Rosiglitazone increases LDL particle size and buoyancy and decreases C-reactive protein in patients with type 2 diabetes on statin therapy

Yu, Dao‐Yi; Murdoch, Susan J.; Parikh, Shamik; Marcovina, Santica M.; Cobitz, Alexander R.; Chen, Hongzi; Brunzell, John D.

doi:10.3132/dvdr.2006.029

Cited by 22 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These effects were achieved mainly through the action of inhibiting the macrophage activation [12,23,24]. A recent study performed on diabetic patients with statin use demonstrated that TZD can significantly lower the CRP level by more than 45% [25]. A meta-analysis also documented that treatment with TZDs significantly decreased the serum CRP level.…”

Section: Anti-inflammatory Anti-oxidant and Other Pleiotropic Effectmentioning

confidence: 96%

Thiazolidinediones can prevent new onset atrial fibrillation in patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes

Chao

Leu

Huang

et al. 2012

International Journal of Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Anti-inflammatory Anti-oxidant and Other Pleiotropic Effectmentioning

confidence: 96%

Thiazolidinediones can prevent new onset atrial fibrillation in patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes

Chao

Leu

Huang

et al. 2012

International Journal of Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Rosiglitazone significantly increased LDL buoyancy as well as LDL particle size in 72 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a 12 week, placebo-controlled study [89]. Another study of the same duration, but open-label, in 18 diabetic patients confirmed an increase in LDL size, with less small, dense LDL particles.…”

Section: Antihyperglycemic Treatments With Effects On Ldl Particle DImentioning

confidence: 57%

Small dense low-density lipoprotein particles: priority as a treatment target in Type 2 diabetes?

Gerber¹,

Spinas²,

Berneis³

2012

Diabetes Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the past two decades, the importance of the quality of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles -in addition to its quantity -has become of increasing interest. The risk of cardiovascular events was recognized to be closely linked to a predominance of small, dense LDL particles. In addition, in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus, the disease itself and its severity (in particular the degree of insulin resistance) is associated with this subclass of LDL particles. Lipid lowering as well as antihyperglycemic drugs have been evaluated in many studies concerning their effect on LDL particle size. It has increasingly been recognized that a reduction of LDL quantity is not necessarily associated with a beneficial effect on LDL quality. Advances in the understanding of alterations in LDL quality may therefore influence the choice of the therapeutic regimen in patients with diabetes in the future. SummaryDuring the last two decades, the importance of the quality of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles -in addition to its quantity -has become of increasing interest. The risk of cardiovascular events was recognized to be closely linked to a predominance of small, dense LDL particles. In addition, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, the disease itself and its severity (in particular the degree of insulin resistance) is associated with this subclass of LDL particles. Lipid lowering as well as antihyperglycemic drugs have been evaluated in many studies concerning their effect on LDL particle size. It has increasingly been recognized that a reduction of LDL quantity is not necessarily associated with a beneficial effect on LDL quality. Advances in the understanding of alterations in LDL quality may therefore influence the choice of the therapeutic regimen in patients with diabetes in the future.

show abstract

“…Of the 13 trials with conclusions that did not favor the test (glitazone) drug, 4 had glycemic control results favoring the glitazone. Moreover, there were 13 trials where the results reported for glycemic control were inconsistent with the conclusions of the papers [29]–[41]. Specifically, in 9 trials, favorable conclusions were reported yet glycemic control results were either similar or unfavorable to the comparator [29]–[37], though notably two trials were focused on lipid effects or inflammatory markers [36], [37].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors Associated with Results and Conclusions of Trials of Thiazolidinediones

Rattinger

Bero²

2009

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWhen a sponsor funds a study of two competing drugs in a head-to-head comparison, the results and conclusions are likely to favor the sponsor’s drug. Thiazolidinediones, oral medications used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, are one of the most costly choices of oral anti-diabetic medications, yet they do not demonstrate clinically relevant differences in achieving lower glycosylated hemoglobin levels compared to other oral antidiabetic drugs. Our aim is to examine associations between research funding source, study design characteristics aimed at reducing bias, and other factors with the results and conclusions of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of thiazolidinediones compared to other oral hypoglycemic agents.Methods and FindingsThis is a cross-sectional study of 61 published RCTs comparing a thiazolidinedione (glitazone) to another anti-diabetic drug or placebo for treatment of type 2 diabetes. Data on study design characteristics, funding source, author’s financial ties, results for primary outcomes, and author conclusions were extracted. Univariate logistic regression identified associations between independent variables and results and conclusions that favored the glitazone. Of the RCTs, 59% (36/61) were funded by industry, 39% (24/61) did not disclose any funding. Common study design weaknesses included inadequate blinding and lack of concealment of allocation. Trials that reported favorable glycemic control results for the glitazone were more likely to have adequate blinding (OR (95% CI) = 5.42 (1.46, 21.19), p = 0.008) and have a corresponding author with financial ties to the glitazone manufacturer (OR (95% CI) = 4.12 (1.05, 19.53); p = 0.04). Trials with conclusions favoring the glitazone were less likely to be funded by a comparator drug company than a glitazone company (OR (95% CI) = 0.026 (0, 0.40), p = 0.003) and less likely to be published in journals with higher impact factors (OR (95% CI) = 0.79 (0.62, 0.97), p = 0.011). One limitation of our study is that we categorized studies as funded by industry based on each article’s disclosure which could underestimate the number of industry sponsored studies and personal ties of investigators. Additionally, our study did not include any head-to-head comparisons of one glitazone to another.ConclusionsPublished RCT comparisons of glitazones with other anti-diabetic drugs or placebo are predominantly industry supported and this support, as well as the financial ties of study authors, appears to be associated with favorable findings.

show abstract

Rosiglitazone increases LDL particle size and buoyancy and decreases C-reactive protein in patients with type 2 diabetes on statin therapy

Cited by 22 publications

References 32 publications

Thiazolidinediones can prevent new onset atrial fibrillation in patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes

Thiazolidinediones can prevent new onset atrial fibrillation in patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes

Small dense low-density lipoprotein particles: priority as a treatment target in Type 2 diabetes?

Factors Associated with Results and Conclusions of Trials of Thiazolidinediones

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About