Improvement in glycaemic control with rosiglitazone/metformin fixed‐dose combination therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes with very poor glycaemic control

Rosenstock, Julio; Rood, Julie A.; Cobitz, Alexander R.; Huang, Chih‐Yang; Garber, Alan J.

doi:10.1111/j.1463-1326.2006.00648.x

Cited by 35 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Patients treated with the combination therapy of pioglitazone and metformin or with Rosiglitazone and metformin fixed‐dose combination therapy had very low incidence of hypoglycaemia [20,21]. In our study, patients treated with metformin as adjunctive therapy to pioglitazone were 25% less likely to have hypoglycaemia than those who did not take adjunctive metformin.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 50%

Hypoglycaemia with pioglitazone: analysis of data from the Prescription‐Event Monitoring study

Vlckova

Cornelius

Kasliwal³

et al. 2010

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 50%

Hypoglycaemia with pioglitazone: analysis of data from the Prescription‐Event Monitoring study

Vlckova

Cornelius

Kasliwal³

et al. 2010

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The initial use of combinations of submaximal doses of antihyperglycemic agents produces more rapid and improved glycemic control and fewer side effects compared to monotherapy at maximal doses (13)(14)(15)(16)(17). Table 1 lists all the available classes of antihyperglycemic therapies.…”

Section: Newly Diagnosed Type 2 Diabetesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pharmacologic Glycemic Management of Type 2 Diabetes in Adults

Lipscombe¹,

Booth²,

Butalia³

et al. 2018

Canadian Journal of Diabetes

172

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Healthy behaviour interventions should be initiated in people newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes.• In people with type 2 diabetes with A1C <1.5% above the person's individualized target, antihyperglycemic pharmacotherapy should be added if glycemic targets are not achieved within 3 months of initiating healthy behaviour interventions.• In people with type 2 diabetes with A1C ≥1.5% above target, antihyperglycemic agents should be initiated concomitantly with healthy behaviour interventions, and consideration could be given to initiating combination therapy with 2 agents.• Insulin should be initiated immediately in individuals with metabolic decompensation and/or symptomatic hyperglycemia.• In the absence of metabolic decompensation, metformin should be the initial agent of choice in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes, unless contraindicated.• Dose adjustments and/or additional agents should be instituted to achieve target A1C within 3 to 6 months. Choice of second-line antihyperglycemic agents should be made based on individual patient characteristics, patient preferences, any contraindications to the drug, glucose-lowering efficacy, risk of hypoglycemia, affordability/access, effect on body weight and other factors.• In people with clinical cardiovascular (CV) disease in whom A1C targets are not achieved with existing pharmacotherapy, an antihyperglycemic agent with demonstrated CV outcome benefit should be added to antihyperglycemic therapy to reduce CV risk.• In people without clinical CV disease in whom A1C target is not achieved with current therapy, if affordability and access are not barriers, people with type 2 diabetes and their providers who are concerned about hypoglycemia and weight gain may prefer an incretin agent (DPP-4 inhibitor or GLP-1 receptor agonist) and/or an SGLT2 inhibitor to other agents as they improve glycemic control with a low risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain.• In people receiving an antihyperglycemic regimen containing insulin, in whom glycemic targets are not achieved, the addition of a GLP-1 receptor agonist, DPP-4 inhibitor or SGLT2 inhibitor may be considered before adding or intensifying prandial insulin therapy to improve glycemic control with less weight gain and comparable or lower hypoglycemia risk.

show abstract

“…We implemented the “last observation carried forward” method to populate the missing laboratory values and created clinically relevant categorical variables (see Appendix B for ranges and categories, available in online article). 25 When multiple values were observed for a given measure in a quarter, we averaged those values.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geographic Variation in Rosiglitazone Use Surrounding FDA Warnings in the Department of Veterans Affairs

Ahuja

Sohn²,

Birge³

et al. 2015

JMCP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Geographic variation in the use of prescription drugs, particularly those deemed harmful by the FDA, may lead to variation in patient exposure to adverse drug events. One such drug is the glucose-lowering drug rosiglitazone, for which the FDA issued a safety alert on May 21, 2007, following the publication of a meta-analysis that suggested a 43% increase in the risk of myocardial infarction with the use of rosiglitazone. This alert was followed by a black box warning on August 14, 2007, that was updated 3 months later. While large declines have been documented in rosiglitazone use in clinical practice, little is known about how the use of rosiglitazone and other glucose-lowering drugs varied within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), surrounding the FDA alerts. Understanding this variation within integrated health care systems is essential to formulating policies that enhance patient protection and quality of care. OBJECTIVE To document variation in the use of rosiglitazone and other glucose-lowering drugs across 21 Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISNs). METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of drug use patterns for all major diabetes drugs in a national cohort of 550,550 veterans with diabetes from 2003 to 2008. This included the time periods when rosiglitazone was added to (November 2003) and removed from (October 2007) the VA national formulary (VANF). We employed multivariable logistic regression models to statistically estimate the association between a patient’s location and the patient’s odds of using rosiglitazone. RESULTS Aggregate rosiglitazone use increased monotonically from 7.7%, in the quarter it was added to the VANF (November 4, 2003), to a peak of 15.3% in the quarter when the FDA issued the safety alert. Rosiglitazone use decreased sharply afterwards, reaching 3.4% by the end of the study period (September 30, 2008). The use of pioglitazone, another glucose-lowering drug in the same class as rosiglitazone, was low when the FDA issued the safety alert (0.4%) but increased sharply afterwards, reaching 3.6% by the end of the study period. Insulin use increased monotonically; metformin use remained relatively flat; and sulfonylurea use exhibited a general declining trend throughout the study period. Statistically significant geographic variation was observed in rosiglitazone use throughout the study period. The prevalence range, defined as the range of minimum to maximum use across VISNs was 3.7%–12.4% in the first quarter (January 1 to March 31, 2003); 1.0%–5.5% in the last quarter of study period (July 1 to September 30, 2008); and reached a peak of 9.6%–25.5% in the quarter when the FDA safety alert was issued (April 1 to March 31, 2007). In 5 VISNs, peak rosiglitazone use occurred before the FDA issued the safety alert. The odds ratio of using rosiglitazone in a given VISN varied from 0.55 (95% CI = 0.52–0.59; VISN 10) to 1.58 (95% CI = 1.50–1.66; VISN 15), with VISN 1 being the reference region. The variation was higher in the periods after the FDA issued ...

show abstract

Improvement in glycaemic control with rosiglitazone/metformin fixed‐dose combination therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes with very poor glycaemic control

Cited by 35 publications

References 17 publications

Hypoglycaemia with pioglitazone: analysis of data from the Prescription‐Event Monitoring study

Hypoglycaemia with pioglitazone: analysis of data from the Prescription‐Event Monitoring study

Pharmacologic Glycemic Management of Type 2 Diabetes in Adults

Geographic Variation in Rosiglitazone Use Surrounding FDA Warnings in the Department of Veterans Affairs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About