Glycemic Durability of Rosiglitazone, Metformin, or Glyburide Monotherapy
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 7 December 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 355 (23) , 2427-2443
- https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa066224
Abstract
The efficacy of thiazolidinediones, as compared with other oral glucose-lowering medications, in maintaining long-term glycemic control in type 2 diabetes is not known. We evaluated rosiglitazone, metformin, and glyburide as initial treatment for recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes in a double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial involving 4360 patients. The patients were treated for a median of 4.0 years. The primary outcome was the time to monotherapy failure, which was defined as a confirmed level of fasting plasma glucose of more than 180 mg per deciliter (10.0 mmol per liter), for rosiglitazone, as compared with metformin or glyburide. Prespecified secondary outcomes were levels of fasting plasma glucose and glycated hemoglobin, insulin sensitivity, and β-cell function. Kaplan–Meier analysis showed a cumulative incidence of monotherapy failure at 5 years of 15% with rosiglitazone, 21% with metformin, and 34% with glyburide. This represents a risk reduction of 32% for rosiglitazone, as compared with metformin, and 63%, as compared with glyburide (P<0.001 for both comparisons). The difference in the durability of the treatment effect was greater between rosiglitazone and glyburide than between rosiglitazone and metformin. Glyburide was associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events (including congestive heart failure) than was rosiglitazone (P<0.05), and the risk associated with metformin was similar to that with rosiglitazone. Rosiglitazone was associated with more weight gain and edema than either metformin or glyburide but with fewer gastrointestinal events than metformin and with less hypoglycemia than glyburide (P<0.001 for all comparisons). The potential risks and benefits, the profile of adverse events, and the costs of these three drugs should all be considered to help inform the choice of pharmacotherapy for patients with type 2 diabetes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00279045.)This publication has 34 references indexed in Scilit:
- Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes With Troglitazone in the Diabetes Prevention ProgramDiabetes, 2005
- ThiazolidinedionesNew England Journal of Medicine, 2004
- Glycemic Control From 1988 to 2000 Among U.S. Adults Diagnosed With Type 2 DiabetesDiabetes Care, 2004
- Preservation of Pancreatic β-Cell Function and Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes by Pharmacological Treatment of Insulin Resistance in High-Risk Hispanic WomenDiabetes, 2002
- Sulfonylurea InadequacyDiabetes Care, 2002
- Glycemic Control With Diet, Sulfonylurea, Metformin, or Insulin in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes MellitusProgressive Requirement for Multiple Therapies (UKPDS 49)JAMA, 1999
- Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33)The Lancet, 1998
- U.K. prospective diabetes study 16. Overview of 6 years' therapy of type II diabetes: a progressive disease. U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study GroupDiabetes, 1995
- Intensive insulin therapy prevents the progression of diabetic microvascular complications in Japanese patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: a randomized prospective 6-year studyDiabetes Research and Clinical Practice, 1995
- The Effect of Intensive Treatment of Diabetes on the Development and Progression of Long-Term Complications in Insulin-Dependent Diabetes MellitusNew England Journal of Medicine, 1993