Display options
Cite
Krentz AJ, Bailey CJ. Oral antidiabetic agents: current role in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Drugs. 2005;65(3):385-411doi: 10.2165/00003495-200565030-00005.
Krentz, A. J., & Bailey, C. J. (2005). Oral antidiabetic agents: current role in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Drugs, 65(3), 385-411. https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-200565030-00005
Krentz, Andrew J, and Bailey, Clifford J. "Oral antidiabetic agents: current role in type 2 diabetes mellitus." Drugs vol. 65,3 (2005): 385-411. doi: https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-200565030-00005
Krentz AJ, Bailey CJ. Oral antidiabetic agents: current role in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Drugs. 2005;65(3):385-411. doi: 10.2165/00003495-200565030-00005. PMID: 15669880.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Drugs. 2005;65(3):385-411. doi: 10.2165/00003495-200565030-00005.

Oral antidiabetic agents: current role in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Drugs

Andrew J Krentz, Clifford J Bailey

Affiliations

  1. Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust, Southampton, UK. [email protected]

PMID: 15669880 DOI: 10.2165/00003495-200565030-00005

Abstract

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a progressive and complex disorder that is difficult to treat effectively in the long term. The majority of patients are overweight or obese at diagnosis and will be unable to achieve or sustain near normoglycaemia without oral antidiabetic agents; a sizeable proportion of patients will eventually require insulin therapy to maintain long-term glycaemic control, either as monotherapy or in conjunction with oral antidiabetic therapy. The frequent need for escalating therapy is held to reflect progressive loss of islet beta-cell function, usually in the presence of obesity-related insulin resistance. Today's clinicians are presented with an extensive range of oral antidiabetic drugs for type 2 diabetes. The main classes are heterogeneous in their modes of action, safety profiles and tolerability. These main classes include agents that stimulate insulin secretion (sulphonylureas and rapid-acting secretagogues), reduce hepatic glucose production (biguanides), delay digestion and absorption of intestinal carbohydrate (alpha-glucosidase inhibitors) or improve insulin action (thiazolidinediones). The UKPDS (United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study) demonstrated the benefits of intensified glycaemic control on microvascular complications in newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes. However, the picture was less clearcut with regard to macrovascular disease, with neither sulphonylureas nor insulin significantly reducing cardiovascular events. The impact of oral antidiabetic agents on atherosclerosis--beyond expected effects on glycaemic control--is an increasingly important consideration. In the UKPDS, overweight and obese patients randomised to initial monotherapy with metformin experienced significant reductions in myocardial infarction and diabetes-related deaths. Metformin does not promote weight gain and has beneficial effects on several cardiovascular risk factors. Accordingly, metformin is widely regarded as the drug of choice for most patients with type 2 diabetes. Concern about cardiovascular safety of sulphonylureas has largely dissipated with generally reassuring results from clinical trials, including the UKPDS. Encouragingly, the recent Steno-2 Study showed that intensive target-driven, multifactorial approach to management, based around a sulphonylurea, reduced the risk of both micro- and macrovascular complications in high-risk patients. Theoretical advantages of selectively targeting postprandial hyperglycaemia require confirmation in clinical trials of drugs with preferential effects on this facet of hyperglycaemia are currently in progress. The insulin-sensitising thiazolidinedione class of antidiabetic agents has potentially advantageous effects on multiple components of the metabolic syndrome; the results of clinical trials with cardiovascular endpoints are awaited. The selection of initial monotherapy is based on a clinical and biochemical assessment of the patient, safety considerations being paramount. In some circumstances, for example pregnancy or severe hepatic or renal impairment, insulin may be the treatment of choice when nonpharmacological measures prove inadequate. Insulin is also required for metabolic decompensation, that is, incipient or actual diabetic ketoacidosis, or non-ketotic hyperosmolar hyperglycaemia. Certain comorbidities, for example presentation with myocardial infarction during other acute intercurrent illness, may make insulin the best option. Oral antidiabetic agents should be initiated at a low dose and titrated up according to glycaemic response, as judged by measurement of glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration, supplemented in some patients by self monitoring of capillary blood glucose. The average glucose-lowering effect of the major classes of oral antidiabetic agents is broadly similar (averaging a 1-2% reduction in HbA1c), alpha-glucosidase inhibitors being rather less effective. Tailoring the treatment to the individual patient is an important principle. Doses are gradually titrated up according to response. However, the maximal glucose-lowering action for sulphonylureas is usually attained at appreciably lower doses (approximately 50%) than the manufacturers' recommended daily maximum. Combinations of certain agents, for example a secretagogue plus a biguanide or a thiazolidinedione, are logical and widely used, and combination preparations are now available in some countries. While the benefits of metformin added to a sulphonylurea were initially less favourable in the UKPDS, longer-term data have allayed concern. When considering long-term therapy, issues such as tolerability and convenience are important additional considerations. Neither sulphonylureas nor biguanides are able to appreciably alter the rate of progression of hyperglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. Preliminary data suggesting that thiazolidinediones may provide better long-term glycaemic stability are currently being tested in clinical trials; current evidence, while encouraging, is not conclusive. Delayed progression from glucose intolerance to type 2 diabetes in high-risk individuals with glucose intolerance has been demonstrated with troglitazone, metformin and acarbose. However, intensive lifestyle intervention can be more effective than drug therapy, at least in the setting of interventional clinical trials. No antidiabetic drugs are presently licensed for use in prediabetic individuals.

References

  1. Diabet Med. 1999 Mar;16(3):179-92 - PubMed
  2. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2002 Sep;4(5):296-304 - PubMed
  3. Diabetes Care. 2002 Dec;25(12):2244-8 - PubMed
  4. Am J Med. 2004 Mar 8;116 Suppl 5A:23S-29S - PubMed
  5. Clin Med (Lond). 2001 Nov-Dec;1(6):472-7 - PubMed
  6. J Clin Invest. 2000 Aug;106(4):453-8 - PubMed
  7. Diabetologia. 2003 Aug;46(8):1029-45 - PubMed
  8. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 Sep 17;42(6):1017-21 - PubMed
  9. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2002 May;15 Suppl 2:737-44 - PubMed
  10. Drugs Aging. 2000 Nov;17(5):411-25 - PubMed
  11. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1999 Sep;48(3):424-32 - PubMed
  12. Drugs. 2004;64(12):1339-58 - PubMed
  13. Drugs. 2002;62(10 ):1463-80 - PubMed
  14. Lancet. 2002 Jun 15;359(9323):2072-7 - PubMed
  15. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2000 Jun;2(3):131-7 - PubMed
  16. Diabetes Care. 1992 Jun;15(6):737-54 - PubMed
  17. N Engl J Med. 2003 Jan 30;348(5):383-93 - PubMed
  18. JAMA. 2003 Jul 23;290(4):486-94 - PubMed
  19. Lancet. 1998 Sep 12;352(9131):854-65 - PubMed
  20. Lancet. 1998 Sep 12;352(9131):837-53 - PubMed
  21. BMJ. 2002 Oct 19;325(7369):860 - PubMed
  22. N Engl J Med. 2004 Sep 9;351(11):1106-18 - PubMed
  23. Diabetologia. 1999 Aug;42(8):903-19 - PubMed
  24. Drugs. 2000 Nov;60(5):1017-28 - PubMed
  25. Circulation. 2003 Dec 9;108(23):2941-8 - PubMed
  26. JAMA. 2002 Jan 16;287(3):360-72 - PubMed
  27. Diabet Med. 2002 Jul;19(7):572-4 - PubMed
  28. Diabetes. 2002 Sep;51(9):2796-803 - PubMed
  29. J Biol Chem. 2001 Oct 12;276(41):37731-4 - PubMed
  30. BMJ. 2000 Jul 29;321(7256):252-3 - PubMed
  31. J Clin Invest. 2001 Oct;108(8):1167-74 - PubMed
  32. Diabet Med. 1999 Sep;16(9):716-30 - PubMed
  33. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2003 Dec;14(6):567-73 - PubMed
  34. N Engl J Med. 1996 Feb 29;334(9):574-9 - PubMed
  35. Diabetes Care. 1997 Jun;20(6):925-8 - PubMed
  36. Lancet. 2000 Mar 18;355(9208):1008-10 - PubMed
  37. Ann Intern Med. 2002 Jul 2;137(1):25-33 - PubMed
  38. Am J Physiol. 1999 Jul;277(1 Pt 1):E1-10 - PubMed
  39. JAMA. 2002 May 15;287(19):2570-81 - PubMed
  40. Lancet. 2001 Nov 17;358(9294):1709-16 - PubMed
  41. Diabetes Care. 2001 Apr;24(4):758-67 - PubMed
  42. Drugs Aging. 2001;18(5):325-33 - PubMed
  43. Drug Saf. 1994 Oct;11(4):223-41 - PubMed
  44. BMJ. 2000 Aug 12;321(7258):394-5 - PubMed
  45. Ann Intern Med. 2001 Jan 2;134(1):61-71 - PubMed
  46. Biochem Soc Trans. 2002 Apr;30(2):333-9 - PubMed
  47. Diabetes. 1972 Sep;21(9):976-9 - PubMed
  48. Am J Med. 2003 Dec 8;115 Suppl 8A:20S-23S - PubMed
  49. Diabetes Care. 1999 Jun;22(6):960-4 - PubMed
  50. Eur J Clin Invest. 2004 Aug;34(8):535-42 - PubMed
  51. Ann Intern Med. 1999 Aug 17;131(4):281-303 - PubMed
  52. N Engl J Med. 2002 Feb 7;346(6):393-403 - PubMed
  53. Diabetes. 1988 Dec;37(12):1595-607 - PubMed
  54. BMJ. 2003 Oct 25;327(7421):951-3 - PubMed
  55. JAMA. 1999 Jun 2;281(21):2005-12 - PubMed
  56. Drugs. 2003;63(10 ):933-51 - PubMed
  57. Diabetes Care. 1993 Jan;16(1):184-6 - PubMed
  58. Diabetologia. 2003 Mar;46 Suppl 1:M17-21 - PubMed
  59. Diabetologia. 2003 Dec;46(12):1594-603 - PubMed

Substances

MeSH terms

Publication Types