The Efficacy and Tolerability of Irbesartan/Amlodipine Combination Therapy in Patients With Essential Hypertension Whose Blood Pressure Were not Controlled by Irbesartan Monotherapy.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of irbesartan (IRB) and amlodipine (AML) combination therapy in patients with essential hypertension whose blood pressure (BP) was not controlled by IRB monotherapy. METHODS: Two multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III studies were conducted in Korea (the I-DUO 301 study and the I-DUO 302 study). After a 4-week run-in period with either 150 mg IRB (I-DUO 301 study) or 300 mg IRB (I-DUO 302 study), patients with uncontrolled BP (ie, mean sitting systolic BP [MSSBP] ≥140 mmHg to <180 mmHg and mean sitting diastolic BP <110 mmHg) were randomized to the placebo, AML 5 mg, or AML 10 mg group. A total of 428 participants were enrolled in the 2 I-DUO studies. In the I-DUO 301 study, 271 participants were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive either IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, or IRB 150 mg/placebo. In the I-DUO 302 study, 157 participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive IRB/AML 300/5 mg or IRB 300 mg/placebo. The primary endpoint was the change in MSSBP from baseline to week 8. Tolerability was assessed according to the development of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and clinically significant changes in physical examination, laboratory tests, pulse, and 12-lead electrocardiography. FINDINGS: In I-DUO 301, the mean (SD) changes of MSSBP at week 8 from baseline were -14.78 (12.35) mmHg, -21.47 (12.78) mmHg, and -8.61 (12.19) mmHg in the IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, and IRB 150 mg/placebo groups, respectively. In I-DUO 302, the mean (SD) changes of MSSBP at week 8 from baseline were -13.30 (12.47) mmHg and -7.19 (15.37) mmHg in the IRB/AML 300/5 mg and IRB 300 mg/placebo groups, respectively. In both studies, all combination groups showed a significantly higher reduction in MSSBP than the IRB monotherapy groups (P < 0.001 for both). TEAEs occurred in 10.00%, 10.99%, and 12.22% of participants in the IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, and IRB 150 mg/placebo groups, respectively, in I-DUO 301 and in 6.33% and 10.67% of participants in the IRB/AML 300/5 mg and IRB 300 mg/placebo groups, respectively, in I-DUO 302, with no significant between-group differences. Overall, there was one serious adverse event throughout I-DUO study. IMPLICATIONS: The combination of IRB and AML has superior antihypertensive effects compared with IRB alone over an 8-week treatment period, with placebo-like tolerability. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05476354 (I-DUO 301), NCT05475665 (I-DUO 302).

Efficacy and Safety of Metformin and Atorvastatin Combination Therapy vs. Monotherapy with Either Drug in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Dyslipidemia Patients (ATOMIC): Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: It is well known that a large number of patients with diabetes also have dyslipidemia, which significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination drugs consisting of metformin and atorvastatin, widely used as therapeutic agents for diabetes and dyslipidemia. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group and phase III multicenter study included adults with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels >7.0% and <10.0%, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >100 and <250 mg/dL. One hundred eighty-five eligible subjects were randomized to the combination group (metformin+atorvastatin), metformin group (metformin+atorvastatin placebo), and atorvastatin group (atorvastatin+metformin placebo). The primary efficacy endpoints were the percent changes in HbA1c and LDL-C levels from baseline at the end of the treatment. Results: After 16 weeks of treatment compared to baseline, HbA1c showed a significant difference of 0.94% compared to the atorvastatin group in the combination group (0.35% vs. -0.58%, respectively; P<0.0001), whereas the proportion of patients with increased HbA1c was also 62% and 15%, respectively, showing a significant difference (P<0.001). The combination group also showed a significant decrease in LDL-C levels compared to the metformin group (-55.20% vs. -7.69%, P<0.001) without previously unknown adverse drug events. Conclusion: The addition of atorvastatin to metformin improved HbA1c and LDL-C levels to a significant extent compared to metformin or atorvastatin alone in diabetes and dyslipidemia patients. This study also suggested metformin's preventive effect on the glucose-elevating potential of atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia, insufficiently controlled with exercise and diet. Metformin and atorvastatin combination might be an effective treatment in reducing the CVD risk in patients with both diabetes and dyslipidemia because of its lowering effect on LDL-C and glucose.

Efficacy and Safety of Alogliptin-Pioglitazone Combination for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Poorly Controlled with Metformin: A Multicenter, Double-Blind Randomized Trial.

Background: Guidelines for switching to triple combination therapy directly after monotherapy failure are limited. This study investigated the efficacy, long-term sustainability, and safety of either mono or dual add-on therapy using alogliptin and pioglitazone for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who did not achieve their target glycemic range with metformin monotherapy. Methods: The Practical Evidence of Antidiabetic Combination Therapy in Korea (PEAK) was a multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trial. A total of 214 participants were randomized to receive alogliptin+pioglitazone (Alo+Pio group, n=70), alogliptin (Alo group, n=75), or pioglitazone (Pio group, n=69). The primary outcome was the difference in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels between the three groups at baseline to 24 weeks. For durability, the achievement of HbA1c levels <7% and <6.5% was compared in each group. The number of adverse events was investigated for safety. Results: After 24 weeks of treatment, the change of HbA1c in the Alo+Pio, Alo, and Pio groups were -1.38%±0.08%, -1.03%±0.08%, and -0.84%±0.08%, respectively. The Alo+Pio group had significantly lower HbA1c levels than the other groups (P=0.0063, P<0.0001) and had a higher proportion of patients with target HbA1c achievement. In addition, insulin sensitivity and ß-cell function, lipid profiles, and other metabolic indicators were also improved. There were no significant safety issues in patients treated with triple combination therapy. Conclusion: Early combination triple therapy showed better efficacy and durability than the single add-on (dual) therapy. Therefore, combination therapy with metformin, alogliptin, and pioglitazone is a valuable early treatment option for T2DM poorly controlled with metformin monotherapy.

A multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel comparison, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pioglitazone add-on therapy in type 2 diabetic patients treated with metformin and dapagliflozin.

AIM: To investigate the efficacy and safety of pioglitazone compared to placebo when added to metformin plus dapagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a multicentre study, with a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design, 249 Korean patients with T2DM suboptimally managed on metformin and dapagliflozin were assigned to receive either pioglitazone (15 mg daily) or placebo for 24 weeks, followed by a 24-week pioglitazone extension. Primary outcomes included changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), with secondary outcomes assessing insulin resistance, adiponectin levels, lipid profiles, liver enzymes, body weight and waist circumference. RESULTS: Pioglitazone administration resulted in a significant reduction in HbA1c levels (from 7.80% ± 0.72% to 7.27% ± 0.82%) compared with placebo (from 7.79% ± 0.76% to 7.69% ± 0.86%, corrected mean difference: -0.42% ± 0.08%; p < 0.01) at 24 weeks. Additional benefits from pioglitazone treatment included enhanced insulin sensitivity, increased adiponectin levels, raised high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and reduced liver enzyme levels, resulting in improvement in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease liver fat score. Despite no serious adverse events in either group, pioglitazone therapy was modestly but significantly associated with weight gain and increased waist circumference. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive pioglitazone treatment in T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin and dapagliflozin demonstrates considerable glycaemic improvement, metabolic benefits, and a low risk of hypoglycaemia. These advantages must be weighed against the potential for weight gain and increased waist circumference.

Real-World Outcomes of Individualized Targeted Therapy with Insulin Glargine 300 Units/mL in Insulin-Naïve Korean People with Type 2 Diabetes: TOBE Study.

INTRODUCTION: The TOujeo BEyond glucose control (TOBE) study evaluated clinical outcomes with insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) in insulin-naïve Korean people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in a real-world setting. METHODS: This 24-week, prospective, non-interventional, multicenter, open-label, single-arm, observational study included adults aged ≥ 20 years with T2DM suboptimally controlled with oral hypoglycemic agents and/or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists who require basal insulin. Eligible participants were assigned to either general target glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c < 7%) or individualized target groups as per physician's discretion considering guidelines and participants' characteristics. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving the HbA1c target (individualized or general) at 24 weeks. RESULTS: Among 369 participants, 19.5% (72/369) of participants achieved the HbA1c target at week 24; 37.5% (33/88) in the individualized and 13.9% (39/281) in the general target group. In both target groups, similar reductions in fasting plasma glucose and body weight were observed, with low incidence of hypoglycemia, and T2DM duration was significantly shorter in participants who did versus those who did not achieve the target HbA1c (individualized target group: 9.6 ± 8.0 versus 13.1 ± 8.4 years, P = 0.0454; general target group: 10.2 ± 8.6 versus 12.8 ± 7.4 years, P = 0.0378). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that initiation of insulin therapy with Gla-300 in people with T2DM using an individualized approach is more effective in achieving an HbA1c target. Moreover, earlier initiation of insulin therapy in people with suboptimally controlled T2DM may increase the success rate of glycemic control. A graphical abstract is available with this article.

Despite various efforts in managing diabetes, individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) encounter numerous challenges to achieve good glycemic control. The major cause is failure to initiate insulin therapy in a timely manner, primarily because of the fear of hypoglycemia. Insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) has smooth and prolonged activity resulting in stable and sustained glycemic control, thus reducing the risk of hypoglycemia. Studies on efficacy and safety of Gla-300 in various populations have been published globally. However, there are limited real-world studies in Asian populations. This study evaluated effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 in Korean people with T2DM who were not on insulin prior to this study but were taking oral glucose-lowering medications. The participants were assigned to two groups: general glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) target (HbA1c < 7%) and individualized HbA1c target according to the participant's characteristics. Results showed that Gla-300 helped to achieve the glycemic target more effectively using an individualized approach. In both groups, similar reductions in fasting plasma glucose and body weight were observed, with low incidence of hypoglycemia. People who achieve glycemic target had a shorter duration of T2DM than those who did not achieve their glycemic target. This suggests that earlier insulin initiation may be a better approach and may increase the success rate of insulin therapy.

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of a Single-Pill Combination of Olmesartan/Amlodipine/Hydrochlorothiazide in Korean Patients with Hypertension and Cardiovascular Risk Factors.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with hypertension and additional cardiovascular risk factors pose a challenge by requiring more intensive blood pressure (BP) control. Single-pill combination (SPC) therapy can benefit these patients by improving medication adherence. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter observational study assessed the real-world safety and effectiveness of an SPC containing olmesartan, amlodipine, and hydrochlorothiazide (O/A/H) in South Korean patients with hypertension and cardiovascular risk factors. BP control rates, defined as the percentage of patients achieving systolic BP (SBP) < 130 mmHg and diastolic BP (DBP) < 80 mmHg for intensive BP control, and < 140 mmHg and < 90 mmHg, respectively, for standard BP control, were investigated across various cardiovascular risk groups, along with changes in SBP and DBP from baseline to week 24. RESULTS: The most prevalent cardiovascular risk factor was age (≥ 45 years in men, ≥ 55 years in women, 86.1%), followed by cardiovascular diseases (64.4%), dyslipidemia (53.7%), body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2 (53.5%), and diabetes mellitus (DM) (46.3%). Switching to O/A/H showed significant BP reduction, with a mean change of - 17.8 mmHg/- 9.3 mmHg in SBP/DBP within 4 weeks. The intensive BP control rate was 41.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 39.5, 43.4), and the standard BP control rate was 73.3% (95% CI 71.5, 75.1), with better control rates in the risk age group (43.1% and 74.1%, respectively) and cardiovascular disease group (42.0% and 73.8%, respectively). The DM group had relatively lower control rates (37.5% for intensive control and 69.4% for standard control). Common adverse drug reactions included dizziness (2.91%), hypotension (1.51%), and headaches (0.70%). CONCLUSION: The SPC therapy of O/A/H caused a rapid and sustained reduction in SBP/DBP in patients' hypertension and additional cardiovascular risk factors. The therapy was safe and well tolerated. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: KCT0003401 ( https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do/20795 ).

Effects of dapagliflozin compared with glimepiride on body composition in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin: The BEYOND study.

AIMS: To evaluate the effect of dapagliflozin on body composition such as total body fat (BF) mass, abdominal visceral adipose tissue (VAT), and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) areas compared with glimepiride in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a 52-week, multicentre, randomized, parallel-group, open-label, Phase IV (NCT02564926) study. Patients with inadequate glycaemic control (glycated haemoglobin ≥7.0% and <10.0%) on metformin monotherapy (≥1000 mg/day) were randomized 1:1 to receive dapagliflozin 10 mg/day or glimepiride 1-2 mg/day for 12 months as an add-on to metformin. Baseline and end of study body composition evaluations included dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and abdominal computed tomography scans. RESULTS: Of 124 enrolled patients from 14 centres, 121 received study treatment (dapagliflozin: 60; glimepiride: 61) and 106 (85.5%) completed the study. Over 52 weeks, the dapagliflozin group showed the following differences versus the glimepiride group: -2.59 kg BF mass, -1.94% BF%, -17.55 cm2 VAT area, -18.39 cm2 SAT area, -0.46% glycated haemoglobin, -18.25 mg/dl fasting blood glucose, -3.7 kg weight, -2.21 cm waist circumference, -1.37 kg/m2 body mass index, -6.81 mmHg systolic blood pressure and +657.71 ng/ml in adiponectin; all were statistically significant. Both groups had similar incidences of adverse events; however, hypoglycaemic events were mainly (12 of 15) reported in the glimepiride group. CONCLUSION: Dapagliflozin reduced total BF mass, abdominal VAT and SAT areas, and showed better glycaemic control than glimepiride. Being safe and well-tolerated, dapagliflozin appears to be a more favourable alternative to sulphonylureas as add-on therapy after metformin monotherapy failure in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes.

Efficacy and safety of monotherapy with enavogliflozin in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Results of a 12-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

AIMS: The study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of enavogliflozin, a newly developed sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, with placebo in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 7.0-10.0%, entered a 2-week placebo run-in period, and were randomized to receive once-daily enavogliflozin (0.1, 0.3 or 0.5 mg) or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline at week 12. RESULTS: Overall, 194 patients were included in the full analysis set [placebo, n = 46; enavogliflozin (0.1 mg, n = 49; 0.3 mg, n = 50; 0.5 mg, n = 49)]. Patients receiving 0.1, 0.3 and 0.5 mg enavogliflozin showed significantly reduced HbA1c compared with those receiving placebo at week 12 (-0.79%, -0.89%, -0.92% and -0.08%, respectively; p < .001 vs. placebo). Mean changes in fasting plasma glucose from baseline at week 12 were -30.5, -31.1, -35.0 and 4.9 mg/dl in patients receiving enavogliflozin doses and placebo, respectively. The proportion of patients achieving HbA1c <7.0% at week 12 was significantly higher in the three enavogliflozin groups than in the placebo group (42.9%, 44.0%, 61.2% and 17.4%, respectively). A higher proportion of patients showed HbA1c reduction by >0.5% after receiving enavogliflozin doses than those receiving placebo (61.2%, 72.0%, 65.3% and 26.1%, respectively). There were no significant differences in incidences of adverse events of hypoglycaemia and genital infection between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily enavogliflozin monotherapy for 12 weeks is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment for Korean patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Efficacy and Safety of Switching to Teneligliptin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled with Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors: 52-Week Results from a Prospective Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of switching to teneligliptin from other dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled despite treatment with a stable dose of other DPP-4 inhibitors. METHODS: Patients with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥ 7% despite taking DPP-4 inhibitors other than teneligliptin, with or without other antidiabetic agents, for at least 3 months were enrolled in this study. Patients on DPP-4 inhibitors administered prior to participation in this study were switched to 20 mg teneligliptin once daily and the dose was maintained for the 52-week study period. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c at week 12. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and the blood lipid profile were also evaluated. Adverse events were monitored for safety assessment. RESULTS: At weeks 12, 24, and 52, the HbA1c values significantly decreased by - 0.39, - 0.44, and - 0.52%, respectively, compared to the baseline value (p < 0.0001); in addition, 56.3, 60.3, and 62.3% of patients, respectively, achieved decreases in HbA1c of at least 0.3%, and 40.1, 46.5, and 52.4% of patients, respectively, achieved decreases in HbA1c of at least 0.5%. The proportion of the patient population achieving HbA1c < 7.0% increased throughout the study period, reaching 30.4, 35.4, and 36.9% at weeks 12, 24, and 52, respectively; at these same time points, the percentage of patients achieving HbA1c < 6.5% increased to 9.5, 11.9, and 13.2% of the total study population. FPG levels and lipid parameters were also significantly decreased after teneligliptin treatment. There were no significant safety concerns. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest the significant glucose-lowering effect of teneligliptin after switching from other DPP-4 inhibitors in patients with T2DM. The improvement in glycemic control was maintained for up to 52 weeks without safety concerns.

Effect of Dapagliflozin as an Add-on Therapy to Insulin on the Glycemic Variability in Subjects with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (DIVE): A Multicenter, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Randomized Study.

Background: Glycemic variability is associated with the development of diabetic complications and hypoglycemia. However, the effect of sodium-glucose transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors on glycemic variability is controversial. We aimed to examine the effect of dapagliflozin as an add-on therapy to insulin on the glycemic variability assessed using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: In this multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized study, 84 subjects received 10 mg of dapagliflozin (n=41) or the placebo (n=43) for 12 weeks. CGM was performed before and after treatment to compare the changes in glycemic variability measures (standard deviation [SD], mean amplitude of glycemic excursions [MAGEs]). Results: At week 12, significant reductions in glycosylated hemoglobin (-0.74%±0.66% vs. 0.01%±0.65%, P<0.001), glycated albumin (-3.94%±2.55% vs. -0.67%±2.48%, P<0.001), and CGM-derived mean glucose (-41.6±39.2 mg/dL vs. 1.1±46.2 mg/dL, P<0.001) levels were observed in the dapagliflozin group compared with the placebo group. SD and MAGE were significantly decreased in the dapagliflozin group, but not in the placebo group. However, the difference in ΔSD and ΔMAGE failed to reach statistical significance between two groups. No significant differences in the incidence of safety endpoints were observed between the two groups. Conclusion: Dapagliflozin effectively decreased glucose levels, but not glucose variability, after 12 weeks of treatment in participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus receiving insulin treatment. The role of SGLT2 inhibitors in glycemic variability warrants further investigations.

A Multicentre, Multinational, Open-Label, 52-Week Extension Study of Gemigliptin (LC15-0444) Monotherapy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

The purpose of this extension study was to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of gemigliptin 50 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Patients with T2DM who had completed the initial 24-week study comparing gemigliptin monotherapy with placebo were eligible to enrol. In the open-label, 28-week extension study, all enrolled patients received gemigliptin, regardless of the treatment received during the initial 24-week study period. The mean reduction±standard deviation (SD) in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) observed after 24 weeks of treatment (-0.6%±1.1%) was further decreased for the gemi-gemi group and the mean change in HbA1c at week 52 from baseline was -0.9%±1.2% (P<0.0001). For the pbo-gemi group, HbA1c decreased after they were switched to gemigliptin, and the mean change in HbA1c at week 52 from baseline was -0.7%±1.2% (P<0.0001). Furthermore, the overall incidence of adverse events demonstrated that gemigliptin was safe and well tolerated up to 52 weeks.

Efficacy and Safety of High-Dose Atorvastatin in Moderate-to-High Cardiovascular Risk Postmenopausal Korean Women with Dyslipidemia.

OBJECTIVE: Postmenopausal women show a more atherogenic lipid profile and elevated cardiovascular risk compared to premenopausal women. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of high-dose atorvastatin on the improvement of the blood lipid profile of postmenopausal women in Korea. METHODS: This study is a prospective, open-label, single-arm clinical trial that was conducted in 3 teaching hospitals. Postmenopausal women with a moderate-to-high cardiovascular risk, according to guidelines from the Korean Society of Lipid & Atherosclerosis, were enrolled. Participants were administered 20 mg of atorvastatin daily for the first 8 weeks, and if the targeted low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level was not achieved, the dose was increased to 40 mg for the second 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was percentage change of LDL-C from baseline after 16 weeks of drug administration. RESULTS: Forty-four women were enrolled, 28 of whom (75.6%) had diabetes mellitus. By the end of treatment period (16 weeks) all patients had achieved LDL-C target levels, with 33 (94.2%) of the participants achieving it after only 8 weeks of administration. After 16 weeks, LDL-C decreased by 45.8±16.7% (p<0.001) from the baseline, and total cholesterol (33.2±10.9%; p<0.001), triglyceride (24.2±37.5%; p=0.001), and apolipoprotein B (34.9±15.6%; p<0.001) also significantly decreased. Blood glucose and liver enzyme levels slightly increased, but none of the participants developed serious adverse events that would cause them to prematurely withdraw from the clinical trial. CONCLUSION: 20 and 40 mg atorvastatin was effective and safe for treating dyslipidemia in postmenopausal Korean women with moderate-to-high cardiovascular risk.

Body Fat Is Related to Sedentary Behavior and Light Physical Activity but Not to Moderate-Vigorous Physical Activity in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Sedentary behavior (SB) has emerged as a new risk factor for cardiovascular accidents. We investigated whether physical activity levels or SB were related to percent body fat (%BF) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: In this cross sectional study, we measured the duration of SB, light physical activity (LPA), moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), total energy expenditure, and step counts using a wireless activity tracker (Fitbit HR; FB) for 7 days in free-living conditions, along with %BF using a bio impedance analyzer (Inbody; Biospace) in 120 smartphone users with T2DM. Subjects were divided into exercise (Exe, n=68) and non-exercise (nonExe, n=52) groups based on self-reports of whether the recommended exercises (30 min/day, 3 days/week for 3 months) were performed. SBt, LPAt, MVPAt were transformed from SB, LPA, MVPA for normally distributed variables. RESULTS: Participants were: female, 59.2%; age, 59.3±8.4 years; body mass index, 25.5±3.4 kg/m²; glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), 7.6%±1.2%; %BF, 30.4%±7.1%. They performed SB for 15.7±3.7 hr/day, LPA for 4.4±1.7 hr/day, and MVPA for 0.9±0.8 hr/day. The %BF was related to SBt and LPAt, but not to MVPA after adjustments for age, gender, and HbA1c. VPA was significantly higher in the Exe group than in the nonExe group, but SB, LPA, and moderate physical activity were not different. Predicted %BF was 89.494 to 0.105 (age), -13.047 (gender), -0.507 (HbA1c), -7.655 (LPAt) (F[4, 64]=62.929, P<0.001), with an R² of 0.785 in multiple linear regression analysis. CONCLUSION: Reduced body fat in elderly diabetic patients might be associated with reduced inactivity and increased LPA.

Efficacy and Safety of Voglibose Plus Metformin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Combination of metformin to reduce the fasting plasma glucose level and an α-glucosidase inhibitor to decrease the postprandial glucose level is expected to generate a complementary effect. We compared the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination of voglibose plus metformin (vogmet) with metformin monotherapy in drug-naïve newly-diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: A total of 187 eligible patients aged 20 to 70 years, with a glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level of 7.0% to 11.0%, were randomized into either vogmet or metformin treatments for 24 weeks. A change in the HbA1c level from baseline was measured at week 24. RESULTS: The reduction in the levels of HbA1c was -1.62%±0.07% in the vogmet group and -1.31%±0.07% in the metformin group (P=0.003), and significantly more vogmet-treated patients achieved the target HbA1c levels of <6.5% (P=0.002) or <7% (P=0.039). Glycemic variability was also significantly improved with vogmet treatment, estimated by M-values (P=0.004). Gastrointestinal adverse events and hypoglycemia (%) were numerically lower in the vogmet-treated group. Moreover, a significant weight loss was observed with vogmet treatment compared with metformin (-1.63 kg vs. -0.86 kg, P=0.039). CONCLUSION: Vogmet is a safe antihyperglycemic agent that controls blood glucose level effectively, yields weight loss, and is superior to metformin in terms of various key glycemic parameters without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia.

Acarbose Add-on Therapy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Metformin and Sitagliptin Failure: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of acarbose add-on therapy in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who are inadequately controlled with metformin and sitagliptin. METHODS: A total of 165 subjects were randomized to metformin and sitagliptin (Met+Sita, n=65), metformin, sitagliptin, and acarbose (Met+Sita+Acarb, n=66) and sitagliptin and acarbose (Sita+Acarb, exploratory assessment, n=34) therapy in five institutions in Korea. After 16 weeks of acarbose add-on or metformin-switch therapy, a triple combination therapy was maintained from week 16 to 24. RESULTS: The add-on of acarbose (Met+Sita+Acarb group) demonstrated a 0.44%±0.08% (P<0.001 vs. baseline) decrease in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at week 16, while changes in HbA1c were insignificant in the Met+Sita group (-0.09%±0.10%, P=0.113). After 8 weeks of triple combination therapy, HbA1c levels were comparable between Met+Sita and Met+Sita+Acarb group (7.66%±0.13% vs. 7.47%±0.12%, P=0.321). Acarbose add-on therapy demonstrated suppressed glucagon secretion (area under the curve of glucagon, 4,726.17±415.80 ng·min/L vs. 3,314.38±191.63 ng·min/L, P=0.004) in the absence of excess insulin secretion during the meal tolerance tests at week 16 versus baseline. The incidence of adverse or serious adverse events was similar between two groups. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, a 16-week acarbose add-on therapy to metformin and sitagliptin, effectively lowered HbA1c without significant adverse events. Acarbose might be a good choice as a third-line therapy in addition to metformin and sitagliptin in Korean subjects with T2DM who have predominant postprandial hyperglycemia and a high carbohydrate intake.

Efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination therapy with gemigliptin (50 mg) and rosuvastatin compared with monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidaemia (BALANCE): A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, controlled, phase 3 trial.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of gemigliptin and rosuvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidaemia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 33 hospitals in Korea participated in this randomized, double-blind trial of diabetic patients with dyslipidaemia. A total of 290 participants were randomly assigned at a 1:1:1 ratio to receive an FDC of gemigliptin (50 mg) and rosuvastatin (20 mg) (GEMI/ROSU FDC group), gemigliptin (50 mg) (GEMI group) or rosuvastatin (20 mg) (ROSU group). Rosuvastatin was up-titrated from 5 to 20 mg/d throughout the study period. Primary efficacy measures were changes in HbA1c and LDL-C from baseline to Week 24 between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups and between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups, respectively. Secondary efficacy measures were changes in HbA1c and LDL-C between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups and between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups, respectively. RESULTS: After 24 weeks of treatment, a significant reduction in HbA1c from baseline was noted in the GEMI/ROSU FDC group (-0.81% of LS mean; P < 0.0001 vs ROSU group), in addition to a significant reduction in LDL-C concentration (-51.9% of LS mean percentage changes, P < 0.0001 vs GEMI group). HbA1c was significantly reduced from baseline in both the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups, but the reduction in HbA1c was significantly greater in the GEMI group than in the GEMI/ROSU FDC group, despite receiving the same dose of gemigliptin. The decrease in LDL-C over time was similar between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups. There were no significant differences in adverse events among the groups. CONCLUSION: The FDC of gemigliptin and rosuvastatin is safe and is effective in reducing both blood glucose and LDL-C levels; thus, it could be a good therapeutic choice for type 2 diabetic patients with dyslipidaemia.

Comparison of Adherence to Glimepiride/Metformin Sustained Release Once-daily Versus Glimepiride/Metformin Immediate Release BID Fixed-combination Therapy Using the Medication Event Monitoring System in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the adherence of the glimepiride/metformin sustained release (GM-SR) once-daily fixed-dose combination and glimepiride/metformin immediate release (GM-IR) BID fixed-dose combination in type 2 diabetes therapies. METHODS: An open-label, randomized, multicenter, parallel-group study was conducted at 11 hospitals in the Republic of Korea. A total of 168 patients with type 2 diabetes treated with >4 mg of glimepiride and 1000 mg of metformin by using free or fixed-dose combination therapy for at least 2 weeks were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive GM-SR 4/1000 mg once-daily or GM-IR 2/500 mg BID for 24 weeks. Adherence was compared by using the Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS). FINDINGS: A significant difference in adherence was observed between the 2 groups. Overall adherence, defined by the number of container openings divided by the number of prescribed doses, was 91.7% in the GM-SR group and 88.6% in the GM-IR group (P < 0.001). The percentage of treatment days with the correct number of doses taken was 85.3% in the GM-SR group and 75.1% in the GM-IR group (P < 0.001). The percentage of missed doses was 11.7% in the GM-SR group and 15.3% in the GM-IR group (P < 0.001). The percentage of doses taken in the correct time window and therapeutic coverage were higher in the GM-SR group (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in glycosylated hemoglobin changes or number of adverse events between the 2 groups. A total of 168 patients randomized to receive GM-SR once daily (86 patients) or GM-IR twice daily (82 patients). Mean Age were 57.8 ± 9.6 years old. Male : female ratio was 47.6 : 52.4 %. Body mass index were 66.3 ± 12.0 kg/m2, Diabetes duration were 10.5 ± 6.6 years. IMPLICATIONS: This study showed that patient adherence with GM-SR once daily was significantly better than with GM-IR BID. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01620489.

A 52-week extension study of switching from gemigliptin vs sitagliptin to gemigliptin only as add-on therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled with metformin alone.

We investigated the long-term efficacy and safety of gemigliptin and the efficacy and safety of gemigliptin treatment after once-daily treatment with sitagliptin 100 mg, in patients with type 2 diabetes. This was a 28-week extension of a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel study of gemigliptin or sitagliptin added to ongoing metformin therapy. After randomization to sitagliptin 100 mg qd (S), gemigliptin 25 mg bid (G1) or gemigliptin 50 mg qd (G2) and after completing 24 weeks of treatment, 118 patients switched from gemigliptin 25 mg bid to 50 mg qd (G1/G2), 111 patients continued gemigliptin 50 mg qd (G2/G2) and 106 patients switched from sitagliptin 100 mg qd to gemigliptin 50 mg qd (S/G2). All 3 treatments reduced glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) (S/G2,-0.99% [95% CI -1.25%, -0.73%]; G1/G2, -1.11% [95% CI -1.33%, -0.89%]; G2/G2, -1.06% [95% CI -1.28%, -0.85%]). The percentage of patients achieving HbA1c < 6.5% was 27.6% in the G1/G2 group at both Week 24 and Week 52, and ranged from 27.3% to 32.7% in the G2/G2 group (difference in proportions, 5% [95% CI -6%, 17%]), while it increased from 6.8% to 27.3% from Week 24 to Week 52 in the S/G2 group (difference in proportions, 20% [95% CI 7%, 34%]). Addition of gemigliptin 50 mg qd to metformin was shown to be efficacious for 52 weeks. Switching from sitagliptin 100 mg to gemigliptin 50 mg showed consistent glyacemic control over the previous treatment.

Effects of High-Dose α-Lipoic Acid on Heart Rate Variability of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients with Cardiac Autonomic Neuropathy in Korea.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) is one of the important complications of diabetes. It is characterized by reduced heart rate variability (HRV). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, 75 patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups. One group (n=41) received α-lipoic acid (ALA) at an oral dose of 600 mg/day for the first 12 weeks and then 1,200 mg/day for the next 12 weeks. The other group (n=34) received placebo treatment for 24 weeks. CAN was assessed by measuring HRVs in people with diabetes. RESULTS: Most of the baseline measures for HRVs were similar between the ALA and placebo groups. Although there were no statistically significant HRV changes in the ALA group compared to the placebo group after 24 weeks of trial, we found a positive tendency in some of the HRV parameters of the ALA group. The standard deviations of normal-to-normal RR intervals in the standing position increased by 1.87 ms in the ALA group but decreased by -3.97 ms in the placebo group (P=0.06). The power spectrum of the low frequency (LF) band in the standing position increased by 15.77 ms² in the ALA group, whereas it declined by -15.04 ms² in the placebo group (P=0.08). The high frequency/LF ratio in the upright position increased by 0.35 in the ALA group, whereas it declined by -0.42 in the placebo group (P=0.06). There were no differences between the two groups regarding rates of adverse events. CONCLUSION: Although a slight improvement tendency was seen in HRV in the ALA group, there were no statistically significant HRV changes in the ALA group compared to the placebo group after 24 weeks of trial. However, the high oral dose of ALA was well-tolerated.

Reduction in microalbuminuria by calcium channel blockers in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension-A randomized, open-label, active-controlled, superiority, parallel-group clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that renoprotection with calcium channel blockers (CCBs) may differ. This study aimed to compare the anti-proteinuric effect of different CCBs in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: A multicentre, randomized, open-label, active-controlled study was performed in seven centres in Korea. A total of 74 patients with T2D and microalbuminuria treated with renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers were randomized to a cilnidipine 10 mg treatment (n=38) or amlodipine 5 mg treatment (n=36). RESULTS: Urine albumin to creatinine ratio (ACR) reduction was similar between the two groups at 12 weeks (-53.0±123.2 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -35.7±83.6 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.29) or 24 weeks (-57.3±106.9 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -20.0±110.4 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.24). In a subgroup analysis, cilnidipine treatment showed a larger ACR reduction than amlodipine treatment at 12 weeks (-84.7±106.8 mg/g in cilnidipine group and -9.5±79.2 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.01) and 24 weeks (-84.0±111.7 mg/g in cilnidipine group and 14.6±119.4 mg/g in amlodipine group, P=.008), particularly in patients with a longer duration of diabetes more than 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Cilnidipine did not show any additional anti-albuminuric effect compared with amlodipine in patients with T2D and microalbuminuria treated with an RAS blocker. However, the anti-albuminuric effect of cilnidipine might differ according to the duration of diabetes.