ABSTRACT
AIM: The primary objective of this review is to develop practice-based expert group opinions on the cardiovascular (CV) safety and utility of modern sulfonylureas (SUs) in cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs). BACKGROUND: The United States Food and Drug Administration issued new guidance to the pharmaceutical industry in 2008 regarding the development of new antihyperglycemic drugs. The guidance expanded the scope for the approval of novel antihyperglycemic drugs by mandating CVOTs for safety. A few long-term CVOTs on dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors have been completed, while others are ongoing. SUs, which constitute one of the key antihyperglycemic agents used for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), have been used as comparator agents in several CVOTs. However, the need for CVOTs on modern SUs remains debatable. In this context, a multinational group of endocrinologists convened for a meeting and discussed the need for CVOTs of modern SUs to evaluate their utility in the management of patients with T2DM. At the meeting, CVOTs of modern SUs conducted to date and the hypotheses derived from the results of these trials were discussed. REVIEW RESULTS: The expert group analyzed the key trials emphasizing the CV safety of modern SUs and also reviewed the results of various CVOTs in which modern SUs were used as comparators. Based on literature evidence and individual clinical insights, the expert group opined that modern SUs are cardiosafe and that since they have been used as comparators in other CVOTs, CVOTs of SUs are not required. CONCLUSION: Modern SUs can be considered a cardiosafe option for the management of patients with diabetes mellitus and CV disease; thus CVOTs among individuals with T2DM are not required.
Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases/drug therapy , Expert Testimony , Sulfonylurea Compounds/therapeutic use , Humans , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
AIM: The primary objective of this review is to develop a practice-based expert group opinion on the role of precision medicine with a specific focus on sulfonylureas (SUs) in diabetes management. BACKGROUND: The clinical etiology, presentation and complications of diabetes vary from one patient to another, making the management of the disease challenging. The pre-eminent feature of diabetes mellitus (DM) are chronically elevated blood glucose concentrations; however, in clinical practice, the exclusion of autoimmunity, pregnancy, pancreatic disease or injury and rare genetic forms of diabetes is crucial. Within this framework, precision medicine provides unique insights into the risk factors and natural history of DM. Precision medicine goes beyond genomics and encompasses patient-centered care, molecular technologies and data sharing. Precision medicine has evolved in the field of diabetology. It has helped improve the efficacy of SUs, a class of drugs, which have been effectively used in the management of diabetes mellitus for decades, and it has enabled the expansion of SUs use in diabetes patients with genetic mutations. REVIEW RESULTS: After due discussions, the expert group analyzed studies that focused on the use of SUs in diabetes patients with genomic variations and rare mutations. The expert group opined that SUs are important glucose-lowering drugs and that precision medicine helps in improving the efficacy of SUs by matching them to those patients who will benefit most. CONCLUSION: Precision medicine opens new vistas for the effective use of SUs in unexpected patient populations, such as those with genetic mutations.
ABSTRACT
Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a progressive disease with multifactorial etiology. The first-line therapy includes monotherapy (with metformin), which often fails to provide effective glycemic control, necessitating the addition of add-on therapy. In this regard, multiple single-dose agents formulated as a single-dose form called fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) have been evaluated for their safety, efficacy, and tolerability. The primary objective of this review is to develop practice-based expert group opinion on the current status and the causes of concern regarding the irrational use of FDCs, in Indian settings. After due discussions, the expert group analyzed the results from several clinical evidence in which various fixed combinations were used in T2DM management. The panel opined that FDCs (double or triple) improve patient adherence, reduce cost, and provide effective glycemic control and, thereby, play an important role in the management of T2DM. The expert group strongly recommended that the irrational metformin FDC's, banned by Indian government, should be stopped and could be achieved through active participation from the government, regulatory bodies, and health ministry, and through continuous education of primary care physicians and pharmacists. In T2DM management, FDCs play a crucial role in achieving glycemic targets effectively. However, understanding the difference between rational and irrational FDC combinations is necessary from the safety, efficacy, and tolerability perspective. In this regard, primary care physicians will have to use a multistep approach so that they can take informed decisions.
