catherine only
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ipgm20
Download by: [York University Libraries] Date: 07 November 2015, At: 00:46
Postgraduate Medicine
ISSN: 0032-5481 (Print) 1941-9260 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ipgm20
Managing Type 2 Diabetes: Balancing HbA1c and Body Weight
Annie A. Mavian DO, Stephan Miller PhD & Robert R. Henry MD
To cite this article: Annie A. Mavian DO, Stephan Miller PhD & Robert R. Henry MD (2010) Managing Type 2 Diabetes: Balancing HbA1c and Body Weight, Postgraduate Medicine, 122:3, 106-117
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3810/pgm.2010.05.2148
Published online: 13 Mar 2015.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 5
View related articles
106 © Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260
C L I N I C A L F O C U S : D I A B E T E S
Managing Type 2 Diabetes: Balancing HbA 1c
and Body Weight
Abstract: Most patients with type 2 diabetes present with comorbid overweight or obesity. Reaching and maintaining acceptable glycemic control is more diffi cult in overweight and obese
patients, and these conditions are associated with increased risk for cardiovascular and other
diseases. Glycemic management for these patients is complicated by the fact that insulin and
many of the oral medications available to treat type 2 diabetes produce additional weight gain.
However, an increasing number of therapeutic options are available that are weight neutral or
lead to weight loss in addition to their glycemic benefi ts. This article evaluates the evidence
from clinical trials regarding the relative glycemic benefi ts, measured in terms of glycated
hemoglobin change, versus the impact on body weight of each medication currently approved
for type 2 diabetes. In general, the sulfonylureas, thiazolidinediones, and D-phenylalanine
derivatives have been shown to promote weight gain. The dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors are
weight neutral, while the biguanides, incretin mimetics, and amylin mimetics promote weight
loss. Trials examining the glycemic benefi ts of the weight loss agents orlistat and sibutramine
are also examined. Awareness of this evidence base can be used to inform medication selection
in support of weight management goals for patients with type 2 diabetes.
Keywords: type 2 diabetes; overweight; obesity; glycemic control
Introduction The prevalence of obesity and the prevalence of diabetes have risen markedly in the
United States.1–3 Overweight and obesity are associated not only with diabetes, high
blood pressure, high cholesterol, asthma and arthritis, but also overall fair or poor
health.3 Furthermore, overweight and obesity are independent risk factors of cardio-
vascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes.4 The majority of patients with type
2 diabetes are overweight or obese at the time of diagnosis, and treatment with many
oral hypoglycemic agents and insulin are known to have weight gain as an adverse
effect. In addition, compared with non-obese patients, obese patients are less able to
maintain initial improvements in glycated hemoglobin A 1c
(HbA 1c
) levels with anti-
diabetic therapy.5 Studies have shown that weight loss is associated with improved
insulin resistance, resulting in better glycemic control,6 and that weight reductions in
post-gastric bypass patients are associated with a decrease in the use of antidiabetic
medications.7
The purpose of this article is to review the effects of currently US Food and Drug
Administration (FDA)-approved non-insulin diabetes medications on HbA 1c
and body
weight in type 2 diabetes. Selected studies include those with the following features:
a monotherapy arm, measurements of both HbA 1c
and weight, conducted within the
last 6 years, duration of � 18 weeks, and � 50 patients. Exceptions were made if the
drug was used only in combination and if no monotherapy studies had been conducted
in the past 6 years. Selected studies of drugs approved for the treatment of obesity
will also be considered. This article will discuss the key features of the studies listed
Annie A. Mavian, DO1
Stephan Miller, PhD2
Robert R. Henry, MD1
1Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, University of California San Diego and Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, CA; 2Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., San Diego, CA
Correspondence: Robert R. Henry, MD, Professor of Medicine, University of California San Diego, Chief, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, CA. Tel: 858-522-8585 x3648 Fax: 858-642-6242 E-mail: [email protected]
Global reprints distributed only by Postgraduate Medicine USA. No part of Postgraduate Medicine may be reproduced or transmitted in any form without written permission from the publisher. All permission requests to reproduce or adapt published material must be directed to the journal office in Berwyn, PA, no other persons or offices are authorized to act on our behalf. Requests should include a statement describing how material will be used, the complete article citation, a copy of the figure or table of interest as it appeared in the journal, and a copy of the “new” (adapted) material if appropriate
71508e
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15
© Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260 107
Balancing Glycemic Control and Body Weight
Table 1. Antidiabetic and Weight Loss Agents and Their Effect on HbA 1c and Body Weight
Agent Ref Study Duration
Subjects Doses Baseline HbA
1c (%)
Δ HbA 1c
(%)
Δ Weight (kg)
Adverse Events (% of subjects)
Sulfonylureas
Tolbutamide 12 24 wks 66 250–1000 mg TID 6.95 −0.93 +1.8 10% nausea 34% fl atulence
Chloropropamide 11 10 y 619 100–500 mg/day 6.3 6.7a +2.6b 1.0% major hypo/y
Glyburide ( glibenclamide)
11 10 y 615 2.5–5 mg/day 6.3 7.2a +1.7 b 1.4% major hypoglycemia/y
13 20 wks 160 2.5–10 mg/day 8.21 −1.24 +1.7 6.3% any hypoglycemia 4.4% diarrhea
19 4 y, median 1441 2.5–7.5 mg BID 7.4 +0.24/yr +1.6 1.8% serious CV events 38.7% any hypoglycemia
Glipizide 14 12 wks 119 5–20 mg/day 7.8 −0.76 +0.9 17% hypoglycemia
15 18 wks 84 15 mg BID 8.9 −0.4 −0.4 No hypoglycemia 13% URI 13% diarrhea
Glimepiride 16 52 wks 123 2–8 mg/day 8.45 −0.68 +0.79 31% any hypoglycemia 17% peripheral edema
Thiazolidinediones
Rosiglitazone 18 24 wks 238 8 mg QD 8.7 −1.3 +1.6 1 subject mild hypoglycemia 7.5% nasopharyngitis 4.1% peripheral edema
19 4 y, median 1456 4 mg QD−4 mg BID
7.4 +0.07/yr +0.7 3.4% serious CV events 9.8% any hypoglycemia
Pioglitazone 20 34.5 mos, mean
2605 15–45 mg QD 7.8 −0.8 +3.6 28% any hypoglycemia
21 24 wks 161 30 mg QD 8.7 −1.4 +1.5 1 subject mild hypoglycemia 4.1% edema
D-phenylalanine derivatives
Nateglinide 25,26 24 wks 179 120 mg 8.3 −0.5 +0.9 12.8% any hypoglycemia 27 28 wks 150 120 mg 8.4 −0.7 +0.53 0.7% confi rmed hypoglycemia
Meglitinides
Repaglinide 29 24 wks 63 4 mg/meal 9.3 −0.17 +1.6 6% mild hypoglycemia
Biguinides
Metformin 31 29 wks 143 850–2550 mg/day 8.4 −1.4 −0.6 8% severe diarrhea 4% severe nausea � 2% any hypoglycemia
31 29 wks 210 500–2500 mg/day 8.9 −0.4 −3.8 2% any hypoglycemia
32 32 wks 272 500–3000 mg/day 7.2 −0.38 −1.9 4% m/m hypoglycemia
19 4 y, median 1454 500 mg to 1 g BID 7.4 +0.14/yr −2.9 3.2% serious CV 11.6% any hypoglycemia
�-Glucosidase inhibitors
Acarbose 12 24 wks 67 200 mg TID 6.88 −0.54 −1.4 80% fl atulence 27% diarrhea
36 24 wks 220 Up to 300 mg/day 8.6 −1.3 −1.7 25.5% GI adverse events No hypoglycemia
Miglitol 37 36 wks 82 100 mg TID 8.2 +0.02 −0.42 71% GI adverse events 8.5% m/m hypoglycemia
(Continued)
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15
108 © Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260
Mavian et al
Table 1 (Continued)
Agent Ref Study Duration
Subjects Doses Baseline HbA
1c (%)
Δ HbA 1c
(%)
Δ Weight (kg)
Adverse Events (% of subjects)
Incretin mimetics
Exenatide 40 24 wks 232 10 μg BID 7.8 −0.9 −3.1 13% nausea 4% m/m hypoglycemia
42 30 wks 147 10 μg BID 8.3 −1.5 −3.6 34.5% nausea 15.4% minor hypoglycemiad
45 26 wks 231 10 μg BID 8.1 −0.79 −2.87 28% nausea 34% minor hypoglycemia 2 episodes major hypoglycemiad
EQW 42 30 wks 148 2 mg QW 8.3 −1.9 −3.7 26.4% nausea 14.5% minor hypoglycemiad
43 52 wks 128 2 mg QW 8.3 −2 −4.5 8.6% diarrheae 7.0% nausea
Liraglutide 44 52 wks 746 1.8 mg QD 8.3 −1.14 −2.45 29% nausea 8% minor hypoglycemia
45 26 wks 233 1.8 mg QD 8.2 −1.12 −3.24 25.5% nausea 26% minor hypoglycemia
Amylinomimetics
Pramlintide 47 52 wks 166 120 μg BID 9.0 −0.62 −1.4 0.3 event rate/patient-year severe hypoglycemia 2% nausea
48 6 mos 166 120 μg BID or TID 8.3 −0.56 −2.8 12% any hypoglycemia 29.5% nausea
DPP-4 inhibitors
Sitagliptin 50 24 wks 238 200 mg QD 8.08 −0.76 −0.1 0.8% m/m hypoglycemia 16.4% GI adverse event
51 24 wks 175 100 mg QD 8.87 −0.66 0.0 0.6% m/m hypoglycemia 16.4% GI adverse event
Saxagliptin 52 24 wks 98 10 mg QD 7.9 −0.54 −0.1 8.2% m/m hypoglycemia 6.1% diarrhea
Lipase Inhibitors
Orlistat 53 1 y 266 120 mg TID 9.01 −0.62 −3.89 80% GI adverse event 17% any hypoglycemia
54 1 y 250 120 mg TID 8.87 −0.75 −4.7 83% GI adverse event 10% m/m hypoglycemia
56 12 mos 71 120 mg TID 7.1 −0.8 −11c 34% GI adverse event
Reuptake Inhibitors
Sibutramine 55 12 mos 62 20 mg QD 9.14 −0.32 −8.0 Increased mean heart rate and blood pressure
56 12 mos 70 10 mg QD 7.0 −0.9 −10.4c Increased blood pressure in 1 subject
aMedian over 10 years; bWeight gain in addition to that with conventional therapy; cWeight change calculated from reported BMI change; dPrimarily in patients with concommitant SU use; eAdverse events from week 30 to week 52. Abbreviations: BID, twice daily; BMI, body mass index; CV, cardivascular; EQW, exenatide once weekly; GI, gastrointestinal symptoms; m/m, mild-to-moderate intensity; QD, once daily; TID, 3 times daily; URI, upper respiratory infection.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15
© Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260 109
Balancing Glycemic Control and Body Weight
in Table 1, with emphasis on select studies. Table 1 can be
referenced for an overview of baseline HbA 1c
, change in
HbA 1c
, change in body weight, and adverse events.
Antihyperglycemic Agents Associated with Weight Gain Sulfonylureas The sulfonylureas (SUs) are a class of antihyperglycemic
agents that improve plasma glucose levels by stimulating
insulin secretion from pancreatic β-cells. Because their specifi c action on insulin is independent of plasma glucose
concentrations, hypoglycemia is a common adverse
effect.8–10 The SUs are indicated as adjuncts to diet or diet
and exercise. The UK Prospective Diabetes Study compared
SUs and insulin with conventional diabetes dietary treat-
ment.11 Patients were randomized to receive either the fi rst-
generation SU chlorpropamide 100 to 500 mg daily (n = 619), the second-generation SU glyburide (glibenclamide) 2.5 to
20 mg daily (n = 615), insulin (n = 911), or conventional treatment with diet (n = 896). Over the course of 10 years, the median HbA
1c was 6.7% in the chlorpropamide group, 7.2%
in the glyburide group, and 7.1% in the insulin group, com-
pared with 7.9% in the conventional treatment group. Weight
gain was observed in all treatment groups and was greater
with chlorpropamide, glibenclamide, and insulin than with
conventional therapy. The chlorpropamide group gained
2.6 kg, the glyburide group gained 1.7 kg, and the insulin
group gained 4 kg more than the conventional treatment
group, which gained approximately 2.5 kg.11
The fi rst-generation SU tolbutamide was studied in a
multicenter, 24-week, placebo-controlled trial comparing
acarbose, tolbutamide, and tolbutamide plus acarbose.12
Patients in the tolbutamide group achieved an HbA 1c
reduction of 0.93% from a baseline of 6.95%, and the acar-
bose group achieved an HbA 1c
reduction of 0.54% from a
baseline of 6.88%. The combination of tolbutamide plus
acarbose produced an HbA 1c
reduction of 1.32% from a
baseline of 6.73%. Treatment with tolbutamide alone resulted
in a 1.8-kg weight gain. Acarbose alone produced a weight
loss of 1.4 kg and appeared to counteract the weight gain
effects of tolbutamide, resulting in a weight increase of only
0.19 kg when the 2 agents were used in combination.
Garber et al13 compared the second-generation SU
glyburide in combination with metformin to monotherapy
with either glyburide or metformin alone in a double-blind,
parallel-group, placebo-controlled multicenter study, in
which 806 subjects were randomized to placebo, glybu-
ride 2.5 mg, metformin 500 mg, glyburide/metformin
(1.25 mg/250 mg), or glyburide/metformin (2.5 mg/500 mg).
At 20 weeks of therapy HbA 1c
was reduced by 1.03% in
the metformin group, 1.24% in the glyburide group, 1.48%
in the glyburide/metformin (1.25 mg/250 mg) group, and
1.53% in the glyburide/metformin (2.5 mg/500 mg) group.
An overall weight gain was observed in all glyburide
treatment arms, whereas weight reduction was achieved
in both the placebo and metformin groups. The glyburide/
metformin (1.25 mg/250 mg) group demonstrated a 1.4-kg
weight gain, the glyburide/metformin (2.5 mg/500 mg) group
a 1.9-kg weight gain, and a 1.7-kg weight gain occurred in
the glyburide monotherapy group. In contrast, the metformin
and placebo groups achieved weight reductions from baseline
of 0.6 kg and 0.7 kg, respectively.
Variable effects on weight gain have been demonstrated
with the second-generation SU glipizide. Scott et al14 com-
pared glipizide monotherapy with sitagliptin in a 12-week
double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 743 patients with
type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with diet and exer-
cise. Patients were randomized to receive placebo, glipizide,
or 1 of 4 doses of sitagliptin twice daily (5 mg, 12.5 mg,
25 mg, or 50 mg). Glipizide was initiated at 5 mg per day
with optional titration up to 20 mg depending on glycemic
control. At 12 weeks, the greatest HbA 1c
reduction was
in the glipizide treatment group (0.76%) compared with
reductions with sitagliptin ranging from 0.15% (2.5 mg) to
0.54% (50 mg) and an HbA 1c
increase in the placebo group
of 0.23%. However, the HbA 1c
reduction with glipizide was
accompanied by a 0.9-kg weight increase, whereas weight
was unchanged in the sitagliptin-treated groups relative to
baseline or placebo.
Goldstein et al15 evaluated glipizide alone and in
combination with metformin in a double-blind, parallel-
group, controlled study of patients who were failing
monotherapy with SUs alone. Subjects were random-
ized to receive glipizide 30 mg (n = 84), metformin 500 mg (n = 76), or glipizide/metformin 5/500 mg (n = 87) over an 18-week course of treatment. The doses were titrated to a maximum dose of glipizide
30 mg, metformin 2000 mg, and metformin/glipizide
20/2000 mg daily. Mean baseline HbA 1c
measurements
were in the range of 8.6% to 8.9% for all 3 groups. At
18 weeks, a greater reduction in HbA 1c
was achieved
in the combination metformin/glipizide group (1.3%)
than with either metformin (0.2%) or glipizide alone
(0.4%). Weight reduction occurred in all 3 arms of
the study, with the greatest reduction observed in the
metformin monotherapy arm (2.7 kg). Weight reduction
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15
110 © Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260
Mavian et al
was smaller in the glipizide-treated arms (0.4 kg with
glipizide monotherapy and 0.3 kg in the metformin/
glipizide arm).
Tan et al16 compared pioglitazone with the third-
generation SU glimepiride. This was a multicenter, 52-week,
double-blind, parallel-group study that randomized patients
to either glimepiride 2 mg daily (n = 123) or pioglitazone 15 mg (n = 121) with titration up to a maximum of 8 mg and 45 mg, respectively, to achieve glycemic targets. The
HbA 1c
decreased by 0.68% from a baseline of 8.45% in the
glimepiride group, while the pioglitazone group achieved
a 0.78% reduction from a baseline of 8.54%. Both groups
experienced weight gain from baseline (1.49 kg in the pio-
glitazone group and 0.79 kg in the glimepiride group).
The clinical trials conducted over the past several years
have consistently shown that while treatment with SUs
improves HbA 1c
, they are often accompanied by signifi cant
weight gain,12–14,16 with the exception of 1 glipizide study
discussed above.15 Weight gain with SUs may be a direct
result of improved insulin secretion and the anabolic effects
of insulin, while weight gain with thiazolidinediones (TZDs)
is partly related to fl uid retention and increased fat mass.
Thiazolidinediones Thiazolidinediones, including rosiglitazone, pioglitazone,
and troglitazone, are agonists of peroxisome proliferator-
activated receptors, which are found primarily in adipose
tissue and the liver and, at lower levels, in skeletal muscle.
Thiazolidinediones improve insulin resistance and insulin
sensitivity by increasing insulin-stimulated glucose disposal
and suppressing hepatic glucose production.17 Thiazolidin-
ediones are approved for use as monotherapy or in combina-
tion with an SU, metformin, or insulin when a single agent
(plus diet and exercise) does not provide adequate control.
Rosenstock et al18 compared vildagliptin with rosiglitazone
monotherapy in a 24-week, double-blind, randomized trial.
Patients were randomized to receive vildagliptin 100 mg
(n = 459) or rosiglitazone 8 mg daily (n = 238). In patients receiving rosiglitazone, there was an HbA
1c reduction of 1.3%
versus 1.1% reduction in the vildagliptin group. The average
body weight in the vildagliptin group did not change signifi -
cantly from a baseline of 91.2 kg, whereas the rosiglitazone
group had a statistically signifi cant weight increase of 1.6 kg
from a baseline of 93.1 kg.
A Diabetes Outcome Progression Trial (ADOPT)
compared monotherapy with rosiglitazone, metformin, and
glyburide as initial therapy in patients who were diagnosed
with type 2 diabetes within the last 3 years and were treatment
naïve.19 The median duration of this study was 4 years, and
the primary endpoint was time to monotherapy failure,
defi ned as a fasting plasma glucose level of � 180 mg/dL.
This was a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial with
4360 patients. Subjects were randomized to receive daily
doses of rosiglitazone 4 mg (n = 1456), metformin 500 mg (n = 1454), or glyburide 2.5 mg (n = 1441). Doses were titrated upwards to maximums of rosiglitazone 4 mg twice
daily, metformin 1 g twice daily, and glyburide 7.5 mg
twice daily. At 5 years, 15% of the patients treated with
rosiglitazone monotherapy met the criteria for monotherapy
failure, compared with 21% in the metformin group and
34% in the glyburide group. Secondary outcomes included
changes in HbA 1c
and body weight. After 4 years, 40% of the
rosiglitazone group achieved an HbA 1c
of � 7%, compared
with 36% of the metformin group and 26% of the glyburide
group. However, the rosiglitazone group experienced the
greatest weight gain, 4.8 kg after 5 years, compared with a
weight reduction of 2.9 kg in the metformin group. Weight
gain was more modest in the glyburide group (1.6 kg after
1 year) and relatively stable thereafter.19
The PROactive Study evaluated macrovascular events
in patients who were randomized to receive pioglitazone
45 mg (n = 2605) or placebo (n = 2633) in addition to their existing medication(s).20 This prospective trial had
an average observation time of 34.5 months until the fi nal
visit, at which time patients in the pioglitazone group had an
HbA 1c
reduction of 0.8% and the placebo group had a 0.3%
reduction. The improvement in the HbA 1c
was accompanied
by a 3.6-kg weight gain in the pioglitazone group, whereas
a 0.4-kg weight loss was observed in the placebo group.
Despite this weight gain, pioglitazone treatment was associ-
ated with a small reduction in risk of myocardial infarction,
stroke, and all-cause mortality.
The clinical trials discussed above consistently
demonstrated weight gain associated with rosiglitazone
or pioglitazone treatment. Another 24-week, multicenter,
randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study compared
pioglitazone monotherapy with vildagliptin monotherapy and
combinations of both drugs in subjects with a mean baseline
HbA 1c
of 8.7%. Patients in the pioglitazone (n = 161, 30 mg) and vildagliptin (n = 154, 100 mg) monotherapy groups had HbA
1c reductions of 1.4% and 1.1%, respectively,
compared with vildagliptin/pioglitazone 100/30 mg
(n = 148) and vildagliptin/pioglitazone 50/15 mg (n = 144), which achieved reductions of 1.9% and 1.7%, respectively.
Body weight did not change signifi cantly from baseline in the
vildagliptin monotherapy group (−0.3 kg) but increased in the
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15
© Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260 111
Balancing Glycemic Control and Body Weight
pioglitazone monotherapy group by 1.5 kg and increased by
1.4 kg and 2.1 kg in the low-dose and high-dose combination
vildagliptin/pioglitazone groups, respectively.21
While TZDs improve HbA 1c
by improving insulin
sensitivity and peripheral glucose disposal, they also
have signifi cant effects on overall body weight by increasing
fat mass and fl uid retention. Thiazolidinedione use is usually
associated with an increase in subcutaneous adipose tissue,
while visceral adiposity decreases or remains unchanged.22,23
This is in contrast to the typical pattern of weight gain pro-
duced with some other classes of antidiabetic medication,
which includes an increase in the mass of metabolically more
toxic visceral adipose tissue. Because of the differential effect
on fat stores, it has been suggested that TZD-mediated weight
gain may be less detrimental than weight gain produced with
other agents, or may even be benefi cial.24 Further, weight gain
can be minimized or prevented by concomitant use of modest
caloric restriction and/or by co-administration of metformin
or glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists.
D-phenylalanine Derivatives Nateglinide is an amino acid derivative that lowers blood
glucose levels by stimulating insulin secretion from the
pancreas.25 Nateglinide is indicated as an adjunct to diet and
exercise either alone or in combination with metformin or a
TZD. Nateglinide monotherapy (n = 179) was compared with metformin monotherapy (n = 178), combination nateglinide/ metformin (n = 172), and placebo (n = 172) in a 24-week double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were
randomized to nateglinide 120 mg before meals, metformin
500 mg after the start of each meal, the combination of
nateglinide/metformin 120/500 mg, or placebo. After
24 weeks of therapy, HbA 1c
changes from baseline were
−0.5% in the nateglinide monotherapy group, −0.8% in the metformin group, −1.4% in the combination group, and +0.5% in the placebo group. All groups had a baseline HbA
1c
of 8.3% to 8.4%. There were no signifi cant changes in weight
from baseline in any of the active treatment groups, although
the nateglinide monotherapy experienced a small weight gain
(� 1 kg).25,26 In another trial, Rosenstock et al27 evaluated
nateglinide, troglitazone, and the combination of nateglinide
and troglitazone in a 28-week, double-blind, randomized,
multicenter study with a 4-week, single-blind placebo, run-
in and a 24-week, double-blind, active treatment period.
Patients were randomized to nateglinide 120 mg, troglitazone
600 mg, nateglinide/troglitazone 120 mg/600 mg, or placebo.
By the end of week 24, HbA 1c
was increased by 0.3% in
the placebo group, but decreased by 0.7%, 1%, and 1.8%
in the nateglinide, troglitazone, and combination groups,
respectively, from a mean baseline HbA 1c
of 8.1% to 8.4%.
Mean body weight was increased by 0.53, 0.50, and 2.31 kg
in the nateglinide, troglitazone, and combination treatment
groups, respectively. Weight gain in the combination group
was greater than twice the amount compared with either
nateglinide or troglitazone monotherapy groups.
Meglitinides Repaglinide is currently the only FDA-approved drug in the
meglitinide class. It has a similar mechanism of action to
that of SUs, in that it is a glucose-independent secretagogue.
It works by inducing insulin secretion from pancreatic β-cells with a rapid onset of action for a short duration. Thus, the most
common adverse event is mild-to-moderate hypoglycemia.28
Repaglinide is indicated for use as monotherapy in conjunction
with diet and exercise or in combination with metformin or
a TZD. In a 24-week, randomized, multicenter, open-label,
parallel-group study, repaglinide plus rosiglitazone was
compared with repaglinide and rosiglitazone monotherapy in
patients with mean baseline HbA 1c
of 9% to 9.3% (N = 252).29 At the end of the 24 weeks, the mean change in HbA
1c in
the repaglinide monotherapy group alone was a decrease of
0.17% compared with 0.56% with rosiglitazone and 1.43%
with repaglinide/rosiglitazone therapy. The small HbA 1c
reduction with repaglinide monotherapy was accompanied
by a weight gain of 1.6 kg. Greater weight gain was noted
in the rosiglitazone monotherapy group (2.3 kg) and with
combination therapy (4.4 kg).29 Similar to the results in the
clinical trial evaluating nateglinide in combination with
troglitazone,27 greater weight gain was observed when repa-
glinide was used in combination with a TZD.
Antihyperglycemic Agents That Promote Weight Loss or Are Weight Neutral Biguanides Metformin hydrochloride is an antihyperglycemic agent
that improves both basal and postprandial plasma glucose
concentrations. Its mechanisms of action include decreasing
hepatic glucose production, decreasing intestinal absorp-
tion of glucose and improving hepatic, and to a lesser
extent, peripheral insulin sensitivity. Because insulin
secretion is unchanged by metformin, hypoglycemia is
uncommon.30 In contrast to most of the agents available,
metformin is approved for use in children as well as adults.
In 2 randomized, placebo-controlled, 29-week multicenter
trials, DeFronzo et al31 evaluated the effi cacy of metformin
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15
112 © Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260
Mavian et al
in moderately obese, non–insulin-dependent patients with
diabetes who were poorly controlled with diet alone or with
diet plus an SU. In protocol 1, the patients were instructed
to follow a low-calorie diet that consisted of 20% fewer
calories than the patient’s calculated daily caloric expen-
diture. After this initial phase, patients were randomized to
receive placebo (n = 146) or metformin (n = 143) starting at 850 mg once daily and uptitrating to 2550 mg daily. By
29 weeks, the HbA 1c
decreased by 1.4% from a baseline of
8.2% in the metformin group and increased by 0.4% from
a baseline of 8.4% in the placebo group. Weight reduction
was observed in both treatment groups, resulting in a 0.6-
kg weight loss in the metformin group and a 1.1-kg weight
loss in the placebo group (P = 0.21). In protocol 2, patients were instructed to follow a weight-maintaining diet. Prior
to randomization, patients were either continued on or were
started on glyburide. Patients who were on another SU were
switched to glyburide. During the active phase, patients were
randomized to glyburide (n = 209), metformin (n = 210), or a metformin/glyburide combination (n = 213). The initial starting dose of metformin was 500 mg daily and uptitrated
to 2500 mg daily, while glyburide was initiated at 10 mg
daily and uptitrated to 20 mg daily. At 29 weeks, the patients
achieved an HbA 1c
reduction of 1.7% from a baseline of 8.8%
in the combination group, compared with a 0.2% reduction
from a baseline of 8.5% in the glyburide group and 0.4%
reduction from a baseline of 8.9% in the metformin group.
There was a weight reduction of 3.8 kg in the metformin
group, an increase of 0.4 kg in the combination treatment
group, and no signifi cant weight change in the glyburide
group, suggesting that the SU offset the weight loss produced
by metformin.
Similar results were achieved in another clinical trial
comparing metformin monotherapy with metformin in
combination with TZDs. In a multicenter, randomized, double-
blind, parallel-group, dose-escalation study, metformin alone
was compared with metformin plus rosiglitazone.32 Two-
hundred seventy-two patients were randomized to metformin
alone, while 254 patients received metformin plus rosigli-
tazone. At the end of 32 weeks, the metformin group achieved
an HbA 1c
reduction from 7.2% to 6.8%. The combination
treatment group achieved an HbA 1c
reduction from 7.2% to
6.7%. Furthermore, a weight reduction of 1.9 kg was achieved
in the metformin group, whereas the combination group had
no signifi cant weight reduction. Two small studies have
demonstrated that the use of metformin in conjunction with
insulin allowed a reduction in insulin dose and either attenu-
ated insulin-induced weight gain33 or promoted weight loss.34
α-Glucosidase Inhibitors The α-glucosidase inhibitors (including acarbose and miglitol) work by delaying enzymatic breakdown of carbohydrates by
inhibiting pancreatic α -amylase and α -glucoside hydrolase, delaying absorption of and thereby lowering postprandial
blood glucose levels.35 A recent article by Pan et al36 com-
pared vildagliptin 100 mg daily (n = 440) and acarbose 300 mg daily (n = 220) monotherapy in a 24-week, random- ized, double-blind, parallel-group study. At the end of the
24-week treatment, there was an HbA 1c
reduction of 1.3% in
the acarbose group and a 1.4% reduction in the vildagliptin
group from a mean baseline HbA 1c
of 8.6%. Body weight
reductions of 1.7 and 0.4 kg were achieved in the acarbose
group and vildagliptin group, respectively.
Similarly, benefi cial effects on weight were also achieved
with another α-glucosidase inhibitor, miglitol, which was evaluated alone and in combination with metformin in a
randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study for
36 weeks. Patients were randomized to placebo (n = 83), miglitol monotherapy 100 mg 3 times daily (n = 82), metformin monotherapy 500 mg (n = 83), or metformin/ miglitol combination therapy (n = 76). Miglitol was started at 25 mg 3 times daily for 4 weeks, and uptitrated to 50 mg
3 times daily for 8 weeks, and fi nally increased to 100 mg
3 times daily until the end of the study. Metformin was
administered 500 mg 3 times daily throughout the study.
At the end of the study, HbA 1c
increased by 0.38% in the
placebo group, while it remained unchanged in the miglitol
monotherapy group. In contrast, patients in the metfor-
min plus miglitol group achieved an HbA 1c
reduction of
1.39%, signifi cantly greater than in the metformin mono-
therapy group, which achieved an HbA 1c
reduction of 0.85%.
Body weight reductions of 0.42 and 0.69 kg were noted in the
miglitol monotherapy group and placebo group, respectively,
while the metformin monotherapy group and miglitol plus
metformin group had greater weight reductions of 0.79 kg
and 1.87 kg, respectively.37
Incretin Mimetics Incretin mimetics augment the glucoregulatory functions of
GLP-1, a natural hormone secreted by L-cells of the ileum in
response to food intake. Agonists of GLP-1 enhance glucose-
dependent insulin secretion by the pancreatic β-cell, suppress inappropriately elevated glucagon secretion, slow gastric
emptying, and suppress appetite.38,39 Exenatide, the fi rst agent
in this class, is a synthetic form of exendin-4, an incretin-
mimetic peptide originally identifi ed in the saliva of the lizard
Heloderma suspectum. Exenatide was initially approved in
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15
© Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260 113
Balancing Glycemic Control and Body Weight
2005 for use only in combination with metformin, an SU,
a TZD, a combination of metformin and an SU, or a com-
bination of metformin and a TZD. However, exenatide has
recently received a monotherapy indication as well for use in
conjunction with diet and exercise. Exenatide monotherapy
was evaluated in a 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled
study of patients (N = 232) with suboptimal glycemic control using diet and exercise alone.40 Patients were randomized
to receive placebo, exenatide 5 μg twice daily, or exenatide
10 μg twice daily. At 24 weeks, HbA 1c
decreased by 0.7%
and 0.9% in the 5 μg and 10 μg exenatide treatment groups,
respectively, while the placebo group experienced 0.2%
reduction in HbA 1c
. Weight loss from baseline was 2.8 kg
with the 5 μg exenatide treatment and 3.1 kg with the 10 μg
treatment, signifi cantly greater in each case than with placebo
(1.4 kg). It has been reported that exenatide is also associated
with weight loss in patients using insulin;41 however, this
combination is not FDA approved.
A long-acting, extended-release formulation of exena-
tide is approaching a regulatory decision with the FDA.
This formulation consists of the same exenatide molecu-
lar entity embedded in injectable microspheres, which
slowly degrade over time, allowing once-weekly dosing.
A monotherapy trial of exenatide once weekly is in prog-
ress, but a 30-week open-label study has been published
in which 295 patients were randomized to receive either
exenatide 2 mg once weekly or exenatide 10 μg twice daily
in addition to preexisting therapy with metformin, an SU,
a TZD, or a combination of any 2 of these agents.42 At
30 weeks, HbA 1c
had decreased 1.9% with exenatide once
weekly compared with 1.5% with exenatide twice daily.
Similar weight loss over this time was experienced by
both groups, resulting in a 3.7-kg reduction with exenatide
once weekly and a 3.6-kg reduction with exenatide twice
daily. A second stage of this trial examined the durabil-
ity of the improvements with exenatide once weekly and
demonstrated that patients continuing through 52 weeks
(n = 128) experienced a mean HbA 1c
reduction of 2% and
a mean weight reduction of 4.5 kg.43
Liraglutide, an analog of human GLP-1, was recently
approved by the FDA and the European Medicines
Agency (EMEA) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes with
once-daily dosing. Liraglutide can be used as monotherapy,
but is not recommended as a fi rst-line therapy because of
uncertainty over the clinical relevance of thyroid cancer
fi ndings in rodents.39 Monotherapy with liraglutide was
evaluated in comparison with glimepiride in a 52-week,
double-blind study of 746 patients with early type 2 dia-
betes.44 Patients were randomized to once-daily liraglu-
tide 1.2 mg, liraglutide 1.8 mg, or glimepiride 8 mg. At
52 weeks HbA 1c
had decreased 0.84% and 1.14% in the
1.2 mg and 1.8 mg liraglutide treatment groups, respec-
tively, and by 0.51% in the glimepiride group. Weight
loss over 52 weeks was 2.05 kg with liraglutide 1.2 mg
and 2.45 kg with liraglutide 1.8 mg in contrast to a gain
of 1.12 kg with glimepiride. Liraglutide and exenatide
twice daily have been compared in a recently published
26-week, open-label trial of patients (N = 464) on back- ground therapies of metformin, or a SU, or both agents.45
Patients were randomized to receive either liraglutide
1.8 mg once daily or exenatide 10 μg twice daily while
maintaining pre-study doses of oral antidiabetic drugs.
At 26 weeks, the liraglutide group experienced a 1.12%
reduction in HbA 1c
accompanied by a 3.24-kg weight loss
while the exenatide twice daily group experienced a 0.79%
HbA 1c
reduction and a weight loss of 2.87 kg.
Amylin Mimetics Pramlintide is an analog of the naturally occurring pancreatic
hormone amylin that slows gastric emptying rate, suppresses
postprandial glucagon secretion, and increases satiety.46
It is approved for use in conjunction with mealtime insulin by
patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. In a 52-week, double-
blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group multicenter study,
656 patients were randomized to receive placebo, pramlintide
60 μg 3 times daily, 90 μg twice daily, or pramlintide 120 μg
twice daily as an adjunct to insulin therapy in patients with
type 2 diabetes.47 The greatest effi cacy was achieved with
the 120 μg twice-daily treatment, which resulted in a mean
HbA 1c
reduction of 0.68% at 26 weeks, maintained through
52 weeks (0.62% reduction). In addition to the HbA 1c
reduc-
tion, patients in the pramlintide 120 μg group had a mean
weight loss of 1.4 kg compared with a 0.7-kg weight gain
for patients in the placebo group.
Weight reduction was successfully demonstrated in
another study involving patients with type 2 diabetes on
pramlintide. Karl et al48 studied pramlintide as an adjunct
to insulin in 166 overweight or obese patients (mean BMI,
39 kg/m2) with type 2 diabetes in an open-label clinical
practice study. Pramlintide 120 μg was added as an adjunct
to mealtime insulin, and insulin doses were initially reduced
by 30% to 50% and then optimized for glycemic control.
Most of the patients were on multiple daily injections or
on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. In addition,
more than half of the patients were also on oral antidiabetic
agents. At 3 and 6 months, there were HbA 1c
reductions of
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15
114 © Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260
Mavian et al
0.66% and 0.56%, respectively, from a baseline of 8.3%. In
addition, reductions in body weight at 3 and 6 months were
2.3 kg and 2.8 kg, respectively.
DPP-4 Inhibitors This class of drug augments the effect of endogenous GLP-1
by inhibiting dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4), the enzyme that
deactivates GLP-1.49 The 2 FDA-approved members of this
class, sitagliptin and saxagliptin, are approved as adjuncts
to diet and exercise either as monotherapy or in combina-
tion with metformin, SUs, or TZDs. The next 2 studies
consistently demonstrate that sitagliptin was not associated
with signifi cant weight changes. A double-blind, placebo-
controlled 24-week study examined 741 patients with type
2 diabetes randomized to receive either placebo, sitagliptin
100 mg, or sitagliptin 200 mg once daily.50 At 24 weeks,
HbA 1c
was reduced by 0.61% with sitagliptin 100 mg and
by 0.76% with sitagliptin 200 mg. In contrast, there were
no signifi cant body weight changes at 24 weeks with either
sitagliptin dose, whereas the placebo group experienced a
weight loss of 1.1 kg. Goldstein et al51 evaluated sitagliptin
in combination with metformin in a 24-week, double-blind,
placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of 1091 patients
who were randomized to daily sitagliptin/metformin
100/1000 mg, sitagliptin/metformin 100/2000 mg, metfor-
min 1000 mg, metformin 2000 mg, sitagliptin 100 mg, or
placebo. At the end of the 24-week study, the HbA 1c
reduction
was 1.9% for sitagliptin/metformin 100/2000 mg, 1.40% for
sitagliptin/metformin 100/1000 mg, 1.13% for metformin
2000 mg monotherapy, 0.82% with metformin 1000 mg
monotherapy, and 0.66% with sitagliptin 100 mg mono-
therapy. Body weight reductions ranging from 0.6 to 1.3 kg
were observed in all the groups, except in the sitagliptin
monotherapy group, which did not change from baseline.
Saxagliptin is the second medication in the DPP-4 class
to be FDA approved and it is also not associated with weight
gain. Saxagliptin monotherapy was evaluated in a 24-week,
double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 401 treatment-naïve
patients with type 2 diabetes randomized to receive 2.5 mg,
5 mg, 10 mg, or placebo once daily.52 At 24 weeks, HbA 1c
reductions from a mean baseline of 7.9% were 0.43%, 0.46%,
and 0.54% for the saxagliptin 2.5 mg, 5 mg, and 10 mg
treatment groups, respectively. In contrast, there was a small
increase in HbA 1c
(0.19%) in the placebo group over this
period. In addition the placebo group experienced a small
weight reduction (1.4 kg), as did the saxagliptin 2.5 mg
treatment group (1.2 kg). Weight was unchanged with 5 mg
and 10 mg of saxagliptin.
Weight Loss Therapies as Diabetes Treatments Many patients with type 2 diabetes have an existing weight
problem at diagnosis, and a number of antidiabetic agents
commonly used to control glucose concentrations facilitate
weight gain. Given these facts, therapeutic agents that target
weight loss represent another approach to the control of type 2
diabetes, and some medications approved for weight loss
have also been studied for management of type 2 diabetes.
Orlistat Orlistat is a lipase inhibitor that inhibits the absorption of
dietary fats. Orlistat was evaluated in a multicenter, double-
blind, placebo-controlled trial of overweight or obese adults
with type 2 diabetes (mean baseline body weight, 102 kg;
HbA 1c
, 9%) treated with insulin alone or combined with
oral agents.53 Patients were randomized to receive either
orlistat 120 mg 3 times daily (n = 266) or placebo (n = 269) in concert with a reduced-calorie diet for 1 year. Thirty-three
percent of subjects treated with orlistat lost � 5% of their
baseline body weight compared with only 13% of patients
treated with placebo. Absolute weight reductions of 3.9 kg
and 1.3 kg were achieved in the orlistat group and placebo
groups, respectively. At the end of 52 weeks, the weight
loss was accompanied by an HbA 1c
reduction of 0.62% in
the orlistat group, while the placebo group had a reduction
of 0.27%. Gastrointestinal adverse events and hypoglycemia
were reported more frequently with orlistat treatment (80%
and 17%, respectively) than with placebo (62% and 10%,
respectively).
Improvement in HbA 1c
and weight loss was also achieved
in another study by Miles et al54 where orlistat was evaluated
as an add-on for patients failing metformin in a 1-year
multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled
trial comparing 120 mg orlistat 3 times daily (n = 250) with placebo (n = 254) in combination with a reduced-calorie diet. After 1 year of treatment, weight loss from baseline was
4.7 kg in the orlistat group (baseline, 102.1 kg) and 1.8 kg
in the placebo group (baseline, 101.1 kg). The study also
showed improvement in HbA 1c
of 0.75% from a baseline
of 8.87% in the orlistat group compared with 0.41% from a
baseline of 8.79% in the placebo group.
Sibutramine Sibutramine is a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhib-
itor that acts centrally to enhance satiety and is FDA approved
for the treatment of obesity. Of note, sibutramine should not
be used in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15
© Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260 115
Balancing Glycemic Control and Body Weight
because of an increased risk of heart attack and stroke associ-
ated with sibutramine therapy. Several studies have examined
the effects of sibutramine in type 2 diabetes. A 12-month,
randomized, prospective, placebo-controlled, double-blind
study compared once-daily sibutramine at 15 mg (n = 68) and 20 mg (n = 62) with placebo (n = 64) in patients with type 2 diabetes on metformin.55 After 12 months, the patients
treated with sibutramine at 15 mg and 20 mg lost 5.5 kg
and 8 kg, respectively, (mean baseline, 104 kg), whereas no
signifi cant weight loss was observed in the placebo group.
A loss of � 5% of baseline body weight was observed in
46% of patients treated with sibutramine 15 mg and 65% of
patients treated with sibutramine 20 mg. A loss of � 10%
of baseline body weight was observed in 14% and 27% of
the patients in the 15 mg and 20 mg groups, respectively. At
the end of the study, there were small reductions in HbA 1c
in
the overall treatment groups (0.56% with sibutramine 15 mg
and 0.32% with sibutramine 20 mg). In addition, reduction
in HbA 1c
correlated with amount of weight loss with a 0.7%
reduction in HbA 1c
in subjects who had lost 5% to 10% of
their body weight and a 1.2% reduction in those who lost
� 10% of their body weight.
The metabolic effects of orlistat and sibutramine were
compared in obese patients with type 2 diabetes in a mul-
ticenter, double-blind, controlled trial in which subjects
were randomized to orlistat 120 mg 3 times daily (n = 71) or sibutramine 10 mg daily (n = 70).56 At baseline, patients had glycemic control with diet alone or diet plus oral
antidiabetes agents and were asked to follow an American
Diabetes Association-recommended diet with a 600 kcal per
day defi cit. At 12 months, there was a mean BMI reduction
from a baseline of 33.6 kg/m² to 29.7 kg/m² in the orlistat
group (P � 0.01) and from 33.1 kg/m² to 29.5 kg/m² in the
sibutramine group (P � 0.01). In addition, there were signifi -
cant HbA 1c
reductions in both the orlistat group (7.1%– 6.3%)
and the sibutramine group (7%–6.1%).
Summary The management of type 2 diabetes should not only facilitate
glycemic control resulting in improved HbA 1c
, but should
also take into consideration the effects of medication on
weight. The classes of diabetes drugs discussed previously
achieve HbA 1c
reduction by different mechanisms of action
and have a variety of effects on body weight. The SUs, TZDs,
D-phenylalanines, and meglitinides have variable effects
on weight gain, while biguanides, �-glucosidase inhibitors,
incretin mimetics, DPP-4 inhibitors, and amylin mimetics
tend to be weight neutral or induce weight loss (Table 2).
The weight loss medications orlistat and sibutramine are also
associated with reduction of HbA 1c
.
The management of type 2 diabetes requires a multidisci-
plinary approach that targets the treatment of not only blood
glucose levels, but also associated cardiovascular risk factors,
including dyslipidemia, blood pressure, infl ammation, and
hypercoagulability.57 Weight reduction has been shown to
improve glycemic control and reduce cardiovascular risk
factors independent of drug effect, whereas weight gain can
exacerbate insulin resistance and worsen glycemic control.
Weight gain can also worsen hypertension and increase
cardiovascular risk factors. Unfortunately, many antihyper-
glycemic agents and insulin promote weight gain, and this
information should be factored into the risk/benefi t analysis
in selecting medications. Before 1995, the only available
drugs for diabetes management in the United States were
insulin and SUs. However, over the past decade we have seen
an increased selection of available antidiabetic agents that
improve glycemic control and are also weight neutral or even
promote weight loss.58 Future studies are needed to defi ne
whether additional metabolic and cardiovascular benefi ts are
derived from agents with these properties.
Table 2. Summary of the Effect on Body Weight of Antidiabetic Medications
Effect on Weight Medication Class Medication Example
Weight gain Sulfonylureas Tolbutamide
Chloropropamide
Glyburide
Glimepiride
Glipizide
Thiazolidinediones Rosiglitazone
Pioglitazone
D-phenylalanine derivatives
Nateglinide
Meglitinides Repaglinide
Weight neutral DPP-4 inhibitors Sitagliptin
Saxagliptin
Vildagliptina
Weight loss Biguinides Metformin
Alpha-glucosidase inhibitors
Acarbose
Miglitol
Incretin mimetics Exenatide
Liraglutide
Amylin mimetics Pramlintide
aVildagliptin is EMEA-approved Abbreviations: DPP-4, dipeptidyl peptidase-4; EMEA, European Medicines Agency.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15
116 © Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260
Mavian et al
Acknowledgments Publication expenses for this article were defrayed by Amylin
Pharmaceuticals.
Confl ict of Interest Statement Annie A. Mavian, DO discloses no confl icts of interest.
Stephan Miller, PhD discloses a confl icct of interest with
Amylin Pharmaceuticals. Robert R. Henry, MD discloses
confl icts of interest with Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Astra-
Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Dainippon
Sumitomo, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Isis,
Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Roche, sanofi -aventis, and
Takeda.
References 1. Cowie CC, Rust KF, Ford ES, et al. Full accounting of diabetes and
pre-diabetes in the U.S. population in 1988–1994 and 2005–2006. Diabetes Care. 2009;32(2):287–294.
2. Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Ogden CL, Curtin LR. Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999–2008. JAMA. 2010;303(3): 235–241.
3. Mokdad AH, Ford ES, Bowman BA, et al. Prevalence of obesity, dia- betes, and obesity-related health risk factors, 2001. JAMA. 2003;289(1): 76–79.
4. Eeg-Olofsson K, Cederholm J, Nilsson PM, et al. Risk of cardiovas- cular disease and mortality in overweight and obese patients with type 2 diabetes: an observational study in 13,087 patients. Diabetologia. 2009;52(1):65–73.
5. Yki-Jarvinen H, Ryysy L, Kauppila M, et al. Effect of obesity on the response to insulin therapy in noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Clin Endocrinol Metabolism. 1997;82(12):4037–4043.
6. Tankova T, Dakovska G, Lazarova M, Dakovska L, Kirilov G, Koev D. Sibutramine in the treatment of obesity in type 2 diabetic patients and in nondiabetic subjects. Acta Diabetol. 2004;41(4):146–153.
7. Smith BR, Hinojosa MW, Reavis KM, Nguyen NT. Remission of diabetes after laparoscopic gastric bypass. Am Surg. 2008;74(10):948–952.
8. Amaryl [package insert]. Bridgewater, NJ: sanofi -aventis; 2009. 9. Glucotrol [package insert]. New York, NY: Pfi zer Inc; 2006. 10. Glynase [package insert]. New York, NY: Pfi zer Inc; 2006. 11. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin com-
pared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS). Lancet. 1998;352(9131):837–853.
12. Coniff RF, Shapiro JA, Seaton TB, Bray GA. Multicenter, placebo- controlled trial comparing acarbose (BAY g 5421) with placebo, tolbutamide, and tolbutamide-plus-acarbose in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Am J Med. 1995;98(5):443–451.
13. Garber AJ, Larsen J, Schneider SH, Piper BA, Henry D. Simultaneous glyburide/metformin therapy is superior to component monotherapy as an initial pharmacological treatment for type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2002;4(3):201–208.
14. Scott R, Wu M, Sanchez M, Stein P. Effi cacy and tolerability of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin as monotherapy over 12 weeks in patients with type 2 diabetes. Int J Clin Pract. 2007;61(1): 171–180.
15. Goldstein BJ, Pans M, Rubin CJ. Multicenter, randomized, double- masked, parallel-group assessment of simultaneous glipizide/metformin as second-line pharmacologic treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus that is inadequately controlled by a sulfonylurea. Clin Ther. 2003;25(3):890–903.
16. Tan M, Johns D, Gonzalez Galvez G, et al. Effects of pioglitazone and glimepiride on glycemic control and insulin sensitivity in Mexican patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial. Clin Ther. 2004;26(5):680–693.
17. Olefsky JM. Treatment of insulin resistance with peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists. J Clin Invest. 2000;106(4): 467–472.
18. Rosenstock J, Baron MA, Dejager S, Mills D, Schweizer A. Comparison of vildagliptin and rosiglitazone monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes: a 24-week, double-blind, randomized trial. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(2):217–223.
19. Kahn SE, Haffner SM, Heise MA, et al. Glycemic durability of rosiglitazone, metformin, or glyburide monotherapy. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(23):2427–2443.
20. Dormandy JA, Charbonnel B, Eckland DJ, et al; PROactive Investiga- tors. Secondary prevention of macrovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes in the PROactive Study (PROspective pioglitAzone Clinical Trial In macroVascular Events): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;366(9493):1279–1289.
21. Rosenstock J, Kim SW, Baron MA, et al. Effi cacy and tolerability of initial combination therapy with vildagliptin and pioglitazone compared with component monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2007;9(2):175–185.
22. Miyazaki Y, Mahankali A, Matsuda M, et al. Effect of pioglitazone on abdominal fat distribution and insulin sensitivity in type 2 diabetic patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002;87(6):2784–2791.
23. Mori Y, Murakawa Y, Okada K, et al. Effect of troglitazone on body fat distribution in type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes Care. 1999;22(6): 908–912.
24. Rizos CV, Liberopoulos EN, Mikhailidis DP, Elisaf MS. Pleio- tropic effects of thiazolidinediones. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2008;9(7):1087–1108.
25. Starlix [package insert]. East Hanover, NJ: Novartis; 2008. 26. Horton ES, Clinkingbeard C, Gatlin M, Foley J, Mallows S, Shen
S. Nateglinide alone and in combination with metformin improves glycemic control by reducing mealtime glucose levels in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2000;23(11):1660–1665.
27. Rosenstock J, Shen SG, Gatlin MR, Foley JE. Combination therapy with nateglinide and a thiazolidinedione improves glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2002;25(9):1529–1533.
28. Prandin [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Novo Nordisk; 2006. 29. Raskin P, McGill J, Saad MF, et al; Repaglinide/Rosiglitazone Study
Group. Combination therapy for type 2 diabetes: repaglinide plus rosiglitazone. Diabet Med. 2004;21(4):329–335.
30. Glucophage [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb; 2009.
31. DeFronzo RA, Goodman AM. Effi cacy of metformin in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. The Multicenter Metformin Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1995;333(9):541–549.
32. Stewart MW, Cirkel DT, Furuseth K, et al. Effect of metformin plus roziglitazone compared with metformin alone on glycaemic control in well-controlled Type 2 diabetes. Diabet Med. 2006;23(10): 1069–1078.
33. Aviles-Santa L, Sinding J, Raskin P. Effects of metformin in patients with poorly controlled, insulin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1999;131(3):182–188.
34. Chaudhuri A, Tomar R, Mohanty P, et al. The combination of insulin and metformin in treatment of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Endocr Pract. 1998;4(5):259–267.
35. Precose [package insert]. Wayne, NJ: Bayer Pharmaceuticals; 2008. 36. Pan C, Yang W, Barona JP, et al. Comparison of vildagliptin and
acarbose monotherapy in patients with Type 2 diabetes: a 24-week, double-blind, randomized trial. Diabet Med. 2008;25:435–441.
37. Chiasson JL, Naditch L; Miglitol Canadian University Investigator Group. The synergistic effect of miglitol plus metformin combination therapy in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2001;24(6):989–994.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15
© Postgraduate Medicine, Volume 122, Issue 3, May 2010, ISSN – 0032-5481, e-ISSN – 1941-9260 117
Balancing Glycemic Control and Body Weight
38. Byetta [package insert]. San Diego, CA: Amylin Pharmaceuticals; 2008.
39. Victoza [package insert]. Princeton, NJ: Novo Nordisk; 2010. 40. Moretto TJ, Milton DR, Ridge TD, et al. Effi cacy and tolerability
of exenatide monotherapy over 24 weeks in antidiabetic drug-naive patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- controlled, parallel-group study. Clin Ther. 2008;30(8):1448–1460.
41. Viswanathan P, Chaudhuri A, Bhatia R, Al-Atrash F, Mohanty P, Dandona P. Exenatide therapy in obese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with insulin. Endocr Pract. 2007;13(5):444–450.
42. Drucker DJ, Buse JB, Taylor K, et al. Exenatide once weekly versus twice daily for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a randomised, open- label, non-inferiority study. Lancet. 2008;372(9645):1240–1250.
43. Buse JB, Drucker DJ, Taylor KL, et al; DURATION-1 Study Group. DURATION-1: Exenatide once weekly produces sustained glycemic control and weight loss over 52 weeks [published online ahead of print March 9, 2010]. Diabetes Care. DOI: 10.2337/dc09-1914.
44. Garber A, Henry R, Ratner R, et al. Liraglutide versus glimepiride monotherapy for type 2 diabetes (LEAD-3 Mono): a randomised, 52-week, phase III, double-blind, parallel-treatment trial. Lancet. 2009;373(9662):473–481.
45. Buse JB, Rosenstock J, Sesti G, et al. Liraglutide once a day versus exenatide twice a day for type 2 diabetes: a 26-week randomised, parallel-group, multinational, open-label trial (LEAD-6). Lancet. 2009;374(9683):39–47.
46. Symlin [package insert]. San Diego, CA: Amylin Pharmaceuticals; 2008.
47. Hollander PA, Levy P, Fineman MS, et al. Pramlintide as an adjunct to insulin therapy improves long-term glycemic and weight control in patients with type 2 diabetes: a 1-year randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2003;26(3):784–790.
48. Karl D, Philis-Tsimikas A, Darsow T, et al. Pramlintide as an adjunct to insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes in a clinical practice setting reduced A1C, postprandial glucose excursions, and weight. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2007;9(2):191–199.
49. Januvia [package insert]. Whitehouse Station, NJ: Merck and Co; 2007.
50. Aschner P, Kipnes MS, Lunceford JK, Sanchez M, Mickel C, Williams- Herman DE. Effect of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin as monotherapy on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2006;29(12):2632–2637.
51. Goldstein BJ, Feinglos MN, Lunceford JK, Johnson J, Williams- Herman DE; Sitagliptin 03 Study Group. Effect of initial combination therapy with sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, and met- formin on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(8):1979–1987.
52. Rosenstock J, Aguilar-Salinas C, Klein E, Nepal S, List J, Chen R. Effect of saxagliptin monotherapy in treatment-naive patients with type 2 diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin. 2009;25(10):2401–2411.
53. Kelley DE, Bray GA, Pi-Sunyer FX, et al. Clinical effi cacy of orlistat therapy in overweight and obese patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: A 1-year randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2002;25(6):1033–1041.
54. Miles JM, Leiter L, Hollander P, et al. Effect of orlistat in overweight and obese patients with type 2 diabetes treated with metformin. Diabetes Care. 2002;25(7):1123–1128.
55. McNulty SJ, Ur E, Williams G; Multicenter Sibutramine Study Group. A randomized trial of sibutramine in the management of obese type 2 diabetic patients treated with metformin. Diabetes Care. 2003;26(1):125–131.
56. Derosa G, Cicero AF, Murdolo G, Ciccarelli L, Fogari R. Comparison of metabolic effects of orlistat and sibutramine treatment in Type 2 diabetic obese patients. Diabetes Nutr Metab. 2004;17(4):222–229.
57. Brunton S. Beyond glycemic control: treating the entire type 2 diabetes disorder. Postgrad Med. 2009;121(5):68–81.
58. Blevins T. Therapeutic options that provide glycemic control and weight loss for patients with type 2 diabetes. Postgrad Med. 2010;122(1): 172–183.
D ow
nl oa
de d
by [
Y or
k U
ni ve
rs it
y L
ib ra
ri es
] at
0 0:
46 0
7 N
ov em
be r
20 15