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

University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Drug Safety (Impact Factor: 2.62). 02/2009; 32(9):787-800. DOI: 10.2165/11316510-000000000-00000
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Non-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).
Patients 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.
The 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.
This 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 ( NCT00494312.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of thiazolidinediones(TZDs) has been associated with increased fracture risk. We performed a comprehensive literature review and meta-analysis to estimate the risk of fractures with TZDs METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Database, from inception to May 2014. We included all randomized trials that described the risk of fractures or changes in bone mineral density(BMD) with TZDs. We pooled data with odds ratios(ORs) for fractures and the weighted mean difference in BMD. To assess heterogeneity in results of individual studies, we used Cochran's Q statistic and the I(2) statistic.
    Bone 08/2014; · 4.46 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Patients with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of chronic liver disease (CLD) such as non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and steatohepatitis and about one-third of cirrhotic patients have diabetes. However, the use of several antidiabetic agents may be a cause for concern in the case of hepatic impairment (HI). Areas covered: An extensive literature search was performed to analyze the influence of HI on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of glucose-lowering agents and the potential consequences for clinical practice as far as the efficacy/safety balance of their use in diabetic patients with CLD is concerned. Expert opinion: Almost no PK studies have been published regarding metformin, sulfonylureas, thiazolidinediones and α-glucosidase inhibitors in patients with HI. Only mild changes in PK of glinides, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and sodium glucose cotransporters type 2 inhibitors were observed in dedicated PK studies in patients with various degrees of HI, presumably without major clinical relevance although large clinical experience is lacking. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists have a renal excretion rather than liver metabolism. Rare anecdotal case reports of hepatotoxicity have been described with various glucose-lowering agents contrasting with numerous reassuring data. Nevertheless, caution should be recommended, especially in patients with advanced cirrhosis, including with the use of metformin.
    Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism &amp Toxicology 03/2014; · 2.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hepatoprotective potential of peroxisome proliferator activator receptor (PPAR)- α and - γ agonists, fenofibrate (FEN), and pioglitazone (PIO), respectively, against cyclophosphamide (CP)-induced toxicity has been investigated in rat. FEN and PIO (150 and 10 mg/kg/day, resp.) were given orally for 4 weeks. In separate groups, CP (150 mg/kg, i.p.) was injected as a single dose 5 days before the end of experiment, with or without either PPAR agonist. CP induced hepatotoxicity, as it caused histopathological alterations, with increased serum alanine and aspartate transaminases, total bilirubin, albumin, alkaline phosphatase and lactate dehydrogenase. CP caused hepatic oxidative stress, indicated by decrease in tissue reduced glutathione, with increase in malondialdehyde and nitric oxide levels. CP also caused decrease in hepatic antioxidant enzyme levels, including catalase, superoxide dismutase, glutathione peroxidase, and glutathione S-transferase. Furthermore, CP increased serum and hepatic levels of the inflammatory marker tumor necrosis factor (TNF)- α , evaluated using ELISA. Preadministration of PIO, but not FEN, prior to CP challenge improved hepatic function and histology, and significantly reversed oxidative and inflammatory parameters. In conclusion, activation of PPAR- γ , but not PPAR- α , conferred protection against CP-induced hepatotoxicity, via activation of antioxidant and anti-inflammatory mechanisms, and may serve as supplement during CP chemotherapy.
    PPAR Research 01/2014; 2014:626319. · 1.64 Impact Factor