Presentation on theme: "The advantages from combining two insulin sensitizers"— Presentation transcript:
1The advantages from combining two insulin sensitizers PIOGLIT-METThe advantages from combining two insulin sensitizersDr. Nizar ALBACHE Aleppo University- Diabetes Research Unit President of Syrian Endocrine Society Vice President of Mediterranean Group for Study of Diabetes
2Diabetes Mellitus in Syria 2006 (>25 year) Epidemiology of Type 2 diabetes mellitus in Aleppo, SyriaN. ALBACHE, R. ALI, S. RASTAM, F. M. FOUAD, F. MZAYEK,. W. MAZIAK; Journal of Diabetes 2 (2009) 1–7
3Major progress in the oral treatment of diabetes 19201940196019802000?GlinidesNPHInsulinMetforminGliptinsInsulindiscoveredInsulin pumpFirstsulphonylureasGLP-1GlitazonesLenteInsulinsHumanInsulinInsulinanaloguesAcarbose.....But the good glycemic control of the type 2 diabeticpatient remains a challenge
4Metformin -In Europe since 1957 -In USA since 1992 Derived from the plant known as Goat's Rue, French Lilac, Italian Fitch or Professor-weed (Galega officinalis)
5Remarkable story of metformin Undisputed first choice!First disappointmentsNew successDiscussion of a possible withdrawalUKPDSCommer-cializationFDAmetforminFatal lactic acidosis!New“steady – state”crazeprogressive disaffectionPhenformin BuforminFinal withdrawal19571980199219982011
7UKPDS: Global Clinical Outcomes Improving the Prognosis of Patients with Type 2 DiabetesSlide 26. UKPDS: Any Diabetes Related Endpoint in Metformin Study Kaplan Meier Survival Plot.Overweight patientsConventional Diet60Any diabetes-related endpointInsulin orSulphonylureas40Met v Diet p=0.0023Metformin 32%ReductionProportion of patients with eventsThe impact of therapy on clinical outcome measurements, in this case the 21 diabetes related complications, is reported in this slide.The 'survival' curves for each therapy represent the time to occurrence of each complication and are expressed as the cumulative damage over 16 years. For example, approximately 15% of diet treated patients have at least one complication at six years, and this figure increases to 60% of patients after 16 years of follow-up.Patients assigned to intensive blood glucose control with metformin had a significant 32% lower risk of developing any diabetes-related endpoint than patients assigned to conventional treatment (p=0.0023). The metformin group also had significantly greater risk reduction than the group assigned to intensive therapy with a sulphonylurea or insulin (p=0.0034).The outcome benefits with metformin became apparent after about 6 years of treatment, where the three curves diverged. This shows that long-term treatment with metformin is required to maximise the benefits in terms of reducing morbidity or mortality.Met v Sus or Insulin p=0.0034203691216Time from randomisation (years)Lancet 1998;352:854-65
8UKPDS: Risk reduction with metformin in overweight patients N = 4075 with type 2 diabetesAggregate endpointsP*Favors metformin or intensiveFavors conventionalAll-cause mortalityMetforminIntensiveMyocardial infarctionStroke0.021The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) randomized patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes to metformin (n = 342; target fasting glucose of 108 mg/dL), other hypoglycemic medication (either chlorpropamide, glibenclamide, or insulin) (n = 951; target fasting glucose of 108 mg/dL), or usual care (n = 411).1 The median duration was 10.7 years.• Relative to usual care, metformin was associated with a 36% relative risk reduction in all-cause mortality (RR, 0.64, 95% CI, 0.45–0.91). The other intensive treatments combined were associated with an 8% relative risk reduction (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.71–1.18) (P = 0.021, comparison between the two intensive-treatment groups).1• There was no difference between the two intensive-treatment groups in the relative risk reductions in stroke and MI, although the trend was in favor of metformin.• These data suggest that insulin-sensitizing therapy may be associated with greater reductions in CV outcomes than other hypoglycemic therapies.0.1110Relative risk reduction (95% CI)*metformin vs intensive therapyUKPDS Group. Lancet. 1998;352:1. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Effect of intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34). Lancet. 1998;352:
9Metformin associated with lower mortality N = 16,417 with diabetes and HF1.00.9• Another class of insulin sensitizer, metformin, was associated with a 14% relative risk reduction in mortality (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78–0.97; data not shown).10.8Proportionof patients survivingMetformin (n = 1861)0.713% Relative risk reductionNo insulin sensitizer (n = 12,069)0.60.550100150200250300350Time (days)Masoudi FA et al. Circulation. 2005;111:1. Masoudi FA, Inzucchi SE, Wang Y, Havranek EP, Foody JM, Krumholz HM. Thiazolidinediones, metformin, and outcomes in older patients with diabetes and heart failure: An observational study. Circulation. 2005;111:
10Metformin and lipid profiles A double-blind, randomised study in 289 patients with previously diet-treated type 2 diabetes showed that total cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol improved significantly, compared with placebo, after 29 weeks of metformin treatment. Triglycerides were also reduced in the metformin group, and increased in the placebo group, though this comparison did not achieve statistical significance. These improvements in lipid profiles are typical of those observed in dyslipidaemic type 2 diabetic populations after treatment with metformin.DeFronzo RA, Goodman AM. Efficacy of metformin in patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 1995;333:541-9.p=0.001p=0.019DeFronzo RA & Goodman AM. NEJM 1995;333:541-9
11Metformin and body fat composition Selective loss of visceral fatWeight (kg)Body Mass Index (Kg/m2)Total Body Fat (L)Total Subcutaneous Fat (L)Abdominal Subcutaneous Fat (L)Viscera Fat (L)Lean Body MassChange frombaseline- 3.3- 1.2- 2.8- 2.1- 0.6% Decreasefrom baseline4%9%7%11%15%No changepvalue0.0060.0140.0250.0130.01NSMetformin and body fat compositionRecent studies suggest that visceral fat is most strongly associated with insulin resistance and increased cardiovascular risk, while subcutaneous fat is associated with a lower risk of poor cardiovascular outcomes.Seven obese type 2 diabetic patients (mean BMI 29 kg/m2) received their maximally tolerated dose of metformin for 6 months in this study. The amount of visceral and subcutaneous fat was measured in each patient using computed tomography and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry techniques.On average, body weight was reduced by 3.3 kg (p<0.008). However, a larger decrease in visceral fat was observed, compared with subcutaneous fat (mean reductions of 15.7% [p=0.01] and 7% [p=NS], respectively).Metformin treatment is therefore associated with a redistribution of visceral fat that is consistent with its beneficial effects on insulin resistance and clinical outcomes.Kurukulasuriya R, Banerji MA, Chaiken R, Lebovitz H. Selective decrease in visceral fat is associated with weight loss during metformin treatment in African Americans with type 2 diabetes [abstract]. Diabetes 1999;48: A315.Data are Means. Duration of Treatment: 6 Months.Kurukulasuriya R et al. Diabetes 1999;48:A315
12Metformin improves endothelial function 400Metformin mg (3 months)Placebo350*300• Endothelial function is impaired early in insulin resistance.• Mather et al randomized 44 patients with type 2 diabetes to metformin 1 g or placebo for 12 weeks.1• Before and after treatment, endothelium-dependent and endothelium-independent vasodilation was assessed by intra-arterial administration of acetycholine or sodium nitroprusside, respectively.• As shown, metformin was associated with a significant improvement in endothelium-dependent vasodilation compared with placebo.• This finding supports a link between insulin resistance and endothelial dysfunction.Increase in forearmblood flow (%)250200*150100*503103031030Acetylcholine (g/min)Before treatmentAfter treatment* P = vs placeboMather KJ et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37:1. Mather KJ, Verma S, Anderson TJ. Improved endothelial function with metformin in type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37:
13Myocardial Infarction Improving the Prognosis of Patients with Type 2 DiabetesSlide 29. UKPDS: Myocardial Infarction in Metformin Study.Heart AttacksCoronary Deaths2010p=0.01p=0.02NS839%15Reduction50%6ReductionMetformin markedly and significantly reduced the incidence of myocardial infarction, by 39% compared with diet alone (p = 0.01). No significant changes were observed with the intensive regimen based on sulphonylureas or insulin.Consistent with the effects on myocardial infarction, metformin also significantly reduced the incidence of coronary deaths, by 50% compared with diet (p = 0.02). No published data on fatal heart attacks have been given for overweight patients assigned to sulphonylureas or insulin.Incidence per 1000 patient years10Incidence per 1000 patient years452ConventionalInsulinMetforminConventionalMetforminDietorDietSulphonylureas
14Improving the Prognosis of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes StrokeSlide 30. UKPDS: Stroke in Metformin Study.P=0.13(NS)P=0.03214%The beneficial cardiovascular effects of metformin, compared with insulin/sulphonylurea based intensive management, also extend to the reduction in risk of stroke.There was a 41% reduction in the risk of stroke in the metformin group which proved to be significantly superior to the 14% increased risk in the insulin/sulphonylurea intensive therapy group (p=0.032).Due to the small number of stroke events there were no significant differences between intensive therapies and the diet alone group.41%Conventional DietMetforminMetforminInsulin or SulphonylureasInsulin or Sulphonyl
15Survival in Overweight Group Improving the Prognosis of Patients with Type 2 DiabetesSurvival in Overweight GroupSlide 32. UKPDS: Mortality Figures in Metformin Study.Diabetes Related Deaths3691215Incidence (Deaths per 1000 Patient Years)All Cause Mortality510152025Incidence (Deaths per 1000 Patient Years)p=0.017p=0.011NSNSp=0.02142%Reduction36%ReductionIn the study in overweight patients, therapy outcomes for survival (measured as the death rate per 1000 patient years) paralleled their effects on myocardial infarction.Patients allocated to metformin treatment had significantly reduced diabetes- related deaths or deaths from all-causes. The magnitude of the risk reductions were 42% (p = 0.02) and 36% (p = 0.011) respectively, compared with the conventional diet-based policy. The insulin/sulphonylurea regimen was without significant effect on either measure of mortality.ConventionalDietInsulinConventionalInsulinMetforminMetforminorDietorSulphonylureasSulphonylureas
16Mechanisms of vascular protection Reduce insulin resistanceImproved lipid profilesAdiposityImproved hemostasisInhibition of glycoxidationInhibition of inflammation
20Early metformin therapy to delay menarche and augment height in girls with precocious pubarche Conclusion)Early metformin therapy (age 8–12 years) sufficesDelay menarcheAugment postmenarcheal heightReduce total, visceral, and hepatic adiposityCurb the endocrine-metabolic course of LBW-PP girls away from adolescent PCOS.Early metformin therapy to delay menarche and augment height in girls with precocious pubarche Lourdes Ibáñez M.D., Ph.D.a, , , Abel Lopez-Bermejo M.D, Abstract – selected,Fertility and Sterility,Article in Press
21Contraindications for metformin treatment Decrease renal functionCongestive heart failurePatients > 80 years of ageLiver diseaseChronic alcohol diseaseSepsis or other acute illnesses with decreased tissue perfusionDuring intavenous radiographic contrast administration(+-)
22Oral Antihyperglycemic Monotherapy Maximum Therapeutic Effect on A1C Metformin associated with lower mortalityMetformin and lipid profilesDecrease Visceral FatMetformin improves endothelial functionDecrease Myocardial InfarctionDecrease StrokeDecrease risk of CancersDecrease the risk of Developing Diabetes(DPP)
2363% of Patients With Diabetes are Not At ADA A1C Goal <7% National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES),37.2%>8%63%7%7.8%25.8%37.0%17.0%12.4%1 in 5Have A1c> 9%A1C% of Subjectsn = 404Saddinne JB, Cadwell B, Gregg EB, Engelgau MM, Vinicor F, Imperatore G, Narayan KMV, (2006), Improvements In Diabetes Processes Of Care And Intermediate Outcomes: United States, , Ann Intern Med 144:Only 7% of adults attained:A1c <7%, BP 130/80, andTotal Cholesterol <200mg/dL
24Need for an early and intensive approach to type 2 diabetes management 30% of MD2 undiagnosedAt Diagnosis of type 2 diabetes:50% of patients already have complications1up to 50% of -cell function hasalready been lost2Current management:two-thirds of patients do notachieve target HbA1c3,4majority require polypharmacyto meet glycaemic goals over time51UKPDS Group. Diabetologia 1991; 34:877–890. 2Holman RR. Diabetes Res Clin Prac 1998; 40 (Suppl.):S21–S25. 3Saydah SH et al. JAMA 2004; 291:335–342.4Liebl A et al. Diabetologia 2002; 45:S23–S28. 5Turner RC et al. JAMA 1999; 281:2005–2012.
25Stepwise approach: delays control and leaves patients at risk of complications OAD monotherapy uptitrationOAD + multiple daily insulin injectionsDiet andexerciseOADmonotherapyOADcombinationOAD + basal insulin10Complications29MeanHbA1c (%)1876Duration of diabetes1Adapted from Del Prato S et al. Int J Clin Pract 2005; 59:1345– Stratton IM et al. BMJ 2000; 321:405–412.
26Early, intensive intervention: reach glycaemic goals and reduce the risk of complications OADmonotherapy10OADcombinationOADuptitration9OAD + multiple daily insulin injectionsOADuptitrationOAD + basal insulinHbA1c (%)18Complications2Mean76Duration of diabetes1Adapted from Del Prato S et al. Int J Clin Pract 2005; 59:1345– Stratton IM et al. BMJ 2000; 321:405–412.
274/14/2017 3:48 PMMetformin Lowers Plasma Glucose by Lowering Hepatic Glucose Production and by Improving Insulin Sensitivity↓ Gluconeogenesis↓ Glycogenolysis↑ Glycogen synthesis↓Glucose production reduced by1–4:LiverMetforminBlood glucosePurpose:To describe the MOA of metformin.Takeaway:Metformin lowers plasma glucose primarily by reducing hepatic glucose output. It also increases insulin sensitivity, which leads to increased glucose uptake in muscle and adipose tissue.↑Glucose uptake in muscle and fat by increasing insulin sensitivity5Metformin Lowers Plasma Glucose by Lowering Hepatic Glucose Production and by Improving Insulin SensitivitySpeaker NotesThe glucose-lowering effects of metformin are primarily a consequence of reduced hepatic glucose output. Metformin also increases insulin sensitivity, which leads to increased insulin-stimulated glucose uptake in skeletal muscle and adipocytes.1Reduced hepatic glucose production:Primarily a result of decreased gluconeogenesis1,2Secondarily through the acute inhibition of glycogenolysis1,3Increased insulin sensitivityIncreased glucose disposal (mainly in muscle) has been demonstrated using hyperinsulinemic, euglycemic, and hyperglycemic clamp procedures in patients with type 2 diabetes.4MuscleAdipose tissueLiver1. Kirpichnikov D et al. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:25– Setter SM et al. Clin Ther. 2003;25:2991– Hundal RS et al. Diabetes. 2000;49:2063– Chu CA et al. Metabolism. 2000;49:1619– Bailey CJ et al. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:574–579.References:1. Kirpichnikov D, McFarlane SI, Sowers JR. Metformin: an update. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:25–33.2. Hundal RS, Krssak M, Dufour S, et al. Mechanism by which metformin reduces glucose production in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes. 2000;49:2063–2069.3. Chu CA, Wiernsperger N, Muscato N, et al. The acute effect of metformin on glucose production in the conscious dog is primarily attributable to inhibition of glycogenolysis. Metabolism. 2000;49:1619–1626.4. Bailey CJ, Turner RC. Metformin. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:574–579.
28Major Pathophysiologic Defects in Type 2 DM 4/14/2017 3:48 PMMajor Pathophysiologic Defects in Type 2 DMIslet-cell dysfunctionGlucagon(alpha cell)PancreasInsulin resistanceGlucose uptake in muscle and fatInsulin(beta cell)Hepatic glucoseoutputMajor Pathophysiologic Defects in Type 2 DiabetesSpeaker NotesThis diagram depicts the impact of type 2 diabetes on the feedback loop that regulates glucose homeostasis.In type 2 diabetes, insulin resistance is increased and insulin secretion is impaired.1Most patients with type 2 diabetes have insulin resistance. Pancreatic beta cells attempt to increase insulin secretion to compensate for insulin resistance. However, when beta-cell function is impaired, hyperglycemia develops.1By the time diabetes is diagnosed, beta-cell function has already decreased substantially and continues to decline over time.1Once insulin secretion is impaired, an imbalance between insulin and glucagon can develop. Elevated glucagon levels lead to an increase in hepatic glucose production.1Likewise, with decreased secretion of insulin, less glucose is taken up by the muscle and adipose tissue.2Purpose:To explain the 3 core pathophysiologic defects of type 2 diabetes.Takeaway:Insulin resistance, beta-cell dysfunction, and elevated hepatic glucose production each contribute to hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes.HyperglycemiaLiverMuscleLiverAdipose tissueAdapted with permission from Kahn CR, Saltiel AR. Joslin’s Diabetes Mellitus. 14th ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005:145–168.Del Prato S, Marchetti P. Horm Metab Res. 2004;36:775–781.Porte D Jr, Kahn SE. Clin Invest Med. 1995;18:247–254.References:1. Del Prato S, Marchetti P. Beta- and alpha-cell dysfunction in type 2 diabetes. Horm Metab Res. 2004;36:775–781.2. Porte D Jr, Kahn SE. The key role of islet dysfunction in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Clin Invest Med. 1995;18:247–254.
29Complementary Mechanisms of Action 4/14/2017 3:48 PMComplementary Mechanisms of ActionCombining Pioglitazone and MetforminComplementary Mechanisms of Action: Combining Sitagliptin and Metformin
30Major Targeted Sites of Oral Drug Classes 4/14/2017 3:48 PMMajor Targeted Sites of Oral Drug ClassesBeta-cell dysfunctionPancreasSulfonylureasMuscle and fatMeglitinidesLiverHepatic glucose overproductionDPP-4 inhibitorsGLP-1Insulin resistance↓Glucose levelMajor Targeted Sites of Various Oral Drug ClassesSpeaker NotesThe various therapeutic agents available for the treatment of type 2 diabetes act on different pathways to control hyperglycemia.1,2Sulfonylureas act in the pancreas, stimulating insulin release by binding to the sulfonylurea receptor of beta-cell membranes.1Meglitinides, another class of short-acting insulin secretagogues, also act in the pancreas, stimulating insulin release by binding to several sites on the beta cells. They are used to control postprandial hyperglycemia.1TZDs (thiazolidinediones) are selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists and act in the muscle. They also exert effects in the liver and adipose tissue. These agents reduce insulin resistance and decrease hepatic glucose output.1,2Alpha-glucosidase inhibitors lower postprandial blood glucose concentrations by inhibiting disaccharidase enzymes in the gut, thereby delaying carbohydrate absorption. This action retards glucose entry into the systemic circulation.1Biguanides (metformin) act primarily in the liver by decreasing hepatic glucose output through a mechanism that has not been fully elucidated. Metformin also enhances insulin sensitivity in muscle and decreases intestinal absorption of glucose.1,3,4Based on their different mechanisms of action, these drugs may be used in combination, as noted in the prescribing information for each product.The dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors are a new class of treatment for type 2 diabetes. These agents prevent the enzyme DPP-4 from degrading and inactivating GLP-1 and GIP, incretin hormones that are produced in the gut and help regulate insulin production and secretion.5This glucose-dependent mechanism targets 2 key defects: insulin release and hepatic glucose production.Purpose:To provide a broad overview of the key mechanisms and targeted sites of available antihyperglycemic classes and to introduce the concept that DPP-4 inhibitors have an effect on both the pancreas and the liver.Takeaway:Different drug classes with different but complementary mechanisms may be suitable for combination therapy to address multiple pathophysiologies and improve A1C control. The glucose-dependent mechanism of DPP-4 inhibitors targets 2 key defects: insulin release and unsuppressed hepatic glucose production.BiguanidesGutGlucose absorptionTZDsTZDsBiguanidesAlpha-glucosidase inhibitorsDPP-4 inhibitorsBiguanidesDPP-4=dipeptidyl peptidase-4; TZDs=thiazolidinediones.DeFronzo RA. Ann Intern Med. 1999;131:281–303.Buse JB et al. In: Williams Textbook of Endocrinology. 10th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2003:1427–1483.References:1. DeFronzo RA. Pharmacologic therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Ann Intern Med. 1999;131:281–303.2. Actos [package insert]. Lincolnshire, Ill: Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc; 2004.3. Buse JB, Polonsky KS, Burant CF. Type 2 diabetes mellitus. In: Larsen PR et al, eds. Williams Textbook of Endocrinology. 10th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2003:1427–1483.4. Glucophage [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb; 2004.5. Herman GA, Bergman A, Stevens C, et al. Effect of single oral doses of sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, on incretin and plasma glucose levels after an oral glucose tolerance test in patient with type 2 diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006;9:4612–4619.
31Alpha-Glucosidase Inhibitors1,2 4/14/2017 3:48 PMNo Single Class of Oral Antihyperglycemic Monotherapy Targets All Key PathophysiologiesAlpha-Glucosidase Inhibitors1,2Meglitinides3SUs4,5TZDs6,7Metformin8DPP-4 InhibitorsInsulin deficiencyInsulin resistanceExcess hepatic glucose outputMajor PathophysiologiesPurpose:To examine the key pathophysiologies targeted by each class of oral antihyperglycemic agent.Takeaway:No one class targets all key pathophysiologies of type 2 diabetes.No Single Class of Oral Antihyperglycemic Monotherapy Targets All Key PathophysiologiesSpeaker NotesNo single-agent monotherapy has an MOA that addresses all key pathophysiologies of type 2 diabetes.Alpha-glucosidase inhibitors decrease intestinal absorption of glucose.1,2Meglitinides and sulfonylureas stimulate insulin secretion.3–5TZDs are insulin sensitizers that also lower hepatic glucose output.6,7Metformin, a biguanide, lowers hepatic glucose production, decreases intestinal absorption of glucose, and improves insulin sensitivity.8DPP-4 inhibitors improve insulin synthesis and release and lower hepatic glucose production, both through suppressing glucagon production and release, and by improving insulin synthesis and release.Each class of oral antihyperglycemic agent does not address at least 1 key pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes.Intestinal glucose absorption1. Glyset [package insert]. New York, NY: Pfizer Inc; Precose [package insert]. West Haven, Conn: Bayer; Prandin [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Novo Nordisk; Diabeta [package insert]. Bridgewater, NJ: Sanofi-Aventis; Glucotrol [package insert]. New York, NY: Pfizer Inc; Actos [package insert]. Lincolnshire, Ill: Takeda Pharmaceuticals; Avandia [package insert]. Research Triangle Park, NC: GlaxoSmithKline; Glucophage [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb; 2004.References:1. Glyset [package insert]. New York, NY: Pfizer Inc; 2004.2. Precose [package insert]. West Haven, Conn: Bayer; 2004.3. Diabeta [package insert]. Bridgewater, NJ: Sanofi-Aventis; 2007.4. Glucotrol [package insert]. New York, NY: Pfizer Inc; 2006.5. Prandin [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Novo Nordisk; 2006.6. Actos [package insert]. Lincolnshire, Ill: Takeda Pharmaceuticals; 2004.7. Avandia [package insert]. Research Triangle Park, NC: GlaxoSmithKline; 2005.8. Glucophage [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb; 2004.
33Effects of Pioglitazone and Metformin on FBG and HbA1c 0.250.2-50.0-5FBG(mg/dL) change from baselineHbA1c (%) change from baseline-15-0.2-25-0.4-35*-0.6-45-38-55-0.8-0.8*Placebo + metforminPioglitazone 30 mg + metformin*P0.05 for comparison with placeboEgan J et al. Diabetes. 1999;47(suppl 1):A117. Abstract.
34Early Addition of Rosiglitazone 8 mg/day to 1 g Metformin: More Patients Reach A1c Goal* vs. MET Monotherapy (2 g)†55%45%Goal‡<7%Goal‡<6.5%*ADA A1c goal <7%, AACE A1C goal 6.5%. †P<0.05.‡Patients received Avandia® 8 mg/day plus metformin 1 g/day (n=322; baseline A1c 8.05%) versus maximum dose metformin (n=313; baseline A1c 7.95%) in a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study.
35Insulin sensitizers vs other glucose-lowering agents following AMI 8872 acute MI patients, mean age 76.4 years, discharged on glucose-lowering medicationMetforminTZDBoth• Patients prescribed thiazolidinediones (alone or in combination with metformin) had a higher risk of readmission for heart failure probably due to drug-related peripheral edema.1• Increases in heart failure readmissions were not associated with increased mortality.Mortality0.92(0.81–1.06)0.92(0.80–1.05)0.52(0.34–0.82)Myocardial infarction readmission1.02(0.86–1.20)0.92(0.77–1.10)0.88(0.56–1.37)Heart failure readmission1.06(0.95–1.18)1.17(1.05–1.30)1.24(0.94–1.63)All-cause readmission1.04(0.96–1.13)1.09(1.00–1.20)1.06(0.87–1.30)1. Inzucchi SE, Masoudi FA, Wang Y, Kosiborod M, Foody JM, Setaro JF, et al. Insulin-sensitizing antihyperglycemic drugs and mortality after acute myocardial infarction: Insights from the National Heart Care Project. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:
36Neutral effect of PPAR activation and metformin on hospital readmission N = 16,417 with diabetes and HFHospital readmission• There were no differences in the risk for all-cause readmission among patients discharged on a thiazolidinedione or metformin Rx compared with those not receiving either drug.1• There was a modestly higher risk (of borderline significance) for heart failure readmission with a thiazolidinedione Rx and a significantly lower risk with a metformin Rx.• The investigators concluded, “This observational study suggests that thiazolidinediones and metformin are not associated with increased mortality and may improve outcomes in older patients with diabetes and heart failure.”All-cause HF TZD 1.04 (0.99–1.10) 1.06 (1.00–1.12) Metformin 0.94 (0.89–1.01) 0.92 (0.86–0.99)TZD = thiazolidinedione1. Masoudi FA, Inzucchi S, Wang Y, Havranek EP, Foody JM, Krumholz HM. Thiazolidinediones, metformin, and outcomes in older patients with diabetes and heart failure. Circulation. 2005;111:
37Mortality benefit with combined insulin-sensitizing therapy 8872 acute MI patients, mean age 76.4 years, discharged on glucose-lowering medicationNo insulin sensitizer (n = 6641) Thiazolidinediones (n = 1273)Metformin (n = 819)TZD + MET (n = 139)1.00• Inzucchi et al conducted a retrospective cohort study of 8872 Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes.1 Subjects were discharged after hospitalization with MI between April 1998 and March 1999 or July 2000 to June 2001; 819 with a thiazolidinedione Rx, 1273 metformin Rx, and 139 receiving both drugs.• Metformin or thiazolidinediones had a neutral effect on mortality compared with treatment that did not include an insulin sensitizer: o Metformin: Hazard ratio (HR) 0.92 (0.81–1.06) o Thiazolidinediones: HR 0.92 (0.80–1.05)• Mortality risk was nearly 50% lower in patients receiving both drugs: o Metformin + thiazolidinediones: HR 0.52 (0.34–0.82).0.95Proportionof patients surviving0.9048% Relative risk reduction0.850.8050100150200250300350Days from discharge1. Inzucchi SE, Masoudi FA, Wang Y, Kosiborod M, Foody JM, Setaro JF, et al. Insulin-sensitizing antihyperglycemic drugs and mortality after acute myocardial infarction: Insights from the National Heart Care Project. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:
38Fixed-dose combination tablets may help to increase patient compliance and improve efficacy
39Patient compliance can be a difficult obstacle to overcome 4/14/2017 3:48 PMPatient compliance can be a difficult obstacle to overcomeAmong newly DM2=53.8% adhered to their treatment regimenCompliance problems result in higher A1C levels10% increase in drug adherence decreased A1C 0.16%optimal compliance vs the group with the worst compliance =1.4% difference in A1C
40Patient compliance is influenced by the frequency of doses taken Patient compliance is dependent on two behavioral aspects:Dose taking :QD dosing is 98.7%BID dosing is 83.1%TID dosing is 65.8%Dose timing:QD dosing is 79.1%BID dosing is 65.6%TID dosing is 38.1%QD dosing regimens are associated with higher rates of adherence than BID or TID regimens.
41Advantages of combination therapy The side effects and toxicities ;not altered by combinationdose related in individual patientslower doses in combination better toleratedDosing flexibility may be key to tight controlPatient compliance increases as complexity decreases
43Evidence vs. opinion based guidelines for the management of type 2 diabetic patients Diabetologia July; 53(7): 1258–1269
44Debate on The ADA and EASD algorithm(Nathan) Deficiencies in the algorithm Not evidence based approachNot offer the best quality of treatmenton the basis of our understanding of the multifactorial pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes or the need for individualised therapyBased more on an outdated expert opinionPriorities for treatmenton the benefits of all available classes of glucose-lowering agentsIn favouring initial use of metformin monotherapy followed by sulfonylurea, an approach known to failDoes not offer appropriate selectionof options to individualise and optimise careDiabetologia July; 53(7): 1258–1269
48Take home messagesGuidelines changing now, we expect the new one to be release soonWe have many choices to initiate oral TTCombination of 2 Sensitizers looks a good oneWith adding Piogl. To Metf. You add the benefits:Increase patients adherenceMore redaction on A1cImprove Lipid profileIncrease cardiac protectionDecrease the cancer risk