Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 226226

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionAcknowledgementReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : January | Volume : 16 | Issue : 1 | Page : OC16 - OC19 Full Version

Real-world Retrospective Assessment of Initiation and Effectiveness of Dual Combination Therapy with Metformin and Teneligliptin in Drug Naïve Indian Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients (INITIATE)


Published: January 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/51028.15902
Manoj Chadha, Subodh Banzal, S Sridhar, Soumik Goswami, Hanmant Barkate, Sachin Suryawanshi, Mayur Jadhav, Manasi Brid

1. Consultant Endocrinologist, Department of Medicine, P.D. Hinduja Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. 2. Endocrinologist, Diabetologist and Metabolic Physician, Department of Medicine, Diabetes and Hormones Care Clinic, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India. 3. Consultant Endocrinologist, Department of Medicine, MIOT Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 4. Consultant Endocrinologist, Department of Medicine, NRS Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. 5. Senior Vice President and Head, Global Medical Affairs, Glenmark, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. 6. General Manager, Global Medical Affairs, Glenmark, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. 7. Manager, Global Medical Affairs, Glenmark, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. 8. Manager, Global Medical Affairs, Glenmark, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Manoj Chadha,
Consultant Endocrinologist, Department of Medicine, P.D. Hinduja Hospital and
Research Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
E-mail: m_chadha59@hotmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Diabetes Mellitus (DM) has become the leading health concern worldwide over the last few decades. But despite advances in both understanding of the pathophysiology of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM), and the development of new treatment strategies, current management of patients with T2DM remains suboptimal. Initial monotherapy is frequently inadequate in patients with high baseline Glycated Haemoglobin (HbA1c). Thus, initial combination therapy has emerged as an alternative approach.

Aim: To assess INItiation and effecTiveness of dual combInation therapy with metformin And Teneligliptin in drug naïvE T2DM patients (INITIATE).

Materials and Methods: In this retrospective, multicentre study, newly diagnosed drug naïve T2DM patients failed with diet and exercise prior to screening and initiated with dual therapy of metformin and teneligliptin were enrolled. Data of all the patients prescribed with any therapeutic dose of metformin (250 mg, 500 mg, 750 mg, 1000 mg, 1500 mg, 2000 mg) and teneligliptin (20 mg, 40 mg) was considered. The data was analysed to assess change in glycaemic parameters from baseline to 12 weeks. Paired t-test was applied for statistical results.

Results: Data of 7857 patients were analysed. The mean change of Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG) from baseline {202.29±52.2 mg/dL (11.23±2.89 mmol/L)} to 12 weeks {142.57±34.5 mg/dL (7.91±1.91 mmol/L)} was -59.72±17.7 mg/dL (-3.31±0.98 mmol/L) (p-value <0.0001). The absolute change in mean Postprandial Plasma Glucose (PPG) from baseline {(286.26±80.43 mg/dL (15.89±4.46 mmol/L)} to 12 weeks {(198.30±42.24 mg/dL (11±2.34 mmol/L)} was -87.96±38.19 mg/dL (-4.88±2.12 mmol/L) (p-value <0.0001). Mean HbA1c level was 8.11%±1% (65±10.9 mmol/mol) at baseline and decreased significantly to 7.15%±0.94% (55±10.3 mmol/mol) (p-value <0.0001) with a mean change of -0.96±0.06 (-10.5±0.7 mmol/mol) at 12 weeks. Total 42.83% (n=3365) patients achieved target HbA1c (<7%) at 12 weeks.

Conclusion: Initiation of dual therapy with metformin and teneligliptin in drug naïve Indian T2DM patients significantly improved glycaemic control.

Keywords

Dual therapy, Glycated haemoglobin, Initial combination treatment

Diabetes Mellitus (DM) has become the leading health concern worldwide over the last few decades. The prevalence of DM has increased from 108 million (4.7%) in 1980 to 425 million (9.3%) in 2019, and it is estimated to be 700 million (10.9%) by 2045 (1),(2). Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM) is the most prevailing form of diabetes which encompasses 90-95% of the diagnosed DM (2). It is a progressive metabolic disorder characterised by increasing hyperglycaemia resulting from defects in insulin secretion, insulin action or both (3). Hyperglycaemia is associated with a wide range of microvascular and macrovascular complications. To reduce these complications, targeted glycaemic control is recommended (4).

There is robust evidence indicating that achieving HbA1c targets reduces the risk of complications of T2DM. Further, there is also potential benefit in achieving HbA1c targets as soon as possible (5). Despite advances in both understanding of the pathophysiology of T2DM and the development of new treatment strategies, current management of patients with T2DM remains suboptimal (6).

According to American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD), hypoglycaemic monotherapy is usually recommended as an initial treatment strategy in newly diagnosed T2DM patients (7). However, initial monotherapy is frequently insufficient to achieve or maintain glycaemic targets (8). Thus, initial combination therapy has emerged as an alternative approach. The ADA “Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes” recommends considering initiating dual therapy in patients with newly diagnosed T2DM who have HbA1c ≥1.5% (12.5 mmol/mol) above their glycaemic target (7). Additionally, the latest American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists’ (AACE) treatment algorithm recommended that patients with HbA1c level of >7.5% should receive combination therapy with metformin plus an additional drug (9).

Previous studies have demonstrated that teneligliptin, a Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor (DPP4I), was effective with a significant reduction in glycaemic parameters as an add-on therapy for inadequately controlled T2DM patients who are already on regimen of diet, exercise, and the maximal tolerable dose of metformin monotherapy (10),(11). There is need for evidence regarding the effectiveness of initial dual combination of metformin and teneligliptin in Indian drug naive T2DM patients. Hence, the current study was intended to assess the initiation and effectiveness (improvement in glycaemic parameters) of metformin in combination with teneligliptin initiated as a dual combination therapy in drug naïve T2DM patients in Indian population.

Material and Methods

This was a retrospective multicentric study. Physicians with experience of treating T2DM for more than five years and who had data available as per protocol in their clinics/hospitals and willing to share were considered across the country. The data was provided by respective sites (210 clinics/hospitals) in a uniform case report form format, which was then entered in a central data base. Data collection was started after getting approval from Suraksha Ethics Committee, Asian Institute of Medical Sciences, Dombivili, Mumbai, India. {Registration No (ECR/644/Inst/MH/2014/RR-17) and OHPP No IORG0008323 dated 9/5/19}. Suraksha Ethics Committee is an institutional committee which provides approval to study protocols involving multiple independent centres.

The data was obtained from hospital database across four zones of India between June 2019 to December 2019. Since this was a retrospective study, authors planned to capture and analyse the data of maximum possible patients from the selected centres. A total of 7857 patients’ records were retrieved in this study to assess the effectiveness of initial dual combination therapy with metformin and teneligliptin in newly diagnosed drug naïve T2DM patients. Data of patients prescribed with any therapeutic dose of metformin (250 mg, 500 mg, 750 mg, 1000 mg, 1500 mg, 2000 mg) and teneligliptin (20 mg, 40 mg) was considered.

Inclusion criteria: Patients of either gender ≥18 years of age with newly diagnosed drug naïve T2DM who had failed treatment with diet and exercise prior to screening and initiated with dual drug combination of metformin plus teneligliptin were included in the study. All the centres having data available as per protocol were considered in this study.

Exclusion criteria: Patients with type 1 diabetes, patients initiated on insulin therapy, pregnant or lactating females were excluded from the study. Patients with serious diabetic and cardiovascular conditions were excluded from the study.

Patients were required to have readings of Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG), Post-Prandial Plasma Glucose (PPG) and HbA1c at baseline and at 12 weeks. The effectiveness parameters considered in this study were FPG, PPG and HbA1c. Since 12 weeks is the minimum time duration to expect any significant change in HbA1c, this was the duration considered for assessment of effectiveness (3). For each patient, the following information was collected regarding age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), FPG, PPG and HbA1c. The glycaemic parameters were evaluated to determine the change at 12 weeks compared to baseline.

Statistical Analysis

All statistical analyses were done using the software STATA. All characteristics were summarised descriptively. For continuous variables, data was represented using mean±Standard Deviation (SD). For categorical data, number and percentages were used in the data summaries. The difference between the means of analysis variables between the two independent groups were tested using paired t-test. All p-values were two-tailed and values were considered statistically significant if p-value <0.05.

Results

A total of 7857 patient’s data was retrieved and analysed. Among all patients, 62.64% were males and the mean age of the enrolled patients was 51.56±10.89 years. (Table/Fig 1) presents the demographic characteristics of the patients. The mean body weight of the study population was 69.37 kg at baseline and 68.06 kg at 12 weeks follow-up. The mean BMI was observed to be 26.10 kg/m2 at baseline and 25.62 kg/m2 at 12 weeks follow-up.

(Table/Fig 2) presents the summary of changes in glycaemic parameters from baseline to 12 weeks with the use of dual drug combination of metformin and teneligliptin. Among all patients, there was a significant reduction in mean FPG {-59.72±17.7 mg/dL (-3.31±0.98 mmol/L)}, PPG {-87.96±38.19 mg/dL (-4.88±2.12 mmol/L)} and HbA1c {-0.96±0.06 (-10.5±0.7 mmol/mol)} from baseline to 12 weeks (p-value <0.0001). Among all patients, 42.83% achieved the target HbA1c (<7%) at 12 weeks.

Regarding the dosages of study drugs, due to the retrospective nature of study, data of all the patients prescribed with any therapeutic dose of metformin and teneligliptin was considered including the patients in whom doses were modified during the study period. The patients only on dual combination of metformin and teneligliptin were considered in the study.

Discussion

The database analysis of this study revealed the effectiveness of dual combination therapy with metformin and teneligliptin in drug naïve Indian T2DM patients. The results showed that initiation of metformin and teneligliptin as a dual combination therapy was significantly effective in improving FPG, PPG and HbA1c from baseline to 12 weeks. Most common combination prescribed as initial treatment in this study was metformin 500 mg plus teneligliptin 20 mg (85.61%) followed by metformin 1000 mg plus teneligliptin 20 mg (10.51%).

In a recent phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, Ji L et al., found that addition of teneligliptin 20 mg in T2DM patients with metformin dose ≥1000 mg/day, yielded significant reductions in HbA1c (-0.81%; p-value <0.0001) and FPG (-22.2 mg/dL; p-value <0.0001) at week 12. At week 24, 41.7% patients on teneligliptin achieved HbA1c <7% compared to 16.1% patients on placebo (p-value <0.0001) (12).

Bryson A et al., conducted a double-blind, parallel group study investigating the efficacy and tolerability of teneligliptin with dose of 5, 10, 20 or 40 mg as an add-on in 447 T2DM patients who were inadequately controlled with stable metformin monotherapy ≥1000 mg/day. From baseline to 12 weeks, HbA1c was reduced by -0.65% and -0.81% (both p-value <0.0001) with 20 and 40 mg doses of teneligliptin, respectively (13).

In a 16-week trial, Kim MK et al. reported that teneligliptin 20 mg/day compared to placebo as an add-on to metformin ≥1000 mg/dL was associated with significantly greater reductions in HbA1c {adjusted mean changes from baseline values were -0.90% for teneligliptin plus metformin compared with -0.12% for placebo plus metformin (p-value <0.0001)} and FPG {adjusted mean change in FPG from baseline to week 16 was -16.79 mg/dL for teneligliptin plus metformin versus +5.69 mg/dL for placebo plus metformin (p-value <0.0001)} in T2DM patients (14).

A retrospective analysis was carried out by Chudasama DB et al., to assess the efficacy of teneligliptin with metformin in 450 drug naïve Indian T2DM patients. Reduction in HbA1c from baseline was 1.2%, 1.6% and 1% at 12, 24 and 48 weeks, respectively. Around 66% of subjects were seen with HbA1c <7% at 24 weeks. Study concluded that the combination of teneligliptin 20 mg with metformin 1000 mg was associated with clinically significant reduction in HbA1c (15).

In a prospective, parallel-group, open-label comparative study, Nishanth T et al., compared dual therapy of glimepiride 1 mg plus metformin 500 mg once daily (group A), with teneligliptin 20 mg plus metformin 500 mg once daily (group B) over three months. The reductions in HbA1c, FPG and PPG were 0.84% (p=0.002), 33.3 mg/dL (p-value <0.001), 79.93 mg/dL (p=0.002) and 1.18% (p=0.001), 44 mg/dL (p-value<0.001), 75 mg/dL (p-value=0.002), respectively in group A and group B (16).

In a large real world retrospective study conducted by Ghosh S et al., the effectiveness of teneligliptin was assessed in improving glycaemic control among Indian patients with T2DM. Out of 10,623 enrolled patients, 4299 were on teneligliptin and metformin combination therapy. This dual therapy reduced FPG, PPG and HbA1c from 160.71±23.06 mg/dL, 266.31±47.40 mg/dL and 8.56±1.15% at baseline to 119.21±22.02 mg/dL, 178.92±43.57 mg/dL and 7.8±1.28% at 12 weeks. The difference was -41.5 mg/dL, -87.39 mg/dL and -0.76% in FPG, PPG and HbA1c respectively (p-value <0.0001) (17).

Another large real-world retrospective data was analysed by Ghosh S et al., to assess the efficacy of teneligliptin in Indian T2DM patients. This study enrolled 4305 patients, out of which 1028 patients were prescribed teneligliptin and metformin combination therapy. Significant reductions in HbA1c, FPG and PPG by -1.07%, -44.72 mg/dL and -69.58 mg/dL respectively were seen in patients receiving this combination therapy at the end of 12 weeks (p-value <0.0001) (18).

In treatment of diabetes, there is often some complacency for physicians as well as patients due to the lack of symptoms at the early stage. Hence, to achieve optimal glycaemic targets, combination therapy of two drugs having complementary mechanisms of action to target different physiological abnormalities may be required. The United Kingdom (UK) Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) has proved that monotherapy does not provide long-term stable glycaemic control, emphasising the need of combination therapy. Thus, early combination therapy holds the promise of altering the course of disease, which provides long-term stable HbA1c levels and also delays the need for therapy intensification (19).

Metformin acts by enhancing insulin sensitivity and affects fasting plasma insulin concentrations. It lowers blood glucose and insulin levels by reducing hepatic glucose output while posing minimal risk of hypoglycaemia and weight gain (20). Teneligliptin is a potent, third-generation, competitive, reversible inhibitor of DPP-4 and decreases the degradation of Glucagon Like Peptide 1 (GLP-1), consequently stimulating insulin secretion and suppressing glucagon secretion in a glucose-dependent manner. Combinations of DPP-4 inhibitors and metformin results in increasing concentrations of active GLP-1 which has an insulinotropic effect and glucagonostatic actions that can augment postprandial insulin secretion, resulting in glucose lowering effect (12). Dual drug therapy of metformin plus teneligliptin is one of the most commonly used combinations in Indian clinical practice. This can reflect the change in prescribing habits of medical practitioners, possibly adopting the safer option of gliptins. As a result of emergence of many gliptins and availability of affordable teneligliptin in India, it has greater impact on glycaemic control in newly diagnosed T2DM (18).

Limitation(s)

Retrospective design is one of the limitations of this study, which does not allow to determine a cause-and-effect relationship due to limited availability of the details of medical records. The safety assessment and comparative analysis was not possible as this was a single arm study focused on effectiveness of teneligliptin plus metformin combination.

Conclusion

This study provides the evidence of significant improvement in glycaemic parameters with the initiation of dual combination therapy with metformin and teneligliptin in newly diagnosed drug naïve T2DM patients in India. Metformin plus teneligliptin combination may be a good choice as initial dual therapy in drug naïve Indian T2DM patients. Large sample size (7857 T2DM patients) is the biggest strength of the present study. It also makes this study probably the largest real-world data assessing teneligliptin plus metformin dual combination as initial treatment in drug naïve Indian T2DM patients.

Acknowledgement

Medical writing and other assistance: Dr. Manoj Chadha developed the design of the study with valuable inputs from Dr. S. Banzal, Dr. S. Sridhar, and Dr. S. Goswami. We acknowledge the support of QREC Corporate for data management. We would also like to thank all the doctors who provided their valuable data for the analysis. The data was analysed and the manuscript was prepared and reviewed by Dr. Manoj Chadha, Dr. S. Banzal, Dr. S. Sridhar and Dr. S. Goswami.

References

1.
Glovaci D, Fan W, Wong ND. Epidemiology of diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2019;21(4):21. [crossref] [PubMed]
2.
Saeedi P, Petersohn I, Salpea P, Malanda B, Karuranga S, Unwin N, et al. Global and regional diabetes prevalence estimates for 2019 and projections for 2030 and 2045: Results from the International Diabetes Federation Diabetes Atlas, 9th edition. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice. 2019;157:107843. [crossref] [PubMed]
3.
American Diabetes Association Standards of medical care in diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2014;37:S14-80. [crossref] [PubMed]
4.
Cahn A, Cefalu W. Clinical considerations for use of initial combination therapy in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2016;39(Supplement 2):S137-45. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Cersosimo E, Johnson E, Chovanes C, Skolnik N. Initiating therapy in patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes: Combination therapy vs a stepwise approach. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism. 2017;20(3):497-507. [crossref] [PubMed]
6.
Lavernia F, Adkins S, Shubrook J. Use of oral combination therapy for type 2 diabetes in primary care: Meeting individualized patient goals. Postgraduate Medicine. 2015;127(8):808-17. [crossref] [PubMed]
7.
American Diabetes Association. 9. Pharmacologic approaches to glycaemic treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes - 2020. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(Suppl. 1):S98-110. [crossref] [PubMed]
8.
Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, Diamant M, Ferrannini E, Nauck M, et al. Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2015: A patient-centred approach. Update to a position statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetologia. 2015;58:429-42. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
Garber AJ, Abrahamson MJ, Barzilay JI, Blonde L, Bloomgarden ZT, Bush MA, et al. Consensus statement by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology on the comprehensive type 2 diabetes management algorithm-2017 executive summary. Endocr Pract. 2017;23(2):207-38. [crossref] [PubMed]
10.
Mohammed R, Ahmed I, Banu A. Efficacy of teneligliptin in type 2 diabetes mellitus. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. 2016;4607-10. [crossref]
11.
Mitra A, Ray S. Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of teneligliptin at a higher dose in indian type 2 diabetes patients: A retrospective analysis. Cureus. 2020;12(1):e6812. [crossref]
12.
Ji L, Li L, Ma J, Li X, Li D, Meng B, et al. Efficacy and safety of teneligliptin added to metformin in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with metformin: A phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism. 2021;4(2):e00222. [crossref] [PubMed]
13.
Bryson A, Jennings PE, Deak L, Paveliu FS, Lawson M. The efficacy and safety of teneligliptin added to ongoing metformin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomised study with open label extension. Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy. 2016;17(10):1309-16. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Kim MK, Rhee EJ, Han KA, Woo AC, Lee MK, Ku BJ, et al. Efficacy and safety of teneligliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, combined with metformin in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A 16-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism. 2015;17(3):309-12. [crossref] [PubMed]
15.
Chudasama DB, Saboo BD, Panchal D, Patel F, Saiyed M, Hasnani D, et al. The efficacy of teneligliptin with metformin in drug-naïve type 2 subjects. Diabetes. 2018;67(1):1205-P. [crossref]
16.
Nishanth T, Maheshwari CU, Lakshmi RS, Sri D, Goud P, Tabassum K et al. A study to compare efficacy of Metformin-Glimepiride versus Metformin-Teneligliptin in type II diabetic patients. Int J Pharm Sci & Res. 2018;9(12):5258-64.
17.
Ghosh S, Tiwaskar M, Chawla R, Jaggi S, Asirvatham A, Panikar V. Teneligliptin real-world effectiveness assessment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in India: A retrospective analysis (TREAT-INDIA 2). Diabetes Therapy. 2020;11(10):2257-68. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Ghosh S, Trivedi S, Sanyal D, Modi KD, Kharb S. Teneligliptin real-world efficacy assessment of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in India (TREAT-INDIA study). Diabetes, Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity: Targets And Therapy. 2016;9:347. [crossref] [PubMed]
19.
Matthews D, Del Prato S, Mohan V, Mathieu C, Vencio S, Chan JCN, et al. Insights from VERIFY: Early combination therapy provides better glycaemic durability than a stepwise approach in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Ther. 2020;11(11):2465-76. [crossref] [PubMed]
20.
Holman R. Metformin as first choice in oral diabetes treatment: The UKPDS experience. Journees annuelles de diabetologie de l’Hotel-Dieu. 2007:13-20.

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/51028.15902

Date of Submission: Jun 24, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Jul 27, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Nov 12, 2021
Date of Publishing: Jan 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? NA
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jun 26, 2021
• Manual Googling: Oct 06, 2021
• iThenticate Software: Dec 03, 2021 (24%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com