Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Improved Glycemic Control and Lipid Profile in a Randomized Study of Pioglitazone Compared with Acarbose in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Treatments in Endocrinology

Abstract

Objective: To assess the efficacy of pioglitazone treatment in comparison with that of acarbose treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Participants and methods: In this randomized, parallel-group, open-label study patients were assigned to treatment with either pioglitazone (n = 129) or acarbose (n = 136). During a 1-week run-in patients commenced an individualized dietary regimen which was maintained throughout the study. Patients received the assigned study medication for 26 weeks. Serum glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, insulin resistance and lipid profiles were determined at baseline and at endpoint.

Results: Mean HbA1c was reduced from 8.98 ± 1.20% to 7.82 ± 1.95% with pioglitazone treatment and from 9.03 ± 1.32% to 8.55 ± 1.96% with acarbose treatment during the 26-week study. The change from baseline to endpoint was significantly greater for pioglitazone compared with acarbose when analyzed for all patients (p < 0.001) and for those who had (p = 0.009) or had not (p < 0.001) received previous medication for diabetes mellitus. Compared with acarbose, pioglitazone produced a significantly greater decrease in fasting glucose, insulin and insulin resistance (p < 0.001 for each). Triglycerides were decreased by 71.1 ± 184.1 mg/dl with pioglitazone compared with 38.1 ± 171.3 mg/dl with acarbose (p = 0.001 for difference between groups). High density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol level was increased by 7.8 ± 10.2 mg/dl with pioglitazone compared with a decrease of 0.8 ± 24.1 mg/dl with acarbose (p < 0.001). While serum low density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol levels remained unchanged with both treatment regimens, the decrease from baseline in very low density lipoprotein (VLDL)-cholesterol was significantly greater with pioglitazone than with acarbose (p < 0.04). Pioglitazone decreased systolic blood pressure by 5.6 ± 17.7mm Hg compared with a 0.4 ± 18.4mm Hg increase during acarbose treatment (p < 0.001). Pioglitazone caused a significantly greater decrease compared with acarbose in serum levels of γ-glutamyl aminotransferase (p < 0.001) and alanine aminotransferase (p = 0.004).

Conclusions: Six months of pioglitazone treatment decreased insulin resistance and improved glycemic control to a significantly greater extent than acarbose treatment. Pioglitazone was also associated with a significantly improved lipid profile, suggesting a reduction in risk of coronary heart disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Table I
Table II
Fig. 2
Table III
Table IV
Table V

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The use of tradenames is for product identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement.

References

  1. DECODE Study Group on behalf of the European Diabetes Epidemiology Group. Glucose tolerance and cardiovascular mortality: comparison of fasting and 2-hour diagnostic criteria. Arch Intern Med 2001; 161: 617–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gu K, Cowie CC, Harris MI. Diabetes and the decline in heart disease mortality in US adults. JAMA 1999; 281: 1291–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Haffner SM, Lehto S, Ronnemaa T, et al. Mortality from coronary heart disease in subjects with type 2 diabetes and in nondiabetic subjects with and without prior myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1998; 339: 229–34

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Stamler J, Vaccaro O, Neaton JD, et al. Diabetes, other risk factors, and 12-yr cardiovascular mortality for men screened in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. Diabetes Care 1993; 16: 434–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Intensive blood glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet 1998; 352: 837–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Stratton IM, Adler AI, Neil HAW, et al. Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35). BMJ 2000; 321: 405–12

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. American Diabetes Association. Consensus development conference on insulin resistance. Diabetes 1998; 21: 310–4

    Google Scholar 

  8. DeFronzo RA. The triumverate: beta-cell, muscle and liver: a collusion responsible for NIDDM. Diabetes 1988; 37: 667–87

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Haffner SM, Mykkanen L, Festa A, et al. Insulin-resistant prediabetic subjects have more atherogenic risk factors than insulin-sensitive prediabetic subjects: implications for preventing coronary heart disease during the prediabetic state. Circulation 2000; 101: 975–80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Weyer C, Bogardus C, Mott DM, et al. The natural history of insulin secretory dysfunction and insulin resistance in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Clin Invest 1999; 104: 787–94

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Groop LC. Insulin resistance: the fundamental trigger of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab 1999; 1 Suppl. 1: S1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. DeFronzo RA, Ferrannini E. Insulin resistance: a multifaceted syndrome responsible for NIDDM, obesity, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Diabetes Care 1991; 14: 173–94

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kuller LH, Velentgas P, Barzillay J, et al. Diabetes mellitus: subclinical cardiovascular disease and risk of incident cardiovascular disease and all cause mortality. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2000; 29: 823–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cullen P, von Eckardstein A, Souris S, et al. Dyslipidaemia and cardiovascular risk in diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab 1999; 1: 189–98

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Laakso M, Sarlund H, Mykkanen L. Insulin resistance is associated with lipid and lipoprotein abnormalities in subjects with varying degrees of glucose intolerance. Atherosclerosis 1990; 10: 223–31

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Holman RR, Cull CA, Turner RC. A randomised double-blind trial of acarbose in type 2 diabetes shows improved glycaemic control over 3 years (UKPDS 44). Diabetes Care 1999; 22: 960–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Scorpiglione N, Belfiglio M, Carinci F, et al. The effectiveness, safety and epidemiology of the use of acarbose in the treatment of patients with type II diabetes mellitus: a model of medicine-based evidence. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1999; 55: 239–49

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Otto C, Lehrke M, Göke B. Novel insulin sensitizers: pharmacogenomic aspects. Pharmacogenomics 2002; 3: 1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Desvergne B, Wahli W. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors: nuclear control of metabolism. Endocr Rev 1999; 20: 649–88

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Matthews DR, Hosker JP, Rudenski AS, et al. Homeostasis model assessment: insulin resistance and β-cell function from fasting plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in man. Diabetologia 1985; 28: 412–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Salman S, Salman F, Satman I, et al. Comparison of acarbose and gliclazide as first-line agents in patients with type 2 diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin 2001; 16: 296–306

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Shaw JT, Purdie DM, Neil HA, et al. The relative risks of hyperglycaemia, obesity and dyslipidaemia in the relatives of patients with type II diabetes. Diabetologia 1999; 42: 24–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Chitturi S, Abeygunasekera S, Farrell GC, et al. NASH and insulin resistance: insulin hypersecretion and specific association with the insulin resistance syndrome. Hepatology 2002; 35: 373–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Reddy JK. Nonalcoholic steatosis and steatohepatitis: III. peroxisomal beta-oxidation, PPAR alpha, and steatohepatitis. Am J Physiol 2001; 281: G1333–9

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Baumgartner-Parzer SM, Waldhäusl WK. The endothelium as a metabolic and endocrine organ: its relation with insulin resistance. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes 2001; 109 Suppl. 2: S166–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by Takeda Pharma, Germany. As a member of the advisory board of Takeda Pharma, Professor Goke participated in this study as principal investigator.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Internal Medicine II, Grosshadern Hospital, University of Munich, Munich, Germany

    Burkhard Göke

Authors
  1. Burkhard Göke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Consortia

German Pioglitazone Study Group

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Göke, B., German Pioglitazone Study Group. Improved Glycemic Control and Lipid Profile in a Randomized Study of Pioglitazone Compared with Acarbose in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Mol Diag Ther 1, 329–336 (2002). https://doi.org/10.2165/00024677-200201050-00005

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00024677-200201050-00005

Keywords

Search

Navigation