Steno Diabetes Center, Gentofte, Denmark.
Boehringer Ingelheim Norway, Asker, Norway.
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014 Sep;2(9):691-700. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(14)70120-2. Epub 2014 Jun 16.
Metformin is the recommended first-line pharmacotherapy for patients with type 2 diabetes. There is no consensus on the optimum second-line pharmacotherapy. We compared the efficacy and safety of the sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin and the sulfonylurea glimepiride as add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes.
In this double-blind phase 3 trial, patients (aged ≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes and HbA1c concentrations of 7-10%, despite metformin treatment and diet and exercise counselling, were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio with a computer-generated random sequence, stratified by HbA1c, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and region, to empagliflozin (25 mg once daily, orally) or glimepiride (1-4 mg once daily, orally) as add-on to metformin for 104 weeks. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c levels at weeks 52 and 104. Differences in the primary endpoint were first tested for non-inferiority (based on a margin of 0·3%). If non-inferiority was shown, differences in the primary endpoint at week 104 were then tested for superiority. Analysis was done on the full-analysis set-ie, patients who were treated with at least one dose of study drug and had a baseline HbA1c value. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01167881. A 104-week extension is ongoing.
Between August, 2010, and June, 2011, 1549 patients were randomly assigned to receive empagliflozin (n=769) or glimepiride (n=780); four patients in the empagliflozin group did not receive the assigned treatment. Empagliflozin was non-inferior to glimepiride at both timepoints. At week 104, adjusted mean difference in change from baseline in HbA1c with empagliflozin versus glimepiride was -0·11% (95% CI -0·19 to -0·02; p=0·0153 for superiority). Adverse events were reported in 661 (86%) patients treated with empagliflozin and 673 (86%) patients treated with glimepiride. Severe adverse events were reported in 72 (9%) patients in the empagliflozin group and 68 (9%) in the glimepiride group. Serious adverse events were reported in 119 (16%) patients in the empagliflozin group and 89 (11%) in the glimepiride group. Confirmed hypoglycaemic adverse events (plasma glucose ≤3·9 mmol/L or requiring assistance) at week 104 were reported in 19 (2%) patients treated with empagliflozin and 189 (24%) patients treated with glimepiride.
Empagliflozin might be an effective and a well tolerated second-line treatment option for patients with type 2 diabetes who have not achieved good glycaemic control on metformin.
Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly.
二甲双胍是治疗 2 型糖尿病患者的推荐一线药物治疗。对于二线药物治疗,目前尚无共识。我们比较了钠-葡萄糖共转运蛋白 2 抑制剂恩格列净和磺酰脲类药物格列美脲作为 2 型糖尿病患者二甲双胍的附加药物治疗的疗效和安全性。
在这项双盲 3 期临床试验中,年龄≥18 岁、糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)浓度为 7-10%、尽管接受了二甲双胍治疗以及饮食和运动咨询,但仍未得到控制的 2 型糖尿病患者,按 1:1 的比例,以计算机生成的随机序列、按 HbA1c、估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)和地区分层,随机分配接受恩格列净(每天一次口服 25mg)或格列美脲(每天一次口服 1-4mg)作为二甲双胍的附加药物治疗,共 104 周。患者和研究者对治疗分配均不知情。主要终点为治疗 52 周和 104 周时 HbA1c 水平与基线相比的变化。首先检验主要终点的非劣效性(基于 0.3%的差异)。如果显示非劣效性,则进一步检验 104 周时主要终点的优越性。分析采用全分析集,即至少接受一剂研究药物且有基线 HbA1c 值的患者。本研究在 ClinicalTrials.gov 上注册,编号为 NCT01167881。一项 104 周的扩展正在进行中。
2010 年 8 月至 2011 年 6 月期间,共有 1549 名患者被随机分配接受恩格列净(n=769)或格列美脲(n=780)治疗;恩格列净组有 4 名患者未接受分配的治疗。恩格列净在两个时间点均不劣于格列美脲。在第 104 周时,与格列美脲相比,恩格列净治疗 HbA1c 水平与基线相比的调整平均差异为-0.11%(95%CI-0.19 至-0.02;p=0.0153 表示优越性)。接受恩格列净治疗的 661(86%)名患者和接受格列美脲治疗的 673(86%)名患者报告了不良事件。恩格列净组有 72(9%)名患者和格列美脲组有 68(9%)名患者报告了严重不良事件。恩格列净组有 119(16%)名患者和格列美脲组有 89(11%)名患者报告了严重不良事件。在第 104 周时,报告有确诊的低血糖不良事件(血浆葡萄糖≤3.9mmol/L 或需要协助)的恩格列净组有 19(2%)名患者,格列美脲组有 189(24%)名患者。
对于未能通过二甲双胍良好控制血糖的 2 型糖尿病患者,恩格列净可能是一种有效的二线治疗选择,并且具有良好的耐受性。
勃林格殷格翰和礼来。