CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR PIOGLITAZONE HYDROCHLORIDE AND GLIMEPIRIDE
✉ Email this page to a colleague
All Clinical Trials for PIOGLITAZONE HYDROCHLORIDE AND GLIMEPIRIDE
| Trial ID | Title | Status | Sponsor | Phase | Start Date | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NCT00225264 ↗ | Efficacy Study of Pioglitazone and Glimepiride on the Rate of Progression of Atherosclerotic Disease. | Completed | Takeda | Phase 3 | 2003-10-01 | The primary purpose of this study is to compare the effects of pioglitazone, once daily (QD), versus glimepiride on the amount of thickening of the carotid artery. |
| NCT00225277 ↗ | Efficacy Study of Pioglitazone Compared to Glimepiride on Coronary Atherosclerotic Disease Progression in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus | Completed | Takeda | Phase 3 | 2003-07-01 | The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of pioglitazone, once daily (QD), compared to glimepiride on atherosclerotic disease measured by intravascular ultrasound. |
| NCT00576784 ↗ | Metabolic Effects of Pioglitazone in Type II Diabetic Patients Previously Treated With Insulin | Completed | IKFE Institute for Clinical Research and Development | Phase 4 | 2005-04-01 | The goal of the study is to demonstrate whether a switch from insulin therapy to an oral therapy with pioglitazone/glimepiride will lead to a deterioration of glycemic control (increase in HbA1c by more than 0.5 %) within a 6 month observation period. |
| NCT00700856 ↗ | Thiazolidinediones Or Sulphonylureas and Cardiovascular Accidents.Intervention Trial | Unknown status | Associazione Medici Diabetologi (AMD) | Phase 4 | 2008-09-01 | Background: In patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin, two main therapeutic options are equally plausible: add-on a sulfonylurea (SU) or a thiazolidinedione (TZD). Since the two classes of drugs clearly differ in terms of mechanisms of action, side effects, economic costs and cardiovascular risk factors profile, a direct comparison of the two therapeutic strategies would be most appropriate. Aims: 1) To evaluate the effects of add-on pioglitazone as compared with add-on a SU on the incidence of cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetic patients inadequately controlled with metformin; 2) To compare the two treatments in terms of glycemic control, safety, and economic costs. Methods: multicentre, randomised, open label, parallel group trial of 48 months duration. Eligible participants (type 2 diabetic males and females, aged 50-75 years, BMI 20-45 Kg/m2, in treatment for the last two months with metformin 2 gr/die in monotherapy and with HbA1c > =7.0% and 8.0 % on two consecutive occasions will lead to addition of insulin to ongoing oral therapy. Primary efficacy outcome: a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, non fatal MI (including silent MI), non fatal stroke, and unplanned coronary revascularization. Secondary outcomes. Principal secondary outcome: a composite ischemic endpoint of sudden death, fatal and non fatal acute MI (including silent MI), fatal and non fatal stroke, major amputations (above ankle), endovascular or surgical intervention on the coronary, leg or carotid arteries. Other secondary outcomes - a composite cardiovascular end point including the primary end point plus hospitalization for heart failure, endovascular or surgical intervention on the coronary, leg or carotid arteries, silent MI, angina - by WHO criteria and confirmed by a new electrocardiogram abnormality - intermittent claudication with an ankle/brachial index lower than 090; events of heart failure; a microvascular endpoint including: plasma creatinine increase of 2 times above the baseline value or creatinine clearance reduction of 20ml/min/1. 73m2 or development of overt nephropathy (dialysis or plasma creatinine >3,3 mg/dl) or macroalbuminuria; glycemic control (changes from baseline in HBA1c, time to failure of glycemic control, i.e., HBA1c >8.0% on two consecutive occasions three months apart); major CV risk factors (lipids, blood pressure, microalbuminuria, inflammation markers, waist circumference); safety and side effects; direct and indirect costs. Data regarding CV endpoints, safety, tolerability, and study conduct will be monitored and analyzed by an independent committee, and will be not available to the study investigators until the closing of data collection. Efficacy end points will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. |
| NCT00700856 ↗ | Thiazolidinediones Or Sulphonylureas and Cardiovascular Accidents.Intervention Trial | Unknown status | Associazione Nazionale Medici Cardiologi Ospedalieri | Phase 4 | 2008-09-01 | Background: In patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin, two main therapeutic options are equally plausible: add-on a sulfonylurea (SU) or a thiazolidinedione (TZD). Since the two classes of drugs clearly differ in terms of mechanisms of action, side effects, economic costs and cardiovascular risk factors profile, a direct comparison of the two therapeutic strategies would be most appropriate. Aims: 1) To evaluate the effects of add-on pioglitazone as compared with add-on a SU on the incidence of cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetic patients inadequately controlled with metformin; 2) To compare the two treatments in terms of glycemic control, safety, and economic costs. Methods: multicentre, randomised, open label, parallel group trial of 48 months duration. Eligible participants (type 2 diabetic males and females, aged 50-75 years, BMI 20-45 Kg/m2, in treatment for the last two months with metformin 2 gr/die in monotherapy and with HbA1c > =7.0% and 8.0 % on two consecutive occasions will lead to addition of insulin to ongoing oral therapy. Primary efficacy outcome: a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, non fatal MI (including silent MI), non fatal stroke, and unplanned coronary revascularization. Secondary outcomes. Principal secondary outcome: a composite ischemic endpoint of sudden death, fatal and non fatal acute MI (including silent MI), fatal and non fatal stroke, major amputations (above ankle), endovascular or surgical intervention on the coronary, leg or carotid arteries. Other secondary outcomes - a composite cardiovascular end point including the primary end point plus hospitalization for heart failure, endovascular or surgical intervention on the coronary, leg or carotid arteries, silent MI, angina - by WHO criteria and confirmed by a new electrocardiogram abnormality - intermittent claudication with an ankle/brachial index lower than 090; events of heart failure; a microvascular endpoint including: plasma creatinine increase of 2 times above the baseline value or creatinine clearance reduction of 20ml/min/1. 73m2 or development of overt nephropathy (dialysis or plasma creatinine >3,3 mg/dl) or macroalbuminuria; glycemic control (changes from baseline in HBA1c, time to failure of glycemic control, i.e., HBA1c >8.0% on two consecutive occasions three months apart); major CV risk factors (lipids, blood pressure, microalbuminuria, inflammation markers, waist circumference); safety and side effects; direct and indirect costs. Data regarding CV endpoints, safety, tolerability, and study conduct will be monitored and analyzed by an independent committee, and will be not available to the study investigators until the closing of data collection. Efficacy end points will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. |
| NCT00700856 ↗ | Thiazolidinediones Or Sulphonylureas and Cardiovascular Accidents.Intervention Trial | Unknown status | Italian Society of Diabetology | Phase 4 | 2008-09-01 | Background: In patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin, two main therapeutic options are equally plausible: add-on a sulfonylurea (SU) or a thiazolidinedione (TZD). Since the two classes of drugs clearly differ in terms of mechanisms of action, side effects, economic costs and cardiovascular risk factors profile, a direct comparison of the two therapeutic strategies would be most appropriate. Aims: 1) To evaluate the effects of add-on pioglitazone as compared with add-on a SU on the incidence of cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetic patients inadequately controlled with metformin; 2) To compare the two treatments in terms of glycemic control, safety, and economic costs. Methods: multicentre, randomised, open label, parallel group trial of 48 months duration. Eligible participants (type 2 diabetic males and females, aged 50-75 years, BMI 20-45 Kg/m2, in treatment for the last two months with metformin 2 gr/die in monotherapy and with HbA1c > =7.0% and 8.0 % on two consecutive occasions will lead to addition of insulin to ongoing oral therapy. Primary efficacy outcome: a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, non fatal MI (including silent MI), non fatal stroke, and unplanned coronary revascularization. Secondary outcomes. Principal secondary outcome: a composite ischemic endpoint of sudden death, fatal and non fatal acute MI (including silent MI), fatal and non fatal stroke, major amputations (above ankle), endovascular or surgical intervention on the coronary, leg or carotid arteries. Other secondary outcomes - a composite cardiovascular end point including the primary end point plus hospitalization for heart failure, endovascular or surgical intervention on the coronary, leg or carotid arteries, silent MI, angina - by WHO criteria and confirmed by a new electrocardiogram abnormality - intermittent claudication with an ankle/brachial index lower than 090; events of heart failure; a microvascular endpoint including: plasma creatinine increase of 2 times above the baseline value or creatinine clearance reduction of 20ml/min/1. 73m2 or development of overt nephropathy (dialysis or plasma creatinine >3,3 mg/dl) or macroalbuminuria; glycemic control (changes from baseline in HBA1c, time to failure of glycemic control, i.e., HBA1c >8.0% on two consecutive occasions three months apart); major CV risk factors (lipids, blood pressure, microalbuminuria, inflammation markers, waist circumference); safety and side effects; direct and indirect costs. Data regarding CV endpoints, safety, tolerability, and study conduct will be monitored and analyzed by an independent committee, and will be not available to the study investigators until the closing of data collection. Efficacy end points will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. |
| NCT00722631 ↗ | Anti-Inflammatory Effects of Pioglitazone | Completed | Kurume University | N/A | 2007-05-01 | There is increasing evidence that inflammation plays a role in progression and destabilization of atherosclerotic plaque. FDG-PET can visualize activated metabolic activity of inflammatory cells. It is possible that FDG-PET can detect atherosclerotic plaque inflammation and that FDG-PET can monitor the effect of pioglitazone on plaque inflammation. |
| >Trial ID | >Title | >Status | >Sponsor | >Phase | >Start Date | >Summary |
Clinical Trial Conditions for PIOGLITAZONE HYDROCHLORIDE AND GLIMEPIRIDE
Condition Name
Clinical Trial Locations for PIOGLITAZONE HYDROCHLORIDE AND GLIMEPIRIDE
Trials by Country
Clinical Trial Progress for PIOGLITAZONE HYDROCHLORIDE AND GLIMEPIRIDE
Clinical Trial Phase
Clinical Trial Sponsors for PIOGLITAZONE HYDROCHLORIDE AND GLIMEPIRIDE
Sponsor Name
