一项横断面研究:比较替尼利汀和其他基于格列汀的治疗方案在解决 2 型糖尿病患者胰岛素抵抗和血糖控制方面的效果。

IF 2.7 Q3 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Harmanjit Singh, Ravi Rohilla, Shivani Jaswal, Mandeep Singla
{"title":"一项横断面研究:比较替尼利汀和其他基于格列汀的治疗方案在解决 2 型糖尿病患者胰岛素抵抗和血糖控制方面的效果。","authors":"Harmanjit Singh, Ravi Rohilla, Shivani Jaswal, Mandeep Singla","doi":"10.1080/17446651.2023.2290486","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The objective of this study was to compare the effects of teneligliptin-based regimens and other gliptin-based regimens with respect to insulin resistance and glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We enrolled T2DM subjects, inadequately controlled with metformin and glimepiride and taking one of the gliptins, and divided them into two groups, i.e. group 1 (teneligliptin-based regimens) and group 2 (other gliptin-based regimens). Fasting plasma insulin, adiponectin levels, homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and fasting blood glucose (FBG) were measured and compared. Costs of different gliptins were noted, and mean cost of per day therapy was compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-six subjects participated in this study (43 each in group 1 and group 2). No significant differences were observed in FBG, HbA1c, insulin levels, and HOMA-IR, but the trend was in favor of teneligliptin-based regimens. A significantly higher number of subjects achieved HbA1c target in group 1 (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Teneligliptin had significantly lower cost of per day therapy as compared to other dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Teneligliptin seems to be cost-effective and safer option in T2DM subjects who were not adequately controlled with metformin and sulfonylureas. However, further prospective studies are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":12107,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism","volume":" ","pages":"81-87"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of teneligliptin and other gliptin-based regimens in addressing insulin resistance and glycemic control in type 2 diabetic patients: a cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"Harmanjit Singh, Ravi Rohilla, Shivani Jaswal, Mandeep Singla\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17446651.2023.2290486\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The objective of this study was to compare the effects of teneligliptin-based regimens and other gliptin-based regimens with respect to insulin resistance and glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We enrolled T2DM subjects, inadequately controlled with metformin and glimepiride and taking one of the gliptins, and divided them into two groups, i.e. group 1 (teneligliptin-based regimens) and group 2 (other gliptin-based regimens). Fasting plasma insulin, adiponectin levels, homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and fasting blood glucose (FBG) were measured and compared. Costs of different gliptins were noted, and mean cost of per day therapy was compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-six subjects participated in this study (43 each in group 1 and group 2). No significant differences were observed in FBG, HbA1c, insulin levels, and HOMA-IR, but the trend was in favor of teneligliptin-based regimens. A significantly higher number of subjects achieved HbA1c target in group 1 (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Teneligliptin had significantly lower cost of per day therapy as compared to other dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Teneligliptin seems to be cost-effective and safer option in T2DM subjects who were not adequately controlled with metformin and sulfonylureas. However, further prospective studies are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12107,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"81-87\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17446651.2023.2290486\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17446651.2023.2290486","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介本研究旨在比较替尼利肝治疗方案和其他格列汀治疗方案对 2 型糖尿病(T2DM)患者胰岛素抵抗和血糖控制的影响:我们招募了使用二甲双胍和格列美脲控制不佳并服用一种格列汀类药物的T2DM受试者,将他们分为两组,即第1组(基于替尼利汀的治疗方案)和第2组(基于其他格列汀的治疗方案)。测量并比较了空腹血浆胰岛素、脂肪连蛋白水平、胰岛素抵抗静态模型评估(HOMA-IR)、糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)和空腹血糖(FBG)。记录了不同格列汀类药物的成本,并比较了每天治疗的平均成本:86名受试者参加了此次研究(第一组和第二组各43人)。在 FBG、HbA1c、胰岛素水平和 HOMA-IR 方面未观察到明显差异,但趋势有利于以替尼列汀为基础的治疗方案。第 1 组达到 HbA1c 目标值的受试者人数明显增加(P对于二甲双胍和磺脲类药物不能充分控制病情的 T2DM 受试者来说,替尼列汀似乎是一种更经济、更安全的选择。不过,还需要进一步的前瞻性研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of teneligliptin and other gliptin-based regimens in addressing insulin resistance and glycemic control in type 2 diabetic patients: a cross-sectional study.

Introduction: The objective of this study was to compare the effects of teneligliptin-based regimens and other gliptin-based regimens with respect to insulin resistance and glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Methods: We enrolled T2DM subjects, inadequately controlled with metformin and glimepiride and taking one of the gliptins, and divided them into two groups, i.e. group 1 (teneligliptin-based regimens) and group 2 (other gliptin-based regimens). Fasting plasma insulin, adiponectin levels, homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and fasting blood glucose (FBG) were measured and compared. Costs of different gliptins were noted, and mean cost of per day therapy was compared.

Results: Eighty-six subjects participated in this study (43 each in group 1 and group 2). No significant differences were observed in FBG, HbA1c, insulin levels, and HOMA-IR, but the trend was in favor of teneligliptin-based regimens. A significantly higher number of subjects achieved HbA1c target in group 1 (P < 0.001). Teneligliptin had significantly lower cost of per day therapy as compared to other dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors.

Conclusion: Teneligliptin seems to be cost-effective and safer option in T2DM subjects who were not adequately controlled with metformin and sulfonylureas. However, further prospective studies are needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Expert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism
Expert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: Implicated in a plethora of regulatory dysfunctions involving growth and development, metabolism, electrolyte balances and reproduction, endocrine disruption is one of the highest priority research topics in the world. As a result, we are now in a position to better detect, characterize and overcome the damage mediated by adverse interaction with the endocrine system. Expert Review of Endocrinology and Metabolism (ISSN 1744-6651), provides extensive coverage of state-of-the-art research and clinical advancements in the field of endocrine control and metabolism, with a focus on screening, prevention, diagnostics, existing and novel therapeutics, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology and epidemiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信