Skip to main content
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart
  • Follow ada on Twitter
  • RSS
  • Visit ada on Facebook
Diabetes Care

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Diabetes Care
  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
Reviews/Commentaries/ADA Statements

A Systematic Review of Drug Therapy to Delay or Prevent Type 2 Diabetes

  1. Raj Padwal, MD1,
  2. Sumit R. Majumdar, MD123,
  3. Jeff A. Johnson, PHD123,
  4. Janice Varney, MLIS2 and
  5. Finlay A. McAlister, MD123
  1. 1Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
  2. 2Institute of Health Economics, Edmonton, Canada
  3. 3Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
  1. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Raj Padwal, Department of Medicine, 2E3.22 Walter C. Mackenzie HSC, University of Alberta Hospital, 8440-112th St., Edmonton, AB, Canada, T6G 2B7. E-mail: rpadwal{at}ualberta.ca
Diabetes Care 2005 Mar; 28(3): 736-744. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.28.3.736
PreviousNext
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

OBJECTIVE—To systematically review the evidence for the prevention of type 2 diabetes by pharmacological therapies.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies examining the effect of oral hypoglycemic agents, antiobesity agents, antihypertensive agents, statins, fibrates, and estrogen on the incidence of type 2 diabetes were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry, and searches of reference lists. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion and performed data extraction.

RESULTS—Ten studies of oral hypoglycemic agents and 15 studies of nonoral hypoglycemic agents were found. Oral hypoglycemic agents and orlistat are the only drugs that have been studied in randomized controlled trials with diabetes incidence as the primary end point. In the largest studies of 2.5–4.0 years’ duration, metformin (relative risk [RR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.57–0.83), acarbose (0.75, 0.63–0.90), troglitazone (0.45, 0.25–0.83), and orlistat (hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% CI 0.46–0.86) have all been shown to decrease diabetes incidence compared with placebo; however, follow-up rates varied from 43 to 96%. Current evidence for statins, fibrates, antihypertensive agents, and estrogen is inconclusive. In addition, the critical question of whether drugs are preventing, or simply delaying, onset of diabetes remains unresolved.

CONCLUSIONS—Currently, no single agent can be definitively recommended for diabetes prevention. Future studies should be designed with diabetes incidence as the primary outcome and should be of sufficient duration to differentiate between genuine diabetes prevention as opposed to simple delay or masking of this condition.

  • DPP, Diabetes Prevention Program
  • IGT, impaired glucose tolerance
  • RCT, randomized controlled trial
  • STOP-NIDDM, Study To Prevent Noninsulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetes currently affects an estimated 171 million individuals worldwide (1). In the U.S. alone, diabetes is the fifth leading cause of death and was responsible for an estimated $132 billion in direct and indirect costs in 2002 (2). With a projected doubling of the number of global cases of diabetes by 2030 (1), the development of effective diabetes prevention strategies is of paramount importance.

Recent studies have shown that intensive lifestyle interventions, primarily in patients with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), may decrease the incidence of type 2 diabetes by up to 58% (3,4). Lifestyle modification may be considered an ideal method of diabetes prevention because of beneficial effects on the entire cardiovascular risk profile as well as noncardiovascular benefits related to weight loss and an improved diet (5–7). However, long-term adherence to such interventions (8) and feasibility in a nontrial setting remain potentially limiting factors to widespread implementation.

Pharmacological therapy to prevent type 2 diabetes may be an important therapeutic modality in those patients in whom lifestyle interventions fail, are not sufficiently potent, or are not feasible. A number of different drug classes have been previously studied (9,10). An important distinction is whether such agents prevent or simply delay the diagnosis of diabetes. It is unclear whether a short-term delay in the biochemical diagnosis of diabetes is a useful surrogate end point and whether the effects of drug therapy are sustained, cost-effective, and free of serious adverse effects. We conducted this systematic review to evaluate the current evidence for the prevention of type 2 diabetes by pharmacological therapies.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Detailed search strategies were designed to detect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies examining the effects of drug therapy on the subsequent incidence of type 2 diabetes. We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry (first quarter, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to June, week 3, 2004), and EMBASE (1980 to week 26, 2004). Reference lists of original studies and narrative reviews were also searched manually. The search was not limited by language and is considered up-to-date as of 1 June 2004.

Studies were included if they reported, or provided sufficient data to calculate, type 2 diabetes incidence using an intention-to-treat analysis. In studies with multiple interventions, only the results of drug intervention arms compared with a placebo or control group were included.

A medical librarian (J.V.) performed the initial search with input from the other authors. The search was limited to adult patients (aged >18 years) with a minimum study sample size of 50 patients. In addition to a general drug search, a specific search for the following agents was performed: sulfonylureas, metformin, phenformin, acarbose, thiazolidinediones, insulin, hydroxymethylglutaryl (HMG)-CoA reductase inhibitors (hereafter, referred to as “statins”), estrogen, phentermine, orlistat, sibutramine, ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, β-blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, and α-blockers. Articles were excluded if the intervention was tested in patients with preexisting diabetes, the sample size was <50 patients, the citation was a review or duplicate article, and if the study was published only in abstract form. A detailed systematic review of antihypertensive drugs and type 2 diabetes incidence (current through August 2003) has recently been published, and this review was updated by including studies published after August 2003 (11).

Two reviewers (R.P. and S.R.M.) independently examined abstracts of the remaining studies for potential inclusion and performed data extraction. Cohen’s κ coefficients were calculated to assess interobserver agreement for study inclusion and data extraction. Disagreements were resolved by consensus.

A priori, we decided that quantitative meta-analyses of data would not be possible due to substantial between-study differences in end point definitions, patient populations, and interventions.

RESULTS

Of the 5,511 initial citations, 5,222 were potentially relevant upon initial screening (online appendix [available at http://care.diabetesjournals.org]). Of these, 4,247 citations involved prevalent cases of type 2 diabetes and were excluded. After screening the titles and abstracts of the remaining 975 citations, 36 full-text articles were reviewed and 10 articles met inclusion criteria. An additional 15 articles were identified through manual searches and review of the reference lists of all included reports.

Interobserver agreement was 1.0 for study inclusion and 0.91 for data extraction.

Oral hypoglycemic agents

Ten studies, including eight RCTs, examined the effect of oral hypoglycemic agents on diabetes incidence (Table 1).

Biguanides.

The largest and most methodologically rigorous trial was the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP), which randomized 2,155 individuals with IGT to metformin or placebo (4). After a mean follow-up period of 2.8 years, the incidence of diabetes was 7.8% in the placebo-treated patients versus 4.8% in those treated with metformin (relative risk [RR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.57–0.83); metformin was also associated with a 2.0-kg (95% CI 0.8–3.2) weight reduction compared with placebo. In post hoc subgroup analyses, the benefits of metformin were primarily observed in patients <60 years of age (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.40–0.79 for patients 25–44 years old) and patients with a BMI ≥35 kg/m2 (0.47, 0.35–0.63).

After metformin was discontinued at the end of the DPP study, patients were observed for a 1- to 2-week washout period, and the number of new cases of diabetes was ascertained (12). In the 79% of eligible patients who completed a washout visit, the incidence of diabetes increased from 25.2 to 30.6% in the metformin group and from 33.4 to 36.7% in the placebo group. When results of the washout period were included in the overall analysis, metformin still significantly decreased diabetes incidence (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.62–0.92).

The remaining biguanide studies found no significant reduction in the incidence of diabetes compared with placebo using intention-to-treat analyses (13–17). All of these studies had very low diabetes incidence rates and were likely underpowered.

Acarbose.

Acarbose was studied in one RCT and one cohort study (13,17). In the Study To Prevent Noninsulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (STOP-NIDDM) trial, the incidence of diabetes was 32% in the acarbose group and 42% in the placebo group (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63–0.90) during 39 months of observation (17). Nearly 25% of individuals discontinued therapy early, predominantly due to acarbose-induced gastrointestinal toxicity. At study end, 60% of eligible patients were observed for a 3-month washout period, during which 15% of acarbose-treated patients developed diabetes compared with 10.5% of placebo-treated patients. In a secondary analysis, acarbose reduced cardiovascular events from 4.7 to 2.1% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.51, 95% CI 0.28–0.95) (18).

Sulfonylureas.

Two studies examined the effect of tolbutamide therapy on diabetes incidence in patients with IGT or high-normal/elevated fasting glucose levels (19,20). Neither study reported a statistically significant decrease in the type 2 diabetes incidence compared with control or placebo, although both studies were small and potentially underpowered (Table 1).

Thiazolidinediones.

While the Troglitazone Prevention of Diabetes (TRIPOD) study reported a reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes from 45 to 20% (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25–0.83) with troglitazone (associated with a nonsignificant weight gain compared with placebo of 0.3 kg [95% CI 0.8–1.4]), the nearly 33% attrition rate during follow-up is a major limitation (21). Eight months postdrug discontinuation, type 2 diabetes incidence was assessed in approximately one-half of eligible patients, with one patient (2%) in the troglitazone arm and six patients (15%) in the placebo group developing diabetes.

One additional small cohort study found a significant reduction in diabetes incidence with thiazolidinedione therapy (Table 1) (22).

Antiobesity agents

While orlistat reduced the incidence of type 2 diabetes from 9 to 6% (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.46–0.86) and weight by 2.8 kg (95% CI 1.1–4.5) compared with placebo in the Xenical in the Prevention of Diabetes in Obese Subjects (XENDOS) study, the attrition rate was 57% (Table 2) (23). Ninety-one percent of orlistat-treated patients experienced gastrointestinal side effects in the first year of therapy compared with 65% of the placebo arm.

A pooled analysis of three RCTs enrolling 642 obese patients reported a nonsignificant reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes from 2 to 0.6% with orlistat therapy (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.05–1.2) (24). The CIs were wide, reflecting the low absolute incidence of diabetes within these trials, and attrition rates averaged >30%.

Antihypertensive drugs

A recently published systematic review of 24 studies involving antihypertensive drugs found that diabetes incidence is unchanged or increased by thiazide diuretics and β-blockers and unchanged or decreased by ACE inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, and angiotensin receptor blockers (11). Six placebo-controlled trials were included in this review. Thiazide diuretic-based treatment regimens were associated with non-statistically significant increases in the incidence of type 2 diabetes from 7.5 to 8.6% in the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP) trial (RR 1.2, 95% CI 0.9–1.5) and from 4.7 to7% in the European Working Party on High Blood Pressure in the Elderly (EWHPE) trial (1.5, 0.85–1.6) (25,26). ACE inhibitor therapy lowered diabetes incidence in the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) trial from 5.4 to 3.6% (0.66, 0.51–0.85) and from 22 to 6% in a small group of patients with heart failure (0.26, 0.13–0.53) (27,28). Angiotensin receptor blocker therapy significantly decreased diabetes incidence in the Candesartan in Heart Failure Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity (CHARM) study from 7 to 6% (0.78, 0.64–0.96) and resulted in a nonsignificant decrease in diabetes incidence from 5.3 to 4.3% in the Study of Cognition and Prognosis in the elderly (SCOPE) trial (0.81, 0.62–1.06) (29,30).

Overall, diabetes incidence was not a prespecified, primary end point in any study, and there was insufficient evidence to definitively recommend any given antihypertensive drug class in patients at risk of developing type 2 diabetes (11).

We found two additional studies published after the aforementioned systematic review (Table 2). In 16,176 hypertensive patients with coronary artery disease enrolled in the International Verapamil-Trandolapril Study (INVEST), a verapamil-based treatment regimen was associated with a decrease in the incidence of type 2 diabetes from 8.2 to 7% compared with an atenolol-based regimen (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77–0.95) (Table 2) (31). Diabetes incidence was not a predefined end point in this study and no adjustment was made for concomitant therapies, which could potentially affect diabetes incidence. In the Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation (VALUE) trial of 10,419 hypertensive patients at high cardiovascular risk, a valsartan-based treatment regimen was associated with a decrease in the incidence of type 2 diabetes from 16 to 13% compared with an amlodipine-based regimen (odds ratio [OR] 0.77, 95% CI 0.69–0.86) (32).

Statins

Four post hoc analyses of placebo-controlled statin trials reported conflicting results regarding the effect of statin therapy on diabetes incidence (Table 2). In the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study (WOSCOPS), diabetes incidence was significantly lower with pravastatin treatment (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50–0.99) (33). In the Heart Protection Study, 4.6% of simvastatin-treated patients developed diabetes versus 4.0% in the placebo arm (1.15, 0.99–1.34) and in the Long-term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) study, 4.0% of pravastatin-treated patients developed new diabetes versus 4.5% in the placebo group (0.89, 0.70–1.13) (34,35). In the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Lipid Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA), the incidence of diabetes was 3.0% in the atorvastatin arm and 2.6% in the placebo group (1.15, 0.91–1.44) (36).

Fibrates

In a post hoc analysis of 303 patients with IGT from the Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention (BIP) trial, bezafibrate therapy was associated with a reduction in diabetes incidence from 54 to 42% compared with placebo (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.49–0.99) (Table 2) (37).

Estrogen

One RCT and five cohort studies have examined the association between estrogen use and diabetes incidence (Table 2). Post hoc analysis of the Heart Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study (HERS) study reported that combination estrogen and progesterone therapy was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of diabetes from 9.5 to 6.2% compared with placebo (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48–0.89) (Table 2) (38).

The Nurses Health Study, which was the largest of the cohort studies, found that over 12 years, current estrogen use was associated with a significant reduction in diabetes incidence compared with never users (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70–0.96) (39). Diabetes incidence in former estrogen users was not significantly different from never users (1.07, 0.95–1.2). Of the remaining four cohort studies (40–43), only one reported a significant covariate-adjusted reduction in diabetes incidence in users of estrogen replacement compared with nonusers. Several trials failed to adjust for potentially important covariates such as family history, weight, or baseline glucose measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, a number of studies have examined the impact of different drugs on diabetes incidence, including oral hypoglycemic agents, antiobesity drugs, statins, fibrates, estrogen, and antihypertensive drugs. Oral hypoglycemic medications and orlistat are the only drugs that have been studied in RCTs with diabetes incidence as the primary end point. The adequately powered studies have shown significant decreases in diabetes incidence with metformin, acarbose, troglitazone, and orlistat; however, high attrition rates were found in trials of the latter two agents. Evidence for statins, estrogen, and antihypertensive agents is conflicting and is limited to cohort studies and secondary post hoc analyses of RCTs.

A potential limitation of any systematic review (including ours) is the possibility of publication bias. In addition, studies reporting diabetes incidence as a secondary or post hoc end point were difficult to identify using standard search strategies because this information was contained within the text of studies and identifiable only by performing manual searches. Indeed, our use of manual searching and examination of bibliographies yielded more valid studies for inclusion than our original search strategy. Regardless, while the possibility of missing trials reporting secondary or post hoc analyses exists, we feel that it is unlikely that any definitive studies were missed.

Besides the reduction in glucose levels achieved by oral hypoglycemic agents, it is likely that drug-induced weight loss is contributing to the observed reduction in diabetes incidence. All but one (thiazolidinediones) of the agents reported to lower type 2 diabetes incidence directly or to indirectly promote weight loss. Weight loss has also been the target of lifestyle modification interventions in the diabetes prevention trials (9,10). In contrast to drug therapy, intensive lifestyle interventions have produced reductions in diabetes incidence of 42–58% in the three largest studies to date, despite modest degrees of weight loss of ∼5 kg or less compared with control populations (3,4,44). In the DPP, the incidence of type 2 diabetes was 3% lower in the lifestyle arm compared with the metformin arm (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49–0.76) and lifestyle modification was efficacious regardless of age, sex, BMI, or ethnic background (4). Assuming that such intensive lifestyle interventions can be successfully implemented in a more practical and equally effective form outside of a clinical trial setting, recidivism remains a major problem. Even within the DPP, the number of participants achieving weight loss targets (7% of initial body weight) decreased from 50% at 24 weeks to 34% at the end of follow-up, and the number of individuals who met the target exercise levels (150 min per week) declined from 74 to 58% by the end of the trial.

A critical and unresolved issue is whether drug therapy simply delays or masks the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, rather than exerting an actual preventative effect. Drugs that acutely lower serum glucose levels may simply lower glucose concentrations to a lower cutoff level than that required for the formal diagnosis of diabetes. In the posttrial washout periods of the STOP-NIDDM and DPP trials, the higher incidence of diabetes in the treatment arms suggests that at least some of the observed benefits were merely due to delay or masking of diabetes. It is unknown if the beneficial effects of the drugs would have persisted if the posttrial follow-up periods were longer. In the TRIPOD study, diabetes incidence, β-cell function, and insulin sensitivity remained stable in the troglitazone arm for at least 8 months after drug discontinuation (21). However, the type 2 diabetes incidence in the posttrial period was very low, and reasons for the high attrition rates in the study were not detailed.

To prove that diabetes is actually prevented, future studies will have to demonstrate arrest of the disease process. Because the average time interval between onset of β-cell dysfunction and development of type 2 diabetes is 10 years (45), follow-up periods will have to be substantially longer. In a recent retrospective cohort analysis of 10,996 patients with diabetes newly treated with oral agents, statin therapy was associated with a 10-month delay in the initiation of insulin therapy (46). However, after 7 years of follow-up, there were no differences between the statin and control groups in their requirements for insulin therapy.

It will also be important to demonstrate a reduction in morbidity and mortality in order to accept that any of these drugs are beneficial in patients who have not yet developed diabetes. The finding that acarbose reduced cardiovascular events in the STOP-NIDDM trial was based on a small number of events and will require confirmation.

There are a number of potential adverse effects associated with drug-related diabetes prevention strategies. For example, hypoglycemia is a potentially limiting side effect of sulfonylurea therapy, occurring at a frequency of 3% in patients with IGT enrolled in the Fasting Hyperglycemia Study (47). Gastrointestinal toxicity contributed to high discontinuation rates in the STOP-NIDDM and XENDOS studies, and troglitazone is no longer available because of the risk of serious hepatotoxicity (48). Given the likelihood of long-term therapy with diabetes prevention agents, additional data regarding adverse events and adherence will be required.

In addition to their clinical effectiveness in diabetes prevention, consideration should also be given to the cost-effectiveness of drug interventions. Two economic analyses of the DPP study have been performed (49,50). In a cost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective, the metformin intervention cost $31,300 per case of diabetes delayed or prevented and $99,600 per quality-adjusted life year gained over the 3-year duration of the study (49). Assuming the use of lower-priced generic metformin, cost estimates decreased to $14,300 and $35,000, respectively. In all analyses, the lifestyle intervention was more economically attractive than metformin. A second economic analysis, performed in Europe, also factored in estimates of cost savings for each case of diabetes presumably prevented (50). Metformin was found to be cost-saving in four of the five European countries studied.

A number of currently ongoing studies should provide more definitive evidence (Table 3) (47,51–56). Short-acting insulin secretagogues, renin-angiotensin inhibitors, newer thiazolidinediones, and insulin glargine are among the drug classes being investigated. The majority of these studies are scheduled for completion in the latter half of this decade.

In conclusion, a number of studies have investigated the effects of several different drug classes on type 2 diabetes incidence. The available evidence suggests that oral hypoglycemic drugs may reduce diabetes incidence compared with placebo, while the evidence for orlistat, statins, estrogen, and antihypertensive drugs is inconclusive. However, the data are not definitive and no single agent can currently be recommended for diabetes prevention. It is critical that future studies be designed with much longer follow-up periods and with development of new-onset diabetes as the primary outcome, so as to differentiate between genuine diabetes prevention as opposed to simple delay or masking of this condition.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1—

Studies of oral hypoglycemic agents to reduce type 2 diabetes incidence

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2—

Studies of other agents and type 2 diabetes incidence

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3—

Ongoing and future RCTs of drug therapy to prevent type 2 diabetes

Acknowledgments

S.R.M. and F.A.M. are Population Health Investigators of the Alberta Heritage Foundation (AHFMR) and New Investigators of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). F.A.M. holds the University of Alberta Merck Frosst/Aventis Chair in Patient Health Management. J.A.J. is a Health Scholar of AHFMR and holds a Canada Research Chair in Diabetes Health Outcomes.

The authors would like to thank Dr. Mao Lee for his assistance in article translation.

Footnotes

  • Additional information for this article can be found in an online appendix at http://care.diabetesjournals.org.

    • Accepted December 12, 2004.
    • Received October 13, 2004.
  • DIABETES CARE

References

  1. ↵
    Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, Sicree R, King H: Global prevalence of diabetes: estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030. Diabetes Care 27: 1047–1053, 2004
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    American Diabetes Association: Economic costs of diabetes in the U.S. in 2002. Diabetes Care 26:917–932, 2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    Tuomilehto J, Lindstrom J, Eriksson JG, Valle TT, Hamalainen H, Ilanne-Parikka P, Keinanen-Kiukaanniemi S, Laakso M, Louheranta A, Rastas M, Salminen V, Uusitupa M: Prevention of type 2 diabetes by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. N Engl J Med 344:1343–1350, 2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. ↵
    The Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group: Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med 346:393–403, 2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. ↵
    Touyz R, Campbell N, Logan A Gledhill N, Petrella R, Padwal R: The 2004 Canadian recommendations for the management of hypertension. III. Lifestyle modifications to prevent and control hypertension. Can J Cardiol 20:55–59, 2004
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. Goldstein DJ: Beneficial effects of modest weight loss. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 16:397–415, 1992
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  7. ↵
    Hooper L, Summerbell CD, Higgins JPT, Thompson RL, Clements G, Capps N, Davey S, Riemersma RA, Ebrahim S: Reduced or modified dietary fat for preventing cardiovascular disease (Cochrane Review). In The Cochrane Library. Issue 2. Chichester, U.K., John Wiley & Sons, 2004
  8. ↵
    NIH Technology Assessment Conference Panel: Methods for voluntary weight loss and control. Ann Intern Med 119:764–770, 1993
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. ↵
    American Diabetes Association and National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease: The prevention or delay of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 25:742–749, 2002
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    Davies MJ, Tringham JR, Troughton J, Khunti KK: Prevention of Type 2 diabetes mellitus: a review of the evidence and its application in a UK setting. Diabet Med 21:403–414, 2004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. ↵
    Padwal R, Laupacis A: Antihypertensive therapy and incidence of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetes Care 27:247–255, 2004
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    The Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group: Effects of withdrawal from metformin on the development of diabetes in the Diabetes Prevention Program. Diabetes Care 26:977–980, 2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    Yang W, Lin L, Qi J: The preventive effect of acarbose and metformin on the IGT population from becoming diabetes mellitus: a 3-year multicentre prospective study. Chin J Endocrinol Metab 17:131–136, 2001
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    Li CL, Pan CY, Lu JM, Zhu Y, Wang JH, Deng XX, Xia FC, Wang HZ, Wang HY: Effect of metformin on patients with impaired glucose tolerance. Diabet Med 16:477–481, 1999
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. ↵
    Fontbonne A, Charles MA, Juhan-Vague I Bard JM, Andre P, Isnard F, Cohen JM, Grandmottet P, Vague P, Safar ME, Eschwege E: The effect of metformin on the metabolic abnormalities associated with upper-body fat distribution. Diabetes Care 19:920–926, 1996
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    Jarrett RJ, Keen H, Fuller JH, McCartney M: Worsening to diabetes in men with impaired glucose tolerance (‘borderline diabetes’). Diabetologia 16:25–30, 1979
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. ↵
    Chiasson JL, Josse RG, Gomis R, Hanefeld M, Karasik A, Laakso M: Acarbose for prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus: the STOP-NIDDM randomized trial. Lancet 359:2072–2077, 2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. ↵
    Chiasson JL, Josse RG, Gomis R, Hanefeld M, Karasik A, Laakso M: Acarbose treatment and the risk of cardiovascular disease and hypertension in patients with impaired glucose tolerance: the STOP-NIDDM trial. JAMA 290:486–494, 2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. ↵
    Sartor G, Schersten B, Carlstrom S, Melander A, Norden A, Persson G: Ten-year follow-up of subjects with impaired glucose tolerance: prevention of diabetes by tolbutamide and diet regulation. Diabetes 29:41–49, 1980
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    Keen H, Jarrett RJ, Ward JD, Fuller JH: Borderline diabetics and their response to tolbutamide. Adv Metab Disord 2 (Suppl. 2):521–531, 1973
    OpenUrl
  21. ↵
    Buchanan TA, Xiang AH, Peters RK, Kjos SL, Marroquin A, Goico J, Ochoa C, Tan S, Berkowitz K, Hodis HN, Azen SP: Preservation of pancreatic B-cell function and prevention of type 2 diabetes by pharmacological treatment of insulin resistance in high-risk Hispanic women. Diabetes 51:2796–2803, 2002
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    Durbin RJ: Thiazolidinedione therapy in the prevention/delay of type 2 diabetes in patients with impaired glucose tolerance and insulin resistance. Diabetes Obes Metab 6:280–285, 2004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  23. ↵
    Torgerson JS, Hauptman J, Boldrin MN, Sjostrom L: Xenical in the prevention of diabetes in obese subjects (XENDOS) study: a randomized study of orlistat as an adjunct to lifestyle changes for the prevention of type 2 diabetes in obese patients. Diabetes Care 27:155–161, 2004
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. ↵
    Heymsfield SB, Segal KR, Hauptman J, Lucas CP, Boldrin MN, Rissanen A, Wilding JP, Sjostrom L: Effects of weight loss with orlistat on glucose tolerance and progression to type 2 diabetes in obese adults. Arch Intern Med 160:1321–1326, 2000
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  25. ↵
    Savage PH, Pressel SL, Curb D, Schron EB, Applegate WB, Black HR, Cohen J, Davis BR, Frost P, Smith W, Gonzalez N, Guthrie GP, Oberman A, Rutan G, Probstfield JL, Stamler J: Influence of long-term, low-dose, diuretic-based antihypertensive therapy on glucose, lipid, uric acid, and potassium levels in older men and women with isolated systolic hypertension. Arch Intern Med 158:741–751, 1998
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  26. ↵
    Fletcher A, Amery A, Birkenhager W, Bulpitt C, Clement D, de Leeuw P, Deruyterre ML, de Schaepdryver A, Dollery C, Fagard R, Forette F, Forte J, Henry JF, Koistinen A, Leonetti G, Lund-Johansen P, Nissinen A, O’Brien E, O’Malley K, Pelemans W, Petrie J, Staessen J, Terzoli L, Thijs L, Tuomilehto J, Webster J, Williams B: Risks and benefits in the trial of the European Working Party on High Blood Pressure in the Elderly. J Hypertens 9:225–230, 1991
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  27. ↵
    Yusuf S, Gerstein H, Hoogwerf B, Pogue J, Bosch J, Wolffenbuttel BHR, Zinman B: Ramipril and the development of diabetes. JAMA 286:1882–1885, 2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  28. ↵
    Vermes E, Ducharme A, Bourassa MG, Lessard M, White M, Tardif JC: Enalapril reduces the incidence of diabetes in patients with chronic heart failure. Circulation 107:1291–1296, 2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    Pfeffer MA, Swedberg K, Granger CB, Held P, McMurray JJV, Michelson EL, Olofsson B, Ostergren J, Yusuf S: Effects of candesartan on mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic heart failure: the CHARM-Overall programme. Lancet 362:759–766, 2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  30. ↵
    Lithell H, Hansson L, Skoog I, Elmfeldt D, Hofman A, Olofsson B, Trenkwalder P, Zanchetti A: The Study on Cognition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE): principle results of a randomized double-blind intervention trial. J Hypertens 21:875–886, 2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  31. ↵
    Pepine CJ, Handberg EM, Cooper-DeHoff RM, Marks RG, Kowey P, Messerli FH, Mancia G, Cangiano JL, Garcia-Barreto D, Keltai M, Erdine S, Bristol HA, Kolb HR, Bakris GL, Cohen JD, Parmley WW: A calcium antagonist vs a non-calcium antagonist hypertension treatment strategy for patients with coronary artery disease: the International Verapamil-Trandolapril Study (INVEST): a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 290:2805–2816, 2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  32. ↵
    Julius S, Kjeldsen SE, Weber M, Brunner HR, Ekman S, Hansson L, Tsushung H, Laragh J, McInnes GT, Mitchell L, Plat F, Schork A, Smith B, Zanchetti A, the VALUE Trial Group: Outcomes in hypertensive patients at high cardiovascular risk treated with regimens based on valsartan or amlodipine: the VALUE randomized trial. Lancet 363:2022–2031, 2004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  33. ↵
    Freeman DJ, Norrie J, Sattar N, Neely DG, Cobbe SM, Ford I, Isles C, Lorimer AR, Macfarlane PW, McKillop JH, Packard CJ, Shepherd J, Gaw A: Pravastatin and the development of diabetes mellitus: evidence for a protective treatment effect in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study. Circulation 103:357–362, 2001
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. ↵
    Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group: MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol-lowering with simvastatin in 5963 people with diabetes: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 361:2005–2016, 2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  35. ↵
    Keech A, Colquhoun D, Best J, Kirby A, Simes RJ, Hunt D, Hague W, Beller E, Arulchelvam M, Baker J, Tonkin A: Secondary prevention of cardiovascular events with long-term pravastatin in patients with diabetes or impaired fasting glucose. Diabetes Care 26:2713–2721, 2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. ↵
    Sever PS, Dahlof B, Poulter NR, Wedel H, Beevers G, Caulfield M, Collins R, Kjeldsen SE, Kristinsson A, McInnes GT, Mehlsen J, Nieminen M, O’Brien E, Ostergren J: Prevention of coronary and stroke events with atorvastatin in hypertensive patients who have average or lower-than-average cholesterol concentrations, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial–Lipid Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 361:1149–1158, 2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  37. ↵
    Tenenbaum A, Motro M, Fisman EZ, Schwammenthal E, Adler Y, Goldenberg I, Leor J, Boyko V, Mandelzweig L, Behar S: Peroxisome proliferators-activated receptor ligand Bezafibrate for prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation 109:2197–2202, 2004
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. ↵
    Kanaya AM, Herrington D, Vittinghoff E Lin F, Grady D, Bittner V, Cauley JA, Barrett-Conner E: Glycemic effects of postmenopausal hormone therapy: the heart and estrogen/progestin replacement study. Ann Intern Med 138:1–9, 1992
  39. ↵
    Manson JE, Rimm EB, Colditz GA, Willett WC, Nathan DM, Arky RA, Rosner B, Hennekens CH, Speizer FE, Stampfer MJ: A prospective study of postmenopausal estrogen therapy and subsequent incidence of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Ann Epidemiol 2:665–673, 1992
    OpenUrlPubMed
  40. ↵
    Rossi R, Origliani G, Modena MG: Transdermal 17-B-Estradiol and risk of developing type 2 diabetes in a population of healthy, nonobese postmenopausal women. Diabetes Care 27:645–649, 2004
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. ↵
    Zhang Y, Howard BV, Cowan LD, Yeh J, Schaefer CF, Wild RA, Wang W, Lee ET: The effect of estrogen use on levels of glucose and insulin and the risk of type 2 diabetes in American Indian postmenopausal women. Diabetes Care 25:500–504, 2002
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  42. ↵
    Hammond CB, Jelovsek FR, Lee KL, Creasman WT, Parker RT: Effects of long-term estrogen replacement therapy. I. Metabolic effects. Am J Obstet Gynecol 133:525–536, 1997
    OpenUrl
  43. ↵
    Gabal LL, Goodman-Gruen D, Barrett-Connor E: The effect of postmenopausal estrogen therapy on the risk of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Am J Public Health 87:443–445, 1997
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  44. ↵
    Pan XR, Li GW, Hu YH, Wang JX, Yang WY, An ZX, Hu ZX, Lin J, Xiao JZ, Cao HB, Liu PA, Jiang XG, Jiang YY, Wang JP, Zheng H, Zhang H, Bennett PH, Howard BV: The Da Qing IGT, Diabetes Study. Effects of diet and exercise in preventing NIDDM in people with impaired glucose tolerance. Diabetes Care 20:537–544, 1997
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  45. ↵
    UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group: UK prospective diabetes study 16: overview of 6 years’ therapy of type II diabetes. Diabetes 44:1249–1258, 1995
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  46. ↵
    Yee A, Majumdar SR, Simpson SH, McAlister FA, Tsuyuki RT, Johnson JA: Statin use in type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with a delay in starting insulin. Diabet Med 21:962–967, 2004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  47. ↵
    Herlihy OM, Morris RJ, Karunakaran S, Holman R: Sulfonylurea therapy over six years does not delay progression to diabetes (Abstract). Diabetologia 43 (Suppl. 1):A73, 2000
    OpenUrl
  48. ↵
    Kohlroser J, Mathai J, Reichheld J, Banner BF, Bonkovsky HL: Hepatotoxicity due to troglitazone: report of two cases and review of adverse events reported to the United States Food and Drug Administration. Am J Gastroenterol 95:272–276, 2000
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  49. ↵
    The Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group: Within-trial cost-effectiveness of lifestyle intervention or metformin for the primary prevention of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 26:2518–2523, 2003
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  50. ↵
    Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, Spinas GA, Shaw JE, Zimmet PZ: Intensive lifestyle changes or metformin in patients with impaired glucose tolerance: modeling the long-term health economic implications of the Diabetes Prevention Program in Australia, France, Germany, Switzerland, and the Untied Kingdom. Clin Ther 26:304–321, 2004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  51. ↵
    Holman RR, Blackwell L, Stratton IM, Manley SE, Tucker L, Frighi V: Six-year results from the Early Diabetes Intervention Trial (Abstract). Diabet Med 20 (Suppl. 2):S15, 2003
    OpenUrl
  52. ↵
    Lindblad U, Lindwall K, Sjostrand A, Ranstam J, Melander A: The NEPI Antidiabetes Study (NANSY). I. Short-term dose-effect relations of glimepiride in subjects with impaired fasting glucose. Diabetes Obes Metab 3:443–451, 2001
    OpenUrlPubMed
  53. ↵
    The Oxford Center for Diabetes Endocrinology and Metabolism. DREAM overview [article online], 2002. Available from http://www.dtu.ox.ac.uk/index.html?maindoc=/dream. Accessed 24 September 2004
  54. ↵
    Navigator press release: the NAVIGATOR study [article online], 2001. Available from http://www.bioportfolio.com/news/novartis_2.htm. Accessed 24 September 2004
  55. ↵
    Yusuf S: From the HOPE to the ONTARGET and the TRANSCEND studies: challenges in improving prognosis. Am J Cardiol 89 (Suppl.):18A–26A, 2002
    OpenUrl
  56. ↵
    Aventis press release: Aventis announces five-year ORIGIN trial to investigate reduction in heart disease risk with LANTUS insulin [article online], 2004. Available from http://www.aventis.com/main/page.asp?pageid=24322020040216162854&lang=en. Accessed 24 September 2004
  57. ↵
    Canadian Diabetes Association Website: Canadian Normoglycemic Outcomes Evaluation trial [article online], 2004. Available from http://www.diabetes.ca/Section_Professionals/canoe_trial.asp. Accessed 22 November 2004
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Diabetes Care: 28 (3)

In this Issue

March 2005, 28(3)
  • Table of Contents
  • About the Cover
  • Index by Author
Sign up to receive current issue alerts
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about Diabetes Care.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A Systematic Review of Drug Therapy to Delay or Prevent Type 2 Diabetes
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Diabetes Care
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Diabetes Care web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
A Systematic Review of Drug Therapy to Delay or Prevent Type 2 Diabetes
Raj Padwal, Sumit R. Majumdar, Jeff A. Johnson, Janice Varney, Finlay A. McAlister
Diabetes Care Mar 2005, 28 (3) 736-744; DOI: 10.2337/diacare.28.3.736

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Add to Selected Citations
Share

A Systematic Review of Drug Therapy to Delay or Prevent Type 2 Diabetes
Raj Padwal, Sumit R. Majumdar, Jeff A. Johnson, Janice Varney, Finlay A. McAlister
Diabetes Care Mar 2005, 28 (3) 736-744; DOI: 10.2337/diacare.28.3.736
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • CONCLUSIONS
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Metabolic Syndrome and Risk of Cancer
  • Emerging Applications of Metabolomic and Genomic Profiling in Diabetic Clinical Medicine
  • Diabetes and Risk of Parkinson’s Disease
Show more Reviews/Commentaries/ADA Statements

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Standards of Care Guidelines
  • Online Ahead of Print
  • Archives
  • Submit
  • Subscribe
  • Email Alerts
  • RSS Feeds

More Information

  • About the Journal
  • Instructions for Authors
  • Journal Policies
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Advertising
  • Privacy Policy: ADA Journals
  • Copyright Notice/Public Access Policy
  • Contact Us

Other ADA Resources

  • Diabetes
  • Clinical Diabetes
  • Diabetes Spectrum
  • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
  • BMJ Open - Diabetes Research & Care
  • Professional Books
  • Diabetes Forecast

 

  • DiabetesJournals.org
  • Diabetes Core Update
  • ADA's DiabetesPro
  • ADA Member Directory
  • Diabetes.org

© 2021 by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care Print ISSN: 0149-5992, Online ISSN: 1935-5548.