An open, randomized, parallel-group study to compare the efficacy and safety profile of inhaled human insulin (Exubera) with glibenclamide as adjunctive therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin

AH Barnett; M Dreyer; Peter Lange; M Serdarevic-Pehar

An open, randomized, parallel-group study to compare the efficacy and safety profile of inhaled human insulin (Exubera) with glibenclamide as adjunctive therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin

AH Barnett, M Dreyer, Peter Lange, M Serdarevic-Pehar

56 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety profile of adding inhaled human insulin (INH) (Exubera) or glibenclamide to metformin monotherapy in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted an open-label, parallel, 24-week multicenter trial. Patients uncontrolled on metformin were randomized to adjunctive INH (n = 243) or glibenclamide (n = 233). Before randomization, patients were divided into two HbA(1c) (A1C) arms: > or =8 to < or =9.5% (moderately high) and >9.5 to < or =12% (very high). The primary efficacy end point was A1C change from baseline. RESULTS: Mean adjusted A1C changes from baseline were -2.03 and -1.88% in the INH and glibenclamide groups, respectively; between-treatment difference -0.17% (95% CI -0.34 to 0.01; P = 0.058), consistent with the noninferiority criterion. In the A1C >9.5% arm, inhaled insulin demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in A1C than glibenclamide, between-treatment difference -0.37% (-0.62 to -0.12; P = 0.004). In the A1C < or =9.5% arm, between-treatment difference was 0.04% (-0.19 to 0.27; P = 0.733). Hypoglycemia (events per subject-month) was greater with INH (0.18) than glibenclamide (0.08), risk ratio 2.24 (1.58-3.16), but there were no associated discontinuations. Other adverse events, except increased cough in the INH group, were similar. At week 24, changes from baseline in pulmonary function parameters were small. Insulin antibody binding increased more with INH but did not have any associated clinical manifestations. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin, adding INH or glibenclamide was similarly effective in improving glycemic control, and both were well tolerated. A predefined subgroup with very high A1C (>9.5%) was more effectively treated with the addition of INH.

Original language	English
Journal	Diabetes Care
Volume	29
Issue number	8
Pages (from-to)	1818-25
ISSN	0149-5992
Publication status	Published - 2006

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/29/8/1818

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'An open, randomized, parallel-group study to compare the efficacy and safety profile of inhaled human insulin (Exubera) with glibenclamide as adjunctive therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

Barnett, AH., Dreyer, M., Lange, P., & Serdarevic-Pehar, M. (2006). An open, randomized, parallel-group study to compare the efficacy and safety profile of inhaled human insulin (Exubera) with glibenclamide as adjunctive therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin. Diabetes Care, 29(8), 1818-25. http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/29/8/1818

An open, randomized, parallel-group study to compare the efficacy and safety profile of inhaled human insulin (Exubera) with glibenclamide as adjunctive therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin. / Barnett, AH; Dreyer, M; Lange, Peter et al.

In: Diabetes Care, Vol. 29, No. 8, 2006, p. 1818-25.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Barnett, AH, Dreyer, M, Lange, P & Serdarevic-Pehar, M 2006, 'An open, randomized, parallel-group study to compare the efficacy and safety profile of inhaled human insulin (Exubera) with glibenclamide as adjunctive therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin', Diabetes Care, vol. 29, no. 8, pp. 1818-25. <http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/content/full/29/8/1818>

@article{7ab555c1c01a4230870732c2e85702c8,

title = "An open, randomized, parallel-group study to compare the efficacy and safety profile of inhaled human insulin (Exubera) with glibenclamide as adjunctive therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin",

abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety profile of adding inhaled human insulin (INH) (Exubera) or glibenclamide to metformin monotherapy in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted an open-label, parallel, 24-week multicenter trial. Patients uncontrolled on metformin were randomized to adjunctive INH (n = 243) or glibenclamide (n = 233). Before randomization, patients were divided into two HbA(1c) (A1C) arms: > or =8 to < or =9.5% (moderately high) and >9.5 to < or =12% (very high). The primary efficacy end point was A1C change from baseline. RESULTS: Mean adjusted A1C changes from baseline were -2.03 and -1.88% in the INH and glibenclamide groups, respectively; between-treatment difference -0.17% (95% CI -0.34 to 0.01; P = 0.058), consistent with the noninferiority criterion. In the A1C >9.5% arm, inhaled insulin demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in A1C than glibenclamide, between-treatment difference -0.37% (-0.62 to -0.12; P = 0.004). In the A1C < or =9.5% arm, between-treatment difference was 0.04% (-0.19 to 0.27; P = 0.733). Hypoglycemia (events per subject-month) was greater with INH (0.18) than glibenclamide (0.08), risk ratio 2.24 (1.58-3.16), but there were no associated discontinuations. Other adverse events, except increased cough in the INH group, were similar. At week 24, changes from baseline in pulmonary function parameters were small. Insulin antibody binding increased more with INH but did not have any associated clinical manifestations. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin, adding INH or glibenclamide was similarly effective in improving glycemic control, and both were well tolerated. A predefined subgroup with very high A1C (>9.5%) was more effectively treated with the addition of INH.",

author = "AH Barnett and M Dreyer and Peter Lange and M Serdarevic-Pehar",

year = "2006",

language = "English",

volume = "29",

pages = "1818--25",

journal = "Diabetes Care",

issn = "0149-5992",

publisher = "American Diabetes Association",

number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An open, randomized, parallel-group study to compare the efficacy and safety profile of inhaled human insulin (Exubera) with glibenclamide as adjunctive therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin

AU - Barnett, AH

AU - Dreyer, M

AU - Lange, Peter

AU - Serdarevic-Pehar, M

PY - 2006

Y1 - 2006

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety profile of adding inhaled human insulin (INH) (Exubera) or glibenclamide to metformin monotherapy in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted an open-label, parallel, 24-week multicenter trial. Patients uncontrolled on metformin were randomized to adjunctive INH (n = 243) or glibenclamide (n = 233). Before randomization, patients were divided into two HbA(1c) (A1C) arms: > or =8 to < or =9.5% (moderately high) and >9.5 to < or =12% (very high). The primary efficacy end point was A1C change from baseline. RESULTS: Mean adjusted A1C changes from baseline were -2.03 and -1.88% in the INH and glibenclamide groups, respectively; between-treatment difference -0.17% (95% CI -0.34 to 0.01; P = 0.058), consistent with the noninferiority criterion. In the A1C >9.5% arm, inhaled insulin demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in A1C than glibenclamide, between-treatment difference -0.37% (-0.62 to -0.12; P = 0.004). In the A1C < or =9.5% arm, between-treatment difference was 0.04% (-0.19 to 0.27; P = 0.733). Hypoglycemia (events per subject-month) was greater with INH (0.18) than glibenclamide (0.08), risk ratio 2.24 (1.58-3.16), but there were no associated discontinuations. Other adverse events, except increased cough in the INH group, were similar. At week 24, changes from baseline in pulmonary function parameters were small. Insulin antibody binding increased more with INH but did not have any associated clinical manifestations. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin, adding INH or glibenclamide was similarly effective in improving glycemic control, and both were well tolerated. A predefined subgroup with very high A1C (>9.5%) was more effectively treated with the addition of INH.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety profile of adding inhaled human insulin (INH) (Exubera) or glibenclamide to metformin monotherapy in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted an open-label, parallel, 24-week multicenter trial. Patients uncontrolled on metformin were randomized to adjunctive INH (n = 243) or glibenclamide (n = 233). Before randomization, patients were divided into two HbA(1c) (A1C) arms: > or =8 to < or =9.5% (moderately high) and >9.5 to < or =12% (very high). The primary efficacy end point was A1C change from baseline. RESULTS: Mean adjusted A1C changes from baseline were -2.03 and -1.88% in the INH and glibenclamide groups, respectively; between-treatment difference -0.17% (95% CI -0.34 to 0.01; P = 0.058), consistent with the noninferiority criterion. In the A1C >9.5% arm, inhaled insulin demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in A1C than glibenclamide, between-treatment difference -0.37% (-0.62 to -0.12; P = 0.004). In the A1C < or =9.5% arm, between-treatment difference was 0.04% (-0.19 to 0.27; P = 0.733). Hypoglycemia (events per subject-month) was greater with INH (0.18) than glibenclamide (0.08), risk ratio 2.24 (1.58-3.16), but there were no associated discontinuations. Other adverse events, except increased cough in the INH group, were similar. At week 24, changes from baseline in pulmonary function parameters were small. Insulin antibody binding increased more with INH but did not have any associated clinical manifestations. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled on metformin, adding INH or glibenclamide was similarly effective in improving glycemic control, and both were well tolerated. A predefined subgroup with very high A1C (>9.5%) was more effectively treated with the addition of INH.

M3 - Journal article

SN - 0149-5992

VL - 29

SP - 1818

EP - 1825

JO - Diabetes Care

JF - Diabetes Care

IS - 8

ER -