4.2 Article

The Glucose and Lipid Effects of Colesevelam as Monotherapy in Drug-Na ve Type 2 Diabetes

期刊

HORMONE AND METABOLIC RESEARCH
卷 46, 期 5, 页码 348-353

出版社

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1358759

关键词

bile acid sequestrants; hemoglobin A1c; LDL cholesterol

资金

  1. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Colesevelam has shown efficacy in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in combination with metformin-, sulfonylurea-, or insulin-based therapy, lowering hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. A study was conducted to evaluate colesevelam as monotherapy in drug-naive patients with T2DM. In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, adults with T2DM who had inadequate glycemic control (HbA1c 7.5% and 9.5%) with diet and exercise alone were randomized to receive colesevelam 3.75g/day (n=176) or placebo (n=181) for 24 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was HbA1c at week 24. Colesevelam as compared to placebo showed significant reductions from baseline in HbA1c (-2.92mmol/mol [0.3%]; p=0.01) and fasting plasma glucose (-10.3mg/dl; p=0.04) at week 24 with last observation carried forward. Colesevelam also significantly reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-11.2%; p<0.0001), total cholesterol (-5.1%; p=0.0005), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-7.4%; p=0.0001), and apolipoprotein B (-6.5%; p=0.0001) and increased apolipoprotein A-I (+2.4%; p=0.04), and triglycerides (+9.7%; p=0.03). Colesevelam monotherapy resulted in statistically significant improvements in glycemic and most lipid parameters in subjects with type 2 diabetes, with no new or unexpected safety and tolerability issues. Modest reductions in HbA1c and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels with colesevelam further support its use in combination with other antidiabetes agents when treatment targets for these parameters are close but are not quite achieved. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00789737

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据