Wenying Yang1, Jie Liu2, Zhongyan Shan3, Haoming Tian4, Zhiguang Zhou5, Qiuhe Ji6, Jianping Weng7, Weiping Jia8, Juming Lu9, Jing Liu10, Yuan Xu11, Zhaojun Yang12, Wei Chen13. 1. China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China. Electronic address: ywying_1010@163.com. 2. Shanxi Province People's Hospital, Taiyuan, China. 3. The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China. 4. West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. 5. Xiangya Second Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, China. 6. Xijing Hospital, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China. 7. The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China. 8. Shanghai Jiaotong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China. 9. Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, China. 10. Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, China. 11. Beijing Chao Yang Hospital, Beijing, China. 12. China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China. 13. Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Metformin is the only first-line oral hypoglycaemic drug for type 2 diabetes recommended by international guidelines with proven efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness. However, little information exists about its use in Asian populations. We aimed to ascertain the effectiveness of the α-glucosidase inhibitor acarbose, extensively adopted in China, compared with metformin as the alternative initial therapy for newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In this 48-week, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial, patients who were newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, with a mean HbA1c of 7·5%, were enrolled from 11 sites in China. After a 4-week lifestyle modification run-in, patients were assigned to 24 weeks of monotherapy with metformin or acarbose as the initial treatment, followed by a 24-week therapy phase during which add-on therapy was used if prespecified glucose targets were not achieved. Primary endpoints were to establish whether acarbose was non-inferior to metformin in HbA1c reduction at week 24 and week 48 timepoints. The non-inferiority margin was 0·3%, with an expected null difference in the change from baseline to week 48 in HbA1c. Analysis was done on a modified intention-to-treat population. This study was registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, number ChiCTR-TRC-08000231. FINDINGS: Of the 788 patients randomly assigned to treatment groups, 784 patients started the intended study drug. HbA1c reduction at week 24 was -1·17% in the acarbose group and -1·19% in the metformin group. At week 48, the HbA1c reduction was -1·11% (acarbose) and -1·12% (metformin) with difference 0·01% (95% CI -0·12 to 0·14, p=0·8999). Six (2%) patients in the acarbose group and seven (2%) patients in the metformin group had serious adverse events, and two (1%) and four (1%) had hypoglycaemic episodes. INTERPRETATION: This study provides evidence that acarbose is similar to metformin in efficacy, and is therefore a viable choice for initial therapy in Chinese patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. FUNDING: Bayer Healthcare (China) and Double Crane Phama.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Metformin is the only first-line oral hypoglycaemic drug for type 2 diabetes recommended by international guidelines with proven efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness. However, little information exists about its use in Asian populations. We aimed to ascertain the effectiveness of the α-glucosidase inhibitor acarbose, extensively adopted in China, compared with metformin as the alternative initial therapy for newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In this 48-week, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial, patients who were newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, with a mean HbA1c of 7·5%, were enrolled from 11 sites in China. After a 4-week lifestyle modification run-in, patients were assigned to 24 weeks of monotherapy with metformin or acarbose as the initial treatment, followed by a 24-week therapy phase during which add-on therapy was used if prespecified glucose targets were not achieved. Primary endpoints were to establish whether acarbose was non-inferior to metformin in HbA1c reduction at week 24 and week 48 timepoints. The non-inferiority margin was 0·3%, with an expected null difference in the change from baseline to week 48 in HbA1c. Analysis was done on a modified intention-to-treat population. This study was registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, number ChiCTR-TRC-08000231. FINDINGS: Of the 788 patients randomly assigned to treatment groups, 784 patients started the intended study drug. HbA1c reduction at week 24 was -1·17% in the acarbose group and -1·19% in the metformin group. At week 48, the HbA1c reduction was -1·11% (acarbose) and -1·12% (metformin) with difference 0·01% (95% CI -0·12 to 0·14, p=0·8999). Six (2%) patients in the acarbose group and seven (2%) patients in the metformin group had serious adverse events, and two (1%) and four (1%) had hypoglycaemic episodes. INTERPRETATION: This study provides evidence that acarbose is similar to metformin in efficacy, and is therefore a viable choice for initial therapy in Chinese patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. FUNDING: Bayer Healthcare (China) and Double Crane Phama.
Authors: Tamara S Hannon; M S Kirkman; Yash R Patel; Robert V Considine; Kieren J Mather Journal: Diabetes Metab Res Rev Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 4.876