Refractory Hypoglycemia Due to Sulfonylurea Contamination of Illicit Opioid Medications.

Illicit drug supply adulteration can heighten the risk for adverse health outcomes. Sulfonylurea medications are widely used in the treatment of diabetes mellitus (DM). Unintentional or intentional overdose of sulfonylureas can cause refractory hypoglycemia. This case report describes a 62-year-old male patient who presented to the emergency department (ED) after being found on the ground with signs of mild trauma. He was noted to be persistently hypoglycemic despite boluses of intravenous dextrose, a dextrose infusion, and oral nutrition. The patient did report purchase and oral ingestion of pills sold as oxycodone and that the pill shape and color were different from his usual supply. The patient was empirically treated with octreotide resulting in normalization of his serum glucose. Testing demonstrated a serum glipizide concentration six times the reporting range. This case represents unintentional sulfonylurea exposure in the setting of non-prescribed oxycodone use, resulting in hypoglycemia refractory to intravenous dextrose and oral nutrition. Octreotide is an additional potential treatment for this condition. As in this case, ingestion of street drugs may present a potential source of sulfonylurea exposure. Opioid contamination with sulfonylureas has not been widely reported in the literature and knowledge about this potential exposure is important for the prompt recognition and treatment of these patients by emergency physicians.

Encyclopaedic Review of Glipizide Pre-clinical and Clinical Status.

Glipizide is an oral glucose-lowering medication that is beneficial for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. This study compiles exhaustively all accessible information on glipizide, from preclinical to clinical studies. Glipizide may be used in concert with TRAIL to treat cancer cells; in vitro studies have shown that it suppresses angiogenesis and vasculogenesis while shielding cells from glycation-induced damage. Anticonvulsant effects and modifications in the pharmacokinetics of other medications, such as Divalproex Sodium, were seen in glipizide in vivo experiments. Propranolol amplifies glipizide's hypoglycemic effect briefly in normal animals but consistently enhances it in diabetic ones. In the treatment of cancer and neurodegenerative poly(Q) illnesses, glipizide has demonstrated to offer potential therapeutic advantages. It is ineffective in preventing DENA-induced liver cancer and may cause DNA damage over time. The way glipizide interacts with genetic variants may increase the risk of hypoglycemia. Combining Syzygium cumini and ARBE to glipizide may enhance glycemic and lipid control in type 2 diabetes. Individuals with coronary artery disease who take glipizide or glyburide have an increased risk of death. The risk of muscular responses and acute pancreatitis is minimal when glipizide and dulaglutide are combined. In conclusion, glipizide has shown promising therapeutic efficacy across a variety of disorders.

Comparative safety of sulfonylureas among U.S. nursing home residents.

BACKGROUND: The comparative safety of sulfonylureas (SUs) in nursing home (NH) residents remains understudied despite widespread use. We compared the effects of three SU medications and initial SU doses on adverse glycemic and cardiovascular events among NH residents. METHODS: This national retrospective cohort study linked Medicare claims with Minimum Data Set 2.0 assessments for long-stay NH residents aged ≥65 years between January 2008 and September 2010. Exposures were the SU medication initiated (glimepiride, glipizide, or glyburide) and doses (standard or reduced). One-year outcomes were hospitalizations or emergency department visits for severe hypoglycemia, heart failure (HF), stroke, and acute myocardial infarction (AMI). After the inverse probability of treatment and inverse probability of censoring by death weighting, we estimated hazard ratios (HR) using Cox regression models with robust 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: The cohort (N = 6821) included 3698 new glipizide, 1754 glimepiride, and 1369 glyburide users. Overall, the mean (standard deviation) age was 81.4 (8.2) years, 4816 (70.6%) were female, and 5164 (75.7%) were White non-Hispanic residents. The rates of severe hypoglycemia were 30.3 (95% CI 22.3-40.1), 49.0 (95% CI 34.5-67.5), and 35.9 (95% CI 22.2-54.9) events per 1000 person-years among new glipizide, glimepiride, and glyburide users, respectively (glimepiride versus glipizide HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.4, p = 0.04; glyburide versus glipizide HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.7-1.9, p = 0.59). The rates of severe hypoglycemia were 27.1 (95% CI 18.6-38.0) and 42.8 (95% CI 33.6-53.8) events per 1000 person-years among new users of reduced and standard SU doses, respectively (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4-3.5, p < 0.01). Rates of HF, stroke, and AMI were similar between medications and doses. CONCLUSIONS: Among long-stay NH residents, new use of glimepiride and standard SU doses resulted in higher rates of severe hypoglycemic events. Cardiovascular outcomes may not be affected by the choice of SU medication or dose.

The effects of glipizide on DNA damage and nuclear transport in differentiated 3T3-L1 adipocytes.

BACKGROUND: Despite commonly use for treatment of type II diabetes, possible effects of glipizide on nuclear transport and DNA damage in cells are unknown. Since clinical response of glipizide may change with aging, the aim of the study was to investigate the effect of glipizide by comparing mature and senescent adipocytes. METHODS AND RESULTS: The effects of glipizide were investigated in 3T3-L1 adipocytes. Effective and lethal doses were determined by real-time monitoring iCELLigence system. Comet assay was performed to determine DNA damage and quantitative PCR was conducted to detect gene expression levels. RAN expressions were found to be up regulated in mature 180 µM glipizide treated adipocytes compared to control group (p < 0.05); whereas down regulated in senescent 180 µM glipizide treated adipocytes compared to their control adipocytes (p < 0.05). Olive Tail Moment values were significantly higher in mature 180 µM glipizide treated adipocytes (MTG) and senescent 180 µM glipizide treated adipocytes (STG) comparing their untreated controls (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001 respectively). Also class 5 comets that shows severe DNA damage were found to be higher in both MTG and STG groups than their controls (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). OTM values were higher in STG than MTG (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that reports glipizide caused DNA damage increasing with senescence in adipocytes. As a response to glipizide treatment Ran gene expression increased in mature; and decreased in senescent adipocytes. Further studies are needed to reveal the effect of glipizide on DNA and nuclear interactions in molecular level.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors Used Concomitantly with Insulin Secretagogues and the Risk of Serious Hypoglycemia.

Serious hypoglycemia is a major adverse event associated with insulin secretagogues. Previous studies have suggested a potential relationship between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) used with sulfonylureas and serious hypoglycemia, and widely used drug compendia warn of this potential drug-drug interaction. We investigated the association between serious hypoglycemia and concomitant use of ACEIs in patients receiving insulin secretagogues, using the self-controlled case series design and Medicaid claims data from 5 US states linked to Medicare claims from 1999-2011. The exposure of interest was active prescription for ACEIs during insulin secretagogue or metformin (negative control object drug) episodes. The outcome was hospital presentation for serious hypoglycemia, identified by discharge diagnosis codes in inpatient and emergency department claims (positive predictive value ~ 78-89%). We calculated confounder-adjusted rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence internals (CIs) of outcome occurrence during ACEI-exposed vs. ACEI-unexposed time using conditional Poisson regression. The RRs for ACEIs were not statistically elevated during observation time of glipizide (RR, 1.06; CI, 0.98-1.15), glyburide (RR, 1.05; CI, 0.96-1.15), repaglinide (RR, 1.15; CI, 0.94-1.41), or metformin (RR, 1.02; CI, 0.97-1.06); but was modestly elevated with glimepiride (RR, 1.23; CI, 1.11-1.37) and modestly reduced with nateglinide (RR, 0.73; CI, 0.56-0.96). The overall pattern of results do not suggest that ACEIs used with insulin secretagogues were associated with increased rates of serious hypoglycemia, with the possible exception of glimepiride.

Risk of sudden cardiac arrest and ventricular arrhythmia with sulfonylureas: An experience with conceptual replication in two independent populations.

Sulfonylureas are commonly used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus. Despite awareness of their effects on cardiac physiology, a knowledge gap exists regarding their effects on cardiovascular events in real-world populations. Prior studies reported sulfonylurea-associated cardiovascular death but not serious arrhythmogenic endpoints like sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) or ventricular arrhythmia (VA). We assessed the comparative real-world risk of SCA/VA among users of second-generation sulfonylureas: glimepiride, glyburide, and glipizide. We conducted two incident user cohort studies using five-state Medicaid claims (1999-2012) and Optum Clinformatics commercial claims (2000-2016). Outcomes were SCA/VA events precipitating hospital presentation. We used Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for high-dimensional propensity scores, to generate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR). We identified 624,406 and 491,940 sulfonylurea users, and 714 and 385 SCA/VA events, in Medicaid and Optum, respectively. Dataset-specific associations with SCA/VA for both glimepiride and glyburide (vs. glipizide) were on opposite sides of and could not exclude the null (glimepiride: aHRMedicaid 1.17, 95% CI 0.96-1.42; aHROptum 0.84, 0.65-1.08; glyburide: aHRMedicaid 0.87, 0.74-1.03; aHROptum 1.11, 0.86-1.42). Database differences in data availability, populations, and documentation completeness may have contributed to the incongruous results. Emphasis should be placed on assessing potential causes of discrepancies between conflicting studies evaluating the same research question.

Insulin and glucose-lowering agents for treating people with diabetes and chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is the commonest cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Both conditions commonly co-exist. Glucometabolic changes and concurrent dialysis in diabetes and CKD make glucose-lowering challenging, increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. Glucose-lowering agents have been mainly studied in people with near-normal kidney function. It is important to characterise existing knowledge of glucose-lowering agents in CKD to guide treatment. OBJECTIVES: To examine the efficacy and safety of insulin and other pharmacological interventions for lowering glucose levels in people with diabetes and CKD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 February 2018 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs looking at head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in people with diabetes and CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, and quality of data and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: Forty-four studies (128 records, 13,036 participants) were included. Nine studies compared sodium glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to placebo; 13 studies compared dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors to placebo; 2 studies compared glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists to placebo; 8 studies compared glitazones to no glitazone treatment; 1 study compared glinide to no glinide treatment; and 4 studies compared different types, doses or modes of administration of insulin. In addition, 2 studies compared sitagliptin to glipizide; and 1 study compared each of sitagliptin to insulin, glitazars to pioglitazone, vildagliptin to sitagliptin, linagliptin to voglibose, and albiglutide to sitagliptin. Most studies had a high risk of bias due to funding and attrition bias, and an unclear risk of detection bias.Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 1092 participants: MD -0.29%, -0.38 to -0.19 (-3.2 mmol/mol, -4.2 to -2.2); I2 = 0%), fasting blood glucose (FBG) (5 studies, 855 participants: MD -0.48 mmol/L, -0.78 to -0.19; I2 = 0%), systolic blood pressure (BP) (7 studies, 1198 participants: MD -4.68 mmHg, -6.69 to -2.68; I2 = 40%), diastolic BP (6 studies, 1142 participants: MD -1.72 mmHg, -2.77 to -0.66; I2 = 0%), heart failure (3 studies, 2519 participants: RR 0.59, 0.41 to 0.87; I2 = 0%), and hyperkalaemia (4 studies, 2788 participants: RR 0.58, 0.42 to 0.81; I2 = 0%); but probably increase genital infections (7 studies, 3086 participants: RR 2.50, 1.52 to 4.11; I2 = 0%), and creatinine (4 studies, 848 participants: MD 3.82 µmol/L, 1.45 to 6.19; I2 = 16%) (all effects of moderate certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may reduce weight (5 studies, 1029 participants: MD -1.41 kg, -1.8 to -1.02; I2 = 28%) and albuminuria (MD -8.14 mg/mmol creatinine, -14.51 to -1.77; I2 = 11%; low certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may have little or no effect on the risk of cardiovascular death, hypoglycaemia, acute kidney injury (AKI), and urinary tract infection (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether SGLT2 inhibitors have any effect on death, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), hypovolaemia, fractures, diabetic ketoacidosis, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.62%, -0.85 to -0.39 (-6.8 mmol/mol, -9.3 to -4.3); I2 = 59%) but may have little or no effect on FBG (low certainty evidence). DPP-4 inhibitors probably have little or no effect on cardiovascular death (2 studies, 5897 participants: RR 0.93, 0.77 to 1.11; I2 = 0%) and weight (2 studies, 210 participants: MD 0.16 kg, -0.58 to 0.90; I2 = 29%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may have little or no effect on heart failure, upper respiratory tract infections, and liver impairment (low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether DPP-4 inhibitors have any effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, GLP-1 agonists probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.53%, -1.01 to -0.06 (-5.8 mmol/mol, -11.0 to -0.7); I2 = 41%; moderate certainty evidence) and may reduce weight (low certainty evidence). GLP-1 agonists may have little or no effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether GLP-1 agonists reduce FBG, increase gastrointestinal symptoms, or affect the risk of pancreatitis (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether glitazones have any effect on HbA1c, FBG, death, weight, and risk of hypoglycaemia (very low certainty evidence).Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin probably reduces hypoglycaemia (2 studies, 551 participants: RR 0.40, 0.23 to 0.69; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin may have had little or no effect on HbA1c, FBG, weight, and eGFR (low certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, it is uncertain if sitagliptin has any effect on death or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty).For types, dosages or modes of administration of insulin and other head-to-head comparisons only individual studies were available so no conclusions could be made. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents in diabetes and CKD is limited. SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists are probably efficacious for glucose-lowering and DPP-4 inhibitors may be efficacious for glucose-lowering. Additionally, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce BP, heart failure, and hyperkalaemia but increase genital infections, and slightly increase creatinine. The safety profile for GLP-1 agonists is uncertain. No further conclusions could be made for the other classes of glucose-lowering agents including insulin. More high quality studies are required to help guide therapeutic choice for glucose-lowering in diabetes and CKD.

Comparative Safety of Sulfonylureas and the Risk of Sudden Cardiac Arrest and Ventricular Arrhythmia.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between individual antidiabetic sulfonylureas and outpatient-originating sudden cardiac arrest and ventricular arrhythmia (SCA/VA). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using 1999-2010 U.S. Medicaid claims from five large states. Exposures were determined by incident use of glyburide, glimepiride, or glipizide. Glipizide served as the reference exposure, as its effects are believed to be highly pancreas specific. Outcomes were ascertained by a validated ICD-9-based algorithm indicative of SCA/VA (positive predictive value ∼85%). Potential confounding was addressed by adjustment for multinomial high-dimensional propensity scores included as continuous variables in a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Of sulfonylurea users under study (N = 519,272), 60.3% were female and 34.9% non-Hispanic Caucasian, and the median age was 58.0 years. In 176,889 person-years of sulfonylurea exposure, we identified 632 SCA/VA events (50.5% were immediately fatal) for a crude incidence rate of 3.6 per 1,000 person-years. Compared with glipizide, propensity score-adjusted hazard ratios for SCA/VA were 0.82 (95% CI 0.69-0.98) for glyburide and 1.10 (0.89-1.36) for glimepiride. Numerous secondary analyses showed a very similar effect estimate for glyburide; yet, not all CIs excluded the null. CONCLUSIONS: Glyburide may be associated with a lower risk of SCA/VA than glipizide, consistent with a very small clinical trial suggesting that glyburide may reduce ventricular tachycardia and isolated ventricular premature complexes. This potential benefit must be contextualized by considering putative effects of different sulfonylureas on other cardiovascular end points, cerebrovascular end points, all-cause death, and hypoglycemia.

Pharmacologic Differences of Sulfonylureas and the Risk of Adverse Cardiovascular and Hypoglycemic Events.

OBJECTIVE: Sulfonylureas have been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular adverse events and hypoglycemia, but it is unclear if these risks vary with different agents. We assessed whether the risks of acute myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and severe hypoglycemia differ between sulfonylureas grouped according to pancreas specificity and duration of action. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Using the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Datalink, linked with the Hospital Episodes Statistics and the Office for National Statistics databases, we conducted a cohort study among patients with type 2 diabetes initiating monotherapy with sulfonylureas between 1998 and 2013. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models, comparing use of pancreas-nonspecific, long-acting sulfonylureas (glyburide/glimepiride) to pancreas-specific, short-acting sulfonylureas (gliclazide/glipizide/tolbutamide). RESULTS: The cohort included 17,604 sulfonylurea initiators (mean [SD] follow-up 1.2 [1.5] years). Compared with specific, short-acting sulfonylureas (15,741 initiators), nonspecific, long-acting sulfonylureas (1,863 initiators) were not associated with an increased risk of acute myocardial infarction (HR 0.86; CI 0.55-1.34), ischemic stroke (HR 0.92; CI 0.59-1.45), cardiovascular death (HR 1.01; CI 0.72-1.40), or all-cause mortality (HR 0.81; CI 0.66-1.003), but with an increased risk of severe hypoglycemia (HR 2.83; CI 1.64-4.88). CONCLUSIONS: The nonspecific, long-acting sulfonylureas glyburide and glimepiride do not have an increased risk of cardiovascular adverse events compared with the specific, short-acting sulfonylureas gliclazide, glipizide, and tolbutamide. However, nonspecific, long-acting sulfonylureas glyburide and glimepiride have an increased risk of severe hypoglycemia.

Sentinel Modular Program for Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Analyses: Application to Glyburide, Glipizide, and Serious Hypoglycemia.

Sentinel is a program sponsored by the US Food and Drug Administration to monitor the safety of medical products. We conducted a cohort assessment to evaluate the ability of the Sentinel Propensity Score Matching Tool to reproduce in an expedited fashion the known association between glyburide (vs. glipizide) and serious hypoglycemia. Thirteen data partners who contribute to the Sentinel Distributed Database participated in this analysis. A pretested and customizable analytic program was run at each individual site. De-identified summary results from each data partner were returned and aggregated at the Sentinel Operations Center. We identified a total of 198,550 and 379,507 new users of glyburide and glipizide, respectively. The incidence of emergency department visits and hospital admissions for serious hypoglycemia was 19 per 1000 person-years (95% confidence interval = 17.9, 19.7) for glyburide users and 22 (21.6, 22.7) for glipizide users. In cohorts matched by propensity score based on predefined variables, the hazard ratio (HR) for glyburide was 1.36 (1.24, 1.49) versus glipizide. In cohorts matched on a high-dimensional propensity score based on empirically selected variables, for which the program ran to completion in five data partners, the HR was 1.49 (1.31, 1.70). In cohorts matched on propensity scores based on both predefined and empirically selected variables via the high-dimensional propensity score algorithm (the same five data partners), the HR was 1.51 (1.32, 1.71). These findings are consistent with the literature, and demonstrate the ability of the Sentinel Propensity Score Matching Tool to reproduce this known association in an expedited fashion.See video abstract at, http://links.lww.com/EDE/B275.

Biomedical Informatics Approaches to Identifying Drug-Drug Interactions: Application to Insulin Secretagogues.

BACKGROUND: Drug-drug interactions with insulin secretagogues are associated with increased risk of serious hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. We aimed to systematically screen for drugs that interact with the five most commonly used secretagogues-glipizide, glyburide, glimepiride, repaglinide, and nateglinide-to cause serious hypoglycemia. METHODS: We screened 400 drugs frequently coprescribed with the secretagogues as candidate interacting precipitants. We first predicted the drug-drug interaction potential based on the pharmacokinetics of each secretagogue-precipitant pair. We then performed pharmacoepidemiologic screening for each secretagogue of interest, and for metformin as a negative control, using an administrative claims database and the self-controlled case series design. The overall rate ratios (RRs) and those for four predefined risk periods were estimated using Poisson regression. The RRs were adjusted for multiple estimation using semi-Bayes method, and then adjusted for metformin results to distinguish native effects of the precipitant from a drug-drug interaction. RESULTS: We predicted 34 pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions with the secretagogues, nine moderate and 25 weak. There were 140 and 61 secretagogue-precipitant pairs associated with increased rates of serious hypoglycemia before and after the metformin adjustment, respectively. The results from pharmacokinetic prediction correlated poorly with those from pharmacoepidemiologic screening. CONCLUSIONS: The self-controlled case series design has the potential to be widely applicable to screening for drug-drug interactions that lead to adverse outcomes identifiable in healthcare databases. Coupling pharmacokinetic prediction with pharmacoepidemiologic screening did not notably improve the ability to identify drug-drug interactions in this case.

Comparison of alogliptin and glipizide for composite endpoint of glycated haemoglobin reduction, no hypoglycaemia and no weight gain in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

This was a post hoc analysis of a 2-year, double-blind study of 2639 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy, which assessed achievement of a composite endpoint of sustained glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction (≤7.0% at week 104 or ≥0.5% decrease from baseline) with no weight gain and no hypoglycaemic events with alogliptin 12.5 and 25 mg daily or glipizide (≤20 mg daily), each added to metformin. With an HbA1c target of ≤7.0%, 24.2 and 26.9% of patients treated with alogliptin 12.5 and 25 mg, respectively, achieved the composite endpoint versus 10.7% of patients treated with glipizide (both p < 0.001). With a criterion of ≥0.5% decrease in HbA1c, the composite endpoint was reached in 22.5, 25.2 and 10.4% of patients treated with alogliptin 12.5 mg, alogliptin 25 mg and glipizide, respectively. Odds ratios for achieving the composite endpoint favoured alogliptin in the primary analysis set and in all subgroups of patients. Patients with T2DM failing metformin monotherapy were more likely to achieve sustained glycaemic control with no hypoglycaemia or weight gain at 2 years with alogliptin than with glipizide.

Severe hypoglycemia in users of sulfonylurea antidiabetic agents and antihyperlipidemics.

Drug-drug interactions causing severe hypoglycemia due to antidiabetic drugs is a major clinical and public health problem. We assessed whether sulfonylurea use with a statin or fibrate was associated with severe hypoglycemia. We conducted cohort studies of users of glyburide, glipizide, and glimepiride plus a statin or fibrate within a Medicaid population. The outcome was a validated, diagnosis-based algorithm for severe hypoglycemia. Among 592,872 persons newly exposed to a sulfonylurea+antihyperlipidemic, the incidence of severe hypoglycemia was 5.8/100 person-years. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for sulfonylurea+statins were consistent with no association. Most overall HRs for sulfonylurea+fibrate were elevated, with sulfonylurea-specific adjusted HRs as large as 1.50 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.24-1.81) for glyburide+gemfibrozil, 1.37 (95% CI: 1.11-1.69) for glipizide+gemfibrozil, and 1.63 (95% CI: 1.29-2.06) for glimepiride+fenofibrate. Concomitant therapy with a sulfonylurea and fibrate is associated with an often delayed increased rate of severe hypoglycemia.

HYPOGLYCEMIA INDUCED BY ANTIDIABETIC SULFONYLUREAS.

Diabetes mellitus is a major health problem due to its increasing prevalence and life-threatening complications. Antidiabetic sulfonylureas represent the first-line drugs in type 2 diabetes even though the most common associated risk is pharmacologically-induced hypoglycemia. In the development of this side effect are involved several factors including the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of the drug, patient age and behavior, hepatic or renal dysfunctions, or other drugs associated with a high risk of interactions. If all these are controlled, the risk-benefit balance can be equal to other oral antidiabetic drugs.

Mortality risk among sulfonylureas: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sulfonylureas are common second-line options for management of type 2 diabetes; however, they are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events compared with other antidiabetic drugs. Since tissue selectivity and risk of hypoglycaemia differ among sulfonylureas, we aimed to assess whether mortality and the risk of cardiovascular events also varies. METHODS: We searched Medline and Embase from inception to June 11, 2014, to identify controlled studies reporting the risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular-related mortality, or myocardial infarction for at least two sulfonylureas. We examined differences in cardiovascular event risk among sulfonylureas with random effects models for direct pairwise comparisons and network meta-analyses to incorporate direct and indirect data. FINDINGS: 14 970 (9%) of 167 327 patients in 18 studies died: 841 (4%) of 19 334 gliclazide users, 5482 (11%) of 49 389 glimepiride users, 2106 (15%) of 14 464 glipizide users, 5296 (7%) of 77 169 glibenclamide users, 1066 (17%) of 6187 tolbutamide users, and 179 (23%) of 784 chlorpropamide users. Inconsistency was low for the network meta-analysis of all-cause mortality, and the relative risk of death compared with glibenclamide was 0·65 (95% credible interval 0·53-0·79) for gliclazide, 0·83 (0·68-1·00) for glimepiride, 0·98 (0·80-1·19) for glipizide, 1·13 (0·90-1·42) for tolbutamide, and 1·34 (0·98-1·86) for chlorpropamide. Similar associations were noted for cardiovascular-related mortality: the relative risk compared with glibenclamide was 0·60 (95% credible interval 0·45-0·84) for gliclazide, 0·79 (0·57-1·11) for glimepiride, 1·01 (0·72-1·43) for glipizide, 1·11 (0·79-1·55) for tolbutamide, and 1·45 (0·88-2·44) for chlorpropamide. INTERPRETATION: Gliclazide and glimepiride were associated with a lower risk of all-cause and cardiovascular-related mortality compared with glibenclamide. Clinicians should consider possible differences in risk of mortality when selecting a sulfonylurea. FUNDING: None.

Coadministration of co-trimoxazole with sulfonylureas: hypoglycemia events and pattern of use.

BACKGROUND: Coadministration of co-trimoxazole with sulfonylureas is reported to increase the risk of hypoglycemia. METHODS: We identified a cohort of Medicare beneficiaries aged 66 years or older who took glyburide or glipizide for diabetes from a 5% national sample of Medicare Part D claims data in 2008 (n = 34,239). We tracked each participant's claims during 2008-2010 for a co-trimoxazole prescription and subsequent emergency room visits for hypoglycemia. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression modeling were used to evaluate hypoglycemia-related emergency room visits after coadministration of co-trimoxazole with sulfonylureas and its utilization patterns in older adults with diabetes. RESULTS: Sulfonylureas users prescribed co-trimoxazole had a significant higher risk of emergency room visits for hypoglycemia, compared with those prescribed noninteracting antibiotics (odds ratio = 3.89, 95% confidence interval = 2.29-6.60 for glipizide and odds ratio = 3.78, 95% confidence interval = 1.81-7.90 for glyburide with co-trimoxazole, using amoxicillin as the reference). Co-trimoxazole was prescribed to 16.9% of those taking glyburide or glipizide during 2008-2010, varying from 4.0% to 35.9% across U.S. hospital referral regions. Patients with polypharmacy and with more prescribers were more likely to receive co-trimoxazole. Patients with an identifiable primary care physician had 20% lower odds of receiving a co-trimoxazole prescription. Hospital referral regions with more PCPs had lower rates of coadministration of the two drugs (r = -.26, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Coadministration of co-trimoxazole with sulfonylureas is associated with increased risk of hypoglycemia, compared with noninteracting antibiotics. Such coadministration is prevalent among older diabetic patients in the United States, especially in patients without an identifiable primary care physician.

Hypoglycemia after antimicrobial drug prescription for older patients using sulfonylureas.

IMPORTANCE: Certain antimicrobial drugs interact with sulfonylureas to increase the risk of hypoglycemia. OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk of hypoglycemia and associated costs in older patients prescribed glipizide or glyburide who fill a prescription for an antimicrobial drug. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a retrospective cohort study of Texas Medicare claims from 2006 to 2009 for patients 66 years or older who were prescribed glipizide or glyburide and who also filled a prescription for 1 of the 16 antimicrobials most commonly prescribed for this population. METHODS: We assessed hypoglycemia events and associated Medicare costs in patients prescribed 1 of 7 antimicrobial agents thought to interact with sulfonylureas, using noninteracting antimicrobials as a comparison. We used a repeated measure logistic regression, controlling for age, sex, ethnicity, Medicaid eligibility, comorbidity, prior emergency department visits for hypoglycemia, prior hospitalizations for any cause, nursing home residence, and indication for the antimicrobial. We estimated odds of hypoglycemia, number needed to harm, deaths during hospitalization for hypoglycemia, and Medicare costs for hypoglycemia treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Any hospitalization or emergency department visit owing to hypoglycemia within 14 days of antimicrobial exposure. RESULTS: In multivariable analyses controlling for patient characteristics and indication for antimicrobial drug use, clarithromycin (odds ratio [OR], 3.96 [95% CI, 2.42-6.49]), levofloxacin (OR, 2.60 [95% CI, 2.18-3.10]), sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim (OR, 2.56 [95% CI, 2.12-3.10]), metronidazole (OR, 2.11 [95% CI, 1.28-3.47]), and ciprofloxacin (OR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.33-1.97]) were associated with higher rates of hypoglycemia compared with a panel of noninteracting antimicrobials. The number needed to harm ranged from 71 for clarithromycin to 334 for ciprofloxacin. Patient factors associated with hypoglycemia included older age, female sex, black or Hispanic race/ethnicity, higher comorbidity, and prior hypoglycemic episode. In 2009, 28.3% of patients prescribed a sulfonylurea filled a prescription for 1 of these 5 antimicrobials, which were associated with 13.2% of all hypoglycemia events in patients taking sulfonylureas. The treatment of subsequent hypoglycemia adds $30.54 in additional Medicare costs to each prescription of 1 of those 5 antimicrobials given to patients taking sulfonylureas. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Prescription of interacting antimicrobial drugs to patients on sulfonylureas is very common, and is associated with substantial morbidity and increased costs.

Durability of the efficacy and safety of alogliptin compared with glipizide in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a 2-year study.

AIMS: To evaluate the long-term durability of the efficacy of alogliptin compared with glipizide in combination with metformin in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on stable-dose metformin. METHODS: This multicentre, double-blind, active-controlled study randomized 2639 patients aged 18-80 years to 104 weeks of treatment with metformin in addition to alogliptin 12.5 mg once daily (n = 880), alogliptin 25 mg once daily (n = 885) or glipizide 5 mg once daily, titrated to a maximum of 20 mg (n = 874). The primary endpoint was least square mean change from baseline in HbA1c level at 104 weeks. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 55.4 years, the mean diabetes duration was 5.5 years and the mean baseline HbA1c was 7.6%. HbA1c reductions at week 104 were -0.68%, -0.72% and -0.59% for alogliptin 12.5 and 25 mg and glipizide, respectively [both doses met the criteria for non-inferiority to glipizide (p<0.001); alogliptin 25 mg met superiority criteria (p=0.010)]. Fasting plasma glucose concentration decreased by 0.05 and 0.18 mmol/l for alogliptin 12.5 and 25 mg, respectively, and increased by 0.30 mmol/l for glipizide (p < 0.001 for both comparisons with glipizide). Mean weight changes were -0.68, -0.89 and 0.95 kg for alogliptin 12.5 and 25 mg and glipizide, respectively (p < 0.001 for both comparisons with glipizide). Hypoglycaemia occurred in 23.2% of patients in the glipizide group vs. 2.5 and 1.4% of patients in the alogliptin 12.5 and 25 mg groups, respectively. Pancreatitis occurred in one patient in the alogliptin 25 mg group and three in the glipizide group. CONCLUSIONS: Alogliptin efficacy was sustained over 2 years in patients with inadequate glycaemic control on metformin alone.

Durability of glycaemic efficacy over 2 years with dapagliflozin versus glipizide as add-on therapies in patients whose type 2 diabetes mellitus is inadequately controlled with metformin.

AIMS: To assess the long-term glycaemic durability, safety and tolerability of dapagliflozin versus glipizide as add-on therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by metformin alone. METHODS: This was a 52-week, randomised, double-blind study of dapagliflozin (n = 406) versus glipizide (n = 408), uptitrated over 18 weeks according to tolerability and glycaemic response to a maximum of 10 and 20 mg/day, respectively, as add-on therapies to metformin (≥ 1500 mg/day) with a 156-week double-blind extension period. Data over 104 weeks are reported here. RESULTS: In total, 53.1% of patients completed 104 weeks of treatment. After the greater initial decrease (0-18 weeks) in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) with glipizide, the 18-104-week HbA1c coefficient of failure (CoF) was lower with dapagliflozin (0.13%/year) than with glipizide (0.59%/year), resulting in significant dapagliflozin versus glipizide differences of -0.46%/year (95% CI -0.60,-0.33; p = 0.0001) for CoF and -0.18%(-2.0 mmol/mol) [95% CI -0.33(-3.6),-0.03(-0.3); p = 0.021] for 104-week HbA1c. Dapagliflozin produced sustained reductions in weight and systolic blood pressure, whereas glipizide increased weight and systolic blood pressure, giving 104-week dapagliflozin versus glipizide differences of -5.1 kg (95% CI: -5.7,-4.4) and -3.9 mmHg (95% CI: -6.1,-1.7), respectively. Over 104 weeks, the hypoglycaemia rate was 10-fold lower with dapagliflozin than with glipizide (4.2 vs. 45.8%), whereas patient proportions with events suggestive of genital infection and of urinary tract infection (UTI) were greater with dapagliflozin (14.8 and 13.5%, respectively) than with glipizide (2.9 and 9.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Over 2 years, compared with glipizide, dapagliflozin demonstrated greater glycaemic durability, sustained reductions in weight and systolic blood pressure and a low hypoglycaemia rate; however, genital infections and UTIs occurred more frequently.

Pharmacoepidemiologic and in vitro evaluation of potential drug-drug interactions of sulfonylureas with fibrates and statins.

AIMS: To examine whether initiation of fibrates or statins in sulfonylurea users is associated with hypoglycaemia, and examine in vitro inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes by statins, fenofibrate and glipizide. METHODS: We used healthcare data to conduct nested case-control studies of serious hypoglycaemia (i.e. resulting in hospital admission or emergency department treatment) in persons taking glipizide or glyburide, and calculated adjusted overall and time-stratified odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We also characterized the in vitro inhibition of CYP enzymes by statins, fenofibrate and glipizide using fluorometric CYP450 inhibition assays, and estimated area under the concentration-time curve ratios (AUCRs) for the drug pairs. RESULTS: We found elevated adjusted overall ORs for glyburide-fenofibrate (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.37, 2.47) and glyburide-gemfibrozil (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.25, 1.96). The apparent risk did decline over time as might be expected from a pharmacokinetic mechanism. Fenofibrate was a potent in vitro inhibitor of CYP2C19 (IC50 = 0.2 µm) and CYP2B6 (IC50 = 0.7 µm) and a moderate inhibitor of CYP2C9 (IC50 = 9.7 µm). The predicted CYP-based AUCRs for fenofibrate-glyburide and gemfibrozil-glyburide interactions were only 1.09 and 1.04, suggesting that CYP inhibition is unlikely to explain such an interaction. CONCLUSIONS: Use of fenofibrate or gemfibrozil together with glyburide was associated with elevated overall risks of serious hypoglycaemia. CYP inhibition seems unlikely to explain this observation. We speculate that a pharmacodynamic effect of fibrates (e.g. activate peroxisome proliferator-activator receptor alpha) may contribute to these apparent interactions.