Repaglinide Versus Nateglinide Monotherapy
A randomized, multicenter study
- Julio Rosenstock, MD1,
- David R. Hassman, DO2,
- Robert D. Madder, DO3,
- Shari A. Brazinsky, MD4,
- James Farrell, MD5,
- Naum Khutoryansky, PHD6,
- Paula M. Hale, MD6 and
- for the Repaglinide Versus Nateglinide Comparison Study Group*
- 1Dallas Diabetes and Endocrine Center, Dallas, Texas
- 2Comprehensive Clinical Research, Berlin, New Jersey
- 3Tri-State Medical Group, Beaver, Pennsylvania
- 4Institute of Health Care Assessment, San Diego, California
- 5Midwest Pharmaceutical Research, St. Peters, Missouri
- 6Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals, Princeton, New Jersey
- Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Julio Rosenstock, Dallas Diabetes and Endocrine Center, 7777 Forest Ln., Suite C618, Dallas, TX 75230. E-mail: juliorosenstock{at}dallasdiabetes.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE—A randomized, parallel-group, open-label, multicenter 16-week clinical trial compared efficacy and safety of repaglinide monotherapy and nateglinide monotherapy in type 2 diabetic patients previously treated with diet and exercise.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Enrolled patients (n = 150) had received treatment with diet and exercise in the previous 3 months with HbA1c >7 and ≤12%. Patients were randomized to receive monotherapy with repaglinide (n = 76) (0.5 mg/meal, maximum dose 4 mg/meal) or nateglinide (n = 74) (60 mg/meal, maximum dose 120 mg/meal) for 16 weeks. Primary and secondary efficacy end points were changes in HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) values from baseline, respectively. Postprandial glucose, insulin, and glucagon were assessed after a liquid test meal (baseline, week 16). Safety was assessed by incidence of adverse events or hypoglycemia.
RESULTS—Mean baseline HbA1c values were similar in both groups (8.9%). Final HbA1c values were lower for repaglinide monotherapy than nateglinide monotherapy (7.3 vs. 7.9%). Mean final reductions of HbA1c were significantly greater for repaglinide monotherapy than nateglinide monotherapy (−1.57 vs. −1.04%; P = 0.002). Mean changes in FPG also demonstrated significantly greater efficacy for repaglinide than nateglinide (−57 vs. −18 mg/dl; P < 0.001). HbA1c values <7% were achieved by 54% of repaglinide-treated patients versus 42% for nateglinide. Median final doses were 6.0 mg/day for repaglinide and 360 mg/day for nateglinide. There were 7% of subjects treated with repaglinide (five subjects with one episode each) who had minor hypoglycemic episodes (blood glucose <50 mg/dl) versus 0 patients for nateglinide. Mean weight gain at the end of the study was 1.8 kg in the repaglinide group as compared with 0.7 kg for the nateglinide group.
CONCLUSIONS—In patients previously treated with diet and exercise, repaglinide and nateglinide had similar postprandial glycemic effects, but repaglinide monotherapy was significantly more effective than nateglinide monotherapy in reducing HbA1c and FPG values after 16 weeks of therapy.
- AUC, area under the curve
- FPG, fasting plasma glucose
- IMI, incremental mean imputation
- LOCF, last observation carried forward
- SMBG, self-monitoring of blood glucose
Footnotes
- *
↵* A complete list of the Repaglinide Versus Nateglinide Comparison Study Group can be found in the appendix.
-
J.R. and D.R.H. have received grant support from Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals, and J.R. has received honoria from Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals.
A table elsewhere in this issue shows conventional and Système International (SI) units and conversion factors for many substances.
-
- Accepted February 26, 2004.
- Received September 18, 2003.
- DIABETES CARE











