Daiichi Sankyo Pharma Development, Edison, NJ 08837, USA.
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2012 Nov;14(11):1000-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2012.01631.x. Epub 2012 Jul 4.
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivoglitazone, a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ agonist in the thiazolidinedione class, in subjects with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).
Subjects aged ≥18 years with T2DM and haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) >7.0% and ≤8.5%, who were treatment naïve or receiving a non-thiazolidinedione antidiabetes monotherapy, entered a 2-week washout and single-blind placebo run-in period and were then randomized 2 : 4 : 11 : 11 to double-blind treatment with placebo, rivoglitazone 1.0 mg/day, rivoglitazone 1.5 mg/day, or pioglitazone 45 mg/day, for 26 weeks.
A total of 1912 subjects received placebo (n = 137), rivoglitazone 1.0 mg (n = 274), rivoglitazone 1.5 mg (n = 750) or pioglitazone (n = 751). Rivoglitazone 1.5 mg was statistically superior (p = 0.0339) and rivoglitazone 1.0 mg was non-inferior (p = 0.0339) to pioglitazone in reducing HbA1c from baseline (changes of -0.7%, -0.4% and -0.6%, respectively). Rivoglitazone also significantly reduced fasting plasma glucose from baseline (p < 0.0001). Rivoglitazone significantly improved estimates of insulin sensitivity, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and other metabolic and inflammatory biomarkers. Rivoglitazone was generally well tolerated at both doses, with treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) rates similar to pioglitazone. The most common drug-related TEAEs were peripheral oedema (active, 5.2-6.2%; placebo 0.7%), increased weight (active, 1.6-3.1%; placebo, 0%) and pitting oedema (active, 1.3-2.2%; placebo, 0%).
In subjects with suboptimally controlled T2DM, rivoglitazone 1.5 mg was associated with statistically superior glycaemic control to pioglitazone 45 mg, while rivoglitazone 1.0 mg was non-inferior; the safety profiles of the two drugs appeared similar.
评估过氧化物酶体增殖物激活受体 γ 激动剂罗格列酮(噻唑烷二酮类)在血糖控制不佳的 2 型糖尿病(T2DM)患者中的疗效和安全性。
年龄≥18 岁、糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)>7.0%且≤8.5%、未接受过噻唑烷二酮类或其他抗糖尿病单药治疗的 T2DM 患者,先进行 2 周洗脱期和单盲安慰剂导入期,然后随机双盲接受安慰剂、罗格列酮 1.0 mg/天、罗格列酮 1.5 mg/天或吡格列酮 45 mg/天治疗 26 周。
共有 1912 例患者接受安慰剂(n=137)、罗格列酮 1.0 mg(n=274)、罗格列酮 1.5 mg(n=750)或吡格列酮(n=751)治疗。罗格列酮 1.5 mg 组(p=0.0339)和罗格列酮 1.0 mg 组(p=0.0339)的糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)自基线的降幅均显著优于吡格列酮组(分别为-0.7%、-0.4%和-0.6%)。罗格列酮也显著降低空腹血糖(p<0.0001)。罗格列酮显著改善胰岛素敏感性、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平和其他代谢及炎症生物标志物。两种剂量的罗格列酮均具有良好的耐受性,治疗期间发生的不良事件(TEAE)发生率与吡格列酮相似。最常见的药物相关 TEAE 为外周水肿(治疗组 5.2-6.2%,安慰剂组 0.7%)、体重增加(治疗组 1.6-3.1%,安慰剂组 0%)和凹陷性水肿(治疗组 1.3-2.2%,安慰剂组 0%)。
在血糖控制不佳的 T2DM 患者中,罗格列酮 1.5 mg 组的血糖控制优于吡格列酮 45 mg 组,而罗格列酮 1.0 mg 组与吡格列酮 45 mg 组的疗效相当;两种药物的安全性特征似乎相似。