You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 297 No. 12, March 28, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letters
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Cardiovascular System, Other
 •Drug Therapy, Other
 •Endocrine Diseases
 •Diabetes Mellitus
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Pioglitazone vs Glimepiride and Carotid Intima-Media Thickness

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: The CHICAGO (Carotid Intima-Media Thickness in Atherosclerosis Using Pioglitazone) trial by Dr Mazzone and colleagues1 found a reduced progression of carotid artery intima-media thickness (CIMT) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus taking pioglitazone for 18 months, compared with those taking glimepiride. There was no regression of CIMT in either treatment group.

However, the absolute decrease in mean glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level was only between 0.3% and 0.4%, which is less than expected based on other studies in patients with similar starting HbA1c values.2 It is surprising that the mean HbA1c value in the glimepiride group returned to baseline by 18 months despite ongoing glimepiride treatment. The treatment comparison appears to be between a weak hypoglycemic insulin-sensitizer (pioglitazone) and an ineffective secretagogue (glimepiride).

Given this, the difference in overall glycemic control between groups might have played a role in the results for changes in CIMT and . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Dario Giugliano, MD, PhD
dario.giugliano@unina2.it

Katherine Esposito, MD, PhD
Department of Geriatrics and Metabolic Diseases
University of Naples SUN
Naples, Italy



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED LETTERS

Pioglitazone vs Glimepiride and Carotid Intima-Media Thickness
Yujiro Kida and Tetsuji Sato
JAMA. 2007;297(12):1316.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Pioglitazone vs Glimepiride and Carotid Intima-Media Thickness—Reply
Theodore Mazzone
JAMA. 2007;297(12):1316-1317.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

Effect of Pioglitazone Compared With Glimepiride on Carotid Intima-Media Thickness in Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Trial
Theodore Mazzone, Peter M. Meyer, Steven B. Feinstein, Michael H. Davidson, George T. Kondos, Ralph B. D’Agostino, Sr, Alfonso Perez, Jean-Claude Provost, and Steven M. Haffner
JAMA. 2006;296(21):2572-2581.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2007 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.