OBJECTIVE—Safety and efficacy of biphasic insulin aspart 70/30 (BIAsp 70/30, prebreakfast and presupper) were compared with once-daily insulin glargine in type 2 diabetic subjects inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—This 28-week parallel-group study randomized 233 insulin-naive patients with HbA1c values ≥8.0% on >1,000 mg/day metformin alone or in combination with other OADs. Metformin was adjusted up to 2,550 mg/day before insulin therapy was initiated with 5–6 units BIAsp 70/30 twice daily or 10–12 units glargine at bedtime and titrated to target blood glucose (80–110 mg/dl) by algorithm-directed titration. RESULTS—A total of 209 subjects completed the study. At study end, the mean HbA1c value was lower in the BIAsp 70/30 group than in the glargine group (6.91 ± 1.17 vs. 7.41 ± 1.24%, P < 0.01). The HbA1c reduction was greater in the BIAsp 70/30 group than in the glargine group (−2.79 ± 0.11 vs. −2.36 ± 0.11%, respectively; P < 0.01), especially for subjects with baseline HbA1c >8.5% (−3.13 ± 1.63 vs. −2.60 ± 1.50%, respectively; P < 0.05). More BIAsp 70/30–treated subjects reached target HbA1c values than glargine-treated subjects (HbA1c ≤6.5%: 42 vs. 28%, P < 0.05; HbA1c <7.0%: 66 vs. 40%, P < 0.001). Minor hypoglycemia (episodes/year) was greater in the BIAsp 70/30 group than in the glargine group (3.4 ± 6.6 and 0.7 ± 2.0, respectively; P < 0.05). Weight gain and daily insulin dose at study end were greater for BIAsp 70/30–treated subjects than for glargine-treated subjects (weight gain: 5.4 ± 4.8 vs. 3.5 ± 4.5 kg, P < 0.01; insulin dose: 78.5 ± 39.5 and 51.3 ± 26.7 units/day, respectively). CONCLUSIONS—In subjects with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on OADs, initiating insulin therapy with twice-daily BIAsp 70/30 was more effective in achieving HbA1c targets than once-daily glargine, especially in subjects with HbA1c >8.5%.
27 September 2004 in Archives of internal medicine (1960)
Background: Using identical methods, three simultaneous placebo-controlled trials of topiramate for painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) did not reach significance. This independent yet concurrent placebo-controlled trial used different methods to assess topiramate efficacy and tolerability in PDN. Methods: This 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial included 323 subjects with PDN and pain visual analog (PVA) score of at least 40 on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst possible pain). Topiramate (n = 214) or placebo (n = 109) was titrated to 400 mg daily or maximum tolerated dose. Short-acting rescue analgesics were permitted only during the first 6 weeks. Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups except for mean body weight (topiramate, 101.4 kg; placebo, 95.7 kg; p = 0.028). Twelve weeks of topiramate treatment reduced PVA scale score (from 68.0 to 46.2 mm) more effectively than placebo (from 69.1 to 54.0 mm; p = 0.038). Fifty percent of topiramate-treated subjects and 34% of placebo-treated subjects responded to treatment, defined as >30% reduction in PVA scale score (p = 0.004). Topiramate monotherapy also reduced worst pain intensity (p = 0.003 vs placebo) and sleep disruption (p = 0.020 vs placebo). Diarrhea, loss of appetite, and somnolence were the most commonly reported adverse events in the topiramate group. Topiramate reduced body weight (−2.6 vs +0.2 kg for placebo; p < 0.001) without disrupting glycemic control. Conclusions: Topiramate monotherapy reduced pain and body weight more effectively than placebo in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy.
29 June 2009 in Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews
RGRepaglinide vs. Nateglinide Metformin Combination Study Group
Repaglinide vs. Nateglinide Metformin Combination Study Group
+2
OBJECTIVE—An open-label, parallel-group, randomized, multicenter trial was conducted to compare efficacy and safety of repaglinide versus nateglinide, when used in a combination regimen with metformin for treatment of type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Enrolled patients (n = 192) had HbA1c >7% and ≤12% during previous treatment with a sulfonylurea, metformin, or low-dose Glucovance (glyburide ≤2.5 mg, metformin ≤500 mg). After a 4-week metformin run-in therapy period (doses escalated to 1,000 mg b.i.d.), patients were randomized to addition of repaglinide (n = 96) (1 mg/meal, maximum 4 mg/meal) or nateglinide (n = 96) (120 mg/meal, reduced to 60 mg if needed) to the regimen for 16 weeks. Glucose, insulin, and glucagon were assessed after a liquid test meal at baseline and week 16. RESULTS—Final HbA1c values were lower for repaglinide/metformin treatment than for nateglinide/metformin (7.1 vs. 7.5%). Repaglinide/metformin therapy showed significantly greater mean reductions of HbA1c (−1.28 vs. −0.67%; P < 0.001) and of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (−39 vs. −21 mg/dl; P = 0.002). Self-monitoring of blood glucose profiles were significantly lower for repaglinide/metformin before breakfast, before lunch, and at 2:00 a.m. Changes in the area under the curve of postprandial glucose, insulin, or glucagon peaks after a test meal were not significantly different for the two treatment groups during this study. Median final doses were 5.0 mg/day for repaglinide and 360 mg/day for nateglinide. Safety assessments were comparable for the two regimens. CONCLUSIONS—The addition of repaglinide to metformin therapy resulted in reductions of HbA1c and FPG values that were significantly greater than the reductions observed for addition of nateglinide.
Background: IL-6 receptor (IL-6R) signaling drives development of T cell populations important to type 1 diabetes pathogenesis. We evaluated whether blockade of IL-6R with monoclonal antibody tocilizumab would slow loss of residual β cell function in newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes patients. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial with tocilizumab in new-onset type 1 diabetes. Participants were screened within 100 days of diagnosis. Eligible participants were randomized 2:1 to receive 7 monthly doses of tocilizumab or placebo. The primary outcome was the change from screening in the mean AUC of C-peptide collected during the first 2 hours of a mixed meal tolerance test at week 52 in pediatric participants (ages 6–17 years). Results: There was no statistical difference in the primary outcome between tocilizumab and placebo. Immunophenotyping showed reductions in downstream signaling of the IL-6R in T cells but no changes in CD4 memory subsets, Th17 cells, Tregs, or CD4 + T effector cell resistance to Treg suppression. A DC subset decreased during therapy but regressed to baseline once therapy stopped. Tocilizumab was well tolerated. Conclusion: Tocilizumab reduced T cell IL-6R signaling but did not modulate CD4 + T cell phenotypes or slow loss of residual β cell function in newly diagnosed individuals with type 1 diabetes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02293837. Funding: NIH National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) UM1AI109565, UL1TR000004 from NIH/National Center for Research Resources (NCRR) Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA), NIH/NIDDK P30DK036836, NIH/NIDDK U01DK103266, NIH/NIDDK U01DK103266, 1UL1TR000064 from NIH/NCRR CTSA, NIH/National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) UL1TR001878, UL1TR002537 from NIH/CTSA; National Health and Medical Research Council Practitioner Fellowship (APP1136735), NIH/NIDDK U01-DK085476, NIH/CTSA UL1-TR002494, Indiana Clinical and Translational Science Institute Award UL1TR002529, Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research UL1TR000445. NIH/NCATS UL1TR003142, NIH/CTSA program UL1-TR002494, Veteran Affairs Administration, and 1R01AI132774.