and hyperglycaemia (MODY 6). CASE PRESENTATION: We have documented a new missense mutation (p.Met114Leu c.340A > C) of the NEUROD1 gene, pathogenetic for diabetes mellitus, in a 48 years-old man affected by diabetes since the age of 25 and treated with insulin basal-bolus therapy. Unfortunately, an attempt to replace rapid insulin with dapagliflozin has failed. However, after the genetic diagnosis of MODY6 and treatment with SUs, he was otherwise able to suspend rapid insulin and close glucose monitoring. Interestingly, our patient had an early onset dilated cardiomyopathy, though no data about cardiac diseases in patients with MODY 6 are available. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic criteria for MODY can overlap with other kinds of diabetes and most cases of genetic diabetes are still misdiagnosed as diabetes type 1 or 2. We encourage to suspect this disease in patients with a strong family history of diabetes, normal BMI, early-onset, and no autoimmunity. The appropriate therapy simplifies disease management and improves the quality of the patient's life.

Positioning sulphonylureas in a modern treatment algorithm for patients with type 2 diabetes: Expert opinion from a European consensus panel.

The large number of pharmacological agents available to treat type 2 diabetes (T2D) makes choosing the optimal drug for any given patient a complex task. Because newer agents offer several advantages, whether and when sulphonylureas (SUs) should still be used to treat T2D is controversial. Published treatment guidelines and recommendations should govern the general approach to diabetes management. However, expert opinions can aid in better understanding local practices and in formulating individual choices. The current consensus paper aims to provide additional guidance on the use of SUs in T2D. We summarize current local treatment guidelines in European countries, showing that SUs are still widely proposed as second-line treatment after metformin and are often ranked at the same level as newer glucose-lowering medications. Strong evidence now shows that sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are associated with low hypoglycaemia risk, promote weight loss, and exert a positive impact on vascular, cardiac and renal endpoints. Thus, using SUs in place of SGLT-2is and GLP-1RAs may deprive patients of key advantages and potentially important cardiorenal benefits. In subjects with ascertained cardiovascular disease or at very high cardiovascular risk, SGLT-2is and/or GLP-1RAs should be used as part of diabetes management, in the absence of contraindications. Routine utilization of SUs as second-line agents continues to be acceptable in resource-constrained settings.

ADVANCE in context: The benefits, risks and feasibility of providing intensive glycaemic control based on gliclazide modified release.

In the last 3 decades, four large multicentre, randomized clinical trials of patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS, ADVANCE, ACCORD and VADT) have studied different approaches to achieving near normal glycaemic targets. Each was designed against a background of international and national guidelines recommending glycaemic targets of 6.5% or less to prevent diabetic complications. Collectively, these clinical trials provide the most robust evidence of the potential vascular benefits and risks of more versus less glucose control and provide critical insights into how therapies are used. In this review, the glucose-lowering approach used by the ADVANCE trial is considered and compared with those used by the other trials.

Comparison of tofogliflozin versus glimepiride as the third oral agent added to metformin plus a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized, 24-week, open-label, controlled trial (STOP-OB).

Metformin plus a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) is the most common therapy for Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes. This 24-week, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group trial randomized patients on dual therapy to add-on tofogliflozin (20 mg/day, n = 33) or glimepiride (0.5 mg/day, n = 31). The primary outcome was change in body fat percentage. The secondary outcomes included changes in HbA1c, fat mass, fat-free mass, liver function variables and uric acid. Tofogliflozin and glimepiride reduced HbA1c to a similar extent. Body fat percentage did not change from baseline in either group. Fat mass was reduced by tofogliflozin but was increased by glimepiride (by -2.0 ± 1.7 kg and +1.6 ± 1.6 kg, P = .002). Fat-free mass was also reduced by tofogliflozin and increased by glimepiride (by -1.3 ± 1.3 kg and +0.9 ± 2.0 kg, P < .001). Alanine aminotransferase and uric acid levels were reduced by tofogliflozin (P = .006 and P < .001, respectively). These data provide novel information useful for selecting the third oral agent for patients whose diabetes is inadequately controlled with metformin plus DPP-4i dual therapy.

Sulfonylurea derivatives and risk of hypoglycaemia in type 2 diabetic patients.

Hypoglycemia related to treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients constantly represents a substantial problem. It is connected with higher mortality and lower quality of life, mostly displayed with elder patients. Therefore it is vital to revise the antidiabetic therapy regularly and to inquire for the associated risks. Nevertheless, elder patiens are often following the inadvisable treatment by sulphonylureas derivates, which represent the second most risky medication causing hypoglycemia after insulin. In our retrospective study we analysed the occurence of serious hypoglycemia, caused by any factor, with severe diabetics urgently hospitalised at The Department of Internal Medicine of Masaryk Hospital in Ústí nad Labem, in relation to the applied antidiabetic therapy. We suspected a negative influence of hypoglycemizing therapy (above all sulphonylureas) with the elderly patiens. In sum, we hospitalised 32 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (average age 76,5 ± 8,2 years), 18 of these using sulphonylureas (average age 77,4, with a relatively wide range from 65 to alarming 93 years). The average figure of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 0,745 (±0,293) ml/s/1,73m2. Moreover, the patients manifested polmorbidity - the average of comorbidities was 3,125, and even 3,5 with patiens on sulphonylureas. Following the arguments summarised above, we believe that hypoglycemic episodes are extremely dangerous especially for elder patients with T2DM, and from this point of view, the medication using sulphonylureas derivates seems to be inappropriate.

Evaluation of weight change and hypoglycaemia as mediators in the association between insulin use and death.

AIM: To evaluate whether weight change or hypoglycaemia mediates the association between insulin use and death. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a retrospective cohort of veterans who filled a new prescription for metformin and added insulin or sulphonylurea (2001-2012), we assessed change in body mass index (BMI) and hypoglycaemia during the first 12 months of treatment intensification. Cox proportional hazards models compared the risk of death between treatment groups. Using the difference method, we estimated the indirect effect and proportion mediated through each mediator. A sensitivity analysis assessed mediators in the first 6 months of intensified therapy. RESULTS: Among 28 892 patients surviving 12 months, deaths per 1000 person-years were 15.4 for insulin users and 12.9 for sulphonylurea users (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.87, 1.64). Change in BMI and hypoglycaemia mediated 13% (-98, 98) and -1% (-37, 71) of this association, respectively. Among 30 214 patients surviving 6 months, deaths per 1000 person-years were 34.8 for insulin users and 21.3 for sulphonylurea users (HR 1.66, 95% CI 1.28, 2.15). Change in BMI and hypoglycaemia mediated 9% (1, 23) and 0% (-9, 4) of this association, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We observed an increased risk of death among metformin users intensifying treatment with insulin versus sulphonylurea and surviving 6 months of intensified therapy, but not among those surviving 12 months. This association was mediated in part by weight change.

Reflections on the sulphonylurea story: A drug class at risk of extinction or a drug class worth reviving?

The role of sulphonylureas (SUs) in modern clinical practice poses ongoing clinical debate. With the advent of newer agents in diabetes management, there is an increasing shift away from the prescribing of SUs, but not necessarily to more effective agents. This review provides a different perspective on the debate, reflecting in depth upon the physiology of SUs, drawing on insights gained from monogenic diabetes to highlight the potential benefit of lower doses of SUs, and the probable benefit of gliclazide over most other, if not all SUs, in terms of sulphonylurea failure and cardiovascular outcomes.

Interaction between variants in the CYP2C9 and POR genes and the risk of sulfonylurea-induced hypoglycaemia: A GoDARTS Study.

Data on the association of CYP2C9 genetic polymorphisms with sulfonylurea (SU)-induced hypoglycaemia (SH) are inconsistent. Recent studies showed that variants in the P450 oxidoreductase (POR) gene could affect CYP2C9 activity. In this study, we explored the effects of POR*28 and combined CYP2C9*2 and CYP2C9*3 genotypes on SH and the efficacy of SU treatment in type 2 diabetes. A total of 1770 patients were included in the analysis of SU efficacy, assessed as the combined outcome of the HbA1c reduction and the prescribed SU daily dose. Sixty-nine patients with severe SH were compared with 311 control patients. The number of CYP2C9 deficient alleles was associated with nearly three-fold higher odds of hypoglycaemia (OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.30-6.09; P = .009) and better response to SU treatment (ß, -0.218; SE, 0.074; P = .003) only in patients carrying the POR*1/*1 genotype. Our results indicate that interaction between CYP2C9 and POR genes may be an important determinant of efficacy and severe adverse effects of SU treatment.

Direct head-to-head comparison of glycaemic durability of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and sulphonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis of long-term randomized controlled trials.

We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the long-term glycaemic durability of dipeptidyl-peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors vs that of sulphonylureas (SUs) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), in terms of the changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels from an intermediate time point (26 or 52 weeks) to 104 weeks of treatment. The Medline (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), and CENTER (Cochrane Library) databases were searched for relevant RCTs. Eight RCTs were included. Compared with SUs, DPP-4 inhibitors were associated with significantly smaller increases in the HbA1c level from 24 to 28 weeks to 104 weeks (mean difference [MD]: -0.16%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.21 to -0.11; P < .001) and from 52 weeks to 104 weeks (MD -0.06%, 95% CI -0.10 to -0.02; P = .001). No significant heterogeneities were detected among the included comparisons (I2 = 0%). These results suggest that long-term treatment with DPP-4 inhibitors confers better durability of glycaemic response than treatment with SUs in patients with T2DM, which may indicate that DPP-4 inhibitors better preserve islet ß-cell function compared with SUs.