HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Carroll, M. F. Articles by Schade, D. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Carroll, M. F. Articles by Schade, D. S. Social Bookmarking                What's this?

Control of Postprandial Hyperglycemia

Optimal use of short-acting insulin secretagogues

From the New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Department of Internal Medicine, Albuquerque, New Mexico

OBJECTIVE—This study was designed to compare the efficacy of acute premeal administration of glipizide versus nateglinide in controlling postprandial hyperglycemia in subjects with non-insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—A total of 20 subjects (10 female, 10 male) with non-insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes were admitted overnight to the General Clinical Research Center on four occasions. In random order, 10 mg glipizide (30 min premeal), 120 mg nateglinide (15 min premeal), 10 mg glipizide plus nateglinide (30 and 15 min premeal, respectively), or placebo pills (30 and 15 min premeal) were administered in a double-blind fashion before a standardized breakfast. Blood was drawn for analysis of glucose, insulin, and C-peptide at -0.05, 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 4 h relative to the meal.

RESULTS—The subjects were aged 56 ± 2 years and were moderately obese (BMI 31 ± 1 kg/m²), with a mean HbA_1c of 7.4 ± 0.4%. The peak postprandial glucose excursion above baseline was higher with placebo (6.1 ± 0.5 mmol/l) than glipizide (4.3 ± 0.6 mmol/l, P = 0.002), nateglinide (4.2 ± 0.4 mmol/l, P = 0.001), or glipizide plus nateglinide (4.1 ± 0.5 mmol/l, P = 0.001). The area under the curve for the glucose excursion above baseline was also higher with placebo (14.1 ± 1.8 mmol/h · l) compared with glipizide (6.9 ± 2.4 mmol/h · l, P = 0.002), nateglinide (9.7 ± 2 mmol/h · l, P = 0.004), or glipizide plus nateglinide (5.6 ± 2.2 mmol/h · l, P < 0.001). Peak and integrated glucose excursions did not differ significantly between glipizide and nateglinide. However, by 4 h postmeal, plasma glucose levels were significantly higher with nateglinide (9 ± 0.9 mmol/l) compared with the premeal baseline (7.8 ± 0.6 mmol/l, P = 0.04) and compared with the 4-h postprandial glucose level after administration of glipizide (7.6 ± 0.6 mmol/l, P = 0.02). Integrated postprandial insulin levels were higher with glipizide (1,556 ± 349 pmol/h · l) than nateglinide (1,364 ± 231 pmol/h · l; P = 0.03). Early insulin secretion, as measured by insulin levels at 30 min postmeal, did not differ between glipizide and nateglinide.

CONCLUSIONS—Acute premeal administration of nateglinide or glipizide has equal efficacy in controlling postbreakfast hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes when each drug is administered at the optimum time before the meal. Glipizide causes a more pronounced and sustained postmeal insulin secretory response compared with nateglinide. Glipizide facilitates the return to near-fasting glucose levels at 4 h postmeal, but with the possible risk of increased frequency of postmeal hypoglycemia in drug-naive patients. The clinical decision to use glipizide versus nateglinide should be based on factors other than the control of postprandial hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes.

Abbreviations: AUC, area under the curve

CiteULike    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. C. Riddle and D. J. Drucker Emerging Therapies Mimicking the Effects of Amylin and Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Diabetes Care, February 1, 2006; 29(2): 435 - 449. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. S. Cozma, S. D. Luzio, G. J. Dunseath, P. M. Underwood, and D. R. Owens {beta}-Cell Response During a Meal Test: A comparative study of incremental doses of repaglinide in type 2 diabetic patients Diabetes Care, May 1, 2005; 28(5): 1001 - 1007. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. D. Lane, C. E. Barkauskas, R. S. Surwit, and M. N. Feinglos Caffeine Impairs Glucose Metabolism in Type 2 Diabetes Diabetes Care, August 1, 2004; 27(8): 2047 - 2048. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Rosenstock, D. R. Hassman, R. D. Madder, S. A. Brazinsky, J. Farrell, N. Khutoryansky, and P. M. Hale Repaglinide Versus Nateglinide Monotherapy: A randomized, multicenter study Diabetes Care, June 1, 2004; 27(6): 1265 - 1270. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. F. Carroll, A. Gutierrez, M. Castro, D. Tsewang, and D. S. Schade Targeting Postprandial Hyperglycemia: A Comparative Study of Insulinotropic Agents in Type 2 Diabetes J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., November 1, 2003; 88(11): 5248 - 5254. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. T. Sheehan Current Therapeutic Options in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Practical Approach Clin. Med. Res., July 1, 2003; 1(3): 189 - 200. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]