Nateglinide and glibenclamide metabolic effects in naïve type 2 diabetic patients treated with metformin

Abstract

Nateglinide improved glycemic control better than glibenclamide in combination with metformin.

Therapies for type 2 diabetes: lowering HbA1c and associated cardiovascular risk factors

“…A recently published, randomized, double-blind study of nateglinide and glibenclamide, in combination with MET, confirmed previous findings [30]. In 119 patients treated with nateglinide over 12 months, there were no significant changes in LDL-C, HDL-C, TGs, SBP, or DBP compared with baseline or SFU therapy at any time point during follow-up [30]. Repaglinide has been reported to have a favorable effect on markers of CV inflammation.…”

“…While all currently available antidiabetes agents lower glucose and HbA1c, the magnitude of reduction is variable (table 3) [20,21,25,30-35]. …”

“…In a study of 248 patients (124 patients treated with MET/nateglinide and 124 with MET/glibenclamide) results suggest that the glinide class is weight neutral with no change in BMI occurring over 12 months of therapy in patients treated with nateglinide (+0.4 kg/m 2 ) or glibenclamide (+0.4 kg/m 2 ) [30]. A Cochrane review of 681 patients summarized the effects of the α-glucosidase inhibitor acarbose on weight, reporting a -1.2 kg weight loss in patients with IFG and/or IGT compared with placebo therapy [35].…”

Effects of sulfonylureas on lipids in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

“…Met = metformin; TC = total cholesterol; LDL‐C = low density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL‐C = high density lipoprotein cholesterol; TG = triglyceride; FFA = free fatty acid; ApoA1 = apolipoprotein A1; Apo B = apolipoprotein B; NR = not report. Derosa 2003 , Derosa 2006 , Derosa 2009 reported baseline ApoA1 and ApoB values. The values for ApoA1 (g/L) of the SUs group and Control group were 1.06 ± 0.16, 1.12 ± 0.18; 1.30 ± 0.18, 1.29 ± 0.16; 1.30 ± 0.21, 1.27 ± 0.20 in orderly.…”

Therapeutic choices, and the nurse practitioner's role, in type 2 diabetes when metformin alone is no longer enough

“…In contrast, the AACE/ACE does not consider the use of SUs until after incretin‐based therapies or TZDs had first been considered. This is because of the increased risk of hypoglycemia, particularly in elderly patients and those with A1c values <7.5% often observed with SUs, particularly in drug‐naïve individuals, compared with comparator antidiabetic treatments (Derosa et al, 2009; Gerich, Raskin, Jean‐Louis, Purkayastha, & Baron, 2005; Rodbard et al, 2009).…”