Comparison of Vildagliptin and Pioglitazone in Korean Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled with Metformin

BACKGROUND: We compared the efficacies of vildagliptin (50 mg twice daily) relative to pioglitazone (15 mg once daily) as an add-on treatment to metformin for reducing glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: The present study was a multicenter, randomized, active-controlled investigation comparing the effects of vildagliptin and pioglitazone in Korean patients receiving a stable dose of metformin but exhibiting inadequate glycemic control. Each patient underwent a 16-week treatment period with either vildagliptin or pioglitazone as an add-on treatment to metformin. RESULTS: The mean changes in HbA1c levels from baseline were -0.94% in the vildagliptin group and -0.6% in the pioglitazone group and the difference between the treatments was below the non-inferiority margin of 0.3%. The mean changes in postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) levels were -60.2 mg/dL in the vildagliptin group and -38.2 mg/dL in the pioglitazone group and these values significantly differed (P=0.040). There were significant decreases in the levels of total, low density lipoprotein, high density lipoprotein (HDL), and non-HDL cholesterol in the vildagliptin group but increases in the pioglitazone group. The mean change in body weight was -0.07 kg in the vildagliptin group and 0.69 kg in the pioglitazone group, which were also significantly different (P=0.002). CONCLUSION: As an add-on to metformin, the efficacy of vildagliptin for the improvement of glycemic control is not inferior to that of pioglitazone in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes. In addition, add-on treatment with vildagliptin had beneficial effects on PPG levels, lipid profiles, and body weight compared to pioglitazone.

Platelet Function Assay for Clopidogrel and Ticlopidine in Patients With Ischemic Stroke

BACKGROUND: The rapid platelet function assay (RPFA) has recently been developed and used to monitor the antiplatelet effects on the P2Y12 ADP receptor. We describe the platelet response to clopidogrel and ticlopidine using the RPFA and identify the clinical factor related to laboratory resistance in patients with ischemic stroke. METHODS: Of the 172 outpatients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) enrolled in this study, 86 were taking clopidogrel (75 mg/day) and 86 were taking ticlopidine (500 mg/day). Demographic data, vascular risk factors, stroke subtypes, and the results of blood tests were recorded. Inhibition is described as the percentage change from baseline aggregation, and is calculated from the P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) and the base PRU on the RPFA. Those patients who displayed ineffective aggregation-inhibition (inhibition <20%) on the RPFA were defined as nonresponders. RESULTS: The response of platelet aggregation-inhibition to clopidogrel and ticlopidine exhibited a variable distribution (PRU; coefficient of variability, 0.477). Ineffective platelet inhibition was detected in 25.6% of the clopidogrel group and 3.5% of the ticlopidine group (p<0.001). In addition to clopidogrel, TIA and diabetes exhibited significantly higher ineffective platelet inhibition in a univariate analysis. In the multivariate analysis, clopidogrel and TIA remained significant, and diabetes fell to borderline significance (p=0.061). CONCLUSIONS: The response to clopidogrel and ticlopidine can vary between patients. Platelet inhibition is lower for clopidogrel than for ticlopidine on the platelet function test in patients with ischemic stroke. The clinical impact of these results remains uncertain; further investigations are needed.