Fixed-dose combination therapy for type 2 diabetes:sitagliptin plus pioglitazone

Type 2 diabetes is typically associated with insulin resistance and dysfunction of insulin-secreting pancreatic beta-cells. Addressing these defects often requires therapy with a combination of differently acting antidiabetic agents. A potential novel combination in development brings together the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor sitagliptin with the thiazolidinedione pioglitazone into a fixed-dose single-tablet combination. The former component acts mainly to increase prandial insulin secretion; the latter improves insulin sensitivity.

Fixed-dose single tablet antidiabetic combinations

Combinations of two or more oral agents with different mechanisms of action are often used for the management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes. While these combinations have customarily been taken as separate tablets, several fixed-dose single tablet combinations are now available. These are based on bioequivalence with the separate tablets, giving similar efficacy to the separate tablets and necessitating the same cautions and contraindications that apply to each active component. Fixed-dose combinations can offer convenience, reduce the pill burden and simplify administration regimens for the patient. They increase patient adherence compared with equivalent combinations of separate tablets, and this is associated with some improvements in glycaemic control. Presently available antidiabetic fixed-dose combinations include metformin combined with a sulphonylurea, thiazolidinedione, dipeptidylpeptidase-4 inhibitor or meglitinide as well as thiazolidinedione-sulphonylurea combinations, each at a range of dosage strengths to facilitate titration. Anticipated future expansion of multiple drug regimens for diabetes management is likely to increase the use of fixed-dose single tablet combinations. © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Anti-obesity fixed-dose combinations

The management of hypertension, dyslipidaemia and hyperglycaemia often requires multiple medications that combine two or more agents with different modes of action to give additive efficacy. In some situations lower doses of two agents with different modes of action can achieve greater efficacy than a high dose of one agent. This is achieved by addressing different pathophysiological features of the disease, whilst at the same time producing fewer side effects than a high dose of one agent. Several examples of this have been described for combinations of blood glucose-lowering therapies in type 2 diabetes. However, the pill burden associated with multiple medications can reduce patient adherence and compromise the potential value of the treatments. To reduce the number of daily doses, single-tablet (‘fixed-dose’) combinations have been introduced to offer greater convenience. There are several ant-diabetic FDCs, mostly combining metformin with another type of glucose-lowering agent. The UK has been less enthusiastic about FDCs than many other parts of the world, and does not have most of these combinations available. One of the concerns expressed about FDCs is a reduced flexibility to select desired doses of the two agents for dose titration. However, in practise the variety of dosage strengths for most FDCs matches the dosages available as separate tablets. Another concern has been the preference to add drugs one at a time to be able to attribute any adverse effects. In most cases the FDC is used when a second drug has been added to a monotherapy that is already a component of the FDC, so it is only the same as adding one agent but without increasing the pill burden.

A double-blind randomized study comparing the effects of continuing or not continuing rosiglitazone + metformin therapy when starting insulin therapy in people with type 2 diabetes

Aims: To compare the efficacy and safety of either continuing or discontinuing rosiglitazone + metformin fixed-dose combination when starting insulin therapy in people with Type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on oral therapy. Methods: In this 24-week double-blind study, 324 individuals with Type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on maximum dose rosiglitazone + metformin therapy were randomly assigned to twice-daily premix insulin therapy (target pre-breakfast and pre-evening meal glucose ≤ 6.5 mmol/l) in addition to either rosiglitazone + metformin (8/2000 mg) or placebo. Results: Insulin dose at week 24 was significantly lower with rosiglitazone + metformin (33.5 ± 1.5 U/day, mean ± se) compared with placebo [59.0 ± 3.0 U/day; model-adjusted difference -26.6 (95% CI -37.7, -15,5) U/day, P < 0.001]. Despite this, there was greater improvement in glycaemic control [HbA 1c rosiglitazone + metformin vs. placebo 6.8 ± 0.1 vs. 7.5 ± 0.1%; difference -0.7 (-0.8, -0.5)%, P < 0.001] and more individuals achieved glycaemic targets (HbA1c < 7.0% 70 vs. 34%, P < 0.001). The proportion of individuals reporting at least one hypoglycaemic event during the last 12 weeks of treatment was similar in the two groups (rosiglitazone + metformin vs. placebo 25 vs. 27%). People receiving rosiglitazone + metformin in addition to insulin reported greater treatment satisfaction than those receiving insulin alone. Both treatment regimens were well tolerated but more participants had oedema [12 (7%) vs. 4 (3%)] and there was more weight gain [3.7 vs. 2.6 kg; difference 1.1 (0.2, 2.1) kg, P = 0.02] with rosiglitazone + metformin. Conclusions: Addition of insulin to rosiglitazone + metformin enabled more people to reach glycaemic targets with less insulin, and was generally well tolerated. © 2007 The Authors.

Linear binocular combination of responses to contrast modulation:contrast-weighted summation in first- and second-order vision

Binocular combination for first-order (luminancedefined) stimuli has been widely studied, but we know rather little about this binocular process for spatial modulations of contrast (second-order stimuli). We used phase-matching and amplitude-matching tasks to assess binocular combination of second-order phase and modulation depth simultaneously. With fixed modulation in one eye, we found that binocularly perceived phase was shifted, and perceived amplitude increased almost linearly as modulation depth in the other eye increased. At larger disparities, the phase shift was larger and the amplitude change was smaller. The degree of interocular correlation of the carriers had no influence. These results can be explained by an initial extraction of the contrast envelopes before binocular combination (consistent with the lack of dependence on carrier correlation) followed by a weighted linear summation of second-order modulations in which the weights (gains) for each eye are driven by the first-order carrier contrasts as previously found for first-order binocular combination. Perceived modulation depth fell markedly with increasing phase disparity unlike previous findings that perceived first-order contrast was almost independent of phase disparity. We present a simple revision to a widely used interocular gain-control theory that unifies first- and second-order binocular summation with a single principle-contrast-weighted summation-and we further elaborate the model for first-order combination. Conclusion: Second-order combination is controlled by first-order contrast.