-
1.
Effect of newer antihyperglycemic drugs on liver steatosis indices in patients with diabetes and obesity.
Carretero Gómez, J, Ena, J, Seguí Ripoll, JM, Carrasco-Sánchez, FJ, Gómez Huelgas, R, Casas Rojo, JM, Suárez Tembra, M, Carabantes Rueda, JJ, Arévalo Lorido, JC
Current medical research and opinion. 2021;(11):1867-1873
Abstract
AIM: To assess the efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptors agonist (GLP-1RA) therapy on liver steatosis measured by fatty liver index (FLI) and hepatic steatosis index (HSI) at 26 weeks in outpatients with diabetes and obesity. METHODS Observational, prospective, multicenter study. Patients with steatosis determined by FLI (values <30 rule out and >60 indicate steatosis) and HIS (values <30 rule out and >36 indicate steatosis) who received combination therapy were included. Patients were stratified into three groups according to the sequential order of treatment. We used robust statistical methods. RESULTS In our final report we included 174 patients (58.6% males), mean age 61.9 (10) years. Baseline body mass index, waist circumference and weight were 36.5 (6.8) kg/m2, 117.5 (15.1) cm and 99.4 (20.5) kg, respectively. One hundred percent of patients had altered biomarkers of fatty liver scores (FLI 96 [13] and HSI 49.2 [8.5]). At 26 weeks, significant reductions in FLI (-4.5 [95% CI 3.5-5.9] p < .001) and HSI (-2.4 [95% CI 1.6-3.2] p < .001) were found in the total sample and pre-specified treatment and FLI cut-off point subgroups. CONCLUSION Our results show a beneficial effect of the combination of GLP-1RAs plus SGLT2is on liver steatosis that goes beyond glucose control, and it is related mainly to weight loss, a decline in biomarkers and reductions in abdominal circumference. For many patients, early detection is essential to improving outcomes in NAFLD and could allow us to select the most efficient treatment options.
-
2.
Anti-interleukin-21 antibody and liraglutide for the preservation of β-cell function in adults with recent-onset type 1 diabetes: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.
von Herrath, M, Bain, SC, Bode, B, Clausen, JO, Coppieters, K, Gaysina, L, Gumprecht, J, Hansen, TK, Mathieu, C, Morales, C, et al
The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology. 2021;(4):212-224
Abstract
BACKGROUND Type 1 diabetes is characterised by progressive loss of functional β-cell mass, necessitating insulin treatment. We aimed to investigate the hypothesis that combining anti-interleukin (IL)-21 antibody (for low-grade and transient immunomodulation) with liraglutide (to improve β-cell function) could enable β-cell survival with a reduced risk of complications compared with traditional immunomodulation. METHODS This randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, double-dummy, double-blind, phase 2 trial was done at 94 sites (university hospitals and medical centres) in 17 countries. Eligible participants were adults aged 18-45 years with recently diagnosed type 1 diabetes and residual β-cell function. Individuals with unstable type 1 diabetes (defined by an episode of severe diabetic ketoacidosis within 2 weeks of enrolment) or active or latent chronic infections were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1), with stratification by baseline stimulated peak C-peptide concentration (mixed-meal tolerance test [MMTT]), to the combination of anti-IL-21 and liraglutide, anti-IL-21 alone, liraglutide alone, or placebo, all as an adjunct to insulin. Investigators, participants, and funder personnel were masked throughout the treatment period. The primary outcome was the change in MMTT-stimulated C-peptide concentration at week 54 (end of treatment) relative to baseline, measured via the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) over a 4 h period for the full analysis set (intention-to-treat population consisting of all participants who were randomly assigned). After treatment cessation, participants were followed up for an additional 26-week off-treatment observation period. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02443155. FINDINGS Between Nov 10, 2015, and Feb 27, 2019, 553 adults were assessed for eligibility, of whom 308 were randomly assigned to receive either anti-IL-21 plus liraglutide, anti-IL-21, liraglutide, or placebo (77 assigned to each group). Compared with placebo (ratio to baseline 0·61, 39% decrease), the decrease in MMTT-stimulated C-peptide concentration from baseline to week 54 was significantly smaller with combination treatment (0·90, 10% decrease; estimated treatment ratio 1·48, 95% CI 1·16-1·89; p=0·0017), but not with anti-IL-21 alone (1·23, 0·97-1·57; p=0·093) or liraglutide alone (1·12, 0·87-1·42; p=0·38). Despite greater insulin use in the placebo group, the decrease in HbA1c (a key secondary outcome) at week 54 was greater with all active treatments (-0·50 percentage points) than with placebo (-0·10 percentage points), although the differences versus placebo were not significant. The effects diminished upon treatment cessation. Changes in immune cell subsets across groups were transient and mild (<10% change over time). The most frequently reported adverse events included gastrointestinal disorders, in keeping with the known side-effect profile of liraglutide. The rate of hypoglycaemic events did not differ significantly between active treatment groups and placebo, with an exception of a lower rate in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group during the treatment period. No events of diabetic ketoacidosis were observed. One participant died while on liraglutide (considered unlikely to be related to trial treatment) in connection with three reported adverse events (hypoglycaemic coma, pneumonia, and brain oedema). INTERPRETATION The combination of anti-IL-21 and liraglutide could preserve β-cell function in recently diagnosed type 1 diabetes. The efficacy of this combination appears to be similar to that seen in trials of other disease-modifying interventions in type 1 diabetes, but with a seemingly better safety profile. Efficacy and safety should be further evaluated in a phase 3 trial programme. FUNDING Novo Nordisk.
-
3.
Evaluation of the gut microbiota after metformin intervention in children with obesity: A metagenomic study of a randomized controlled trial.
Pastor-Villaescusa, B, Plaza-Díaz, J, Egea-Zorrilla, A, Leis, R, Bueno, G, Hoyos, R, Vázquez-Cobela, R, Latorre, M, Cañete, MD, Caballero-Villarraso, J, et al
Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie. 2021;:111117
Abstract
BACKGROUND Metformin, a first-line oral antidiabetic agent that has shown promising results in terms of treating childhood and adolescent obesity, might influence the composition of the gut microbiota. We aimed to evaluate whether the gut microbiota of non-diabetic children with obesity changes after a metformin intervention. METHODS The study was a multicenter and double-blind randomized controlled trial in 160 children with obesity. Children were randomly assigned to receive either metformin (1 g/day) or placebo for 6 months in combination with healthy lifestyle recommendations in both groups. Then, we conducted a metagenomic analysis in a subsample obtained from 33 children (15 metformin, 18 placebo). A linear mixed-effects model (LMM) was used to determine the abundance changes from baseline to six months according to treatment. To analyze the data by clusters, a principal component analysis was performed to understand whether lifestyle habits have a different influence on the microbiota depending on the treatment group. RESULTS Actinobacteria abundance was higher after placebo treatment compared with metformin. However, the interaction time x treatment just showed a trend to be significant (4.6% to 8.1% after placebo vs. 3.8 % to 2.6 % after metformin treatment, p = 0.055). At genus level, only the abundance of Bacillus was significantly higher after the placebo intervention compared with metformin (2.5% to 5.7% after placebo vs. 1.5 % to 0.8 % after metformin treatment, p = 0.044). Furthermore, different ensembles formed by Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, and Verrucomicrobia were found according to the interventions under a similar food consumption. CONCLUSION Further studies with a large sample size controlled by lifestyle patterns are required in obese children and adolescents to clarify whether metformin might trigger gut microbiota alterations. TRIAL REGISTRATION Registered on the European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT, ID: 2010-023061-21) on 14 November 2011.
-
4.
Erectile function in men with type 2 diabetes treated with dulaglutide: an exploratory analysis of the REWIND placebo-controlled randomised trial.
Bajaj, HS, Gerstein, HC, Rao-Melacini, P, Basile, J, Colhoun, H, Conget, I, Cushman, WC, Dagenais, GR, Franek, E, Hanefeld, M, et al
The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology. 2021;(8):484-490
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diabetes is a major risk factor for erectile dysfunction, however, the effect of GLP-1 receptor agonists on erectile dysfunction is unknown. We aimed to assess the incidence, prevalence, and progression of erectile dysfunction in men treated with dulaglutide compared with placebo, and to determine whether dulaglutide's effect on erectile dysfunction was consistent with its effect on other diabetes-related outcomes. METHODS The Researching Cardiovascular Events with a Weekly Incretin in Diabetes (REWIND) trial was a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial of the effect of dulaglutide on cardiovascular outcomes. REWIND was done at 371 sites in 24 countries. Men and women aged older than 50 years with type 2 diabetes, who had either a previous cardiovascular event or cardiovascular risk factors, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either dulaglutide or placebo. Participating men were offered the opportunity to complete the standardised International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire at baseline, 2 years, 5 years, and study end. We did an exploratory analysis, in which we included participants who completed a baseline and at least 1 follow-up IIEF questionnaire. The primary outcome for these analyses was the first occurrence of moderate or severe erectile dysfunction following randomisation, assessed by the erectile function subscores on IIEF. This analysis was part of the REWIND trial, which is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01394952. FINDINGS Between Aug 18, 2011, and Aug 14, 2013, 3725 (70·1%) of 5312 male participants with a mean age of 65·5 years (SD 6·4 years) were analysed, of whom 1487 (39·9%) had a history of cardiovascular disease, and 2104 (56·5%) had moderate or severe erectile dysfunction at baseline. The incidence of erectile dysfunction following randomisation was 21·3 per 100 person-years in the dulaglutide group and 22·0 per 100 person-years in the placebo group (HR 0·92, 95% CI 0·85-0·99, p=0·021). Men in the dulaglutide group also had a lesser fall in erectile function subscore compared with the placebo group, with a least square mean difference of 0·61 (95% CI 0·18-1·05, p=0·006). INTERPRETATION Long-term use of dulaglutide might reduce the incidence of moderate or severe erectile dysfunction in men with type 2 diabetes. FUNDING Eli Lilly and Company.
-
5.
Once-weekly tirzepatide versus once-daily insulin degludec as add-on to metformin with or without SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes (SURPASS-3): a randomised, open-label, parallel-group, phase 3 trial.
Ludvik, B, Giorgino, F, Jódar, E, Frias, JP, Fernández Landó, L, Brown, K, Bray, R, Rodríguez, Á
Lancet (London, England). 2021;(10300):583-598
Abstract
BACKGROUND Tirzepatide is a novel dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and GLP-1 receptor agonist under development for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of tirzepatide versus titrated insulin degludec in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by metformin with or without SGLT2 inhibitors. METHODS In this open-label, parallel-group, multicentre (122 sites), multinational (13 countries), phase 3 study, eligible participants (aged ≥18 years) had a baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 7·0-10·5%, body-mass index of at least 25 kg/m2, stable weight, and were insulin-naive and treated with metformin alone or in combination with an SGLT2 inhibitor for at least 3 months before screening. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1), using an interactive web-response system, to once-weekly subcutaneous injection of tirzepatide (5, 10, or 15 mg) or once-daily subcutaneous injection of titrated insulin degludec, and were stratified by country, HbA1c, and concomitant use of oral antihyperglycaemic medications. Tirzepatide was initially given at 2·5 mg and the dose was escalated by 2·5 mg every 4 weeks until the assigned dose was reached. Insulin degludec was initially given at 10 U per day and was titrated once weekly to a fasting self-monitored blood glucose of less than 5·0 mmol/L (<90 mg/dL), following a treat-to-target algorithm, for 52 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was non-inferiority of tirzepatide 10 mg or 15 mg, or both, versus insulin degludec in mean change from baseline in HbA1c at week 52. Key secondary efficacy endpoints were non-inferiority of tirzepatide 5 mg versus insulin degludec in mean change from baseline in HbA1c at week 52, superiority of all doses of tirzepatide versus insulin degludec in mean change from baseline in HbA1c and bodyweight, and the proportion of participants achieving HbA1c of less than 7·0% (<53 mmol/mol) at week 52. We used a boundary of 0·3% to establish non-inferiority in HbA1c difference between treatments. Efficacy and safety analyses were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (all participants who received at least one dose of study drug). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03882970, and is complete. FINDINGS Between April 1 and Nov 15, 2019, we assessed 1947 participants for eligibility, 1444 of whom were randomly assigned to treatment. The modified intention-to-treat population was 1437 participants from the tirzepatide 5 mg (n=358), tirzepatide 10 mg (n=360), tirzepatide 15 mg (n=359), and insulin degludec (n=360) groups. From a mean baseline HbA1c of 8·17% (SD 0·91), the reductions in HbA1c at week 52 were 1·93% (SE 0·05) for tirzepatide 5 mg, 2·20% (0·05) for tirzepatide 10 mg, and 2·37% (0·05) for tirzepatide 15 mg, and 1·34% (0·05) for insulin degludec. The non-inferiority margin of 0·3% was met. The estimated treatment difference (ETD) versus insulin degludec ranged from -0·59% to -1·04% for tirzepatide (p<0·0001 for all tirzepatide doses). The proportion of participants achieving a HbA1c of less than 7·0% (<53 mmol/mol) at week 52 was greater (p<0·0001) in all three tirzepatide groups (82%-93%) versus insulin degludec (61%). At week 52, from a baseline of 94·3 kg (SD 20·1), all three tirzepatide doses decreased bodyweight (-7·5 kg to -12·9 kg), whereas insulin degludec increased bodyweight by 2·3 kg. The ETD versus insulin degludec ranged from -9·8 kg to -15·2 kg for tirzepatide (p<0·0001 for all tirzepatide doses). The most common adverse events in tirzepatide-treated participants were mild to moderate gastrointestinal events that decreased over time. A higher incidence of nausea (12-24%), diarrhoea (15-17%), decreased appetite (6-12%), and vomiting (6-10%) was reported in participants treated with tirzepatide than in those treated with insulin degludec (2%, 4%, 1%, and 1%, respectively). Hypoglycaemia (<54 mg/dL or severe) was reported in five (1%), four (1%), and eight (2%) participants on tirzepatide 5, 10, and 15 mg, respectively, versus 26 (7%) on insulin degludec. Treatment discontinuation due to an adverse event was more common in the tirzepatide groups than in the insulin degludec group. Five participants died during the study; none of the deaths were considered by the investigators to be related to the study treatment. INTERPRETATION In patients with type 2 diabetes, tirzepatide (5, 10, and 15 mg) was superior to titrated insulin degludec, with greater reductions in HbA1c and bodyweight at week 52 and a lower risk of hypoglycaemia. Tirzepatide showed a similar safety profile to that of GLP-1 receptor agonists. FUNDING Eli Lilly and Company.
-
6.
Improved time in range and postprandial hyperglycemia with canagliflozin in combination with teneligliptin: Secondary analyses of the CALMER study.
Cho, KY, Nomoto, H, Nakamura, A, Kawata, S, Sugawara, H, Takeuchi, J, Nagai, S, Omori, K, Tsuchida, K, Miya, A, et al
Journal of diabetes investigation. 2021;(8):1417-1424
Abstract
AIMS/INTRODUCTION We recently reported the beneficial effect of the combination of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor on daily glycemic variability in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Additional favorable effects of combination therapy were explored in this secondary analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS The CALMER study was a multicenter, open-label, prospective, randomized, parallel-group comparison trial for type 2 diabetes mellitus involving continuous glucose monitoring under meal tolerance tests. Patients were randomly assigned to switch from teneligliptin to canagliflozin (SWITCH group) or to add canagliflozin to teneligliptin (COMB group). The continuous glucose monitoring metrics, including time in target range, were investigated. RESULTS All 99 participants (mean age 62.3 years; mean glycated hemoglobin 7.4%) completed the trial. The time in target range was increased in the COMB group (71.2-82.7%, P < 0.001). The extent of the reduction in time above target range was significantly larger in the COMB group compared with the SWITCH group (-14.8% vs -7.5%, P < 0.01). Area under the curve values for glucose at 120 min after all meal tolerance tests were significantly decreased in the COMB group compared with the SWITCH group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor combined with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor improved the quality of glycemic variability and reduced postprandial hyperglycemia compared with each monotherapy.
-
7.
Metformin use is associated with a reduced risk of mortality in patients with diabetes hospitalised for COVID-19.
Lalau, JD, Al-Salameh, A, Hadjadj, S, Goronflot, T, Wiernsperger, N, Pichelin, M, Allix, I, Amadou, C, Bourron, O, Duriez, T, et al
Diabetes & metabolism. 2021;(5):101216
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIMS: Metformin exerts anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive effects. We addressed the impact of prior metformin use on prognosis in patients with type 2 diabetes hospitalised for COVID-19. METHODS CORONADO is a nationwide observational study that included patients with diabetes hospitalised for COVID-19 between March 10 and April 10, 2020 in 68 French centres. The primary outcome combined tracheal intubation and/or death within 7 days of admission. A Kaplan-Meier survival curve was reported for death up to day 28. The association between metformin use and outcomes was then estimated in a logistic regression analysis after applying a propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighting approach. RESULTS Among the 2449 patients included, 1496 were metformin users and 953 were not. Compared with non-users, metformin users were younger with a lower prevalence of diabetic complications, but had more severe features of COVID-19 on admission. The primary endpoint occurred in 28.0% of metformin users (vs 29.0% in non-users, P = 0.6134) on day 7 and in 32.6% (vs 38.7%, P = 0.0023) on day 28. The mortality rate was lower in metformin users on day 7 (8.2 vs 16.1%, P < 0.0001) and on day 28 (16.0 vs 28.6%, P < 0.0001). After propensity score weighting was applied, the odds ratios for primary outcome and death (OR [95%CI], metformin users vs non-users) were 0.838 [0.649-1.082] and 0.688 [0.470-1.007] on day 7, then 0.783 [0.615-0.996] and 0.710 [0.537-0.938] on day 28, respectively. CONCLUSION Metformin use appeared to be associated with a lower risk of death in patients with diabetes hospitalised for COVID-19.
-
8.
Do sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors lead to fracture risk? A pharmacovigilance real-world study.
Zhao, B, Shen, J, Zhao, J, Pan, H
Journal of diabetes investigation. 2021;(8):1400-1407
Abstract
AIMS/INTRODUCTION Given the mechanism of action of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), these drugs can also reduce bone density and increase fracture risk. We aimed to identify and characterize fracture-related adverse events that are associated with SGLT2is. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this observational, retrospective, pharmacovigilance, real-world study, we used disproportionality and Bayesian analyses to compare fracture-related adverse event reporting in patients who received SGLT2is from the first quarter in 2004 to the fourth quarter in 2019 in the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System. We also compared the effect on combined therapy with SGLT2is and other glucose-lowering medications (GLMs), and compared their onset times and outcomes. RESULTS A total of 317 SGLT2is-associated fractures were identified. Affected patients tended to be aged >45 years (68.76%) and were more often male than female (58.04% vs 34.07%). SGLT2is-associated fracture is most commonly reported with canagliflozin (51.10%), dapagliflozin (24.60%) and empagliflozin (23.66%). SGLT2is or SGLT2is combined with GLMs do not show an association with fracture risk under disproportionality and Bayesian analyses. SGLT2i-associated fractures result in hospitalization in 66.64% of patients and death in 9.38% of patients. GLMs show an increased hospitalization rate compared with SGLT2is (69.72% vs 55.14%, P < 0.0001) and GLMs plus SGLT2is (69.72% vs 61.20%, P = 0.0197). CONCLUSIONS Based on the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database, no association is noted between fracture risk and SGLT2is, or SGLT2is combined with GLMs. Long-term follow up and high-quality studies need to further verify and explore the relationship between SGLT2is and fractures.
-
9.
Impact of endogenous insulin secretion on the improvement of glucose variability in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes treated with canagliflozin plus teneligliptin.
Miya, A, Nakamura, A, Cho, KY, Kawata, S, Nomoto, H, Nagai, S, Sugawara, H, Taneda, S, Tsuchida, K, Omori, K, et al
Journal of diabetes investigation. 2021;(8):1395-1399
Abstract
AIMS/INTRODUCTION To identify the effect of combination therapy with a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor and a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor compared with switching from a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor to a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor on improving the glucose variability in patients with or without impaired endogenous insulin secretion. MATERIALS AND METHODS A secondary analysis regarding the relationship between endogenous insulin secretion and the change in mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (ΔMAGE) was carried out in a multicenter, prospective, randomized, parallel-group comparison trial that enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes who had been taking teneligliptin and were treated by switching to canagliflozin (SWITCH) or adding canagliflozin (COMB). Participants were categorized into the following four subgroups: SWITCH or COMB and high or low fasting C-peptide (CPR) divided at baseline by the median. RESULTS ΔMAGE in the COMB group was greatly improved independent of a high or low CPR (-29.2 ± 28.3 vs -20.0 ± 24.6, respectively; P = 0.60). However, ΔMAGE was not ameliorated in the low CPR SWITCH group, and the ΔMAGE was significantly smaller than that in the high CPR COMB group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS COMB would be a better protocol rather than switching teneligliptin to canagliflozin to improve daily glucose variability in patients with impaired endogenous insulin secretion.
-
10.
Metformin for gestational diabetes study: metformin vs insulin in gestational diabetes: glycemic control and obstetrical and perinatal outcomes: randomized prospective trial.
Picón-César, MJ, Molina-Vega, M, Suárez-Arana, M, González-Mesa, E, Sola-Moyano, AP, Roldan-López, R, Romero-Narbona, F, Olveira, G, Tinahones, FJ, González-Romero, S
American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2021;(5):517.e1-517.e17
Abstract
BACKGROUND Gestational diabetes that is not properly controlled with diet has been commonly treated with insulin. In recent years, several studies have published that metformin can lead to, at least, similar obstetrical and perinatal outcomes as insulin. Nevertheless, not all clinical guidelines endorse its use, and clinical practice is heterogeneous. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to test whether metformin could achieve the same glycemic control as insulin and similar obstetrical and perinatal results, with a good safety profile, in women with gestational diabetes that is not properly controlled with lifestyle changes. STUDY DESIGN The metformin for gestational diabetes study was a multicenter, open-label, parallel arms, randomized clinical trial performed at 2 hospitals in Málaga (Spain), enrolling women with gestational diabetes who needed pharmacologic treatment. Women at the age of 18 to 45 years, in the second or third trimesters of pregnancy, were randomized to receive metformin or insulin (detemir or aspart). The main outcomes were (1) glycemic control (mean glycemia, preprandial and postprandial) and hypoglycemic episodes and (2) obstetrical and perinatal outcomes and complications (hypertensive disorders, type of labor, prematurity, macrosomia, large for gestational age, neonatal care unit admissions, respiratory distress syndrome, hypoglycemia, jaundice). Outcomes were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS Between October 2016 and June 2019, 200 women were randomized, 100 to the insulin-treated group and 100 to the metformin-treated group. Mean fasting and postprandial glycemia did not differ between groups, but postprandial glycemia was significantly better after lunch or dinner in the metformin-treated-group. Hypoglycemic episodes were significantly more common in the insulin-treated group (55.9% vs 17.7% on metformin; odds ratio, 6.118; 95% confidence interval, 3.134-11.944; P=.000). Women treated with metformin gained less weight from the enrollment to the prepartum visit (36-37 gestational weeks) (1.35±3.21 vs 3.87±3.50 kg; P=.000). Labor inductions (45.7% [metformin] vs 62.5% [insulin]; odds ratio, 0.506; 95% confidence interval, 0.283-0.903; P=.029) and cesarean deliveries (27.6% [metformin] vs 52.6% [insulin]; odds ratio, 0.345; 95% confidence interval, 0.187-0.625; P=.001) were significantly lower in the metformin-treated group. Mean birthweight, macrosomia, and large for gestational age and babies' complications were not different between treatment groups. The lower cesarean delivery rate for women treated with metformin was not associated with macrosomia, large or small for gestational age, or other complications of pregnancy. CONCLUSION Metformin treatment was associated with a better postprandial glycemic control than insulin for some meals, a lower risk of hypoglycemic episodes, less maternal weight gain, and a low rate of failure as an isolated treatment. Most obstetrical and perinatal outcomes were similar between groups.