Efficacy and safety of biphasic insulin aspart 30 combined with pioglitazone in type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on glibenclamide (glyburide) monotherapy or combination therapy: an 18-week, randomized, open-label study

Itamar Raz, Stephen Stranks, Robert Filipczak, Pankaj Joshi, Benedikte Lertoft, Jacob Rastam, Chun Chung Chow, Joseph Shaban

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

28 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Few large randomized controlled trials have assessed the value of adding insulin to an oral antidiabetic drug regimen. Objective: This trial compared the efficacy and safety of biphasic insulin aspart 30/70 (BIAsp 30) plus pioglitazone (n = 93), glibenclamide (glyburide) plus pioglitazone (n = 91), or BIAsp 30 monotherapy (n = 97). Methods: This 18-week, multinational, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial involved 281 patients with type 2 diabetes (60% male; mean age, 56 years; mean body mass index, 29.5 kg/m2) with inadequate glycemic control (mean glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c], 9.5%; range, 7.4%-14.7%) on glibenclamide monotherapy or combination therapy. The primary objective was to compare end-of-trial HbA 1c among the 3 treatment groups. Fasting and mean 7- and 8-point blood glucose profiles, blood lipid levels, plasminogen activator inhibitor levels, adverse events, and hypoglycemia frequency were also compared. Patients using BIAsp 30 (alone or with pioglitazone) were injected twice daily (immediately before breakfast and dinner). Pioglitazone (30 mg/d) and glibenclamide (5-15 mg/d) were taken orally once daily with or immediately after breakfast. Results: At the end of the trial, HbA1c was significantly lower for the BIAsp 30 plus pioglitazone group than for the glibenclamide plus pioglitazone group (mean [SD], -0.64% [0.23%]; P = 0.005) and the BIAsp 30 monotherapy group (-0.60% [0.22%]; P = 0.008). Mean (SD) fasting blood glucose (before breakfast) was significantly lower for BIAsp 30 plus pioglitazone than for glibenclamide plus pioglitazone (153 [45] mg/dL vs 169 [65] mg/dL, respectively; P = 0.012). Each time point on the 8-point blood glucose profile was lower for BIAsp 30 plus pioglitazone than for glibenclamide plus pioglitazone (P < 0.001 to P < 0.05). No major hypoglycemic episodes were reported, and the absolute rate of hypoglycemic events was low (<1 event/patient-week) in the BIAsp-only group. Edema was reported in ≤9% of patients in each treatment group, but no occurrence was classified as serious. Weight gain (mean, 4.0 kg) was more common in the BIAsp plus pioglitazone group (8%); however, this was consistent with improved glycemic control and is similar to that reported in other pioglitazone trials. Conclusions: BIAsp 30 plus pioglitazone provided an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment alternative to glibenclamide plus pioglitazone or BIAsp 30 alone in this population of patients who previously were not well controlled on glibenclamide monotherapy or combination therapy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1432-1443
Number of pages12
JournalCLINICAL THERAPEUTICS
Volume27
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2005
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Biphasic insulin aspart
  • Glibenclamide
  • Glyburide
  • Glycemic control
  • Pioglitazone
  • Sulfonylurea
  • Type 2 diabetes

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Efficacy and safety of biphasic insulin aspart 30 combined with pioglitazone in type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on glibenclamide (glyburide) monotherapy or combination therapy: an 18-week, randomized, open-label study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this