PubMed:23531118 JSONTXT

{"project":"Allie","denotations":[{"id":"SS1_23531118_2_0","span":{"begin":277,"end":301},"obj":"expanded"},{"id":"SS2_23531118_2_0","span":{"begin":303,"end":307},"obj":"abbr"},{"id":"SS1_23531118_8_0","span":{"begin":1022,"end":1035},"obj":"expanded"},{"id":"SS2_23531118_8_0","span":{"begin":1037,"end":1039},"obj":"abbr"},{"id":"SS1_23531118_8_1","span":{"begin":1083,"end":1102},"obj":"expanded"},{"id":"SS2_23531118_8_1","span":{"begin":1104,"end":1106},"obj":"abbr"}],"relations":[{"id":"AE1_23531118_2_0","pred":"abbreviatedTo","subj":"SS1_23531118_2_0","obj":"SS2_23531118_2_0"},{"id":"AE1_23531118_8_0","pred":"abbreviatedTo","subj":"SS1_23531118_8_0","obj":"SS2_23531118_8_0"},{"id":"AE1_23531118_8_1","pred":"abbreviatedTo","subj":"SS1_23531118_8_1","obj":"SS2_23531118_8_1"}],"text":"Alogliptin versus glipizide monotherapy in elderly type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with mild hyperglycaemia: a prospective, double-blind, randomized, 1-year study.\nAIM: To prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of alogliptin versus glipizide in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) over 1 year of treatment.\nMETHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study of elderly T2DM patients (aged 65-90 years) with mild hyperglycaemia on diet/exercise therapy alone [glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 6.5-9.0%] or plus oral antidiabetic monotherapy (HbA1c 6.5-8.0%). Patients were randomized to once-daily alogliptin 25 mg or glipizide 5 mg titrated to 10 mg, if needed. Hypoglycaemic episodes were systematically captured under predefined criteria.\nRESULTS: In the primary analysis, HbA1c mean changes from a baseline of 7.5% were -0.14% with alogliptin (n = 222) and -0.09% with glipizide (n = 219) at the end of the study, demonstrating non-inferiority of alogliptin to glipizide [least squares (LS) mean difference = -0.05%; one-sided 97.5% confidence interval (CI): -∞, 0.13%]. More clinically relevant HbA1c reductions occurred among patients who completed the study: -0.42 and -0.33% with alogliptin and glipizide, with non-inferiority again confirmed (LS mean difference = -0.09%; one-sided 97.5% CI: -∞, 0.07%). Overall, alogliptin was safe and well tolerated, with notably fewer hypoglycaemic episodes than glipizide [5.4% (31 episodes) vs. 26.0% (232 episodes), respectively]; three patients experienced severe hypoglycaemia, all with glipizide. Alogliptin also resulted in favourable weight changes versus glipizide (-0.62 vs. 0.60 kg at week 52; p \u003c 0.001).\nCONCLUSIONS: Alogliptin monotherapy maintained glycaemic control comparable to that of glipizide in elderly patients with T2DM over 1 year of treatment, with substantially lower risk of hypoglycaemia and without weight gain."}

{"project":"PubmedHPO","denotations":[{"id":"T1","span":{"begin":284,"end":301},"obj":"HP_0000819"}],"text":"Alogliptin versus glipizide monotherapy in elderly type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with mild hyperglycaemia: a prospective, double-blind, randomized, 1-year study.\nAIM: To prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of alogliptin versus glipizide in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) over 1 year of treatment.\nMETHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study of elderly T2DM patients (aged 65-90 years) with mild hyperglycaemia on diet/exercise therapy alone [glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 6.5-9.0%] or plus oral antidiabetic monotherapy (HbA1c 6.5-8.0%). Patients were randomized to once-daily alogliptin 25 mg or glipizide 5 mg titrated to 10 mg, if needed. Hypoglycaemic episodes were systematically captured under predefined criteria.\nRESULTS: In the primary analysis, HbA1c mean changes from a baseline of 7.5% were -0.14% with alogliptin (n = 222) and -0.09% with glipizide (n = 219) at the end of the study, demonstrating non-inferiority of alogliptin to glipizide [least squares (LS) mean difference = -0.05%; one-sided 97.5% confidence interval (CI): -∞, 0.13%]. More clinically relevant HbA1c reductions occurred among patients who completed the study: -0.42 and -0.33% with alogliptin and glipizide, with non-inferiority again confirmed (LS mean difference = -0.09%; one-sided 97.5% CI: -∞, 0.07%). Overall, alogliptin was safe and well tolerated, with notably fewer hypoglycaemic episodes than glipizide [5.4% (31 episodes) vs. 26.0% (232 episodes), respectively]; three patients experienced severe hypoglycaemia, all with glipizide. Alogliptin also resulted in favourable weight changes versus glipizide (-0.62 vs. 0.60 kg at week 52; p \u003c 0.001).\nCONCLUSIONS: Alogliptin monotherapy maintained glycaemic control comparable to that of glipizide in elderly patients with T2DM over 1 year of treatment, with substantially lower risk of hypoglycaemia and without weight gain."}

{"project":"yaoziqian_800_3","denotations":[{"id":"T1","span":{"begin":0,"end":10},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T10","span":{"begin":644,"end":654},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T11","span":{"begin":664,"end":673},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T12","span":{"begin":882,"end":892},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T13","span":{"begin":919,"end":928},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T14","span":{"begin":997,"end":1007},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T15","span":{"begin":1011,"end":1020},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T16","span":{"begin":1234,"end":1244},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T17","span":{"begin":1249,"end":1258},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T18","span":{"begin":1368,"end":1378},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T19","span":{"begin":1455,"end":1464},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T2","span":{"begin":18,"end":27},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T20","span":{"begin":1584,"end":1593},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T21","span":{"begin":1595,"end":1605},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T22","span":{"begin":1656,"end":1665},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T23","span":{"begin":1722,"end":1732},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T24","span":{"begin":1796,"end":1805},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T25","span":{"begin":1831,"end":1835},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T5","span":{"begin":51,"end":75},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T6","span":{"begin":224,"end":234},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T7","span":{"begin":242,"end":251},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T8","span":{"begin":277,"end":301},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T9","span":{"begin":416,"end":420},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T26","span":{"begin":303,"end":307},"obj":"DP"}],"text":"Alogliptin versus glipizide monotherapy in elderly type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with mild hyperglycaemia: a prospective, double-blind, randomized, 1-year study.\nAIM: To prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of alogliptin versus glipizide in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) over 1 year of treatment.\nMETHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study of elderly T2DM patients (aged 65-90 years) with mild hyperglycaemia on diet/exercise therapy alone [glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 6.5-9.0%] or plus oral antidiabetic monotherapy (HbA1c 6.5-8.0%). Patients were randomized to once-daily alogliptin 25 mg or glipizide 5 mg titrated to 10 mg, if needed. Hypoglycaemic episodes were systematically captured under predefined criteria.\nRESULTS: In the primary analysis, HbA1c mean changes from a baseline of 7.5% were -0.14% with alogliptin (n = 222) and -0.09% with glipizide (n = 219) at the end of the study, demonstrating non-inferiority of alogliptin to glipizide [least squares (LS) mean difference = -0.05%; one-sided 97.5% confidence interval (CI): -∞, 0.13%]. More clinically relevant HbA1c reductions occurred among patients who completed the study: -0.42 and -0.33% with alogliptin and glipizide, with non-inferiority again confirmed (LS mean difference = -0.09%; one-sided 97.5% CI: -∞, 0.07%). Overall, alogliptin was safe and well tolerated, with notably fewer hypoglycaemic episodes than glipizide [5.4% (31 episodes) vs. 26.0% (232 episodes), respectively]; three patients experienced severe hypoglycaemia, all with glipizide. Alogliptin also resulted in favourable weight changes versus glipizide (-0.62 vs. 0.60 kg at week 52; p \u003c 0.001).\nCONCLUSIONS: Alogliptin monotherapy maintained glycaemic control comparable to that of glipizide in elderly patients with T2DM over 1 year of treatment, with substantially lower risk of hypoglycaemia and without weight gain."}

{"project":"Zierdiyeerkenaili_800_3","denotations":[{"id":"T1","span":{"begin":0,"end":10},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T10","span":{"begin":1455,"end":1464},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T11","span":{"begin":1584,"end":1593},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T12","span":{"begin":1656,"end":1665},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T13","span":{"begin":1796,"end":1805},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T19","span":{"begin":51,"end":75},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T2","span":{"begin":1595,"end":1605},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T20","span":{"begin":277,"end":301},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T21","span":{"begin":644,"end":654},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T22","span":{"begin":224,"end":234},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T23","span":{"begin":882,"end":892},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T24","span":{"begin":997,"end":1007},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T25","span":{"begin":1234,"end":1244},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T26","span":{"begin":1368,"end":1378},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T3","span":{"begin":1722,"end":1732},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T4","span":{"begin":18,"end":27},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T5","span":{"begin":242,"end":251},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T6","span":{"begin":664,"end":673},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T7","span":{"begin":919,"end":928},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T8","span":{"begin":1011,"end":1020},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T9","span":{"begin":1249,"end":1258},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T27","span":{"begin":303,"end":307},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T28","span":{"begin":416,"end":420},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T29","span":{"begin":1831,"end":1835},"obj":"DP"}],"text":"Alogliptin versus glipizide monotherapy in elderly type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with mild hyperglycaemia: a prospective, double-blind, randomized, 1-year study.\nAIM: To prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of alogliptin versus glipizide in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) over 1 year of treatment.\nMETHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study of elderly T2DM patients (aged 65-90 years) with mild hyperglycaemia on diet/exercise therapy alone [glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 6.5-9.0%] or plus oral antidiabetic monotherapy (HbA1c 6.5-8.0%). Patients were randomized to once-daily alogliptin 25 mg or glipizide 5 mg titrated to 10 mg, if needed. Hypoglycaemic episodes were systematically captured under predefined criteria.\nRESULTS: In the primary analysis, HbA1c mean changes from a baseline of 7.5% were -0.14% with alogliptin (n = 222) and -0.09% with glipizide (n = 219) at the end of the study, demonstrating non-inferiority of alogliptin to glipizide [least squares (LS) mean difference = -0.05%; one-sided 97.5% confidence interval (CI): -∞, 0.13%]. More clinically relevant HbA1c reductions occurred among patients who completed the study: -0.42 and -0.33% with alogliptin and glipizide, with non-inferiority again confirmed (LS mean difference = -0.09%; one-sided 97.5% CI: -∞, 0.07%). Overall, alogliptin was safe and well tolerated, with notably fewer hypoglycaemic episodes than glipizide [5.4% (31 episodes) vs. 26.0% (232 episodes), respectively]; three patients experienced severe hypoglycaemia, all with glipizide. Alogliptin also resulted in favourable weight changes versus glipizide (-0.62 vs. 0.60 kg at week 52; p \u003c 0.001).\nCONCLUSIONS: Alogliptin monotherapy maintained glycaemic control comparable to that of glipizide in elderly patients with T2DM over 1 year of treatment, with substantially lower risk of hypoglycaemia and without weight gain."}