Rosiglitazone and glimeperide: review of clinical results supporting a fixed dose combination

Type 2 diabetes has become a major burden to the health care systems worldwide. Among the drugs approved for this indication, glimepiride and rosiglitazone have gained substantial importance in routine use. While glimepiride stimulates β-cell secretion and leads to reduction of blood glucose values, rosiglitazone activates PPARγ and improves insulin resistance, at the vascular and metabolically active cells. Therefore, the combination of the two drugs may be an interesting approach to improve glycemic control and lower cardiovascular risk. A fixed combination of both drugs has been approved for clinical use in the US and EU. The combination of glimepiride and rosiglitazone is generally well tolerated and the use of a fixed combination may lead to improved adherence of the patients to their therapy. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the clinical data that have been published on this combination, appearing to represent a convenient way to obtain therapeutic targets in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Evaluation of Dexterity in Insulin-Treated Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND: Daily routine for insulin-treated patients with diabetes mellitus requires correct performance of self-monitoring of blood glucose and insulin injections several times a day. Dexterity skills may play an important role in the performance efficacy of these procedures. METHODS: We collected data of insulin-treated (>10 years) patients with different age ranges [healthy controls, 14 female/11 male, age (mean ± standard deviation) 55 ± 7 years; type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) patients, 12/13, 45 ± 9 years, disease duration 23.9 ± 6.5 years; T2DM patients, 8/17, 64 ± 6 years, 16.2 ± 6.9 years; T2DM patients (>70 years of age), 9/16, 75 ± 4 years, 19.7 ± 7.0 years]. After assessment of neuropathy (temperature, pain, and vibration perception), the patients participated in two dexterity test batteries [Jebsen–Taylor hand-function test (JHFT) and motoric performance series (MPS)]. RESULTS: Patients with type 2 diabetes showed disturbed vibration perception as compared to the other groups. The dexterity results were influenced by age to a large extent. Older T2DM patients performed worst in the majority of the subtests (e.g., JHFT, writing nondominant hand: control, 40.8 ± 11.7 s; T1DM, 46.3 ± 50.9 s, not significant versus control; old T2DM, 68.1 ± 29.5 s, p < .05; young T2DM, 52.5 ± 26.2 s, p < .05). Patients with type 1 diabetes showed similar JHFT and MPS results than the 10-year-older control subjects and performed outside of the age-dependent normal reference range. CONCLUSIONS: Manual skills and dexterity differed between the groups, and age-corrected reduced skills were common in both T1DM and T2DM patients in this study. Our findings underline the importance of considering dexterity and manual skills when designing medical devices for patients with diabetes mellitus