These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The Effect of Sitagliptin on Carotid Artery Atherosclerosis in Type 2 Diabetes: The PROLOGUE Randomized Controlled Trial.
    Author: Oyama J, Murohara T, Kitakaze M, Ishizu T, Sato Y, Kitagawa K, Kamiya H, Ajioka M, Ishihara M, Dai K, Nanasato M, Sata M, Maemura K, Tomiyama H, Higashi Y, Kaku K, Yamada H, Matsuhisa M, Yamashita K, Bando YK, Kashihara N, Ueda S, Inoue T, Tanaka A, Node K, PROLOGUE Study Investigators.
    Journal: PLoS Med; 2016 Jun; 13(6):e1002051. PubMed ID: 27351380.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Experimental studies have suggested that dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors provide cardiovascular protective effects. We performed a randomized study to evaluate the effects of sitagliptin added on to the conventional therapy compared with conventional therapy alone (diet, exercise, and/or drugs, except for incretin-related agents) on the intima-media thickness (IMT) of the carotid artery, a surrogate marker for the evaluation of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used a multicenter PROBE (prospective, randomized, open label, blinded endpoint) design. Individuals aged ≥30 y with T2DM (6.2% ≤ HbA1c < 9.4%) were randomly allocated to receive either sitagliptin (25 to 100 mg/d) or conventional therapy. Carotid ultrasound was performed at participating medical centers, and all parameters were measured in a core laboratory. Of the 463 enrolled participants with T2DM, 442 were included in the primary analysis (sitagliptin group, 222; conventional therapy group, 220). Estimated mean (± standard error) common carotid artery IMT at 24 mo of follow-up in the sitagliptin and conventional therapy groups was 0.827 ± 0.007 mm and 0.837 ± 0.007 mm, respectively, with a mean difference of -0.009 mm (97.2% CI -0.028 to 0.011, p = 0.309). HbA1c level at 24 mo was significantly lower with sitagliptin than with conventional therapy (6.56% ± 0.05% versus 6.72% ± 0.05%, p = 0.008; group mean difference -0.159, 95% CI -0.278 to -0.041). Episodes of serious hypoglycemia were recorded only in the conventional therapy group, and the rate of other adverse events was not different between the two groups. As it was not a placebo-controlled trial and carotid IMT was measured as a surrogate marker of atherosclerosis, there were some limitations of interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: In the PROLOGUE study, there was no evidence that treatment with sitagliptin had an additional effect on the progression of carotid IMT in participants with T2DM beyond that achieved with conventional treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000004490.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]