par Fery, Françoise 
Référence Revue médicale de Bruxelles, 35, 4, page (347-355)
Publication Publié, 2014-09
Référence Revue médicale de Bruxelles, 35, 4, page (347-355)
Publication Publié, 2014-09
Article révisé par les pairs
| Résumé : | The therapeutic options for type 2 diabetes have grown considerably in recent years with the successive emergence on the market of glitazones, incretin mimetics, gliptins and very soon gliflozins. Meanwhile, physicians have been advised to take into account individual patient characteristics and preferences when setting glycemic targets and choosing the most appropriate molecule. Faced with an abundance of options, clinicians, even those specialized in diabetology, are left confused and are divided in their choices. To guide them in their practice, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) jointly published a position statement in 2012. The guidelines posit that the main criteria to be considered are glucose-lowering efficacy, risk of hypoglycemia, effect on body weight, side effects and costs. Not surprisingly, they propose metformin as first line treatment but do not formulate a precise indication regarding the molecule to be introduced in case of metformin contra-indication, intolerance or monotherapy failure. In addition, there is no mention of gliflozins, which were still under evaluation at the time but are now approved and already marketed in some countries. Here we review the mechanisms of action, efficacy and side effects of the two most recent drug classes, namely incretin-based therapies and gliflozins, and try to position them in the therapeutic algorithm of type 2 diabetes. |
