Effects of exenatide and metformin in combination on some adipocytokine levels: a comparison with metformin monotherapy.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of exenatide on levels of serum adipocytokines and on ß-cell function. The study was conducted between 2008 and 2012. After a run-in period with metformin, 174 patients with type-2 diabetes were randomly distributed to either a group receiving exenatide at 10 µg twice daily, or a group receiving the placebo, for 12 months. We evaluated body mass index (BMI), blood pressure, glycemic control, lipid profile, fasting plasma insulin (FPI), HOMA-IR, HOMA-ß, fasting plasma proinsulin (FPPr), proinsulin : fasting plasma insulin ratio (Pr/FPI ratio), C-peptide, glucagon, retinol binding protein-4 (RBP-4), visfatin, omentin-1, and microalbuminuria. We used ELISA methods to assess the various parameters. Patients also underwent a combined euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic and hyperglycemic clamp, with subsequent arginine stimulation. After 12 months, a combination of exenatide and metformin produced a better decrease in body mass, BMI, glycemic control, FPI, FPPr, FPPr/FPI ratio, HOMA-IR, and glucagon level. Treatment with exenatide + metformin was superior to the placebo + metformin in increasing HOMA-ß, C-peptide, and ß-cell function. Significant negative correlations were found between M value, an index of insulin sensitivity, and measured adipocytokines. In conclusion, the combination of exenatide + metformin plays a role in improving some adipocytokine levels, and is better than metformin alone. The significant negative correlation between M value and measured adipocytokines is another confirmation of the positive effects linked to the improvement in insulin sensitivity.

Continuous glucose monitoring system in free-living healthy subjects: results from a pilot study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The Continuous Glucose Monitoring System (CGMS) (Medtronic Minimed, Northridge, CA) provides an opportunity to better understand abnormalities in glucose metabolism in both healthy subjects and those with diabetes. The aims of our study were to assess the reliability of CGMS compared to self-monitoring of blood glucose (BG) and to analyze the graphs obtained in a sample of healthy free-living subjects in order to establish the suitability of CGMS in physiological studies. METHODS: Eighteen healthy adults, 12 women and six men, were enrolled in this study. Each subject performed 24-h CGMS and inserted 24 glycemic values, measured through a glucose meter, during their common daily activities. Three subjects were excluded from the analysis since they did not meet accuracy criteria. None of the participants received any advice as regard diet and physical activity. Means and standard deviations were used to summarize quantitative data. Normal distribution of data was tested with the Shapiro-Wilk W test. Differences over time and association between glucose levels with other variables were evaluated with linear regression models for repeated measures. RESULTS: We did not find statistically significant differences between CGMS measures and meter readings. In the subjects studied the mean glucose levels increase according to age, and we found a mean increase in glucose concentration of 0.50 mg/dL for every year of age. As regards gender, men presented a 4.63% higher mean glucose concentration than women. A 1.16% higher glucose concentration for every unit (kg/m(2)) of body mass index (BMI) was observed in both groups. All subjects presented glucose concentrations within the established range of normal glucose levels for 91% of the total duration of CGMS. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that long-term studies on larger groups of healthy subjects performing CGMS would be useful in order to better understand if BMI, daily stressors due to work or psychological stress, or other factors can influence daily BG variability and if these nonpathological alterations are related to development of glucose metabolism disorders.

Rosiglitazone therapy improves insulin resistance parameters in overweight and obese diabetic patients intolerant to metformin.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have directly compared rosiglitazone and metformin effects on adipocytokines. The aim was to observe the possible effects of rosiglitazone and metformin on glycemic control, insulin sensitivity, plasma leptin (pL), adiponectin (ADN), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), and resistin (R) in overweight and obese diabetic patients intolerant to metformin. METHODS: Six hundred and ninety-four consecutive overweight and obese type 2 diabetic patients were evaluated and 56 patients were intolerant to metformin at maximum dosage. We added rosiglitazone to metformin in these intolerant patients (RM) and we compared them with 61 patients treated with metformin (M) in a single-blind placebo-controlled trial. We evaluated body mass index (BMI), glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting plasma insulin (FPI), pL, ADN, TNF-alpha, and R at baseline and after 3 and 6 months. Furthermore, we calculated insulin resistance index (HOMA-index) using FPG and FPI. RESULTS: Glycated hemoglobin, FPG, FPI, and HOMA-index results were lower than baseline values in RM and M groups. Glycated hemoglobin and HOMA-index values were significantly lower in RM group compared to M group at 6 months. Plasma leptin, ADN, TNF-alpha, and R were significantly improved in RM group compared to M group at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: No BMI change was observed, probably because rosiglitazone was added to metformin, that could mitigate the body increase of rosiglitazone. Rosiglitazone improved glycemic control and insulin resistance-correlated parameters when added to intolerant metformin patients. These data suggest that rosiglitazone may be the drug of choice for the treatment of overweight and obese type 2 diabetic patients.

Blood pressure control and inflammatory markers in type 2 diabetic patients treated with pioglitazone or rosiglitazone and metformin.

The aim of the study was to assess the effects of the combination of metformin plus pioglitazone or rosiglitazone on glucose and blood pressure in type 2 diabetic patients with metabolic syndrome, as well as its tolerability in those patients. In this 12-month, multicentric, double-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial, all patients began with metformin. Patients were randomized for self-administration of either pioglitazone or rosiglitazone for 12 months. We assessed body mass index (BMI), glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)], fasting and postprandial plasma glucose and insulin levels [FPG, PPG, FPI and PPI, respectively] and homeostasis model assessment [HOMA] index) and systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP, respectively), at baseline and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of treatment, as well as high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), nitrites/nitrates and adiponectin (ADN) at baseline and at 12 months of treatment. Significant HbA(1c) decreases were obtained after 9 (p<0.05) and 12 (p<0.01) months in both groups. After 9 and 12 months, mean FPG and PPG levels were decreased in both groups (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). We observed decreases in FPI and PPI at 9 and 12 months (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively) compared to the baseline values in both groups. Furthermore, HOMA index improvement over the baseline value was obtained only at 12 months (p<0.05) in both groups. SBP and DBP improved significantly (p<0.05, for each) in both groups after 12 months. hs-CRP decreased significantly (p<0.05) in both groups after 12 months; nitrites/nitrates and ADN increased significantly (p<0.05, for each) in both groups after 12 months. The combination of thiazolinediones and metformin is associated with a slight but significant improvement in the long-term blood pressure control of these patients, and with an improvement in the anti-inflammatory state, both of which are related to a similar reduction in insulin-resistance.

Matrix metalloproteinase-2, -9, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 in patients with hypertension.

There are conflicting data in the literature regarding the expression pattern of the vascular matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) system and their inhibitors (TIMPs) in human hypertension. The authors hypothesized that MMP-2, MMP-9, and TIMP-1 would be abnormal in hypertension, reflecting alterations in extracellular matrix (ECM) turnover. The authors measured plasma levels and activities of MMP-2, MMP-9, and TIMP-1 in 44 hypertensive patients and 44 controls. MMP-2 levels and activity were significantly higher in hypertensive group (p < .0001). Significant increase was also observed for MMP-9 level and activity (p < .0001) and for TIMP-1 (p < .0001) in hypertensive patients. Plasma levels and activities of MMP-2, MMP-9, and TIMP-1 are increased in hypertensive patients, which may reflect abnormal ECM metabolism.

Telmisartan and irbesartan therapy in type 2 diabetic patients treated with rosiglitazone: effects on insulin-resistance, leptin and tumor necrosis factor-alpha.

The aim of our study was to investigate the metabolic effect of telmisartan and irbesartan in subjects treated with rosiglitazone, a well-known insulin-sensitizing drug, in order to clarify the direct metabolic effects of the two former drugs. Patients were enrolled, evaluated, and followed at 3 Italian centers. We evaluated 188 type 2 diabetic patients with metabolic syndrome (94 males and 94 females in total; 49 males and 46 females, aged 56+/-5, treated with telmisartan; and 45 males and 48 females, aged 55+/-4, treated with irbesartan). All had been diabetic for at least 6 months, and glycemic control by the maximum tolerated dietary changes and maximum tolerated dose of oral hypoglycemic agents had been attempted and failed in all cases. All patients took a fixed dose of rosiglitazone, 4 mg/day. We administered telmisartan (40 mg/day) or irbesartan (150 mg/day) in a randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical manner. We evaluated body mass index (BMI), glycemic control (HbA1c fasting plasma glucose and insulin levels [FPG, and FPI, respectively], and homeostasis model assessment [HOMA] index), lipid profile (total cholesterol [TC], low density lipoprotein-cholesterol [LDL-C], high density lipoprotein-cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides [TG]), systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), and leptin during the 12 months of this treatment. No BMI change was observed after 6 or 12 months in either group. Significant decreases in HbAlc and FPG were observed after 6 months in the telmisartan group, and after 12 months in both groups. The decrease in HbA1c and FPG at 12 months was statistically significant only in the telmisartan group. A significant decrease in FPI was observed at 12 months in both groups, and this decrease was significantly greater in the telmisartan group. Significant decreases in the HOMA index were observed at 6 and 12 months in both groups, and the decrease in the HOMA index after 12 months was significantly greater in the telmisartan group than in the irbesartan group. Significant changes in SBP, DBP, TC, and LDL-C were observed after 6 and 12 months in both groups. Significant decreases in TNF-alpha and leptin levels were observed after 6 months in the telmisartan group, and after 12 months in both groups. In conclusion, in this study of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome, telmisartan seemed to result in a greater improvement in glycemic and lipid control and metabolic parameters related to metabolic syndrome compared to irbesartan. These observed metabolic effects of different angiotensin type 1 receptor blockers could be relevant when choosing a therapy to correct metabolic derangement of patients affected by metabolic syndrome and diabetes.

Effects of 1 year of treatment with pioglitazone or rosiglitazone added to glimepiride on lipoprotein (a) and homocysteine concentrations in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Although the metabolic effects of the thiazolidinediones have been well studied, there is a lack of comparative data on their effects on certain cardiovascular risk factors, such as elevated plasma levels of lipoprotein (a) (Lp[a]) and homocysteine (Hcy). OBJECTIVE: This study compared the effects of pioglitazone or rosiglitazone added to glimepiride on a range of lipid parameters, focusing on Lp(a) and Hcy, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and the metabolic syndrome. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, controlled, double-blind study in patients with type 2 diabetes and the metabolic syndrome (hypertension [>or=130/85 mm Hg]) and triglyceridemia (>or=150 mg/dL). In addition to glimepiride 4 mg/d, patients received pioglitazone 15 mg QD or rosiglitazone 4 mg QD for 1 year. The primary efficacy variables were change from baseline in body mass index (BMI), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)), Lp(a), and Hey. Secondary efficacy measures were changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) concentrations, fasting and postprandial insulin concentrations (FPI and PPI, respectively), the Homeostasis Model Assessment index, and the lipid profile (total cholesterol [TC], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides). All these parameters were measured after a 12-hour fast every 3 months for 1 year. Tolerability was assessed based on reported adverse events and laboratory abnormalities at each study visit. RESULTS: Ninety-one white patients with type 2 diabetes and the metabolic syndrome were enrolled, and 87 completed the study (43 men, 44 women; mean [SD] age, 53 [6] years; mean weight, 68.4 [3.3] kg). Mean baseline values for BMI and HbA(1c) were 24.3 (0.8) kg/m(2) and 8.1 % (0.8 %), respectively. At the end of 1 year, both treatment groups had significant increases from baseline in BMI (4.9% glimepiride + pio glitazone, 6.2% glimepiride + rosiglitazone; P < 0.05). Glimepiride + pioglitazone was associated with the following percent improvements from baseline in measures of glycemic control: -17.1% in HbA(1c), -19.3% in FPG, -17.8% in PPG, -40.1% in FPI, and -22.6% in PPI (all, P < 0.01). The corresponding percent improvements from baseline with glimepiride + rosiglitazone were -16.3%, -19.9%, -15.0%, -44.8%, and -22.1% (all, P < 0.01). There were no significant differences between treatment groups in any of these parameters. The pioglitazone group had significant improvements from baseline in TC (-11.1%), LDL-C (-12.0%), HDL-C (15.0%), and triglycerides (-22.4%) [corrected] (all, P < 0.05), whereas the rosiglitazone group had significant increases in TC (14.9%), LDL-C (16.5%), and triglycerides (17.9%) (all, P < 0.05); the difference between pioglitazone and rosiglitazone was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The change from baseline in Lp(a) was significant in the pioglitazone group, both relative to baseline and compared with the rosiglitazone group (-19.7% vs 0.5%, respectively; P < 0.05 vs baseline and vs rosiglitazone). Changes from baseline in Hey were significant in both the pioglitazone and rosiglitazone groups (-20.2% and -25.0%, respectively; P < 0.05), with no significant difference between groups. Both treatments were well tolerated, and no patients had significant changes in transaminases. CONCLUSIONS: In these patients with type 2 diabetes and the metabolic syndrome, the combinations of glimepiride with pioglitazone and glimepiride with rosiglitazone produced significant improvements in measures of glycemic control, plasma lipids, and homocysteinemia. One year of treatment with the pioglitazone combination was associated with significantly reduced plasma Lp(a) levels compared with the rosiglitazone combination.

Synergistic effect of doxazosin and acarbose in improving metabolic control in patients with impaired glucose tolerance.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate if the expected improvement in glucose and lipid metabolism obtainable with doxazosin is or is not synergistic with standard antihyperglycaemic treatment using the alpha-glucosidase inhibitor acarbose. METHODS: Patients in this randomised, controlled, double-blind clinical trial were enrolled, evaluated and followed up at three Italian centres. We evaluated 107 patients (53 males and 54 females) with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) as determined by oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs). All patients took a fixed dose of acarbose 150 mg/day for 3 months, after which they were titrated up to 300 mg/day for the next 3 months. In addition, patients were randomised to either placebo (53 patients: 27 males and 26 females, aged 50 +/- 4 [mean +/- SD] years) or doxazosin 4 mg/day (54 patients: 26 males and 28 females, aged 51 +/- 5 years) for the entire 6-month treatment period. Parameters evaluated during the 6-month treatment period included body mass index (BMI), glycaemic control (glycosylated haemoglobin [HbA(1c)], fasting plasma [FPG] and post-prandial plasma [PPG] glucose, fasting plasma [FPI] and post-prandial plasma [PPI] insulin levels, homeostasis model assessment [HOMA]-index [insulin resistance]), lipid profile (total cholesterol [TC], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides [TG]), and systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure. RESULTS: Significant reductions in BMI, HbA(1c), FPG and PPG compared with baseline were observed after 6 months in both groups (p < 0.05). A significant decrease in FPI was obtained after 6 months (p < 0.05) in the doxazosin group compared with baseline, and this difference was also significant (p < 0.05) compared with the placebo group. Similarly, a significant decrease in HOMA-index was observed at 6 months (p < 0.05) compared with baseline in the doxazosin group, and this difference was also significant (p < 0.05) compared with the placebo group. Significant decreases in TC, LDL-C, HDL-C and TG (p < 0.05) were observed in the doxazosin group after 6 months compared with baseline values. Significant decreases in SBP and DBP were also observed at 3 months in the doxazosin group compared with baseline (p < 0.05), and these differences were significant (p < 0.05) compared with placebo. Furthermore, significant decreases in SBP and DBP were observed at 6 months (p < 0.01) in the doxazosin group compared with baseline, and these differences were also significant (p < 0.01) compared with placebo. All patients who completed an OGTT at 6 months (96 patients) were restored to normal glucose tolerance status. CONCLUSION: In patients with IGT, doxazosin given in combination with acarbose seemed to improve glycaemic and lipid control compared with placebo, with the benefits observed appearing to extend beyond those expected from improvements in blood pressure. Patients in this study also benefited from acarbose therapy, which restored all patients from IGT to normal glucose tolerance status.

Thiazolidinedione effects on blood pressure in diabetic patients with metabolic syndrome treated with glimepiride.

The aim of our study was to compare the long-term effect of pioglitazone and rosiglitazone on blood pressure control of diabetic patients with metabolic syndrome treated with glimepiride. We evaluated 91 type 2 diabetic patients with metabolic syndrome. All were required to have been diagnosed as diabetic for at least 6 months, and to have failed to achieve glycemic control by dietary changes and the maximum tolerated dose of the oral hypoglycemic agents sulfonylureas or metformin. All patients took a fixed dose of 4 mg/day glimepiride. We administered pioglitazone (15 mg/day) or rosiglitazone (4 mg/day) for 12 months in a randomized, double-blind fashion, and evaluated body mass index (BMI), glycemic control, blood pressure and heart rate (HR) throughout the treatment period. A total of 87 patients completed the study and were randomized to receive double-blind treatment with pioglitazone or rosiglitazone. An increase in BMI was observed after 12 months (p < 0.05) in both groups. After 9 and 12 months, there were significant decreases in glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)), mean fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), fasting plasma insulin (FPI), and postprandial plasma insulin (PPI) in both treatment groups (p < 0.05 at 9 months and p < 0.01 at 12 months for all parameters). Furthermore, homeostasis model assessment index (HOMA index) improvement was obtained at 9 and 12 months (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively) in both groups. Significant systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) improvement (p < 0.05, respectively) was observed in both groups after 12 months. There were no significant changes in transaminases at any point during the study. We can conclude that the association of a thiazolinedione to the glimepiride treatment of type 2 diabetic subjects with metabolic syndrome is associated to a significant improvement in the long-term blood pressure control, related to a reduction in insulin-resistance.

Long-term effects of glimepiride or rosiglitazone in combination with metformin on blood pressure control in type 2 diabetic patients affected by the metabolic syndrome: a 12-month, double-blind, randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Some evidence suggests that antihyperglycemic drugs might have a small but clinically significant beneficial effect on blood pressure in patients with diabetes mellitus. Based on a literature search, few direct comparisons of different antihyperglycemic treatments on blood pressure have been reported. OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of the present study was to compare the effect of long-term (12-month) combination treatment with glimepiride or rosiglitazone plus metformin on blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM-2) and the metabolic syndrome. Secondary end points were glycemic control and improvement in insulin sensitivity. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind study was conducted at 2 centers in Italy. Patients aged > or =18 years with DM-2 and the metabolic syndrome and poor glycemic control (insulin resistance) with monotherapy with the maximum tolerated dose of an antihyperglycemic agent (eg, a sulfonylurea, metformin) were enrolled. All patients received 12 months of oral treatment with metformin 500 mg TID plus glimepiride 2 mg QD (G + M) or rosiglitazone 4 mg QD (R + M). Blood pressure, heart rate (HR), and body mass index (BMI); plasma levels of fasting and postprandial glucose and insulin (FPG, PPG, FPI, and PPI, respectively) and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)); and homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) index were determined at 0 (baseline), 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment. Adverse effects (AEs) were assessed using spontaneous reporting, patient interview, and laboratory analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients were enrolled in the study; 95 completed it (48 men, 47 women; mean age, 54 years [range, 47-58 years]; G + M, 47 patients; R + M, 48 patients). Four patients did not complete the study due to noncompliance (2 patients in the R + M group), protocol violation (1 patient in the G + M group), and loss to follow-up (1 patient in the G + M group). Mean blood pressure values were not significantly improved in the G + M group at any time point, whereas these values were significantly improved at 12 months in the R + M group. Mean BMI, HbA(1c), FPG, and PPG were significantly decreased from baseline in both groups at 12 months (all, P < or = 0.05). Mean FPI, PPI, and HOMA index were significantly improved at 12 months only in the R + M group (all, P < or = 0.05 vs baseline); these changes were not found in the G + M group. No significant changes in HR were found. Headache and flatulence were reported in both groups (G + M, 2 patients each; R + M, 1 and 2 patients, respectively), but these AEs were mild and transient. In the R + M group, liver enzyme levels were increased to 1.5-fold the upper limit of normal in 3 patients, but were normalized by study end. CONCLUSIONS: In this study in patients with DM-2 and the metabolic syndrome, long-term (12-month) combination treatment with R + M, but not G + M, was associated with a significant improvement in blood pressure control. Improvements in glycemic control and insulin resistance-related parameters were found at 9 months with R + M, compared with 12 months with G + M. Both treatments were well tolerated.

Antithrombotic effects of rosiglitazone-metformin versus glimepiride-metformin combination therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the differential effect on coagulation and fibrinolysis parameters of combination therapy with glimepiride-metformin and with rosiglitazone-metformin beyond their effect on glucose metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome. DESIGN: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Two university-affiliated medical centers in Italy. PATIENTS: Ninety-five patients with type 2 diabetes for at least 6 months without glycemic control by diet and oral hypoglycemic agents to their maximum tolerated dosage and who also had metabolic syndrome. INTERVENTION: All 95 patients received metformin 1500 mg/day. In a randomized manner, 47 patients received glimepiride 2 mg/day and 48 patients received rosiglitazone 4 mg/day. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Body mass index (BMI), glycemic control, and coagulation and fibrinolysis parameters were evaluated at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment. Compared with baseline values, significant decreases in BMI, fasting plasma glucose, postprandial plasma glucose, and hemoglobin A1c were observed at 12 months in both the glimepiride and rosiglitazone groups (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). Decreases in fasting plasma insulin and postprandial plasma insulin were observed at 12 months (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively) compared with baseline values in the rosiglitazone group. Furthermore, improvement in the Homeostasis Model Assessment index was observed only at 9 and 12 months (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively) compared with baseline in the rosiglitazone group. Significant improvement in plasminogen activator inhibitor (PAI)-1 was present in the rosiglitazone group after 9 months (p<0.05), and significant PAI-1 improvement was observed in the glimepiride and rosiglitazone groups after 12 months (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The rosiglitazone-metformin combination significantly improved the long-term control of all insulin resistance-related parameters compared with the glimepiride-metformin combination. However, both combinations were associated with a slight but statistically significant improvement in PAI-1 value, related to a similar reduction in insulin resistance.

A comparison of the effects of pioglitazone and rosiglitazone combined with glimepiride on prothrombotic state in type 2 diabetic patients with the metabolic syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of glimepiride plus pioglitazone or plus rosiglitazone in diabetic patients with the metabolic syndrome on coagulation and fibrinolysis parameters. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: 91 type 2 diabetic patients with the metabolic syndrome participated. All patients took a fixed dose of glimepiride, 4 mg/day. We administered pioglitazone (15 mg/day) or rosiglitazone (4 mg/day) in a randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical study. We compared body mass index (BMI), glycemic control, coagulation and fibrinolysis parameters, and heart rate (HR) during 12 months of this treatment. RESULTS: A total of 87 completed the study (pioglitazone n=45 or rosiglitazone n=42). Body mass index increased after 12 months compared to baseline (p<0.05) in both groups. A significant decrease in glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) was observed after 9 (p<0.05), and 12 (p<0.01) months in both groups. After 9 and 12 months, mean fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) levels were lower in both groups (p<0.05 and 0.01, respectively), as were fasting plasma insulin (FPI) and postprandial plasma insulin (PPI) (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). An improvement in the homeostasis model assessment index (HOMA index) was seen at 9 and 12 months (p<0.05 and 0.01, respectively) compared to the baseline value in both groups. Plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) was significant lower (p<0.05) in both groups after 12 months compared to the baseline values. No changes in tissue-plasminogen activator (t-PA) and fibrinogen (Fg) were seen during the study nor were there any changes in transaminases. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the addition of a thiazolinedione to glimepiride treatment in type 2 diabetic subjects with the metabolic syndrome is associated with a slight but significant reduction of PAI-1 value, related to a similar reduction in insulinresistance.

Effects of telmisartan compared with eprosartan on blood pressure control, glucose metabolism and lipid profile in hypertensive, type 2 diabetic patients: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 12-month study.

We evaluated the antihypertensive activity, glucose homeostasis and plasma lipid profile in patients with mild hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus treated by diet and exercise, and not in receipt of oral hyperglycemics, following 12-month treatment with either telmisartan or eprosartan. In this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 119 patients with mild essential hypertension (diastolic blood pressure [DBP] 91-104 mmHg) and type 2 diabetes were divided into three groups and randomized to receive once-daily telmisartan 40 mg, eprosartan 600 mg, or placebo for 12 months. At enrollment, patients were advised on diet (1,400-1,600 kcal/day) and exercise (physical aerobics on a bicycle for at least 30 min on 4 days each week). Compared with baseline, a significant reduction (p<0.01) in seated trough systolic blood pressure (SBP) was detected after 12-month treatment with either telmisartan or eprosartan. Seated trough DBP was also reduced by telmisartan (p<0.01) and eprosartan (p<0.05); the antihypertensive effect of telmisartan was significantly superior (p<0.05). No change in body mass index or glucose metabolism was observed with either active treatment, or with placebo. Telmisartan, but not eprosartan, significantly improved plasma total cholesterol (p<0.01), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (p<0.01) and triglycerides (p<0.05) compared with eprosartan. In conclusion, 12-month telmisartan treatment produced a significantly greater reduction in DBP than eprosartan and significantly improved plasma lipids. The improvement could be due to varying pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of telmisartan compared with eprosartan, even if it is not clear about the relationship between angiotensin-II receptor blockade and 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibition.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled comparison of the action of orlistat, fluvastatin, or both an anthropometric measurements, blood pressure, and lipid profile in obese patients with hypercholesterolemia prescribed a standardized diet.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess obese patients with hypercholesterolemia whom were prescribed a standardized diet, comparing the action of orlistat, fluvastatin, orlistat with fluvastatin, and placebo on anthropometric measurements, blood pressure (BP), and lipid profile. METHODS: This was a 1-year, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The patients were prescribed a controlled-energy diet and were randomly allocated to receive placebo, orlistat 120 mg TID (O group), fluvastatin 80 mg/d (F group), or olistat 120 mg TID with fluvastatin 80 mg/d (OF group). Clinical measurements (body weight, body mass index [BMI], waist circumference, and BP) and lipid profile assessment (total cholesterol [TC], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides [TGs]) were performed at baseline and after 6 months and 1 year of treatment. RESULTS: The study included 99 obese patients with hypercholesterolemia (48 men and 51 women; mean [SD] age, 51 [9] years). There were no significant differences between groups in baseline demographic, BP, or plasma lipid values. Three patients dropped out (2 women in the O group and 1 man in the OF group) due to adverse events related to orlistat treatment, including gastrointestinal events (oily spotting and fecal urgency). Ninety-six patients completed the study. There were significant differences from baseline (mean [SD]) in BMI, waist circumference reduction (WCR), and body weight loss (BWL) at 6 months in the OF group (29.9 [1.1] kg/m(2), 2.7 [0.8] cm, and 7.4 [0.9] kg, respectively; all P < 0.05), and BMI, WCR, and BWL at 1 year in the O group (29.0 [1.0] kg/m(2), 3.0 [1.0] cm, and 8.6 [1.0] kg, respectively; all P < 0.02), the F group (29.3 [1.6] kg/m(2), 2.4 [1.0] cm, and 8/0 [1.0] kg, respectively; all P < 0.05), and the OF group (28.4 [0.6] kg/m(2), 4.0 [0.6] cm, and 11.4 [1.0] kg, respectively; all P < 0.01). Significant reductions from baseline in systolic and diastolic BP were observed at 1 year in the O and F groups (all P < 0.05) and the OF group (both P < 0.01). At 6 months, there were significant reductions from baseline in TC and LDL-C in the F group (both P < 0.05) and in TC, LDL-C, and TGs in the OF group (P < 0.02, P < 0.02, and P < 0.05, respectively), as well as a significant increase in HDL-C in the OF group (P < 0.02). At 1 year, there were significant reduction from baseline in TC in the O, F, and OF groups (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively), LDL-C (P < 0.05, P < 0.02, and P < 0.01, respectively), and TGs (P < 0.02, P < 0.05, and P < 0.02, respectively). Also at 1 year, HDL-C was significantly higher than baseline in the F and OF groups (P < 0.02 and P < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: Improvements in clinical and lipid-profile parameters were found at 1 year with all 3 treatments.

Comparison between repaglinide and glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a one-year, randomized, double-blind assessment of metabolic parameters and cardiovascular risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Repaglinide and glimepiride are relatively new oral hypoglycemic agents. Few data are available concerning their effects on metabolic parameters other than measures of glycemic control. OBJECTIVES: In addition to assessing the effects of repaglinide and glimepiride on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, this study also examined the effects of these agents on 3 metabolic parameters known to be cardiovascular risk factors--lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]), plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1), and homocysteine (Hcy). METHODS: This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial was conducted at a single center in Italy. Eligible patients were nonsmokers; had no hypertension or coronary heart disease; were taking no hypolipidemic drugs, diuretics, beta-blockers, or thyroxin; and had normal renal function. After an initial 4-week placebo washout period, patients were randomized to receive repaglinide 1 mg/d or glimepiride 1 mg/d. The dose of study drug was optimized over an 8-week titration period, which was followed by a 12-month treatment period. Measures of glycemic control (glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c], fasting plasma glucose [FPG], postprandial plasma glucose [PPG], fasting plasma insulin [FPI], postprandial plasma insulin [PPI]) and the other metabolic parameters of interest were assessed after 6 and 12 months of treatment. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-four patients (63 women, 61 men) completed the study, 62 in each treatment group. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics between groups. After 6 and 12 months of treatment, FPG levels and HbA1c values were significantly reduced from baseline in both groups (6 months, P < 0.05; 12 months, P < 0.01). After 6 months, PPG levels were significantly decreased only in the repaglinide group (P < 0.05 vs baseline); at 12 months, however, PPG levels were significantly reduced from baseline in both groups (P < 0.01 repaglinide, P < 0.05 glimepiride). No significant changes from baseline in FPI or PPI levels were seen in either group at 6 months, although FPI levels were significantly increased in the repaglinide group at 12 months (P < 0.05). Repaglinide significantly lowered levels of Lp(a), PAI-1, and Hcy after 12 months (all, P < 0.05 vs baseline). Glimepiride significantly lowered levels of Lp(a) and Hcy after 6 months (both, P < 0.05 vs baseline) and levels of Lp(a) (P < 0.01 vs baseline), Hcy (P < 0.01 vs baseline), and PAI-1 (P < 0.05 vs baseline) after 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Repaglinide and glimepiride improved glycemic control and reduced levels of other metabolic parameters of interest in this population of patients with type 2 diabetes. It is possible that the reductions in Lp(a), PAI-1, and Hcy were the result of improved glucose metabolism; however, the possibility that repaglinide and glimepiride may have a direct effect on these parameters should not be excluded.

A randomized, double-blind, controlled, parallel-group comparison of perindopril and candesartan in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: When choosing an antihypertensive drug for patients with hypertension and diabetes mellitus (DM), the metabolic side effects, possibility of improving some metabolic parameters, and need for adequate blood pressure control must all be considered. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare the impacts of perindopril and candesartan on blood pressure, glucose metabolism, serum lipid profile, and metabolic parameters in patients with mild hypertension and type 2 DM during therapy and after a 1-month washout period. METHODS: Type 2 DM patients with mild hypertension and good glucose control who were not taking hypercholesterolemic drugs were enrolled. Perindopril 4 mg QD or candesartan 16 mg QD was administered for 12 months in this randomized, double-blind, controlled, parallel-group clinical trial. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting plasma insulin (FPI), glycosylated hemoglobin, homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) index, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]), plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1), homocysteine, body mass index (BMI), and albumin excretion rate (AER) were assessed. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients (49 women and 47 men; mean [SD] ages, 53 [10] years [perindopril] and 55 [9] years [candesartan]) were enrolled. Mean (SD) body weight, height, and BMI were 78.2 (9.4) kg, 1.69 (0.05) m, and 27.2 (2.0) kg/m(2) in the perindopril group and 77.5 (8.6) kg, 1.70 (0.06) m, and 26.8 (2.5) kg/m(2) in the candesartan group. A significant change occurred from baseline to month 12 during treatment with perindopril in SBP and DBP (both P < 0.01), FPG (P < 0.05), FPI (P < 0.05), TC (P < 0.05), LDL-C (P < 0.05), Lp(a) (P < 0.05), PAM (P < 0.05), and AER (P < 0.05). Significant changes from baseline to month 12 occurred with candesartan in SBP and DBP (both P < 0.01) and AER (P < 0.05). The HOMA index was significantly lower at month 12 in the perindopril group than in the candesartan group (P < 0.05). When we interrupted perindopril and candesartan therapy for a 1-month washout period, changes in SBP and DBP values were significant compared with month 12 in both groups (all P < 0.05). Changes in TC and LDL-C from month 12 to the end of washout were significant only in the perindopril group (both P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Perindopril and candesartan both effectively lowered blood pressure in this group of patients with mild hypertension and type 2 DM. Perindopril showed an improvement on some metabolic parameters compared with candesartan. However, the inclusion/exclusion criteria could limit the ability to extrapolate the results to a general population.

Comparison of fluvastatin + fenofibrate combination therapy and fluvastatin monotherapy in the treatment of combined hyperlipidemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and coronary heart disease: a 12-month, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes risk is often complicated by a mixed hyperlipoproteinemia not sufficiently controlled by a single antihyperlipidemic drug; however, there are some concerns about the safety of combined statin and fibrate treatments. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety profile of fluvastatin + fenofibrate combination therapy and those of fluvastatin monotherapy in the treatment of combined hyperlipidemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), and coronary heart disease (CHD) (ie, high risk for cardiovascular disease [CVD]). METHODS: This 12-month, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial was conducted at the University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy. Patients aged 18 to 80 years with combined hyperlipidemia, type 2 DM, and CHD were randomly assigned to receive combination therapy with extended-release fluvastatin 80 mg + micronized fenofibrate 200 mg or monotherapy with extended-release fluvastatin 80 mg. All treatments were given in tablet form, once daily with the evening meal, for 12 months. Lipid variables (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], total cholesterol [TC], and triglycerides [TG]) at 6 and 12 months were the primary efficacy variables, and glycemic status (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)], fasting plasma glucose, and postprandial plasma glucose levels) at 6 and 12 months was the secondary efficacy variable. Tolerability was assessed using physical examination, including vital-sign assessment, body-weight measurement, electrocardiography, adverse events, and laboratory tests. A pharmacoeconomic analysis of both treatment regimens was also carried out using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: A total of 48 patients (24 men, 24 women; mean [SD] age, 60 [5] years) were enrolled. After 6 months, all primary efficacy variables, except for TG level, showed significant improvements from baseline only in the combination-therapy group (changes: LDL-C, -25%; HDL-C, +12%; and TC, -19%; all, P < 0.05 vs baseline). After 12 months, lipid variables showed significant improvements over baseline in both groups (all, P < 0.05), except for TG in the monotherapy group. Significant changes in LDL-C, HDL-C, and TG were found in the combination-therapy group (-35%, +34%, -32%, respectively) versus the monotherapy group (-25%, +14%, -17%, respectively; all, P < 0.05 between groups). The change from baseline in HbA(1c) level was significant with combination therapy (-12% vs -7%; P < 0.05). Both treatments were well tolerated, with no significant differences in the incidences of adverse events between the 2 groups. The ICER showed that each 1% decrease in LDL-C level achieved with the fenofibrate + fluvastatin combination added a cost of 14.97 Euros/y (US 12.25 US dollars/y), and each 1% increase in HDL-C level added a cost of 7.48 Euros/y (6.12/y US dollars), over the cost of monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In this selected sample of patients with combined hyperlipidemia, type 2 DM, and CHD, the combination of extended-release fluvastatin + micronized fenofibrate was associated with a more improved lipid profile than fluvastatin monotherapy, and was a well-tolerated and cost-effective therapeutic choice to treat these patients at high risk for CVD.

The effect of L-carnitine on plasma lipoprotein(a) levels in hypercholesterolemic patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: A previous study has demonstrated that L-carnitine reduces plasma lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) levels in patients with hypercholesterolemia. OBJECTIVE: To test a tolerable Lp(a)-reducing agent in diabetic patients, we assessed the effect of a dietary supplementation of L-carnitine on plasma lipid levels, particularly Lp(a), of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and hypercholesterolemia. METHODS: In this 6-month, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled clinical trial, patients were enrolled, assessed, and followed up at the Diabetic and Metabolic Diseases Center of the Department of Internal Medicine and Therapeutics at the University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy. All study patients had newly diagnosed type 2 DM that was managed through dietary restriction alone throughout the study, as well as hypercholesterolemia. Patients were randomized to 1 of 2 groups. One group received L-carnitine, one 1-g tablet BID. The other group received a corresponding placebo. We assessed body mass index, fasting plasma glucose, postprandial plasma glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin, fasting plasma insulin, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, apolipoprotein (apo) A-I, apo B, and Lp(a) at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months of treatment. RESULTS: This study included 94 patients. The treatment group included 24 men and 22 women (mean [SD] age, 52 [6] years). The placebo group included 23 men and 25 women (mean [SD] age, 50 [7] years). The baseline characteristics of the groups did not differ significantly. The mean (SD) body weight, height, and body mass index were 78.2 (5.8) kg, 1.70 (0.04) m, and 27.3 (2.5) kg/m(2), respectively, in the L-carnitine group and 77.6 (6.4) kg, 1.71 (0.05) m, and 26.8 (2.2) kg/m(2), respectively, in the placebo group. In the treatment group, Lp(a) was significantly reduced at 3 and 6 months compared with baseline (P < 0.05) and P < 0.01, respectively). We observed a significant improvement after 6 months (P < 0.05) in the Lp(a) value in patients taking L-carnitine compared with those taking placebo. Between-group differences in other variables did not reach a level of significance at months 3 and 6. No drug-related adverse events were reported or observed. CONCLUSION: In this preliminary study, after 3 and 6 months, L-carnitine significantly lowered the plasma Lp(a) level compared with placebo in selected hypercholesterolemic patients with newly diagnosed type 2 DM.

Comparison of the effects of telmisartan and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system on blood pressure control, glucose metabolism, and the lipid profile in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and mild hypertension: a 12-month, randomized, double-blind study.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) provide effective blood pressure control. Whereas none of the ARBs appear to affect glucose homeostasis, some ARBs have been associated with a decrease in cholesterolemia. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to evaluate blood pressure control glucose homeostasis, and the plasma lipid profile in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and mild hypertension during 12 months of treatment with the ARB telmisartan or nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS). METHODS: In this double-blind trial, patients taking oral hypoglycemic agents were randomized to receive telmisartan 40 mg or nifedipine GITS 20 mg once daily for 12 months. At the time of enrollment, patients were given advice on diet (1400-1600 kcal/d) and exercise (stationary bicycle for > or =30 min, 4 d/wk). Assessments of systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure, body mass index (BMI), fasting plasma glucose concentrations, glycosylated hemoglobin, fasting plasma insulin concentrations, the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, and the lipid profile were performed at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of treatment. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen patients were divided into 2 age- and sex-matched treatment groups (58 men, 58 women; mean [SD] age, 52.5 [5] years). All patients were in good general health at baseline; had achieved adequate glycemic control with diet and oral hypoglycemic agents; were taking antihypercholesterolemic drugs; and had no evidence of macroangiopathy, microalbuminuria, or neuropathy. There were significant reductions from baseline in seated trough SBP after 12 months of treatment with both telmisartan and nifedipine GITS (from 139 [4] to 132 [4] mm Hg and from 140 [4] to 130 [4] mm Hg, respectively; both, P < 0.01). No change in BMI or glucose metabolism was observed with either treatment. After 12 months, there were significant improvements in concentrations of total cholesterol (TC) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) with telmisartan (-9% and -11.5%, respectively; both, P < 0.01) compared with nifedipine GITS (-2% and -1.5%). CONCLUSIONS: In this selected sample of patients with type 2 diabetes and mild hypertension, both telmisartan and nifedipine GITS produced significant reductions in blood pressure. Telmisartan was associated with a slight but statistically significant improvement in plasma TC and LDL-C concentrations compared with nifedipine GITS.

Metabolic effects of pioglitazone and rosiglitazone in patients with diabetes and metabolic syndrome treated with glimepiride: a twelve-month, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial.

BACKGROUND: Glimepiride is approved as monotherapy and in combination with metformin or with insulin, whereas the combination of glimepiride with other antihyperglycemic drugs is under investigation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the differential effect on glucose and lipid variables and tolerability of the combination of glimepiride plus pioglitazone or rosiglitazone in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and metabolic syndrome. METHODS: This 12-month, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel-group trial was conducted at 3 study sites in Italy. We assessed patients with type 2 DM (duration, > or =6 months) and with metabolic syndrome. All patients were required to have poor glycemic control with, or to have experienced > or =1 adverse effect (AE) with, diet and oral hypoglycemic agents such as sulfonylureas or metformin, both given up to the maximum tolerated dose. All patients received a fixed oral dose of glimepiride, 4 mg/d divided into 2 doses, self-administered for 12 months. Patients also were randomized to receive oral pioglitazone (15 mg once daily) (G + P group) or oral rosiglitazone (4 mg once daily) (G + R group), self-administered for 12 months. We assessed body mass index (BMI), glycemic control (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)], fasting and postprandial plasma glucose and insulin levels [FPG, PPG, FPI, and PPI, respectively], and homeostasis model assessment index), lipid profile (total cholesterol [TC], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], and triglycerides [TG]), and lipoprotein variables (apolipoprotein [apo] A-I and apo B) at baseline and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment. Treatment tolerability was assessed at each study visit using a thorough interview of patients, and comparisons of clinical and laboratory values to baseline levels. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients were enrolled in the study; 87 patients completed it (G + P group: 24 women, 21 men; mean [SD] age, 53 [6] years; G + R group: 20 women, 22 men; mean [SD] age, 54 [5] years). Patients in the G + P and G + R groups experienced significant increases in mean BMI at 12 months compared with baseline (4.92% and 6.17%, respectively; both, P < 0.05). The combination of glimepiride with pioglitazone or rosiglitazone significantly improved glycemic control in the study patients. At 12 months, we observed a 1.3% improvement in mean values for plasma HbA(1c) concentration (P < 0.01) 19.3% in FPG (P < 0.01), 16.3% in PPG (P < 0.01), 42.4% in FPI ), and 23.3% in PPI (P <0.05); no significant differences were found between treatment groups. Although the G + P group experienced a significant improvement at 12 months in almost all variables of lipid metabolism from baseline (TC, - 11%; LDL-C, -12%; HDL-C, 15%; and apo B, - 10.6% [all, P , 0.05]), the G + R group experienced a significant increase in mostly the lipid risk factors for cardiovascular disease (TC, 14.9%; LDL-C, 16.5%; TG, 17.9%; and apo B, 10.3% [all, P , 0.05]). Overall, no statistically significant changes in plasma aminotransferase activities were observed. Of the 87 patients who completed the study, 6.7% (3/45) of patients in the G + P group and 11.9% (5/42) of patients in the G + R group had transient, mild to moderate AEs that did not cause withdrawal from the trial. CONCLUSION: In this study of patients with type 2 DM and metabolic syndrome who did not respond adequately to, or experienced AEs with, diet and either a sulfonylurea or metformin previously, the combination of glimepiride plus pioglitazone was associated with a significant improvement in lipid and lipoprotein variables, whereas the combination of glimepiride plus rosiglitazone appears to not have had any clinically significant effect on lipid metabolism.