Effectiveness and safety of Bifidobacterium and berberine in human hyperglycemia and their regulatory effect on the gut microbiota: a multi-center, double-blind, randomized, parallel-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Berberine and Bifidobacterium have been reported to improve glucose tolerance in people with hyperglycemia or other metabolic disorders. This study aimed to assess the hypoglycemic effect and the regulation of the gut microbiota caused by berberine and Bifidobacterium and the possible additive benefits of their combination. METHODS: This was an 18-week, multi-center, randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled study of patients newly diagnosed with hyperglycemia. After a 2-week run-in period, 300 participants were randomly assigned to the following four groups for 16 weeks of treatment: berberine (Be), Bifidobacterium (Bi), berberine and Bifidobacterium (BB), and placebo group. The primary efficacy endpoint was the absolute value of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) compared with baseline after 16 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Between October 2015 and April 2018, a total of 297 participants were included in the primary analysis. Significant reductions of FPG were observed in the Be and BB groups compared with the placebo group, with a least square (LS) mean difference of - 0.50, 95% CI [- 0.85, - 0.15] mmol/L, and - 0.55, 95% CI [- 0.91, - 0.20] mmol/L, respectively. The Be and BB groups also showed significant reductions in 2-h postprandial plasma glucose. A pronounced decrease in HbA1c occurred in the BB group compared to the placebo group. Moreover, compared with the Bi and placebo groups, the Be and BB groups had more changes in the gut microbiota from the baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Berberine could regulate the structure and function of the human gut microbiota, and Bifidobacterium has the potential to enhance the hypoglycemic effect of berberine. These findings provide new insights into the hypoglycemic potential of berberine and Bifidobacterium. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03330184. Retrospectively registered on 18 October 2017.

Comparison of Blood Glucose Variability Between Exenatide and Biphasic Insulin Aspart 30 in Chinese Participants with Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled with Metformin Monotherapy: A Multicenter, Open-Label, Randomized Trial.

INTRODUCTION: To compare blood glucose variability (GV) in Chinese participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) whose blood glucose levels are inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy after twice-daily exenatide or biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp30). METHODS: In this 16-week multicenter, randomized clinical trial, 104 participants were randomized 1:1 to receive exenatide (exenatide group) or BIAsp30 (BIAsp30 group) twice daily. All participants continued metformin treatment. The primary outcome was the change in GV as measured by a continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) from baseline to 16 weeks. RESULTS: At 16 weeks, both the Exenatide and BIAsp30 groups effectively decreased mean glucose (MG), but neither group changed the mean amplitude of glycemic excursion (MAGE), largest amplitude of glycemic excursion (LAGE), mean of daily difference (MODD), or standard deviation of blood glucose (SDBG). The decrease in 2-h post-breakfast glucose excursions was greater in the Exenatide group compared to the BIAsp30 group, with a least square (LS) mean difference [95% CI] of (1.58 [0.53, 2.63]). Exenatide also significantly reduced 2-h post-lunch glucose excursion compared to BIAsp30 (LS mean difference [95% CI], 1.19 [0.18, 2.20]). The Exenatide group had significantly reduced body weight and body mass index (BMI), while the BIAsp30 group had increased weight and had no change in BMI. Both treatments were well tolerated with no serious hypoglycemic events and with fewer identified hypoglycemic events in the Exenatide group than in the BIAsp30 group (5.77% vs. 17.31%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Although there was no difference in change of GV between Exenatide and BIAsp30, exenatide provided more improvement in postprandial glucose excursion and weight control, without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia in Chinese patients with T2DM whose blood glucose was inadequately controlled with metformin. These findings may provide new options for patients who choose further hypoglycemic treatment, especially in patients with obesity who have large postprandial plasma glucose excursions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov indentifier: NCT02449603.

Effects of intravenous Injections Paederiae and Stauntonia on spontaneous pain, hyperalgesia and inflammation induced by cutaneous chemical tissue injury in the rat.

To study whether commercial traditional Chinese medicinal preparations Injection Paederiae (IP) or Injection Stauntonia (IS) has anti-nociceptive and/or anti-inflammatory effects, we used two persistent pain models (bee venom and formalin test) to evaluate the systemic effects of IP or IS on the chemical tissue injury-induced persistent spontaneous pain-related responses (PSPR), primary thermal/mechanical hyperalgesia and inflammation in conscious rats. Injection of bee venom (BV, 0.1 mg, 50 microl) into the plantar surface of one hind paw resulted in not only a 1-h monophasic PSPR such as flinching reflex in the injected paw and a subsequent period of 3-4 days primary heat and mechanical hyperalgesia, but also a marked sign of inflammation, including redness and swelling of the plantar surface in the injected paw. Intraplantar injection of formalin produced two phases of PSPR as reported previously. Systemic pre-treatment with three doses of IP (0.32, 1.6 and 9.0 ml/kg, 500%) or IS (0.32, 1.6 and 9.0 ml/kg, 250%) produced a dose-dependent suppression of the BV- or formalin-induced flinching reflex of 1 h time course as compared with the saline control group. Post-treatment with IP or IS 5 min after BV injection also produced a significant suppression of the flinching reflex in both BV test and formalin test respectively, as compared with the control group. However, neither pre- nor post-treatment with IP or IS produced any significantly suppressive effect on the BV-induced primary heat and mechanical hyperalgesia and inflammation. The analgesia produced by IP or IS was not mediated by the endogenous opioid receptors since naloxone, a non-selective opioid receptor antagonist, had no reversal effect on the IP and IS-produced analgesia in the BV-induced PSPR. Our present results suggest that IP or IS might prevent and relieve clinical persistent spontaneous pain, but without any anti-nociceptive and anti-inflammatory effects on the primary heat hyperalgesia, mechanical hyperalgesia, as well as inflammatory responses. The BV test might be a useful model of pain to evaluate and screen anti-nociceptive and anti-inflammatory effects of certain compounds of the Chinese medicinal herbs on the pathological origins of pain.