Comparative glycemic efficacy and safety of sitagliptin versus gliclazide in uncomplicated type 2 diabetes mellitus: a 6-month prospective study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20261960Keywords:
Type 2 diabetes mellitus, Sitagliptin, Gliclazide, Glycemic control, HbA1c, Hypoglycemia, Oral antidiabetic drugsAbstract
Background: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic metabolic disorder requiring effective glycemic control while minimizing adverse effects such as hypoglycemia. Sitagliptin and gliclazide are commonly used oral antidiabetic agents with different mechanisms of action and safety profiles, but comparative data in uncomplicated T2DM are limited.
Methods: This prospective, open-label, observational cohort study was conducted from July 2024 to August 2025 in patients aged 18-70 years with uncomplicated T2DM. A total of 291 patients were included and allocated into two groups based on treating physician’s discretion. Group A received sitagliptin (100 mg once daily) and group B received gliclazide (30 mg once daily). Patients were followed for six months. Glycemic parameters including fasting blood glucose (FBG), postprandial blood glucose (PPBG), and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were assessed at baseline, 3 months and 6 months. Adverse drug reactions were recorded. Intra-group comparisons were performed using paired t-tests and inter-group comparisons were analyzed using unpaired t-tests, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.
Results: Both groups showed significant reduction in FBG and PPBG over six months (p<0.05). At 6 months, FBG decreased from 162.3±18.5 to 138.2±14.7 mg/dl in the sitagliptin group and from 164.1±19.2 to 124.5±13.9 mg/dl in the gliclazide group (p<0.05). PPBG decreased from 248.6±26.4 to 198.7±20.3 mg/dl in the sitagliptin group and from 251.2±27.1 to 175.8±19.6 mg/dl in the gliclazide group (p<0.05). HbA1c reduction was greater in the gliclazide group (8.3±1.0 to 6.8±0.6) compared to the sitagliptin group (8.2±0.9 to 7.5±0.7) (p<0.01). The incidence of hypoglycemia was significantly lower in the sitagliptin group (2.05%) compared to the gliclazide group (8.28%) (p<0.05).
Conclusions: Gliclazide provides superior glycemic control, whereas sitagliptin offers a better safety profile with a lower risk of hypoglycemia. Treatment should be individualized based on patient characteristics and clinical priorities.
References
Kumar P, Clark M. Diabetes Mellitus and Other Disorders of Metabolism. In: Clinical Medicine. 6th ed. London: Saunders WB. 2002;1069-71.
American Diabetes Association. Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2024. Diabetes Care. 2024;47(1):S1-350.
Zheng Y, Ley SH, Hu FB. Global aetiology and epidemiology of T2DM and its complications. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2018;14(2):88-98.
Boussageon R, Bejan-Angoulvant T, Saadatian-Elahi M, Lafont S, Bergeonneau C, Kassai B, et al. Effect of intensive glucose lowering treatment on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and microvascular events in type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d4169.
Sun H, Saeedi P, Karuranga S, Pinkepank M, Ogurtsova K, Duncan BB, et al. IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global, regional and country-level diabetes prevalence estimates for 2021 and projections for 2045. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2022;183:109119.
International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas. 10th ed. Brussels: International Diabetes Federation. 2021.
Chatterjee S, Khunti K, Davies MJ. Type 2 diabetes. Lancet. 2017;389(10085):2239-51.
Anjana RM, Deepa M, Pradeepa R, Mahanta J, Narain K, Das HK, et al. Prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes in India: results from the ICMR-INDIAB study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5(8):585-96.
Holman RR, Paul SK, Bethel MA, Matthews DR, Neil HAW. 10-year follow-up of intensive glucose control in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1577-89.
Turner RC, Cull CA, Frighi V, Holman RR. Glycemic control with diet, sulfonylurea, metformin, or insulin in patients with T2DM (UKPDS 49). JAMA. 1999;281:2005-12.
Deacon CF, Lebovitz HE. Comparative review of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and sulfonylureas in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2016;18(4):333-47.
Maruthur NM, Tseng E, Hutfless S, Wilson LM, Suarez-Cuervo C, Berger Z, et al. Diabetes medications as monotherapy or metformin-based combination therapy for type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(11):740-51.
Terauchi Y, Yamada Y, Ishida H, Yokoyama H, Shimomura I, Hirose T, et al. Efficacy and safety of sitagliptin compared with glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes (START-J trial). Diabetes Obes Metab. 2017;19(8):1188-92.
Gallwitz B. Clinical use of DPP-4 inhibitors. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;10:389.
Bhat KA, Singh KP, Maddukuri HR, Routray SN, Sharma S, Sharma SK, et al. Clinical profile, comorbidities and therapies in type 2 diabetes patients on sitagliptin-based therapy in an Indian outpatient setting. Cureus. 2024;16(11):e74820.
Nauck MA, Meininger G, Sheng D, Terranella L, Stein PP, Sitagliptin Study 024 Group. Efficacy and safety of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin compared with the sulfonylurea glipizide in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin alone: a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2007;9:194-205.
Seck T, Nauck M, Sheng D, Sunga S, Davies MJ, Stein PP, et al. Safety and efficacy of treatment with sitagliptin or glipizide in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin: a 2-year study. Int J Clin Pract. 2010;64:562-76.
Sharma M, Beckley N, Nazareth I, Heald AH, Cummins E, Bhattacharya D, et al. Effectiveness of sitagliptin compared to sulfonylureas for type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on metformin: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e017260.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
