Hermann L S, Ranstam J, Vaaler S, Melander A
Epidemiologic Centre, National Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Diabetes Obes Metab. 1999 Jul;1(4):227-32. doi: 10.1046/j.1463-1326.1999.00034.x.
To assess the effect of oral antihyperglycaemic therapy on fasting proinsulin and the relation between proinsulin levels and cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes.
One hundred and sixty-five patients with type 2 diabetes, fasting blood glucose concentration (FBG) > or = 6.7 mmol/l, were recruited from five diabetes outpatient clinics in primary health care. Diet and antihyperglycaemic medication, aiming at FBG < 6.7 mmol/l, was maintained for 6 months after completed dose titration in a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial with metformin (M), glibenclamide (G) and primary combination of both drugs (MG). The study compared M, G and MG in low dose (MGL) and also different high-dose regimens, i.e. G added to M (M/G), M added to G (G/M) and primary combination (MGH). Outcome measures were fasting proinsulin, glycaemia, body mass index, blood pressure, lipids, insulin and C-peptide.
Lower proinsulin levels were found when therapy was initiated with metformin (M vs. G, p = 0.013 and M/G vs. G/M, p = 0.033). M and G were equally effective on glucose levels. In the group as a whole FBG decreased from (mean +/- s.d.) 10.2 +/- 2.7 to 7.0 +/- 1.2 mmol/l with no change in proinsulin. Proinsulin was associated with cardiovascular risk factors, linking high proinsulin to an atherogenic risk marker profile. Mean proinsulin change from baseline was inconsistently associated with markers of insulin resistance. Meal-stimulated glucose (net AUC) decreased after treatment only in those with low baseline proinsulin levels.
It may be advantageous to initiate oral antihyperglycaemic therapy with metformin rather than with sulphonylurea. High proinsulin levels are associated with an atherogenic-risk marker profile and an impaired therapeutic postprandial glucose response after treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes. Proinsulin change after therapy is inconsistently associated with markers of insulin resistance and unrelated to fasting blood glucose reduction.
评估口服降糖治疗对2型糖尿病患者空腹胰岛素原的影响以及胰岛素原水平与心血管危险因素之间的关系。
从初级卫生保健的5家糖尿病门诊招募了165例2型糖尿病患者,其空腹血糖浓度(FBG)≥6.7 mmol/L。在一项随机、双盲、双模拟试验中,使用二甲双胍(M)、格列本脲(G)以及两种药物的初始联合制剂(MG),在完成剂量滴定后,将饮食和降糖药物维持6个月,目标是使FBG<6.7 mmol/L。该研究比较了低剂量的M、G和MG(MGL)以及不同的高剂量方案,即G加至M(M/G)、M加至G(G/M)和初始联合制剂(MGH)。观察指标包括空腹胰岛素原、血糖、体重指数、血压、血脂、胰岛素和C肽。
起始使用二甲双胍治疗时胰岛素原水平较低(M与G相比,p = 0.013;M/G与G/M相比,p = 0.033)。M和G对血糖水平的疗效相当。总体而言,该组患者的FBG从(均值±标准差)10.2±2.7 mmol/L降至7.0±1.2 mmol/L,而胰岛素原无变化。胰岛素原与心血管危险因素相关,提示高胰岛素原与致动脉粥样硬化风险标志物谱有关。胰岛素原相对于基线的平均变化与胰岛素抵抗标志物之间的关联并不一致。仅在基线胰岛素原水平较低的患者中,治疗后餐时刺激血糖(净AUC)降低。
起始口服降糖治疗时使用二甲双胍而非磺脲类药物可能更具优势。在2型糖尿病患者中,高胰岛素原水平与致动脉粥样硬化风险标志物谱以及治疗后餐后血糖反应受损有关。治疗后胰岛素原的变化与胰岛素抵抗标志物之间的关联并不一致,且与空腹血糖降低无关。