Insulin glargine or NPH combined with metformin in type 2 diabetes: the LANMET study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: In type 2 diabetic patients we compared 9 months of combination therapy with insulin glargine and metformin with 9 months of NPH insulin combined with metformin. The primary focus was changes in HbA(1c); secondary focus was diurnal glucose profiles and symptomatic hypoglycaemia. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated open, parallel-group clinical trial involving seven centres, 110 insulin-naive type 2 diabetic patients with poor glycaemic control (HbA(1c) >or=8.0%) on oral hypoglycaemic agents (90% using sulfonylurea plus metformin) were randomised to receive bedtime insulin glargine with metformin (G+MET) or bedtime NPH with metformin (NPH+MET) for 36 weeks. The patients were taught how to self-adjust their insulin dose and use a modem to send the results of home glucose monitoring to treatment centres. The goal was to achieve a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) of 4.0 to 5.5 mmol/l in both groups. RESULTS: During the last 12 weeks, FPGs averaged 5.75+/-0.02 and 5.96+/-0.03 mmol/l (p<0.001) and insulin doses were 68+/-5 and 70+/-6 IU/day (0.69+/-0.05 and 0.66+/-0.04 IU kg(-1) day(-1), NS) in the G+MET and NPH+MET groups, respectively. At 36 weeks, mean HbA(1c) was 7.14+/-0.12 and 7.16+/-0.14%, respectively (NS). Symptomatic, but not confirmed symptomatic, hypoglycaemia was significantly lower during the first 12 weeks in the G+MET group (4.1+/-0.8 episodes/patient-year) than in the NPH+MET group (9.0+/-2.3 episodes/patient-year, p<0.05), but not significantly different thereafter. Glucose levels before dinner were higher in the NPH+MET group (10.1+/-0.3 mmol/l) than in the G+MET group (8.6+/-0.3 mmol/l, p=0.002) throughout the 36-week study. With regard to baseline characteristics such as initial glycaemia or C-peptide, there was no difference between patients who achieved good glycaemic control (HbA(1c) <7.0%) and those who did not. Differences were seen in the following: between study centres, weight gain during the run-in period and insulin therapy, and FPG during the last 12 weeks (5.7+/-0.2 vs 6.7+/-0.3 mmol/l for patients reaching vs those not reaching target, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Good glycaemic control can be achieved with both G+MET and NPH+MET. Use of G+MET reduces symptomatic hypoglycaemia during the first 12 weeks and dinner time hyperglycaemia compared with NPH+MET.

Improvement of glycemic control by 1 year of insulin therapy leads to a sustained decrease in sE-selectin concentrations in type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether and how improvement of glycemic control by long-term insulin therapy decreases endothelial activation as measured by serum levels of the soluble adhesion molecules sE-selectin and vascular cell adhesion molecule (VCAM-1) and whether the drug used to lower blood glucose in addition to insulin influences such a response. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Circulating adhesion molecules were measured before and after 3 and 12 months of therapy in 81 patients with type 2 diabetes and 41 subjects without diabetes. The patients were treated with bedtime administration of NPH insulin combined with either glibenclamide (n = 19), metformin (n = 17), glibenclamide and metformin (n = 17), or morning administration of NPH insulin (n = 23). RESULTS: Before insulin therapy, serum sE-selectin level was 71% higher in the patients with type 2 diabetes (77 +/- 4 ng/ml) than in the normal subjects (45 +/- 3 ng/ml, P < 0.001), whereas levels of sVCAM-1 were comparable (420 +/- 25 vs. 400 +/- 11 ng/ml, respectively). Glycemic control in all patients improved as judged from a decrease in HbA1c from 9.7 +/- 0.2 to 7.6 +/- 0.1% (P < 0.001). sE-selectin decreased to 67 +/- 4 ng/ml by 3 months (P < 0.001 vs. 0 months) and then remained unchanged until 12 months (70 +/- 4 ng/ml P < 0.001 vs 0 months). sVCnM-1 levels at 12 months was similar to those at 0 months (416 +/- 25 ng/ml). The change in glycemic control, measured by HbA1c, but not in other parameters, was correlated with the change of sE-selectin (r = 0.41, P < 0.001) within the patients with type 2 diabetes. The decreases in sE-selectin were not different between the various treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that improvement in glycemic control by administration of insulin alone or insulin combined with either glibenclamide, metformin, or both agents induces a sustained decrease in sE-selectin, the magnitude of which seems to be dependent on the degree of improvement in glycemia. These data suggest that sE-selectin might provide a marker of effects of treatment of chronic hyperglycemia on endothelial activation.

Hepatic fat content and insulin action on free fatty acids and glucose metabolism rather than insulin absorption are associated with insulin requirements during insulin therapy in type 2 diabetic patients.

To determine causes of interindividual variation in insulin requirements, we recruited 20 type 2 diabetic patients with stable glucose control and insulin doses for >1 year on combination therapy with bedtime NPH insulin and metformin. Insulin absorption (increase in free and total insulin over 8 h after a subcutaneous dose of regular insulin) and actions of intravenous (6-h 0.3 mU x kg(-1) x min(-1) euglycemic insulin clamp combined with [3-3H]glucose) and subcutaneous (glucose infusion rate required to maintain isoglycemia and suppression of free fatty acids [FFAs]) insulin, liver fat content (proton spectroscopy), visceral fat (magnetic resonance imaging), weight, and body composition were determined. We found the following variation in parameters: insulin dose range 10-176 U (mean 42 U, fold variation 17.6x) or 0.13-1.39 U/kg (0.44 U/kg, 10.7x), absorbed insulin 10.6x, action of subcutaneous insulin to suppress FFAs 7.5 x and to stimulate glucose metabolism (M value) 11.5x, body weight 67-127 kg (91 kg, 1.9x), liver fat 2-28% (12%, 14x), and visceral fat 179-2,053 ml (1,114 ml, 11.5x). The amount of insulin absorbed, measured as either free or total insulin, was significantly correlated with its ability to suppress FFAs and stimulate glucose metabolism but not with the insulin dose per se. The actions of absorbed insulin were, on the other hand, significantly correlated with the daily insulin dose (r = 0.70 for action on FFAs, P < 0.001, and r = -0.61 for M value, P < 0.005). Actions of subcutaneous and intravenous insulin to suppress FFAs were significantly correlated (r = 0.82, P < 0.001, R2 = 67%). Of the measures of adiposity, the percent hepatic fat was the parameter best correlated with the daily insulin dose (r = 0.76, P < 0.001). The percent hepatic fat was also significantly correlated with the ability of intravenous insulin to suppress endogenous glucose production (r = 0.72, P < 0.005). We conclude that the major reason for interindividual variation in insulin requirements in type 2 diabetes is the variation in insulin action. Variation in hepatic fat content may influence insulin requirements via an effect on the sensitivity of endogenous glucose production to insulin.

Comparison of bedtime insulin regimens in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. A randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Compared with other insulin regimens, combination therapy with oral hypoglycemic agents and bedtime insulin produces similar improvement in glycemic control but induces less weight gain. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether bedtime insulin regimens differ with respect to their effects on weight gain in patients with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Four outpatient clinics at central hospitals. PATIENTS: 96 patients (mean age, 58 +/- 1 years; mean body mass index, 29 +/- 1 kg/m2) whose type 2 diabetes was poorly controlled with sulfonylurea therapy (mean glycosylated hemoglobin value, 9.9% +/- 0.2%; mean fasting plasma glucose level, 11.9 +/- 0.3 mmol/L [214 +/- 5 mg/dL]). INTERVENTION: Random assignment to 1 year of treatment with bedtime intermediate-acting insulin plus glyburide (10.5 mg) and placebo, metformin (2 g) and placebo, glyburide and metformin, or a second injection of intermediate-acting insulin in the morning. Patients were taught to adjust the bedtime insulin dose on the basis of fasting glucose measurements. MEASUREMENTS: Body weight, biochemical and symptomatic hypoglycemias, and indices of glycemic control. RESULTS: At 1 year, body weight remained unchanged in patients receiving bedtime insulin plus metformin (mean change, 0.9 +/- 1.2 kg; P < 0.001 compared with all other groups) but increased by 3.9 +/- 0.7 kg, 3.6 +/- 1.2 kg, and 4.6 +/- 1.0 kg in patients receiving bedtime insulin plus glyburide, those receiving bedtime insulin plus both oral drugs, and those receiving bedtime and morning insulin, respectively. The greatest decrease in the glycosylated hemoglobin value was observed in the bedtime insulin and metformin group (from 9.7% +/- 0.4% to 7.2% +/- 0.2% [difference, -2.5 +/- 0.4 percentage points] at 1 year; P < 0.001 compared with 0 months and P < 0.05 compared with other groups). This group also had significantly fewer symptomatic and biochemical cases of hypoglycemia (P < 0.05) than the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy with bedtime insulin plus metformin prevents weight gain. This regimen also seems superior to other bedtime insulin regimens with respect to improvement in glycemic control and frequency of hypoglycemia.

Effect of obesity on the response to insulin therapy in noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.

An initial improvement in glycemic control is often followed by gradual deterioration of glycemia during insulin treatment of patients with noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM). We examined the causes of such worsening in a 12-month follow-up analysis of 100 insulin-treated NIDDM patients in the Finnish Multicenter Insulin Therapy Study who were treated with either combination therapy with insulin or insulin alone. In the entire study group, glycemic control averaged 9.7 +/- 0.2% at 0 months and 8.0 +/- 0.1%, 8.0 +/- 0.1%, 8.2 +/- 0.1%, and 8.5 +/- 0.2% at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months (P < 0.001 for each time point vs. 0 months). Glycemic control at 12 months was significantly worse than that at 3 (P < 0.001), 6 (P < 0.001), and 9 months (P < 0.02). Baseline body mass index was the most significant predictor of deterioration in glycemic control. During 1 yr, hemoglobin A1c decreased almost 3-fold more (by 1.7 +/- 0.2%; P < 0.001 vs. 0 months) in patients whose baseline weight was below the mean baseline body mass index of 28.1 kg/m2 (nonobese patients) than in those whose weight exceeded 28.1 kg/m2 (obese patients; 0.5 +/- 0.2%; P = NS vs. 0 months; P < 0.01 vs. obese patients). Glycemic control improved similarly over 1 yr in the nonobese subjects and deteriorated similarly in the obese patients regardless of their treatment regimen. Insulin doses, per body weight, were similar in the nonobese and obese patients. The nonobese patients consistently gained less weight during 12 months of combination therapy with insulin (3.5 +/- 0.6 kg at 12 months) than during insulin therapy alone (5.1 +/- 0.6 kg; P < 0.05). The treatment regimen did not influence weight gain in the obese group, who gained 4.4 +/- 1.0 kg during combination therapy with insulin and 4.5 +/- 1.1 kg during insulin therapy alone. We reached the following conclusions: 1) after an initial good response, glycemic control deteriorates more in obese than in nonobese patients with NIDDM; 2) in obese patients, weight gain per se cannot explain the poor glycemic response to combination or insulin therapy, but it may induce a disproportionately large increase in insulin requirements because of greater insulin resistance in the obese than in the nonobese; 3) in nonobese patients, glycemic control improves equally during 1 yr with combination therapy with insulin and insulin alone, but combination therapy with insulin is associated with less weight gain than treatment with insulin alone; 4) weight gain appears harmful, as it is associated with increases in blood pressure and low density lipoprotein cholesterol.

Comparison of insulin regimens in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Insulin is widely used to improve metabolic control in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM), but there is no consensus about the optimal regimen of insulin treatment. METHODS: We treated 153 patients with NIDDM for three months with five regimens: (1) oral hypoglycemic drug therapy plus NPH insulin given at 7 a.m. (the morning-NPH group), (2) oral hypoglycemic drug therapy plus NPH insulin given at 9 p.m. (the evening-NPH group), (3) NPH and regular insulin (ratio, 70 units to 30 units) given before breakfast and dinner (the two-insulin-injection group), (4) NPH insulin at 9 p.m. and regular insulin before meals (the multiple-insulin-injection group), and (5) continued oral hypoglycemic drug therapy (the control group). RESULTS: The mean (+/- SE) value for glycosylated hemoglobin decreased similarly in all four insulin-treatment groups (1.7 +/- 0.3, 1.9 +/- 0.2, 1.8 +/- 0.3, and 1.6 +/- 0.3 percent, respectively). The decrease was significantly greater in these four groups than in the control group (0.5 +/- 0.2 percent; P < 0.001 vs. all insulin-treated groups). Weight gain was significantly less (1.2 +/- 0.5 kg) in the evening-NPH group than in the other insulin-treatment groups (2.2 +/- 0.5 kg in the morning-NPH group, 1.8 +/- 0.5 kg in the two-insulin-injection group, and 2.9 +/- 0.5 kg in the multiple-injection group; P < 0.05). In addition, the increment in the mean diurnal serum free insulin concentration was 50 to 65 percent smaller in the evening-NPH group than in the other insulin-treatment groups. Subjective well-being improved significantly more in the insulin-treatment groups than in the control group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NIDDM who are receiving oral hypoglycemic drug therapy, the addition of NPH insulin in the evening improves glycemic control in a manner similar to combination therapy with NPH insulin in the morning, a two-insulin-injection regimen, or a multiple-insulin-injection regimen, but induces less weight gain and hyperinsulinemia. The data thus suggest that patients with NIDDM do not benefit from multiple insulin injections and that nocturnal insulin administration appears preferable to daytime administration.

Antihypertensive action of drug combination: Timolol, hydralazine, hydrochlorothiazide and triamterene.

A fixed combination tablet containing 5 mg of timolol, 25 mg of hydralazine, 25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide and 37.5 mg of triamterene was prepared and its antihypertensive effect compared with placebo in a randomized double-blind cross-over study lasting 16-20 weeks. 37 patients entered the study and 32 of them completed it. The trial drug caused a highly significant drop in blood pressure in both the supine and standing positions (from 172/112 to 142/91 mm Hg supine and from 168/17 to 136/100 mm Hg standing). There was also a highly significant fall in heart rate. Three patients were nonresponders with maximal dose used (4 tablets daily) and two patients had to withdraw from the trial because of complications. In general the side effects recorded were mild and equally common both on placebo and the trial drug. The serum potassium level was well maintained. The serum urate concentration was increased, but no signs of gout were observed. The conclusion was that this fixed combination of timolol, hydralazine, hydrochlorothiazide and triamterene is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension.