Add-On Treatment with Liraglutide Improves Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes on Metformin Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Liraglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor analog recently approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of liraglutide versus glimepiride, as adjunct treatments to metformin, in achieving glycemic control in Italian patients with T2DM uncontrolled by metformin alone. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: One hundred seventy-nine diabetes patients treated with metformin plus liraglutide (1.8 mg) or glimepiride (4 mg) were retrospectively assessed at baseline, during, and after 18 months of continuous therapy. RESULTS: Treatment with liraglutide resulted in mean decreases in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of -1.4%, when compared with glimepiride (-0.4%) (P < 0.001), and was followed by a significant reduction (P < 0.001) in fasting plasma glucose. Variations in HbA1c occurred independently from weight loss, which was significantly reduced (P < 0.001) in liraglutide-treated patients. The percentage of subjects reaching HbA1c levels below 7% or ≤ 6.5% was significantly different between the two treated groups (P < 0.001). Treatment with liraglutide reduced waist circumference (WC) (P < 0.001) and decreased both systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) (P < 0.001). It is interesting that the study also showed the impact of female gender in predicting a better glycemic response to liraglutide (P = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Liraglutide was more effective than glimepiride in reducing HbA1c levels in treated patients with T2DM. This was evident in both genders, but particularly in women. Furthermore, liraglutide reduced body weight, WC, and BP, which are critical risk factors for cardiovascular disease.

Gestational diabetes mellitus: screening and outcomes in southern italian pregnant women.

Recent Italian guidelines exclude women <35 years old, without risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), from screening for GDM. To determine the effectiveness of these measures with respect to the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria, we evaluated 2,448 pregnant women retrospectively enrolled in Calabria, southern Italy. GDM was diagnosed following the IADPSG 2010 criteria. Among 538 women <35 years old, without risk factors, who would have not been tested according to the Italian guidelines, we diagnosed GDM in 171 (31.8%) pregnants (7.0% of total pregnants). Diagnosis was made at baseline (55.6%), 1 hour (39.8%), or 2 hours (4.7%) during OGTT. Despite of appropriate treatment, GDM represented a risk factor for cesarean section, polyhydramnios, increased birth weight, admission to neonatal intensive care units, and large for gestational age. These outcomes were similar to those observed in GDM women at high risk for GDM. In conclusion, Italian recommendations failed to identify 7.0% of women with GDM, when compared to IADPSG criteria. The risk for adverse hyperglycaemic-related outcomes is similar in low-risk and high-risk pregnants with GDM. To limit costs of GDM screening, our data suggest to restrict OGTT to two steps (baseline and 1 hour).

Predictors of postpartum glucose tolerance testing in italian women with gestational diabetes mellitus.

Postpartum screening is critical for early identification of type 2 diabetes in women previously diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Nevertheless, its rate remains disappointingly low. Thus, we plan to examine the rate of postpartum glucose tolerance test (ppOGTT) for Italian women with GDM, before and after counseling, and identify demographic, clinical, and/or biochemical predictors of adherence. With these aims, we retrospectively enrolled 1159 women with GDM, in Calabria, Southern Italy, between 2004 and 2011. During the last year, verbal and written counseling on the importance of followup was introduced. Data were analyzed by multiple regression analysis. A significant increase of the return rate was observed following introduction of the counseling [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 5.17 (95% CI, 3.83-6.97), P < 0.001]. Interestingly, previous diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) emerged as the major predictor of postpartum followup [AOR 5.27 (95% CI, 3.51-8.70), P < 0.001], even after stratification for the absence of counseling. Previous diagnosis of GDM, higher educational status, and insulin treatment were also relevant predictors. Overall, our data indicate that counseling intervention is effective, even if many women fail to return, whereas PCOS represents a new strong predictor of adherence to postpartum testing.