↓ Skip to main content

Comparative analysis of therapeutic efficiency and costs (experience in Bulgaria) of oral antidiabetic therapies based on glitazones and gliptins

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparative analysis of therapeutic efficiency and costs (experience in Bulgaria) of oral antidiabetic therapies based on glitazones and gliptins
Published in
Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13098-015-0059-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elena Pavlova Filipova, Katya Hristova Uzunova, Toni Yonkov Vekov

Abstract

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a serious, chronic, progressive and widespread disease. Metformin is the most commonly prescribed initial therapy, but combination with other antidiabetic agents usually becomes necessary due to the progression of the disease. Pioglitazone is recommended as a second-line therapy because of its strong antihyperglycemic effect and its ability to reduce insulin resistance. Treatment with pioglitazone is associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular complications and hypoglycemia, while simultaneously improving the lipid profile and the symptomatic and histological changes in the liver. Gliptins (sitagliptin and vildagliptin) are a new class of oral antidiabetic drugs which reduce glycated hemoglobin by a different mechanism. Although the efficacy of sitagliptin and vildagliptin is close to that of pioglitazone, the lack of long-term safety data and the higher price question their predominant use. The objective of this review is to highlight the advantages of mono- and combination therapy with pioglitazone in comparison with gliptins and to underline the inconsistencies in the medicinal and reimbursement policy in Bulgaria.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 22%
Researcher 6 12%
Other 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 13 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 34%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 26%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 12 24%