PDF factsheet
      Z

prevention in diabetes type 2 for all type of patients , clinical trials results

AHA 2 diet versus AHA 1 diet
Liao, 2002
American Heart Association (AHA) step 2 diet (<30% of total calories as fat, <7% saturated fat, 55% carbohydrate, and < 200 mg cholesterol daily) plus endurance exercise for 1 h three times a week
versus
AHA step 1 diet (30% of total calories as fat, 10% saturated fat, 50% carbohydrate, and <300 mg cholesterol) plus stretching exercise three times a week
Japanese American subjects with impaired glucose tolerance (WHO criteria 1998)open
Follow-up duration: 22 months
USA
error versus placebo
Pan, 2003
acarbose 50 mg three times daily
versus
placebo
patients with impaired glucose tolerance (American Diabetes Association 1997 criteria)double blind
Follow-up duration: 16 weeks
China
STOP-NIDDM (Chiasson), 2002
acarbose 100mg three times daily
versus
placebo
patients with impaired glucose tolerance (WHO 1985 criteria)double blind
Follow-up duration: 3.3 years
Canada, Germany, Austria, Nordic countries, Spain, Israel
glipizide versus placebo
Eriksson, 2006
glipizide 2.5 mg daily
versus
placebo
first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes fulfilling WHO criteria for IGT (WHO criteria in 2006)double blind
Follow-up duration: 18 months
Finland
insulin glargine versus placebo
GRACE - ORIGIN (glargine), 2012
insulin glargine (with a target fasting blood glucose level of <=95 mg per deciliter [5.3 mmol per liter])
versus
standard glycemic care alone
subject with known CV disease and/or CV risk factors plus impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, or type 2 diabetesopen-label
intensive dietary advice versus routine dietary advice
Wein, 1999
intensive dietary advice
versus
routine dietary advice
women with previous gestational diabetes and currently with impaired glucose tolerance (WHO 1985 criteria)open
Follow-up duration: 4.24 y
USA
jiangtang bushen recipe versus control
Fan, 2004
jiangtang bushen recipe 2-3 times/week
versus
placebo
patients with impaired glucose tolerance (WHO 1999 criteria)open
Follow-up duration: 4.1 y
China
lifestyle modification versus control
DPS (Lindström), 2003
individualized counseling aimed at reducing weight and intake of total and saturated fat, and increasing intake of fiber and physical activity
versus
control
Patients overweight with impaired glucose tolerance (WHO 1985 criteria)open
Follow-up duration: 3.2y
Finnish
Fang, 2004
standard prevention education
versus
subject with impaired glucose tolerance
China
JDPP (Sakane), 2005
lifestyle intervention
versus
patients with impaired glucose tolerance (WHO 1999 criteria)
Japan
Keen, 1982
either dietary teaching to restrict carbohydrate intake to 120 g/day or advice to restrict table sugar
versus
subject with impaired glucose tolerance
Kosaka, 2005
to maintain body mass index (BMI) of <24.0 kg/m2 and of <22.0 kg/m2, respectively, by diet and exercise. In the intervention group, detailed instructions on lifestyle were repeated every 3-4 months
versus
control
men with impaired glucose tolerance (WHO criteria 1980)open
Follow-up duration: 3.64 y
Japan
Pan, 1997
three active treatment groups: diet only, exercise only, or diet plus exercise
versus
control
Patients with impaired glucosetolerance (WHO 1985 criteria)open
Follow-up duration: 6 y
China
Tao, 2004
lifestyle intervention
versus
patients with impaired glucose tolerance (WHO 1999 criteria)
Follow-up duration: 31 months
China
US-DDP (lifestyle) (Knowler), 2002
lifestyle-modification intervention
versus
placebo
nondiabetic patients with elevated glucose and high risk for diabetesopen
Follow-up duration: 2.8 years
lifestyle modification + metformin versus control
IDDP (Ramachandran), 2006
advice on lifestyle modification, metformin, or both
versus
given standard health care advice (control)
native Asian Indians with impaired glucose toleranceopen
Follow-up duration: 2.5 y
India
Jarret, 1979
carbohydrate restriction with phenformin 50 mg daily
versus
carbohydrate restriction alone
men with impaired glucose tolerancopen
Follow-up duration: 4.3 y
metformin versus control
James, 2005
metformin 1 g BID
versus
no treatment
Abdominal obesity with insulin resistance[
Follow-up duration: 8 weeks
metformin versus placebo
Baillargeon, 2004
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Non obese women with PCOS
Follow-up duration: 26 weeks
Bridger, 2006
metformin 750 mg BID
versus
placebo
Adolescents with PCOS and insulin resistance
Follow-up duration: 12 weeks
Charles, 1998
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Abdominal obesity
Follow-up duration: 52 weeks
Charles, 2000
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Abdominal obesity, hypertension, and elevated triglycerides
Follow-up duration: 13 weeks
Choux, 2003
metformin 500 mg TID
versus
placebo
PCO
Follow-up duration: 13 weeks
Crave, 1995
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Overweight with PCO
Follow-up duration: 17 weeks
EDIT (Holman), 2003
metformin 500 mg three times/day,
versus
placebo
(WHO 1985 criteria)
UK
Fleming, 2002
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
PCO
Follow-up duration: 17 weeks
Freemark, 2001
metformin 500 mg BID
versus
placebo
Insulin resistance and family history of diabetes
Follow-up duration: 26 weeks
Gambineri, 2004
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Obesity and PCOS
Follow-up duration: 26 weeks
Giugliano, 1993
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Hypertension with normal glucose tolerance
Follow-up duration: 12 weeks
Hoeger, 2004
metformin 850 mg BID + lifestyle modification
versus
placebo + lifestyle modification
Overweight with PCOSo[
Follow-up duration: 48 weeks
Kay, 2001
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Adolescents with morbid obesity
Follow-up duration: 8 weeks
Kelly, 2002
metformin 500 mg TID
versus
placebo
PCO
Follow-up duration: 26 weeks
Kocak, 2002
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
PCO
Follow-up duration: 8 weeks
Lehtovirta, 2001
metformin 500 mg BID
versus
placebo
Overweight with impaired glucose tolerance and family history of diabetes
Follow-up duration: 26 weeks
Li, 1999
metformin 250 mg three times/day
versus
placebo
patients with impaired glucose tolerance (WHO 1985 criteria)double blind
Follow-up duration: 12 months
China
Moghetti, 2000
metformin 500 mg TID
versus
placebo
PCOS with normal glucose tolerance
Follow-up duration: 26 weeks
Morel, 1999
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Impaired glucose tolerancee
Follow-up duration: 8 weeks
Ng, 2001
metformin 500 mg TID
versus
placebo
PCO
Follow-up duration: 12 weeks
Orchard, 2005
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Impaired glucose tolerance
Follow-up duration: 156 weeks
Pasquali, 2000
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Abdominal obesity with and without PCO
Follow-up duration: 26 weeks
Rodriguez, 2004
metformin 1.7 g/d
versus
placebo
Obesity with insulin resistance
Follow-up duration: 20 weeks
Rodriguez-Moctezuma, 2004
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Family history of diabetes
Follow-up duration: 8 weeks
Sirtori, 1984
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Peripheral vascular disease
Follow-up duration: 26 weeks
Srinivasan, 2006
metformin 1 g BID
versus
placebo
Children and adolescents with obesity and insulin resistance
Follow-up duration: 26 weeks
Stakos, 2005
metformin 500 mg/d
versus
placebo
African-Americans with insulin resistance and family history of diabetes
Follow-up duration: 104 weeks
Sturrock, 2002
metformin 1500 mg/d
versus
placebo
PCO
Follow-up duration: 13 weeks
Tang, 2006
metformin 850 mg BID
versus
placebo
Obesity with PCO
Follow-up duration: 26 weeks
US-DPP (metformin) (Knowler), 2002
metformin 850mg twice daily
versus
placebo
nondiabetic patients with elevated glucose and high risk for diabetesdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 2.8 years
USA
Vitale, 2005
metformin 500 mg BID
versus
placebo
Metabolic syndrome
Follow-up duration: 13 weeks
n-3 fatty acid supplement versus placebo
GRACE - ORIGIN (n-3 fatty acid),
n-3 fatty acid supplemen
versus
placebo
subjects with known CV disease and/or CV risk factors plus impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, or type 2 diabetesdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 4.9y (median)
nateglinide versus placebo
NAVIGATOR nateglinide, 2010
NCT00097786
nateglinide 60mg 3 times daily
versus
placebo
subjects with impaired glucose tolerance and either CV disease or CV risk factors double-blind
Follow-up duration: 5 years
40 countries
orlistat versus placebo
Heymsfield, 2000
orlistat 120 mg three times/day
versus
placebo
obese (body mass index, 30-43 kg/m2) adults (WHO 1985 criteria)double blind
Follow-up duration: 4 weeks
USA, Europe
XENDOS (Chiasson), 2002
orlistat 120 mg three times/day
versus
placebo
patients with impaired glucose tolerance (WHO 1994)double blind
Follow-up duration: 3 months
Sweden
ramipril versus placebo
DREAM ramipril, 2006
NCT00095654
ramipril up to 15 mg daily
versus
placebo
patients with impaired fasting glucose or impaired glucose tolerance, or both, and no previous cardiovascular diseasedouble blind
Follow-up duration: 3 y (median)
21 countries
rosiglitazone versus placebo
DREAM rosiglitazone, 2006
NCT00095654
rosiglitazone 8 mg daily
versus
placebo
patients with impaired fasting glucose or impaired glucose tolerance, or bothdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 3 years (median)
21 countries
rosiglitazone and metformin versus placebo
CANOE, 2010
NCT00116932
rosiglitazone (2 mg) and metformin (500 mg) twice-daily
versus
placebo
patients with impaired glucose tolerance double-blind
Follow-up duration: 3.9y (median)
troglitazone versus placebo
TRIPOD (Buchanan), 2002
troglitazone 400 mg once daily
versus
placebo
Hispanic women with previous gestational diabetesdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 30 months (median)
USA
US DDP troglitazone (Knowler), 2005
troglitazone
versus
double placebo
nondiabetic patients with elevated glucose and high risk for diabetesdouble blind
Follow-up duration: 0.9 year
USA
valsartan versus placebo
NAVIGATOR valsartan, 2010
NCT00097786
valsartan up to 160 mg daily
versus
placebo
subjects with impaired glucose tolerance and either CV disease or CV risk factorsdouble-blind
Follow-up duration: 5 years
40 countries
voglibose versus placebo
Voglibose Ph-3, 2009
UMIN 000001109-
voglibose 0.2 mg three times daily
versus
placebo
patients with impaired fasting glucosedouble blind
Follow-up duration: 4.01 years
Japan

  Options


in first

in second

  Filter