Evidence mapPaperPMID 19670918Full record

Trial reportDrug safety2009

Liver safety in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with pioglitazone: results from a 3-year, randomized, comparator-controlled study in the US.

Keith G Tolman, James W Freston, Stuart Kupfer, Alfonso Perez

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Drug safety, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00494312 (A Randomized, Comparator Controlled, Double-Blind Study of the Liver Safety of Pioglitazone HCl vs Glyburide With Metformin and Insulin as Part of Step Therapy in Subjects With Type 2), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00494312 phase4completednot on this map

A Randomized, Comparator Controlled, Double-Blind Study of the Liver Safety of Pioglitazone HCl vs Glyburide With Metformin and Insulin as Part of Step Therapy in Subjects With Type 2 (Non-Insulin Dependent) Diabetes

TypeinterventionalSponsorTakedaRan2000 to 2005Enrolled2,120ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, LiverArmsPioglitazone, Glyburide
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Personalized Management of Type 2 Diabetes.Current diabetes reports · 2019
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Pioglitazone in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: safety and efficacy review.Clinical medicine insights. Endocrinology and diabetes · 2010
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Keith G TolmanUniversity of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. Keith.Tolman@hsc.utah.edu
James W Freston
Stuart Kupfer
Alfonso Perez
Takeda (United States) · USUConn Health · USUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsNon-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), the major hepatic manifestation of type 2 diabetes mellitus, is the most common liver disease in the US. Thiazolidinediones, a commonly used drug class for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, have emerged as a potentially useful treatment for NAFLD. There are, however, lingering concerns about their potential toxicity as well as emerging concerns about how to monitor for and assess hepatotoxicity. We conducted a randomized, long-term, double-blind, hepatic safety study at 171 centres in the US in which 2097 patients with type 2 diabetes received either pioglitazone or glibenclamide (glyburide).

methodsPatients were randomized to receive either pioglitazone (15-45 mg once daily) or glibenclamide (5-15 mg once daily) for 3 years. The primary objective was to evaluate drug-induced liver injury manifested by liver enzyme elevations, measured every 8 weeks for the first year and every 12 weeks thereafter. The primary endpoint was a confirmed ALT greater than three times the upper limit of normal (>3 x ULN) with a secondary endpoint of 8 x ULN. MAIN

resultsThe intent-to-treat population included 1051 pioglitazone-treated and 1046 glibenclamide-treated patients; of these, 411 pioglitazone patients and 413 glibenclamide patients completed the study. The incidence of hepatocellular injury was 0 with pioglitazone and 4 (0.38%) with glibenclamide (p = 0.0617). Analyses of the secondary endpoints revealed no ALT >8 x ULN for pioglitazone versus 1 with glibenclamide (p = 0.4988); no ALT >3 x ULN + total bilirubin 2 x ULN with pioglitazone versus 1 with glibenclamide (p = 0.4988); and fewer ALT >3 x ULN single elevations with pioglitazone (n = 3) than with glibenclamide (n = 9; p = 0.0907). Significantly (p < or = 0.05) fewer cases of ALT >1.5 x ULN, aspartate aminotransferase >1.5 x ULN and gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase >1.5 x ULN were seen with pioglitazone compared with glibenclamide. No case of hepatic dysfunction or hepatic failure was reported in either treatment group; two cases of hepatic cirrhosis with glibenclamide were reported.

conclusionThis study demonstrates an hepatic safety profile of pioglitazone similar to that of glibenclamide in long-term use in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Trial registration number (clinicaltrials.gov): NCT00494312.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBlood GlucoseChemical and Drug Induced Liver InjuryDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Double-Blind MethodDrug ApprovalEndpoint DeterminationFemaleGlyburideHumansHypoglycemic AgentsLiver Function TestsMaleBlood GlucoseGlyburideHypoglycemic AgentsPioglitazoneThiazolidinediones

Identifiers

PMID19670918
OpenAlexW164912637

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.