ICEECE2012 Poster Presentations Diabetes (248 abstracts)
School of Medicine Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Objective: To investigate whether restoration of insulin secretion and long-term optimal glycemic control can be achieved by short-term liraglutide (a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist) therapy compared with basal insulin therapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes.
Research Design and Methods: Japanese subjects with type 2 diabetes had a short-term, 3 week course of basal insulin therapy (n=114) or liraglutide therapy (n=29) to achieve a target two hours postprandial glucose of less than 140 mg/dL, then they were discontinued. Efficacy and safety of short-term liraglutide and basal insulin were retrospectively compared in terms of restoration effect of insulin secretion evaluated by fasting C-peptide immunoreactivity (CPR) (ng/mL) / fasting blood glucose (FBS) (mg/dL), two hours postprandial CPR / two hours postprandial blood glucose, insulinogenic index and urinary CPR.
Results: Fasting CPR / FBS was improved from 0.014±0.007 to 0.021±0.008 in liraglutide group, favorably compared to the improvement in basal insulin group (from 0.011±0.006 to 0.020±0.006). Moreover, liraglutide also improved two hours postprandial CPR / two hours postprandial blood glucose from 0.027±0.024 to 0.052±0.028, insulinogenic index from 0.18±0.16 to 0.50±0.39, and urinary CPR from 103.3±69.4 to 66.8±39.5 μg/day. Blood glucose levels of liraglutide-withdrawn patients were kept in long-term good control without medication or with only oral antidiabetic drugs. Gastrointestinal side effects were occasional but tolerable, and hypoglycemic episode was never observed in liraglutide group.
Conclusion: Short-term liraglutide and basal insulin therapy induced the same degree of improvement on insulin secretion in Japanese type 2 diabetic patients. A long-lasting protective effect on pancreatic beta-cell function can be expected by short-term liraglutide therapy.
Declaration of interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.
Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sector.