Literature DB >> 9428831

Efficacy of 24-week monotherapy with acarbose, metformin, or placebo in dietary-treated NIDDM patients: the Essen-II Study.

J Hoffmann1, M Spengler.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the therapeutic potential of acarbose, metformin, or placebo as first line treatment in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-six patients with NIDDM (35-70 years of age, body mass index (BMI) < or = 35 kg/m2, insufficiently treated with diet alone, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c; 7% to 11%) were randomized into 3 groups and treated for 24 weeks with acarbose, 3 x 100 mg/day, or metformin, 2 x 850 mg/day, or placebo. Efficacy, based on HbA1c (primary efficacy criterion), fasting blood glucose (BG) and insulin, 1 hour postprandial BG and insulin (after standard meal test), postprandial insulin increase, plasma lipid profile, and tolerability, based on subjective symptoms and laboratory values were determined every 6 weeks. Analysis of covariance was performed for endvalues with adjustment on baseline values. Ninety-four patients were valid for efficacy evaluation.
RESULTS: Both active drugs showed the same improvement of efficacy criteria compared with placebo. Baseline adjusted means at endpoint were as follows: BG, fasting and 1 hour postprandial, 9.2 mM and 10.9 mM with placebo, 7.6 mM and 8.7 mM with acarbose, and 7.8 mM and 9.0 mM with metformin; HbA1c was 9.8% with placebo, 8.5% with acarbose, and 8.7% with metformin. Comparisons: acarbose versus placebo and metformin versus placebo were statistically significant, but not acarbose versus metformin. No effect on fasting insulin could be observed. Relative postprandial insulin increase was 1.90 with placebo, 1.09 with acarbose, and 1.03 with metformin. Comparisons: acarbose versus placebo and metformin versus placebo were statistically significant, but not acarbose versus metformin. With respect to lipid profile, acarbose was superior to metformin. Low-density lipoprotein (LDL)/high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol ratio increased by 14.4% with placebo, was unchanged with metformin, but decreased by 26.7% with acarbose. Comparisons: acarbose versus placebo and acarbose versus metformin were statistically significant, but not metformin versus placebo. Slight body weight changes were observed with acarbose (-0.8 kg) and metformin (-0.5 kg), but not with placebo. Acarbose led to mild or moderate intestinal symptoms in 50% of the patients within the first 4 weeks, but in only 13.8% of the patients within the last 4 weeks.
CONCLUSIONS: Acarbose and metformin are effective drugs for the first line monotherapy of patients with NIDDM. With respect to plasma lipid profile, especially HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and LDL/HDL cholesterol ratio acarbose may be superior to metformin.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9428831     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9343(97)00252-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med        ISSN: 0002-9343            Impact factor:   4.965


  24 in total

Review 1.  Modern pharmacotherapies for type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  S H Hsia
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 1.798

2.  A multinational, observational study to investigate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of acarbose as add-on or monotherapy in a range of patients: the Gluco VIP study.

Authors:  Weiwei Zhang; Dongjun Kim; Elizabeth Philip; Zahid Miyan; Irina Barykina; Birgit Schmidt; Herbert Stein
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.859

Review 3.  Lipid effects and cardiovascular disease risk associated with glucose-lowering medications.

Authors:  Barbara E Stähli; Catherine Gebhard; Jean-Claude Tardif
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 2.931

4.  [Diabetes Care Austria 2009: registry for type 2 diabetic patients in general practitioners' ordinations in Austria].

Authors:  Bernhard Ludvik; Guntram Schernthaner
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2012-01-09       Impact factor: 1.704

Review 5.  Oral antihyperglycemic therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Alice Y Y Cheng; I George Fantus
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2005-01-18       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 6.  Risk of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis with metformin use in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Shelley R Salpeter; Elizabeth Greyber; Gary A Pasternak; Edwin E Salpeter
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-04-14

Review 7.  A review of the efficacy and safety of oral antidiabetic drugs.

Authors:  Stephanie Aleskow Stein; Elizabeth Mary Lamos; Stephen N Davis
Journal:  Expert Opin Drug Saf       Date:  2012-12-14       Impact factor: 4.250

Review 8.  Diabetes: glycaemic control in type 2.

Authors:  Bala Srinivasan; Nick Taub; Kamlesh Khunti; Melanie Davies
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2008-03-04

Review 9.  Is there a role for alpha-glucosidase inhibitors in the prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus?

Authors:  André J Scheen
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 10.  Alpha-glucosidase inhibitors in the early treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Floris Alexander van de Laar
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2008
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.