Pioglitazone for Diabetes Prevention in Impaired Glucose Tolerance Full Text
New England Journal of Medicine, 03/25/2011
DeFronzo RA et al. - As compared with placebo, pioglitazone reduced the risk of conversion of impaired glucose tolerance to type 2 diabetes mellitus by 72% but was associated with significant weight gain and edema.Methods
- A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted.
- 602 patients were randomly assigned to receive pioglitazone or placebo.
- The median follow-up period was 2.4 years.
- Fasting glucose was measured quarterly, and oral glucose tolerance tests were performed annually.
- Conversion to diabetes was confirmed on the basis of the results of repeat testing.
- Annual incidence rates for type 2 diabetes mellitus were 2.1% in the pioglitazone group and 7.6% in the placebo group, and the hazard ratio for conversion to diabetes in the pioglitazone group was 0.28 (95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.49; P<0.001).
- Conversion to normal glucose tolerance occurred in 48% of the patients in the pioglitazone group and 28% of those in the placebo group (P<0.001).
- Treatment with pioglitazone as compared with placebo was associated with significantly reduced levels of fasting glucose (a decrease of 11.7 mg per deciliter vs. 8.1 mg per deciliter [0.7 mmol per liter vs. 0.5 mmol per liter], P<0.001), 2-hour glucose (a decrease of 30.5 mg per deciliter vs. 15.6 mg per deciliter [1.6 mmol per liter vs. 0.9 mmol per liter], P<0.001), and HbA1c (a decrease of 0.04 percentage points vs. an increase of 0.20 percentage points, P<0.001).
- Pioglitazone therapy was associated with a decrease in diastolic blood pressure (by 2.0 mm Hg vs. 0.0 mm Hg, P=0.03), a reduced rate of carotid intima–media thickening (31.5%, P=0.047), and a greater increase in the level of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (by 7.35 mg per deciliter vs. 4.5 mg per deciliter [0.4 mmol per liter vs. 0.3 mmol per liter], P=0.008).
- Weight gain was greater with pioglitazone than with placebo (3.9 kg vs. 0.77 kg, P<0.001), and edema was more frequent (12.9% vs. 6.4%, P=0.007).