Derosa Giuseppe, Maffioli Pamela, Salvadeo Sibilla A T, Ferrari Ilaria, Gravina Alessia, Mereu Roberto, Palumbo Ilaria, D'Angelo Angela, Cicero Arrigo F G
Department of Internal Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Pavia, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico S Matteo, 2-27100 Pavia, Italy.
Metabolism. 2009 Aug;58(8):1059-66. doi: 10.1016/j.metabol.2009.03.007. Epub 2009 Jun 18.
The aim of the study was to compare the long-term effect of 4 antidiabetic treatment protocols on insulin resistance evaluated by euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. Two hundred seventy-one type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with poor glycemic control and who were overweight were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomized and titrated to take pioglitazone, metformin, pioglitazone + metformin, or glimepiride + metformin for 15 months. They underwent a euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp at baseline, after 3 months, and after 15 months. Anthropometric and metabolic measurements were assessed at baseline, after 3 months, and after 15 months. There was a decrease in glycated hemoglobin in all groups, but glycated hemoglobin value was lower in the group treated with pioglitazone + metformin compared with the groups treated with metformin alone and with pioglitazone alone. There was a decrease in fasting plasma glucose and postprandial plasma glucose values in all groups, but values obtained with pioglitazone + metformin were lower compared with values in the groups treated with metformin alone and with pioglitazone alone. Fasting plasma insulin and postprandial plasma insulin values were higher in the group treated with glimepiride + metformin compared with the other groups. After 15 months, glucose infusion rate and total glucose requirement values observed in the groups treated with pioglitazone alone and with pioglitazone + metformin were higher compared with the values in the group treated with metformin alone and with glimepiride + metformin; furthermore, values obtained in the group treated with pioglitazone + metformin were higher than the value obtained with pioglitazone alone. Pioglitazone-metformin-based therapeutic control is associated with the most quantitatively relevant improvement in insulin resistance-related parameters, whereas the sulfonylurea-metformin-including protocol has less relevant effects.
本研究旨在比较4种抗糖尿病治疗方案对2型糖尿病患者胰岛素抵抗的长期影响,胰岛素抵抗通过正常血糖高胰岛素钳夹技术进行评估。271例血糖控制不佳且超重的2型糖尿病患者纳入本研究。患者被随机分组并滴定服用吡格列酮、二甲双胍、吡格列酮+二甲双胍或格列美脲+二甲双胍,疗程为15个月。在基线、3个月和15个月时对患者进行正常血糖高胰岛素钳夹试验。在基线、3个月和15个月时评估人体测量学和代谢指标。所有组糖化血红蛋白均下降,但与单独使用二甲双胍组和单独使用吡格列酮组相比,吡格列酮+二甲双胍治疗组的糖化血红蛋白值更低。所有组空腹血糖和餐后血糖值均下降,但与单独使用二甲双胍组和单独使用吡格列酮组相比,吡格列酮+二甲双胍治疗组的血糖值更低。与其他组相比,格列美脲+二甲双胍治疗组的空腹血浆胰岛素和餐后血浆胰岛素值更高。15个月后,单独使用吡格列酮组和吡格列酮+二甲双胍治疗组的葡萄糖输注率和总葡萄糖需求量值高于单独使用二甲双胍组和格列美脲+二甲双胍治疗组;此外,吡格列酮+二甲双胍治疗组的值高于单独使用吡格列酮组的值。基于吡格列酮-二甲双胍的治疗控制与胰岛素抵抗相关参数在数量上最显著的改善相关,而包含磺脲类-二甲双胍的方案效果相对较小。