Therapy after single oral agent failure: adding a second oral agent or an insulin mixture?

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان: Therapy after single oral agent failure: adding a second oral agent or an insulin mixture?
المؤلفون: Andrew S. Howard, James Malone, Scott D. Beattie, Zvonko Milicevic, Patricia A. Johnson, Barbara N. Campaigne
المصدر: Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice. 62:187-195
بيانات النشر: Elsevier BV, 2003.
سنة النشر: 2003
مصطلحات موضوعية: Adult, Male, medicine.medical_specialty, endocrine system diseases, medicine.drug_class, Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, medicine.medical_treatment, Type 2 diabetes, Hypoglycemia, Glibenclamide, Endocrinology, Internal medicine, Internal Medicine, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Medicine, Insulin lispro, Aged, Glycated Hemoglobin, business.industry, Incidence, Insulin, Racial Groups, nutritional and metabolic diseases, General Medicine, Middle Aged, medicine.disease, Sulfonylurea, Metformin, Sulfonylurea Compounds, Postprandial, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Patient Satisfaction, Drug Therapy, Combination, Female, business, medicine.drug
الوصف: to compare the glycemic response to an insulin lispro mixture (25% insulin lispro and 75% NPL) twice daily plus metformin (Mix25+M) with glibenclamide plus metformin (G+M), in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with a single oral agent.597 patients treated in a randomized, open-label, 16-week parallel study. Variables evaluated: hemoglobin A1C (A1C), patient symptoms, hypoglycemia rate (episodes/patient/30 days), and incidence (% patients experiencingor =1 episode). For a subset of patients (N=120), fasting, 1-h, and 2-h postprandial plasma glucose (FPG, 1-h ppPG, 2-h ppPG) in response to a standardized test meal (STM) and self-monitored blood glucose (BG) profiles were measured.improved A1C at endpoint for both groups, and A1C changes from baseline to endpoint were not significantly different between treatments (Mix25+M, -1.87+/-1.35% vs. G+M, -1.98+/-1.28%; p=0.288). Among patients completing STM; endpoint 2-h ppPG was significantly lower with Mix25+M (9.05+/-3.32 mmol/l vs. 12.31+/-3.65 mmol/l; p0.001), as was 2-h ppPG excursion (2-h ppPGex)(0.38+/-3.23 mmol/l vs. 2.88+/-1.98 mmol/l; p0.001). Percentage of patients achieving postprandial BG targets (10 mmol/l) at endpoint was significantly greater with Mix25+M (80% vs. 48%; p0.001). Although, overall hypoglycemia rates were similar, percentage of patients experiencing and rate of nocturnal hypoglycemia was less with Mix25+M (1% vs. 5%; p0.01, and 0.01 vs. 0.08 episodes/pt/30 d; p=0.007). Patients reported less polyuria with Mix25+M (p0.001).in patients with type 2 diabetes failing on metformin or a sulfonylurea, Mix25+M provided similar overall glycemic control, lower ppPG, reduced nocturnal hypoglycemia, and fewer hyperglycemic symptoms compared to G+M.
تدمد: 0168-8227
الوصول الحر: https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_dedup___::0ccd660bf894da0697602068d981aa62Test
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2003.08.003Test
حقوق: CLOSED
رقم الانضمام: edsair.doi.dedup.....0ccd660bf894da0697602068d981aa62
قاعدة البيانات: OpenAIRE