Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai Clinical Center for Diabetes, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Diabetes Mellitus, Shanghai Diabetes Institute, Shanghai, China.
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013 Jun;15(6):481-8. doi: 10.1089/dia.2013.0046. Epub 2013 Apr 30.
Recent studies have identified postprandial glycemic excursions as risk factors for diabetes complications. This study aimed to compare the effects of nateglinide and acarbose treatments on postprandial glycemic excursions in Chinese subjects with type 2 diabetes.
This was a multicenter, open-label, randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group study. One hundred three antihyperglycemic agent-naive subjects with type 2 diabetes (hemoglobin A1c range, 6.5-9.0%) were prospectively recruited from four hospitals in China. The intervention was nateglinide (120 mg three times a day) or acarbose (50 mg three times a day) therapy for 2 weeks. A continuous glucose monitoring system was used to calculate the incremental area under the curve of postprandial blood glucose (AUCpp), the incremental glucose peak (IGP), mean amplitude of glycemic excursions, SD of blood glucose, the mean of daily differences, and 24-h mean blood glucose (MBG). Subjects' serum glycated albumin and the plasma insulin levels were also analyzed.
Both agents caused significant reductions on AUCpp and IGP. Similarly, both treatment groups showed significant improvements in the intra- and interday glycemic excursions, as well as the 24-h MBG and serum glycated albumin compared with baseline (P<0.001). However, neither of the agents produced a significantly better effect (P>0.05). Moreover, the nateglinide-treated group had significantly increased insulin levels at 30 min and at 120 min after a standard meal compared with baseline, whereas the acarbose-treated group decreased. No serious adverse events occurred in either group. The rates of hypoglycemic episodes were comparable in the two groups, and no severe hypoglycemic episode occurred in either group.
Nateglinide and acarbose were comparably effective in reducing postprandial glycemic excursions in antihyperglycemic agent-naive Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes, possibly through different pathophysiological mechanisms.
最近的研究已经确定餐后血糖波动是糖尿病并发症的危险因素。本研究旨在比较那格列奈和阿卡波糖治疗对中国 2 型糖尿病患者餐后血糖波动的影响。
这是一项多中心、开放标签、随机、阳性对照、平行组研究。从中国的四家医院前瞻性招募了 103 名未经抗高血糖药物治疗的 2 型糖尿病患者(糖化血红蛋白范围为 6.5-9.0%)。干预措施为那格列奈(每日 3 次,每次 120mg)或阿卡波糖(每日 3 次,每次 50mg)治疗 2 周。连续血糖监测系统用于计算餐后血糖增量曲线下面积(AUCpp)、血糖增量峰值(IGP)、血糖波动幅度均值、血糖标准差、日间血糖均值差和 24 小时平均血糖(MBG)。还分析了受试者的血清糖化白蛋白和血浆胰岛素水平。
两种药物均显著降低 AUCpp 和 IGP。同样,与基线相比,两组治疗后日内和日间血糖波动、24 小时 MBG 和血清糖化白蛋白均有显著改善(P<0.001)。然而,两种药物均未产生明显更好的效果(P>0.05)。此外,那格列奈治疗组在标准餐后 30 分钟和 120 分钟时胰岛素水平显著升高,而阿卡波糖治疗组则降低。两组均未发生严重不良事件。两组低血糖发作率相当,且均未发生严重低血糖事件。
那格列奈和阿卡波糖在降低未经抗高血糖药物治疗的中国 2 型糖尿病患者餐后血糖波动方面同样有效,可能通过不同的病理生理机制。