Clark H E, Matthews D R
Oxford Diabetes Centre, Radcliffe Infirmary, United Kingdom.
Horm Metab Res. 1996 Sep;28(9):445-50. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-979835.
The comparative effects of glimepiride (Amaryl; HOE 490) and glibenclamide on insulin and glucose metabolism under hyperglycaemic and hyperinsulinaemic, euglycaemic clamp conditions were studied in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial. Patients with sulfonylurea-controlled non insulin-dependent diabetes were allocated in random order to placebo, glimepiride (5 mg) or glibenclamide (5 mg) and received one week treatment of each with no wash-out period. At the end of each treatment week a clamp study was performed. Two protocols were used. Protocol 1 used a 5 h hyperglycaemic clamp at 10.9 mmol/l whole blood glucose concentration and Protocol II used a 3 h hyperinsulinaemic, euglycaemic damp at 3.5 mmol/l whole blood glucose concentration. Both glimepiride and glibenclamide exhibited a hypoglycaemic effect. A significant reduction in fasting whole blood glucose concentration was observed after one-week treatment of each active agent (fasting glucose: glimepiride v. placebo, 9.3 +/- 0.7 v. 10.7 +/- 0.8 mmol/l, p < 0.02; glibenclamide v. placebo, 8.9 +/- 0.9 v. 10.7 +/- 0.8 mmol/l, p < 0.005). This hypoglycaemic action of both preparations administered in equivalent daily dose appeared comparable. Glimepiride and glibenclamide stimulated beta-cell secretion and in the basal state both beta-cell secretory products insulin and C-peptide, were elevated in the plasma (basal C-peptide concentration: glimepiride v. placebo, 0.79 +/- 0.08 v. 0.68 +/- 0.07 nmol/l, p < 0.01; glibenclamide v. placebo, 0.79 +/- 0.07 v. 0.68 +/- 0.07 nmol/l, p < 0.004). This insulinotropic effect appeared to be comparable with no demonstrable difference in the efficacy of the two preparations. Under steady-state hyperglycaemic conditions both agents promoted insulin release (stimulated C-peptide concentration; glimepiride v. placebo, 1.39 +/- 0.16 v. 1.11 +/- 0.20 nmol/l, p < 0.006; glibenclamide v. placebo. 1.60 +/- 0.18 v. 1.11 +/- 0.20 nmol/l, p < 0.001) and there was no statistically significant difference between active treatments. Under steady-state euglycaemia both preparations continued to stimulate insulin release as evidenced by the mean plasma C-peptide concentrations (glimepiride v. placebo, 0.69 +/- 0.10 v. 0.28 +/- 0.06 nmol/l, p < 0.01; glibenclamide v. placebo, 0.76 +/- 0.12 v. 0.28 +/- 0.06 nmol/l, p < 0.01). Both glimepiride and glibenclamide had a comparable and significant enhancing effect on glucose metabolism (Protocol II: M: glimepiride v. placebo 4.4 +/- 1.3 v. 1.3 +/- 0.7 mg/kg.min, p < 0.05; glibenclamide v. placebo 4.7 +/- 1.3 v. 1.3 +/- 0.7 mg/kg min, p < 0.03) and improved tissue sensitivity to the action of insulin as determined by the quantity of glucose metabolised per unit insulin (Protocol II: M/l ratio: glimepiride v. placebo, 0.09 +/- 0.03 v. 0.03 +/- 0.01 kg.min per mU/l, p < 0.02; glibenclamide v. placebo, 0.1 +/- 0.03 v. 0.03 +/- 0.01 kg.min per mU/l, p < 0.01). In conclusion, glimepiride is a "second-generation" sulfonylurea agent which stimulates pancreatic beta-cell insulin secretion, lowers blood glucose and improves tissue insulin sensitivity in non-insulin-dependent diabetic subjects. Its insulinotropic effect is comparable with that of glibenclamide but may diminish in the presence of normoglycaemia. The magnitude and hence, the clinical relevance of a selective beta-cytotropic action, determined by blood glucose concentration, remains to be demonstrated.
在一项双盲、安慰剂对照的交叉试验中,研究了格列美脲(亚莫利;HOE 490)和格列本脲在高血糖和高胰岛素血症、正常血糖钳夹条件下对胰岛素和葡萄糖代谢的比较作用。磺脲类药物控制的非胰岛素依赖型糖尿病患者被随机分配接受安慰剂、格列美脲(5毫克)或格列本脲(5毫克)治疗,每种药物治疗一周,无洗脱期。在每个治疗周结束时进行钳夹研究。使用了两种方案。方案1在全血葡萄糖浓度为10.9毫摩尔/升的情况下进行5小时高血糖钳夹,方案II在全血葡萄糖浓度为3.5毫摩尔/升的情况下进行3小时高胰岛素血症、正常血糖钳夹。格列美脲和格列本脲均表现出降血糖作用。每种活性药物治疗一周后,空腹全血葡萄糖浓度均显著降低(空腹血糖:格列美脲与安慰剂相比,9.3±0.7与10.7±0.8毫摩尔/升,p<0.02;格列本脲与安慰剂相比,8.9±0.9与10.7±0.8毫摩尔/升,p<0.005)。两种制剂以等效日剂量给药时的这种降血糖作用似乎相当。格列美脲和格列本脲刺激β细胞分泌,在基础状态下,血浆中β细胞分泌产物胰岛素和C肽均升高(基础C肽浓度:格列美脲与安慰剂相比,0.79±0.08与0.68±0.07纳摩尔/升,p<0.01;格列本脲与安慰剂相比,0.79±0.07与0.68±0.07纳摩尔/升,p<0.004)。这种促胰岛素作用似乎相当,两种制剂的疗效无明显差异。在稳态高血糖条件下,两种药物均促进胰岛素释放(刺激后的C肽浓度:格列美脲与安慰剂相比,1.39±0.16与1.11±0.20纳摩尔/升,p<0.006;格列本脲与安慰剂相比:1.60±0.18与1.11±0.20纳摩尔/升,p<0.001),活性治疗之间无统计学显著差异。在稳态正常血糖条件下,两种制剂均继续刺激胰岛素释放,平均血浆C肽浓度证明了这一点(格列美脲与安慰剂相比,0.69±0.10与0.28±0.06纳摩尔/升,p<0.01;格列本脲与安慰剂相比,0.76±0.12与0.28±0.06纳摩尔/升,p<0.01)。格列美脲和格列本脲对葡萄糖代谢均有相当且显著的增强作用(方案II:M:格列美脲与安慰剂相比为4.4±1.3与1.3±0.7毫克/千克·分钟,p<0.05;格列本脲与安慰剂相比为4.7±1.3与1.3±0.7毫克/千克·分钟,p<0.03),并且根据每单位胰岛素代谢的葡萄糖量确定,改善了组织对胰岛素作用的敏感性(方案II:M/l比值:格列美脲与安慰剂相比,0.09±0.03与0.03±0.01千克·分钟/毫单位/升,p<0.02;格列本脲与安慰剂相比,0.1±0.03与0.03±0.01千克·分钟/毫单位/升,p<0.01)。总之,格列美脲是一种“第二代”磺脲类药物,可刺激胰腺β细胞胰岛素分泌,降低血糖,并改善非胰岛素依赖型糖尿病患者的组织胰岛素敏感性。其促胰岛素作用与格列本脲相当,但在血糖正常时可能减弱。由血糖浓度决定的选择性β细胞促生长作用的程度及其临床相关性仍有待证实。