Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 24, 2026

Regulatory T cells: Therapeutic Potential for Treating Transplant Rejection and Type I Diabetes
Published on: August 20, 2007
Diabetes clinical trials: helped or hindered by the current shift in regulatory requirements?
Faiez Zannad1, Wendy Gattis Stough, Stuart J Pocock
1INSERM, Centre d'Investigation Clinique 9501 and Unité 961, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, and the Department of Cardiology, Nancy University, Hôpital Jeanne d' Arc, 54200 Toul, Nancy, France. f.zannad@chu-nancy.fr
Abstract:
Glycaemic control is an inadequate surrogate marker of cardiovascular event reduction in patients with type 2 diabetes. Clinical trials to date have been unsuccessful in identifying a therapeutic approach that addresses the underlying problem in diabetes (glycaemic control) and reduces cardiovascular risk. The potential for some agents to increase the risk of cardiovascular events has led to substantial changes in regulatory requirements for new anti-diabetic therapies. These requirements, while key to ensuring the cardiovascular safety of new agents, fail to emphasize the need to show clinical benefits, such as less visual impairment, less need for dialysis, or fewer cardiovascular events and deaths. Changes in test results such as glycaemic control, serum creatinine, micro-albuminuria, or retinopathy are inadequate surrogates. Regulators should consider the potential advantages of offering extended patent protection in order to encourage companies to conduct long-term trials in diabetes and many other chronic medical conditions. Cooperative efforts among physicians, clinical trialists, regulators, and sponsors are needed to address unresolved issues including re-defining therapeutic targets that are meaningful to patients with diabetes, determining the appropriate length of follow-up for future trials, and considering the ethical and operational challenges of non-inferiority designs.
Insights
Glycaemic control is insufficient for measuring cardiovascular risk reduction in type 2 diabetes. New trials must focus on meaningful clinical benefits beyond blood sugar levels for diabetes treatments.
Area of Science:
- Endocrinology
- Cardiology
- Clinical Trials
Background:
- Glycaemic control is an inadequate surrogate marker for cardiovascular event reduction in type 2 diabetes.
- Current therapeutic approaches have not successfully linked glycaemic control to reduced cardiovascular risk.
- Concerns about cardiovascular risks associated with some anti-diabetic agents have altered regulatory requirements.
Purpose of the Study:
- To highlight the inadequacy of glycaemic control as a surrogate marker for cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes.
- To advocate for regulatory frameworks that prioritize demonstration of clinical benefits in diabetes trials.
- To propose improvements in clinical trial design and regulatory standards for anti-diabetic therapies.
Main Methods:
- Review of existing clinical trial data and regulatory requirements for anti-diabetic therapies.
- Analysis of the limitations of surrogate markers like glycaemic control, serum creatinine, and micro-albuminuria.
- Discussion of potential strategies to encourage long-term clinical trials.
Main Results:
- Glycaemic control, serum creatinine, micro-albuminuria, and retinopathy changes are insufficient surrogates for cardiovascular benefits.
- Existing regulatory requirements emphasize safety but often neglect the need to demonstrate tangible clinical benefits.
- There is a lack of therapeutic approaches effectively addressing both glycaemic control and cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes.
Conclusions:
- Regulators should encourage long-term trials by considering incentives like extended patent protection.
- Redefining therapeutic targets to include patient-meaningful outcomes is crucial.
- Collaborative efforts are needed to address challenges in trial design, duration, and ethical considerations for chronic conditions like diabetes.
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Drug Regulation
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Impact of Pharmacokinetic–Pharmacodynamic Models: Regulatory Decisions
Preclinical Development: Overview