74
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Metformin, Sulfonylureas, or Other Antidiabetes Drugs and the Risk of Lactic Acidosis or Hypoglycemia : A nested case-control analysis

      research-article
      , MD, MSC 1 , , MD 2 , , MD, PHD 1 , , DSC 3 , 4 , , PHD, MSC 3 , 4 , 5
      Diabetes Care
      American Diabetes Association

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          OBJECTIVE—Lactic acidosis has been associated with use of metformin. Hypoglycemia is a major concern using sulfonylureas. The aim of this study was to compare the risk of lactic acidosis and hypoglycemia among patients with type 2 diabetes using oral antidiabetes drugs.

          RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—This study is a nested case-control analysis using the U.K.-based General Practice Research Database to identify patients with type 2 diabetes who used oral antidiabetes drugs. Within the study population, all incident cases of lactic acidosis and hypoglycemia were identified, and hypoglycemia case subjects were matched to up to four control patients based on age, sex, practice, and calendar time.

          RESULTS—Among the study population of 50,048 type 2 diabetic subjects, six cases of lactic acidosis during current use of oral antidiabetes drugs were identified, yielding a crude incidence rate of 3.3 cases per 100,000 person-years among metformin users and 4.8 cases per 100,000 person-years among users of sulfonylureas. Relevant comorbidities known as risk factors for lactic acidosis could be identified in all case subjects. A total of 2,025 case subjects with hypoglycemia and 7,278 matched control subjects were identified. Use of sulfonylureas was associated with a materially elevated risk of hypoglycemia. The adjusted odds ratio for current use of sulfonylureas was 2.79 (95% CI 2.23–3.50) compared with current metformin use.

          CONCLUSIONS—Lactic acidosis during current use of oral antidiabetes drugs was very rare and was associated with concurrent comorbidity. Hypoglycemic episodes were substantially more common among sulfonylurea users than among users of metformin.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Systematic review: comparative effectiveness and safety of oral medications for type 2 diabetes mellitus.

          As newer oral diabetes agents continue to emerge on the market, comparative evidence is urgently required to guide appropriate therapy. To summarize the English-language literature on the benefits and harms of oral agents (second-generation sulfonylureas, biguanides, thiazolidinediones, meglitinides, and alpha-glucosidase inhibitors) in the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from inception through January 2006 for original articles and through November 2005 for systematic reviews. Unpublished U.S. Food and Drug Administration and industry data were also searched. 216 controlled trials and cohort studies and 2 systematic reviews that addressed benefits and harms of oral diabetes drug classes available in the United States. Using standardized protocols, 2 reviewers serially abstracted data for each article. Evidence from clinical trials was inconclusive on major clinical end points, such as cardiovascular mortality. Therefore, the review was limited mainly to studies of intermediate end points. Most oral agents (thiazolidinediones, metformin, and repaglinide) improved glycemic control to the same degree as sulfonylureas (absolute decrease in hemoglobin A1c level of about 1 percentage point). Nateglinide and alpha-glucosidase inhibitors may have slightly weaker effects, on the basis of indirect comparisons of placebo-controlled trials. Thiazolidinediones were the only class that had a beneficial effect on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (mean relative increase, 0.08 to 0.13 mmol/L [3 to 5 mg/dL]) but a harmful effect on low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels (mean relative increase, 0.26 mmol/L [10 mg/dL]) compared with other oral agents. Metformin decreased LDL cholesterol levels by about 0.26 mmol/L (10 mg/dL), whereas other oral agents had no obvious effects on LDL cholesterol levels. Most agents other than metformin increased body weight by 1 to 5 kg. Sulfonylureas and repaglinide were associated with greater risk for hypoglycemia, thiazolidinediones with greater risk for heart failure, and metformin with greater risk for gastrointestinal problems compared with other oral agents. Lactic acidosis was no more common in metformin recipients without comorbid conditions than in recipients of other oral diabetes agents. Data on major clinical end points were limited. Studies inconsistently reported adverse events other than hypoglycemia, and definitions of adverse events varied across studies. Some harms not assessed in trials or observational studies may have been overlooked. Compared with newer, more expensive agents (thiazolidinediones, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, and meglitinides), older agents (second-generation sulfonylureas and metformin) have similar or superior effects on glycemic control, lipids, and other intermediate end points. Large, long-term comparative studies are needed to determine the comparative effects of oral diabetes agents on hard clinical end points.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Validity of the general practice research database.

            The United Kingdom General Practice Research Database (GPRD) is an office-based, computer-generated, medical resource designed from its inception to be used for epidemiologic research. A distinct version of the GPRD is maintained by the Boston Collaborative Drug Surveillance Program and has been the source of more than 130 scientific articles primarily addressing drug safety issues. We reviewed evidence related to the validity of the GPRD. Specifically, with our extensive experience with this automated database, we evaluated the quality and completeness of the data that it contains.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Validation of information recorded on general practitioner based computerised data resource in the United Kingdom.

              To determine the extent of agreement between clinical information recorded on surgery computers of selected general practitioners and similar information in manual records of letters received from hospital consultants and kept in the general practitioners' files. Hospital consultants' letters in the manual records of selected general practitioners were photocopied and the consultants' clinical diagnoses were compared with diagnoses recorded on computer. General practices in the United Kingdom using computers provided by VAMP Health for recording clinical information. 2491 patients who received one of three non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and who attended 58 practices whose computer recorded data were considered after a preliminary review to be of satisfactory quality. Among 1191 patients for whom consultants' letters were forwarded a clinical diagnosis reflecting the diagnosis noted on a consultant letter was present on the computer record for 1038 (87%). Clinical information available on the computer records of the general practitioners who participated in this study is satisfactory for many clinical studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Diabetes Care
                diacare
                Diabetes Care
                American Diabetes Association
                0149-5992
                1935-5548
                November 2008
                : 31
                : 11
                : 2086-2091
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
                [2 ]Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Clinical Nutrition, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
                [3 ]Boston Collaborative Drug Surveillance Program, Boston University School of Medicine, Lexington, Massachusetts
                [4 ]Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Boston University, Massachusetts
                [5 ]Basel Pharmacoepidemiology Unit, Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
                Author notes

                Corresponding author: Christoph R. Meier, meierch@ 123456uhbs.ch

                Article
                31112086
                10.2337/dc08-1171
                2571051
                18782901
                704856e9-3306-4d29-afc3-addfd91b1a77
                Copyright © 2008, American Diabetes Association

                Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for details.

                History
                : 27 June 2008
                : 10 August 2008
                Categories
                Clinical Care/Education/Nutrition/Psychosocial Research

                Endocrinology & Diabetes
                Endocrinology & Diabetes

                Comments

                Comment on this article