Sulphonylurea antidiabetic drugs. An update of their clinical pharmacology and rational therapeutic use.

Apart from the amelioration of symptoms, a major aim of the treatment of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM, type 2 diabetes) should be the prevention of cardiovascular complications. These are associated with the chronic hyperglycaemia that is characteristic of NIDDM, and the risk of complications is already increased in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). For these reasons, and because hyperglycaemia appears to be a self-perpetuating condition, treatment should be introduced as early as possible and should be aimed at normalisation of blood glucose. To enable early detection and intervention, screening is necessary. As diet regulation alone rarely suffices to normalise blood glucose, addition of sulphonylurea drugs is indicated in many cases. If introduced in the IGT phase, sulphonylureas drugs combined with diet regulation may postpone the development of IGT to manifest NIDDM, and may reduce the increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Sulphonylureas stimulate insulin release, possibly via interaction with receptors in the pancreatic B cells. In addition, such treatment enhances the reduced insulin action. This might be a primary effect but is also a consequence of the increased access to insulin and the subsequent reduction of hyperglycaemia. Sulphonylureas may enhance insulin availability by reducing insulin clearance. Effects on blood lipids are probably secondary phenomena. Fast and short acting sulphonylureas may improve the impaired meal-induced acute insulin release. If combined with weight-reducing diet regulation and introduced early, such treatment can maintain (near) normal blood glucose levels and an improved insulin action for several years without increasing basal insulin secretion, without chronic hyperinsulinaemia, and without weight increase. If not combined with diet regulation, sulphonylurea therapy is likely to fail. If introduced when NIDDM is advanced, the efficacy of these drugs is limited, with secondary failures developing at a rate of 5 to 10% per year. Continuous (24-hour-a-day) exposure to drug treatment could possibly desensitise the B cell to sulphonylurea stimulation. 'Second-generation' sulphonylurea drugs have a higher potency than 'first-generation' drugs, but this need not signify a greater clinical efficacy. The effect of several of these drugs may be increased if they are ingested half an hour before meal(s). Short acting sulphonylureas may be safer than long acting ones, which seem more likely to cause long lasting and fatal hypoglycaemia, at least in elderly patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)