Type 2 diabetes:assessing the relative risks and benefits of glucose-lowering medications

The selection of appropriate pharmacologic therapy for any disease requires a careful assessment of benefit and risk. In the case of type 2 diabetes, this decision typically balances the benefits accrued from improved glycemic control with the risks inherent in glucose-lowering medications. This review is intended to assist therapeutic decision-making by carefully assessing the potential benefit from improved metabolic control relative to the potential risks of a wide array of currently prescribed glucose-lowering agents. Wherever possible, risks and benefits have been expressed in terms of absolute rates (events per 1000 patient-years) to facilitate cross-study comparisons. The review incorporates data from new studies (Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation, Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes, and the Veterans Affairs Diabetes Trial), as well as safety issues associated with newer glucose-lowering medications. © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

What is the prevalence of diabetic macular oedema involving the centre of the macula in patients undergoing digital diabetic retinopathy screening

Free Paper Sessions Design. Retrospective analysis. Purpose. To assess the prevalence of center-involving diabetic macular oedema (CIDMO) and risk factors. Methods. Retrospective review of patients who were screen positive for maculopathy (M1) during 2010 in East and North Birmingham. The CIDMO was diagnosed by qualitative identification of definite foveal oedema on optical coherence tomography (OCT). Results. Out of a total of 15,234 patients screened, 1194 (7.8%) were screen positive for M1 (64% bilateral). A total of 137 (11.5% of M1s) were diagnosed with macular oedema after clinical assessment. The OCT results were available for 123/137; 69 (56.1%) of these had CI-DMO (30 bilateral) which is 0.5% of total screens and 5.8% of those screen positive for M1. In those with CIDMO 60.9% were male and 63.8% Caucasian; 90% had type 2 diabetes and mean diabetes duration was 20 years (SD 9.7, range 2-48). Mean HbA1c was 8.34%±1.69, with 25% having an HbA1c =9%. Furthermore, 62% were on insulin, 67% were on antihypertensive therapy, and 64% were on a cholesterol-lowering drug. A total of 37.7% had an eGFR between 30% and 60% and 5.8% had eGFR <30. The only significant difference between the CIDMO and non-CIDMO group was mean age (67.83±12.26 vs 59.69±15.82; p=0.002). A total of 65.2% of those with CIDMO also had proliferative or preproliferative retinopathy in the worst eye and 68.1% had subsequently been treated with macular laser at the time of data review. Conclusions. The results show that the prevalence of CIDMO in our diabetic population was 0.5%. A significant proportion of macula oedema patients were found to have type 2 diabetes with long disease duration, suboptimal glycemic and hypertensive control, and low eGFR. The data support that medical and diabetic review of CIDMO patients is warranted particularly in the substantial number with poor glycemic control and if intravitreal therapies are indicated.

Dapagliflozin add-on to metformin in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin:a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 102-week trial

Background: Management of type 2 diabetes with metformin often does not provide adequate glycemic control, thereby necessitating add-on treatment. In a 24-week clinical trial, dapagliflozin, an investigational sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, improved glycemic control in patients inadequately controlled with metformin. The present study is an extension that was undertaken to evaluate dapagliflozin as long-term therapy in this population.Methods: This was a long-term extension (total 102 weeks) of a 24-week phase 3, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group trial. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to blinded daily treatment (placebo, or dapagliflozin 2.5 to 5, or 10 mg) plus open-label metformin (=1,500 mg). The previously published primary endpoint was change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at 24 weeks. This paper reports the follow-up to week 102, with analysis of covariance model performed at 24 weeks with last observation carried forward; a repeated measures analysis was utilized to evaluate changes from baseline in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and weight.Results: A total of 546 patients were randomized to 1 of the 4 treatments. The completion rate for the 78-week double-blind extension period was lower for the placebo group (63.5%) than for the dapagliflozin groups (68.3% to 79.8%). At week 102, mean changes from baseline HbA1c (8.06%) were +0.02% for placebo compared with -0.48% (P = 0.0008), -0.58% (P

The efficacy and safety of imeglimin as add-on therapy in patientswith type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy

OBJECTIVE - A 12-week study assessed the efficacy and safety of a new oral antidiabetic agent, imeglimin, as add-on therapy in type 2 diabetes patients inadequately controlled with metformin alone. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - A total of 156 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive imeglimin (1,500mg twice a day) or placebo added to a stable dose of metformin (1,500-2,000 mg/day). Change in A1C from baseline was the primary efficacy outcome; secondary outcomes included fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and proinsulin/insulin ratio. RESULTS - After 12 weeks, the placebo-subtracted decrease in A1C with metformin-imeglimin was 20.44% (P <0.001). Metformin-imeglimin also significantly improved FPG and the proinsulin/insulin ratio from baseline (20.91 mg/dL and 27.5, respectively) compared with metformin-placebo (0.36 mg/dL and 11.81). Metformin-imeglimin therapy was generally welltolerated with a comparable safety profile to metformin-placebo. CONCLUSIONS - Addition of imeglimin to metformin improved glycemic control and offers potential as a new treatment for type 2 diabetes. Copyright © 2013 by the American Diabetes Association.

Inhaled human insulin (Exubera®):clinical profile and patient considerations

Inhaled human insulin (Exubera®) is a rapid-acting regular human insulin administered by oral inhalation before meals. It provides a non-invasive alternative to multiple subcutaneous injections for the treatment of hyperglycemia in adult patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Compared with subcutaneous rapid-acting insulin analogs, Exubera provides equivalent HbA1c control. As a monotherapy or in combination with oral agents, Exubera also provides greater glycemic control than oral agents alone, at least in patients with high levels of HbA1c. Exubera demonstrates improved patient satisfaction compared with subcutaneous insulin or oral agents alone. When offered as a treatment option together with standard treatments in uncontrolled patients naive to insulin, Exubera increases acceptance of insulin therapy three-fold compared with patients offered standard regimens only. Exubera is well tolerated in comparison to subcutaneous insulin, with a similar incidence of mild to moderate hypoglycemia. Although cough is a common adverse effect early in therapy, this leads to treatment discontinuations in less than 1% of patients. Despite an increased incidence of insulin antibodies compared with subcutaneous administration, and a consistent but minor impact on pulmonary function, long-term safety data of up to 4 years continue to support the safety profile of Exubera.

Insulin therapy in people with type 2 diabetes:opportunities and challenges?

Given the continued interest in defining the optimal management of individuals with type 2 diabetes, the Editor of Diabetes Care convened a working party of diabetes specialists to examine this topic in the context of insulin therapy. This was prompted by recent new evidence on the use of insulin in such people. The group was aware of evidence that the benefits of insulin therapy are still usually offered late, and thus the aim of the discussion was how to define the optimal timing and basis for decisions regarding insulin and to apply these concepts in practice. It was noted that recent evidence had built upon that of the previous decades, together confirming the benefits and safety of insulin therapy, albeit with concerns about the potential for hypoglycemia and gain in body weight. Insulin offers a unique ability to control hyperglycemia, being used from the time of diagnosis in some circumstances, when metabolic control is disturbed by medical illness, procedures, or therapy, as well as in the longer term in ambulatory care. For those previously starting insulin, various other forms of therapy can be added later, which offer complementary effects appropriate to individual needs. Here we review current evidence and circumstances in which insulin can be used, consider individualized choices of alternatives and combination regimens, and offer some guidance on personalized targets and tactics for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. © 2014 by the American Diabetes Association.

Glycated hemoglobin, body weight and blood pressure in type 2 diabetes patients initiating dapagliflozin treatment in primary care:a retrospective study

Introduction - The present study aimed to describe characteristics of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in UK primary care initiated on dapagliflozin, post-dapagliflozin changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), body weight and blood pressure, and reasons for adding dapagliflozin to insulin. Methods - Retrospective study of patients with T2D in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink with first prescription for dapagliflozin. Patients were included in the study if they: (1) had a first prescription for dapagliflozin between November 2012 and September 2014; (2) had a Read code for T2D; (3) were registered with a practice for at least 6 months before starting dapagliflozin; and (4) remained registered for at least 3 months after initiation. A questionnaire ascertained reason(s) for adding dapagliflozin to insulin. Results - Dapagliflozin was most often used as triple therapy (27.7%), dual therapy with metformin (25.1%) or added to insulin (19.2%). Median therapy duration was 329 days [95% confidence interval (CI) 302–361]. Poor glycemic control was the reason for dapagliflozin initiation for 93.1% of insulin-treated patients. Avoiding increases in weight/body mass index and insulin resistance were the commonest reasons for selecting dapagliflozin versus intensifying insulin. HbA1c declined by mean of 9.7 mmol/mol (95% CI 8.5–10.9) (0.89%) 14–90 days after starting dapagliflozin, 10.2 mmol/mol (95% CI 8.9–11.5) (0.93%) after 91–180 days and 12.6 mmol/mol (95% CI 11.0–14.3) (1.16%) beyond 180 days. Weight declined by mean of 2.6 kg (95% CI 2.3–2.9) after 14–90 days, 4.3 kg (95% CI 3.8–4.7) after 91–180 days and 4.6 kg (95% CI 4.0–5.2) beyond 180 days. In patients with measurements between 14 and 90 days after starting dapagliflozin, systolic and diastolic blood pressure decreased by means of 4.5 (95% CI −5.8 to −3.2) and 2.0 (95% CI −2.9 to −1.2) mmHg, respectively from baseline. Similar reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressure were observed after 91–180 days and when follow-up extended beyond 180 days. Results were consistent across subgroups. Conclusion - HbA1c, body weight and blood pressure were reduced after initiation of dapagliflozin in patients with T2D in UK primary care and the changes were consistent with randomized clinical trials.