4.5 Article

The efficacy of lowering glycated haemoglobin with a gliclazide modified release-based intensive glucose lowering regimen in the ADVANCE trial

Journal

DIABETES RESEARCH AND CLINICAL PRACTICE
Volume 89, Issue 2, Pages 126-133

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2010.05.012

Keywords

Gliclazide modified release; Glycated haemoglobin; Intensive glucose control; ADVANCE trial

Funding

  1. Servier
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia
  3. Servier International
  4. National Heart Foundation of Australia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of these analyses was to examine the efficacy of the intensive gliclazide MR-based glucose lowering regimen used in the ADVANCE trial in lowering the level of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). All 11,140 randomised patients were included in analyses of treatment efficacy. Treatment efficacy was also examined in subgroups defined by baseline characteristics and treatments. At the end of 5 years follow-up, the mean HbA1c was reduced from 7.5% at baseline to 6.5% in those on intensive glucose control and to 7.3% in those on standard glucose control. With intensive glucose lowering greater proportions achieved HbA1c levels of <= 7.0%, <= 6.5% and <= 6.0%. With intensive glucose lowering substantial reductions in HbA1c were observed across subgroups defined by baseline age, sex, duration of diabetes, BMI, HbA1c or treatment regimen (p < 0.0001). The main independent predictors of reduction in HbA1c during follow-up were baseline HbA1c, duration of diabetes and BMI. There was no weight gain in the intensive glucose control group and severe hypoglycaemia was uncommon, though more frequent than in the standard control group. Intensive glucose control with a gliclazide MR-based regimen was well tolerated and consistently effective in lowering HbA1c across a broad range of patient with type 2 diabetes. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available