Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017 Nov;5(11):887-897. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30317-0. Epub 2017 Sep 13.
The best treatment option for patients with type 2 diabetes in whom treatment with metformin alone fails to achieve adequate glycaemic control is debated. We aimed to compare the long-term effects of pioglitazone versus sulfonylureas, given in addition to metformin, on cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes.
TOSCA.IT was a multicentre, randomised, pragmatic clinical trial, in which patients aged 50-75 years with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy (2-3 g per day) were recruited from 57 diabetes clinics in Italy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), by permuted blocks randomisation (block size 10), stratified by site and previous cardiovascular events, to add-on pioglitazone (15-45 mg) or a sulfonylurea (5-15 mg glibenclamide, 2-6 mg glimepiride, or 30-120 mg gliclazide, in accordance with local practice). The trial was unblinded, but event adjudicators were unaware of treatment assignment. The primary outcome, assessed with a Cox proportional-hazards model, was a composite of first occurrence of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or urgent coronary revascularisation, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned participants with baseline data available and without any protocol violations in relation to inclusion or exclusion criteria). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00700856.
Between Sept 18, 2008, and Jan 15, 2014, 3028 patients were randomly assigned and included in the analyses. 1535 were assigned to pioglitazone and 1493 to sulfonylureas (glibenclamide 24 [2%], glimepiride 723 [48%], gliclazide 745 [50%]). At baseline, 335 (11%) participants had a previous cardiovascular event. The study was stopped early on the basis of a futility analysis after a median follow-up of 57·3 months. The primary outcome occurred in 105 patients (1·5 per 100 person-years) who were given pioglitazone and 108 (1·5 per 100 person-years) who were given sulfonylureas (hazard ratio 0·96, 95% CI 0·74-1·26, p=0·79). Fewer patients had hypoglycaemias in the pioglitazone group than in the sulfonylureas group (148 [10%] vs 508 [34%], p<0·0001). Moderate weight gain (less than 2 kg, on average) occurred in both groups. Rates of heart failure, bladder cancer, and fractures were not significantly different between treatment groups.
In this long-term, pragmatic trial, incidence of cardiovascular events was similar with sulfonylureas (mostly glimepiride and gliclazide) and pioglitazone as add-on treatments to metformin. Both of these widely available and affordable treatments are suitable options with respect to efficacy and adverse events, although pioglitazone was associated with fewer hypoglycaemia events.
Italian Medicines Agency, Diabete Ricerca, and Italian Diabetes Society.
对于单独使用二甲双胍治疗未能达到充分血糖控制的 2 型糖尿病患者,哪种治疗方案最佳仍存在争议。我们旨在比较吡格列酮与磺酰脲类药物(加用二甲双胍)在长期治疗时对 2 型糖尿病患者心血管事件的影响。
TOSCA.IT 是一项多中心、随机、实用的临床试验,纳入了来自意大利 57 家糖尿病诊所的 50-75 岁、接受二甲双胍(每天 2-3 克)单药治疗血糖控制不佳的 2 型糖尿病患者。患者按照 1:1 的比例,通过随机区组(区组大小为 10)、按地点和既往心血管事件进行分层,随机分配加用吡格列酮(15-45 毫克)或磺酰脲类药物(5-15 毫克格列本脲、2-6 毫克格列美脲或 30-120 毫克格列齐特,具体剂量取决于当地实践)。试验未设盲,但结局判定人员不了解治疗分组。主要结局是复合终点,采用 Cox 比例风险模型评估,定义为全因死亡、非致死性心肌梗死、非致死性卒中和紧急冠状动脉血运重建的首次发生,评估人群为改良意向治疗人群(所有随机分组的参与者均具有基线数据,且在纳入或排除标准方面无任何方案违反)。这项研究在 ClinicalTrials.gov 注册,编号为 NCT00700856。
2008 年 9 月 18 日至 2014 年 1 月 15 日期间,共纳入 3028 例患者进行分析。其中 1535 例患者被分配接受吡格列酮治疗,1493 例患者接受磺酰脲类药物治疗(格列本脲 24 例[2%]、格列美脲 723 例[48%]、格列齐特 745 例[50%])。入组时,335 例(11%)患者有既往心血管事件。在中位随访 57.3 个月后,基于无效性分析提前终止研究。接受吡格列酮治疗的 105 例患者(每 100 人年 1.5 例)和接受磺酰脲类药物治疗的 108 例患者(每 100 人年 1.5 例)发生了主要结局(风险比 0.96,95%CI 0.74-1.26,p=0.79)。与磺酰脲类药物组(148 例[10%])相比,吡格列酮组低血糖事件较少(508 例[34%],p<0.0001)。两组均有体重适度增加(平均增加不到 2 公斤)。心力衰竭、膀胱癌和骨折的发生率在两组间无显著差异。
在这项长期、实用的试验中,与磺酰脲类药物(主要是格列美脲和格列齐特)相比,吡格列酮作为二甲双胍的附加治疗,对心血管事件的发生无显著影响。这两种药物都广泛应用且价格实惠,在疗效和不良反应方面都有各自的优势,尽管吡格列酮与低血糖事件的发生较少相关。
意大利药品管理局、糖尿病研究和意大利糖尿病学会。