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. 300 No. 7, August 20, 2008 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 article
 •Related letters
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Cardiovascular System, Other
 •Nutritional and Metabolic Disorders
 •Nutritional and Metabolic Disorders, Other
 •Cardiovascular System
 •Prognosis/ Outcomes
 •Cardiovascular Disease/ Myocardial Infarction
 •Drug Therapy
 •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 in the PERISCOPE Trial

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: Dr Nissen and colleagues1 reported that in patients with type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease, treatment with pioglitazone resulted in a significantly lower rate of progression of coronary atherosclerosis compared with glimepiride. According to the authors, patients randomized to pioglitazone exhibited a lower rate of progression of coronary atherosclerosis across a wide array of prespecified and exploratory subgroups. Similar results by the same group and other researchers have been reported with statin treatment, in particular with rosuvastatin and atorvastatin.2-3 Given that statins are known to provide this type of benefit, a possible interference of statin exposure should have been taken into consideration in the study design, possibly stratifying treatment allocation on the basis of statin presence or absence.

In the PERISCOPE trial,1 patients randomized to pioglitazone who were not treated with a statin showed disease progression (percentage atheroma volume change from baseline, +0.92%; 95% confidence interval . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Claudio Fresco, MD
clfresco@fastwebnet.it
Department of Cardiopulmonary Sciences
University Hospital Udine
Udine, 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 ARTICLE

Comparison of Pioglitazone vs Glimepiride on Progression of Coronary Atherosclerosis in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: The PERISCOPE Randomized Controlled Trial
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , and
JAMA. ;299():1561-1573.
FULL TEXT  

RELATED LETTERS

Pioglitazone vs Glimepiride in the PERISCOPE Trial

JAMA. ;300():787-788.
FULL TEXT  

Pioglitazone vs Glimepiride in the PERISCOPE Trial--Reply
, , and
JAMA. ;300():788-788.
FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2008 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.