Roberto Mereu

Effects of one year treatment of vildagliptin added to pioglitazone or glimepiride in poorly controlled type 2 diabetic patients.

The aim of the study was to compare the effects of vildagliptin added to pioglitazone or glimepiride on metabolic and insulin resistance related-indices in poorly controlled type 2 diabetic patients (T2DM). 168 patients with T2DM were randomized to take either pioglitazone 30 mg once a day plus vildagliptin 50 mg twice a day or glimepiride 2 mg 3 times a day plus vildagliptin 50 mg twice a day. We evaluated body weight, body mass index (BMI), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), fasting plasma insulin (FPI), homeostasis model assessment insulin resistance index (HOMA-IR), homeostasis model assessment beta-cell function index (HOMA-beta), fasting plasma proinsulin (FPPr), proinsulin/fasting plasma insulin ratio (Pr/FPI ratio), adiponectin (ADN), resistin (R), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (Hs-CRP) at their baseline values, and after 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment. We observed a similar improvement of HbA1c, FPG, PPG, and Hs-CRP compared to baseline in the 2 groups. Fasting plasma insulin, FPPr, Pr/FPI ratio, R, and TNF-alpha were significantly decreased and ADN was significantly increased with pioglitazone plus vildagliptin, but not with glimepiride plus vildagliptin. HOMA-IR, and HOMA-beta values obtained with pioglitazone plus vildagliptin were significantly better than the values obtained with glimepiride plus vildagliptin. Pioglitazone plus vildagliptin were found to be more effective in preserving beta-cell function, and in reducing insulin resistance, and inflammatory state parameters.

Oral fat load effects on inflammation and endothelial stress markers in healthy subjects

The aim was to study the effect of a standardized oral fat load (OFL) on different inflammatory parameters in a large sample of adult healthy subjects (n = 286) of both sexes. The fat load was given between 08:00 and 09:00 h after a 12-h fast. Blood samples were drawn before and 3, 6, 9, and 12 h after the OFL. All patients underwent a measurement of body mass index (BMI), blood glucose (BG), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (Tg), soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM-1), interleukin-6 (IL-6), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (sVCAM-1), soluble E-selectin (sE-selectin), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α). Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) increase was +3.26% at 3 h, +4.35% at 6 h, +1.09% at 9 h while FPG decrease was −1.09% at 12 h. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol increase was +2.08% at 3 h, and at 12 h during OFL study; a significant HDL-C decrease was present in subjects after 6 h (−4.17%; P < 0.05 vs 0). A significant Tg change was observed after 6 h (+70.37%; P < 0.01 vs 0) and 9 h (+58.33%; P < 0.05 vs 0) respectively, and the increase was +22.22% at 3 h and +18.52% at 12 h. Total cholesterol increase was +0.52% after 3 h, +1.04% after 6 h, while after 12 h the decrease was −0.52%. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol increase was +1.64% after 6 h with a decrease of −0.82% at 9 and 12 h. A significant sICAM-1, hsCRP, and sE-selectin variation was observed after 6 and 9 h, while a significant sVCAM-1 change occurred after 3, 6, and 9 h. Soluble ICAM-1 increase was +20.58% at 3 h, +34.10% at 6 h (P < 0.05 vs 0) +25.94% at 9 h (P < 0.01 vs 0), and +19.14% at 12 h; sVCAM-1 increase was +13.97% (P < 0.05 vs 0) at 3 h, +18.55% at 6 h (P < 0.01 vs 0), +12.02% at 9 h (P < 0.05 vs 0), and +8.70% at 12 h. High-sensitivity CRP increase was +36.36% at 3 h, +90.91% at 6 h (P < 0.01 vs 0), +63.64% at 9 h (P < 0.05 vs 0), and +36.36% at 12 h. Soluble E-selectin increase was +27.11% at 3 h, +51.90% at 6 h (P < 0.05 vs 0), +45.19% at 9 h (P < 0.01 vs 0), and +20.12% at 12 h. Interleukin-6 increase was +61.11% at 3 h (P < 0.05 vs 0), +83.33% at 6 h (P < 0.001 vs 0), +55.56% at 9 h (P < 0.01 vs 0), and +22.22% at 12 h. Tumor necrosis factor-α increase was +42.86% at 3 h (P < 0.05 vs 0), +71.43% at 6 h (P < 0.01 vs 0), (+50.00% at 9 h (P < 0.05 vs 0), and +28.57% at 12 h. We observed that the OFL induces a complex and massive systemic inflammatory response that includes IL-6, TNF-α, hsCRP, and cell adhesion molecules, even before Tg significantly rises.

Fenofibrate, simvastatin and their combination in the management of dyslipidaemia in type 2 diabetic patients.

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of fenofibrate, simvastatin or their combination in type 2 diabetic patients with combined dyslipidaemia. Research design and methods: 241 patients, who had never previously taken lipid-lowering medications, received fenofibrate 145 mg/day, or simvastatin 40 mg/day, or fenofibrate 145 mg/day + simvastatin 40 mg/day combination for 12 months. We evaluated lipids, glycaemic, haemostatic, and inflammatory variables at baseline, and after 6 and 12 months. Results: After 12 months total cholesterol (TC), LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) and triglycerides (Tg) decreased while HDL cholesterol (HDL-C) increased in all groups, even if the values obtained with fenofibrate + simvastatin were the best. At the end of the study apolipoprotein A-1 (Apo A-1) increased with fenofibrate + simvastatin, while apolipoprotein B (Apo B) decreased in all groups compared to baseline. Plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) and high-sensitivity C reactive protein (hs-CRP) decreased after 12 months compared to baseline with simvastatin, and with fenofibrate + simvastatin even if the value obtained with fenofibrate–simvastatin was the lowest. After 12 months, fibrinogen (Fg) decreased compared to baseline with fenofibrate + simvastatin. Limitations: This study has some limitations. The first one is the relatively small sample of studied patients. The second one is the lack of an advanced lipid proteins evaluation, such as lipoprotein subfraction changes in the different treatment regimen. Finally, we have not selected patients that could show the best response to fibrate (i.e.: hypertriglyceridemics) or statins (i.e.: hypercholesterolemics) monotherapy, so the effect of these drugs administered alone may have been partly attenuated. Conclusions: Fenofibrate + simvastatin association improved lipid parameters, prothrombotic and inflammatory factors, and appeared to have a good tolerability profile over 12 months of therapy.

Metabolic effect of repaglinide or acarbose when added to a double oral antidiabetic treatment with sulphonylureas and metformin: a double-blind, cross-over, clinical trial.

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the metabolic effects of acarbose and repaglinide in type 2 diabetic patients who are being treated with a sulphonylurea–metformin combination therapy. The primary endpoint of the study was to evaluate which add-on treatment between acarbose and repaglinide is more efficacious in reducing PPG. The second endpoint was to evaluate which of these two treatment is more efficacious in the global management of glucose homeostasis in the enrolled patients. Research design and methods: After a 4-week run-in period with a suplonylurea–metformin combination, 103 patients were randomised to receive in addition either repaglinide, up to 6 mg/day (2 mg three times a day) or acarbose, up to 300 mg/day (100 mg three times a day) with forced titration (independently of their glycaemic control, unless side-effects developed due to the drug dosage) for 15 weeks. The treatment was then crossed-over for further 12 weeks until the 27th week. We assessed body mass index (BMI), glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucoe (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), fasting plasma insulin (FPI), postprandial plasma insulin (PPI), homeostatic model assesssment (HOMA) index, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglycerides (Tg), at baseline and at 1, 2, 15 and 27 weeks of treatment. Results: Seven patients did not complete the study, comprising one patient who was lost to follow-up and a further six through side-effects (two in week 1, one in week 15 and three after cross-over) Side-effects were classified as nausea (one in acarbose group), gastrointestinal events (four in acarbose group), and hypoglycaemia (one in repaglinide group). After 15 weeks of therapy, the repaglinide-treated patients experienced a significant decrease in HbA1c (−1.1%, p < 0.05), FPG (−9.5%, p < 0.05), and PPG (−14.9%, p < 0.05), when compared to the baseline values. However, the same treatment was associated with a significant increase in body weight (+2.3%, p < 0.05), BMI (+3.3%, p < 0.05) and FPI (+22.5%, p < 0.05); The increase was reversed during the cross-over phase. After 15 weeks of therapy, the acarbose-treated patients experienced a significant decrease in body weight (−1.9%, p < 0.05), BMI (−4.1%, p < 0.05), HbA1c (−1.4%, p < 0.05), FPG (−10.7%, p < 0.05), PPG (−16.2%, p < 0.05), FPI (−16.1%, p < 0.05), PPI (−26.9%, p < 0.05), HOMA index (−30.1%, p < 0.05), when compared to the baseline values. All these changes were reversed during the cross-over study phase, except those relating to HbA1c, FPG and PPG. The only changes that significantly differed when directly comparing acarbose- and repaglinide-treated patients were those relating to FPI (−16.1% vs. +22.5%, respectively, p < 0.05) and HOMA index (−30.1% vs. +2.7%, p < 0.05). Conclusion: In addition from having a similar effect to repaglinide on PPG, acarbose appeared to have a more comprehensive positive effect on glucose metabolism compared to repaglinide in this relatively small sample of type 2 diabetic patients when used as add-on therapy to sulphonylureas and metformin.

Differential effects of candesartan and olmesartan on adipose tissue activity biomarkers in type II diabetic hypertensive patients.

The aim of this study is to compare the effects of candesartan and olmesartan on insulin sensitivity-related parameters, before and after antihypertensive therapy. After a 4-week washout placebo period, 194 hypertensive (diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ⩾80 mm Hg and systolic blood pressure (SBP) ⩾130 mm Hg) patients with well-controlled type II diabetes were randomized to receive either 8 mg of candesartan once a day (o.d.) or 10 mg olmesartan o.d. and titrated after 1 month to 16 mg candesartan o.d. or 20 mg olmesartan o.d., respectively; the treatment period had a 1-year duration. We evaluated body weight, body mass index, SBP, DBP, glycated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose, M value, adiponectin (ADN), resistin (r), retinol-binding protein 4, visfatin, vaspin and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (Hs-CRP) at their baseline values and after 6 and 12 months of treatment. We observed no variation in body weight or glycemic profile for either treatment. SBP and DBP were significantly reduced by both treatments (from 144±8/88±6 to 126±5/77±4 mm Hg by candesartan (P<0.001) and from 145±9/89±7 to 128±7/79±5 mm Hg by olmesartan (P<0.001)) without any difference between them. Retinol binding protein-4, r, and the vaspin value decreased in the candesartan group but not in olmesartan group. The M value, visfatin and ADN increased with candesartan, whereas no significant variations were observed with olmesartan. Both treatments resulted in a similar reduction in Hs-CRP. Although both therapies resulted in similar reductions in blood pressure, candesartan therapy was more effective than olmesartan therapy in improving insulin sensitivity.

Oral glucose tolerance test effects on endothelial inflammation markers in healthy subjects and diabetic patients.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) on the level of endothelial dysfunction and vascular inflammation markers in healthy subjects (H) and diabetic overweight patients (D). We enrolled 256 healthy subjects and 274 type 2 diabetic patients. We evaluated blood glucose (BG), soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM-1), interleukin-6 (IL-6), high-sensitivity C reactive protein (hsCRP), soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (sVCAM-1), soluble E-selectin (sE-selectin), and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) at baseline and after OGTT. We observed that BG, sICAM-1, IL-6, hs-CRP, sVCAM-1, sE-selectin, and TNF-alpha values were higher in D group than in H group. In a large sample of adult healthy subjects and type 2 diabetics we observed that both answer to an OGTT with a significant increase in biomarkers of systemic low-grade inflammation and endothelial dysfunction such as hsCRP, IL-6, TNF-alpha, sICAM-1, sVCAM-1, and sE-selectin. Type 2 diabetics experienced, however, a more significant increase in TNF-alpha, and sE-selectin.

Candesartan effect on inflammation in hypertension

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of candesartan on inflammatory biomarkers in hypertensive patients with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus after a standardized oral fat load (OFL). A total of 219 patients were enrolled: 106 patients were assigned to the non-diabetic hypertensive (NH) group, and 113 to the diabetic hypertensive (DH) group. All patients received candesartan therapy for 6 months and underwent a standardized OFL at baseline and after 6 months of therapy. We evaluated systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP), blood glucose (BG), triglycerides (Tg), soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM-1), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and high-sensitivity C reactive protein (Hs-CRP). At baseline, glycated hemoglobin, homeostasis model assessment insulin resistance index, BG, fasting plasma insulin, Tg, sICAM-1, IL-6 and Hs-CRP in the DH group were significantly higher, whereas high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol value was significantly lower compared to NH group. After 6 months of candesartan therapy, sICAM-1, IL-6 and Hs-CRP were significantly lower compared to baseline in both groups; furthermore, there was a significant decrease of SBP and DBP values in both groups. After the OFL administered at baseline, there was an increase of Tg, sICAM-1, IL-6 and Hs-CRP in both groups. After the OFL administered after 6 months of therapy, instead, there was no significant variation of BG, Tg or sICAM-1 value in both groups, whereas there was an increase of IL-6 and Hs-CRP compared to time 0. We observed that candesartan treatment attenuated the inflammatory answer in both groups of patients, even if more efficiently in nondiabetic ones.

Effect of pioglitazone and acarbose on endothelial inflammation biomarkers during oral glucose tolerance test in diabetic patients treated with sulphonylureas and metformin

What is known:  The increased risk of cardiovascular events in diabetic patients has been related to numerous metabolic and haemoreological factors. Some of these factors appear to be particularly evident during the post‐prandial phases and to be related to peak plasma glucose level.

Effects of a standardized oral fat load on vascular remodelling markers in healthy subjects.

The most adequate way to experimentally reproduce the post-prandial lipemia condition appears to be the administration of a standardized oral fat load (OFL) to fasting patients. We studied the effects of a standardized OFL on markers of vascular remodelling in healthy subjects. We enrolled 286 Caucasians aged >or= 18 of either sex. The OFL was given after a 12-h fast. Blood samples were drawn before and 3, 6, 9 and 12h after the fat load. The following parameters were evaluated: body mass index (BMI), blood glucose (BG), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), lipid profile, nitrites and nitrates, adiponectin (ADP), metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2) and metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9). High density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) decrease was present in subjects after 6h. Triglycerides (Tg) change was observed after 6h. Nitrites/nitrates variation was observed after 6 and 9h during OFL. Adiponectin level was decreased after 6 and 9h during OFL. Both MMP-2 and MMP-9 levels were higher after 6h during OFL. We observed that nitrites/nitrates and ADP significantly decreased and MMP-2 and MMP-9 significantly increased after a standardized OFL. Other studies need to confirm the direct acute effects of post-prandial lipemia on vascular damage.

Effects of combination of sibutramine and L-carnitine compared with sibutramine monotherapy on inflammatory parameters in diabetic patients.

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of 12-month treatment with sibutramine plus L-carnitine compared with sibutramine alone on body weight, glycemic control, insulin resistance, and inflammatory state in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. Two hundred fifty-four patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (glycated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)] >8.0%) in therapy with different oral hypoglycemic agents or insulin were enrolled in this study and randomized to take sibutramine 10 mg plus L-carnitine 2 g or sibutramine 10 mg in monotherapy. We evaluated at baseline and after 3, 6, 9, and 12 months these parameters: body weight, body mass index, HbA(1c), fasting plasma glucose, postprandial plasma glucose, fasting plasma insulin, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance index, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, leptin, tumor necrosis factor-α, adiponectin, vaspin, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. Sibutramine plus L-carnitine gave a faster improvement of fasting plasma glucose, postprandial plasma glucose, lipid profile, leptin, tumor necrosis factor-α, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein compared with sibutramine alone. Furthermore, there was a better improvement of body weight, HbA(1c), fasting plasma insulin, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance index, vaspin, and adiponectin with sibutramine plus L-carnitine compared with sibutramine alone. Sibutramine plus L-carnitine gave a better and faster improvement of all the analyzed parameters compared with sibutramine alone without giving any severe adverse effect.