Evaluation of the repaglinide efficiency in comparison to the glimepiride in the type 2 diabetes patients poorly regulated by the metmorfine administration.

OBJECTIVES: An impaired early phase of insulin secretion in the type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is very important for the postprandial hyperglycemia. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of metformin/repaglinid and metformin/glimepirid regimes in type 2 diabetics uncontrolled with metformin monotherapy. METHODS: Totally, 60 type 2 diabetics with haemoglobin A1c > or = 7.5% and 2000 mg of metformin monotherapy for at least three months were divided in the following groups: A-30 patients with metformin+repaglinid (2 mg for each meal) and B metformin+glimepirid (3 mg in the morning). Assessment of the regimes efficacy comprised of haemoglobin A1c, fasting blood glucose (FBG) and postprandial blood glucose (PBG). Assessment of the safety was performed on the basis of recorded hypoglycemia (<4.0 mmol/l). RESULTS: In both groups, FBG was significantly lower at the end of the study. In the group A it decreased from 9.03 +/- 1.00 to 7.32 +/- 0.65 (p < 0.001), in the group B from 8.94 +/- 1.01 to 7.23 +/- 0.70 (p < 0.001). There was no statistical difference between the groups. PBG was significantly lower after 12 weeks in both groups. CONCLUSION: Metformin/repaglinid is an efficient and safe therapeutic regime in the treatment of the type 2 DM that ensure a better control of PBG levels (Tab. 4, Ref. 18).

Biphasic insulin aspart 30: better glycemic control than with premixed human insulin 30 in obese patients with Type 2 diabetes.

AIM: This 3-month study compared the effect on overall glycemic control of adding biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp30) and premixed human insulin 30/70 (BHI30) to metformin (met) in insulin-naïve, obese patients (30 males/20 females) with Type 2 diabetes (T2DM). MATERIAL/SUBJECTS: At baseline, patients had a mean age of 58.7 yr, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 9.5%, and body mass index 34+/-2 kg/m2. Patients received either twice-daily BIAsp30 (no.=20) or twice-daily BHI30 (no.=30), and continued to receive maximal doses (2000 mg) of met for the duration of the study, but sulphonylurea oral antidiabetic drugs were discontinued. Primary efficacy endpoint was the change in HbA1c in both groups at study end. Safety endpoints included hypoglycemic episodes and weight gain. RESULTS: Both groups reduced HbA1c by end of trial: BIAsp30 + met by 2.5% [2.16-2.86%; 95% confidence interval (CI)]; BHI30 + met by 1.18% (0.98- 1.39%; 95% CI), giving a significantly better HbA1c reduction with BIAsp30 + met (1.33%; p<0.05). Post-prandial plasma glucose decreased in both groups, by 6.38 mmol/l in patients treated with BIAsp30 + met, and by 4.34 mmol/l in those treated with BHI30 + met (p<0.05). Fasting plasma glucose also decreased in both groups, with a slightly larger decrease seen in BIAsp30 patients than in BHI30 patients (7.36 mmol/l at end of study vs 7.82 mmol/l; p=ns). Subjects treated with BIAsp30 gained less weight than those receiving BHI30 (0.3+/-0.1 kg vs 1.2+/-0.4 kg). There was no significant difference in the frequency or number of hypoglycemic episodes between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Adding BIAsp30 to met in obese patients with T2DM results in better glycemic control and less weight gain than adding BHI30.