Background and Aim: The China PDS aims to investigate the effectiveness and safety of vildagliptin dual therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. Here, we compared the vildagliptin plus metformin (VM) and insulin secretagogue plus metformin (ISM).

Materials and Methods: China PDS was a prospective, 1-year, real-world study conducted in 52 sites in patients with T2DM and inadequately controlled on monotherapy. Eligible patients were assigned either vildagliptin dual therapy or other dual therapy according to local physician’s decision. The proportions of patients with HbA1c<7%, without tolerability events (hypoglycemia, weight gain, or discontinuation due to gastrointestinal event), and tolerability were compared in VM and ISM in this study.

Results: In total, 933 patients received vildagliptin dual therapy with 64.7% for VM, while 670 patients received other dual therapy with 48.7% for ISM (Table 1). Compared with ISM (31.6%), VM (50.8%) had higher proportion of patients reaching the primary outcome (P<0.001; adjusted OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.59-2.87). VM (5.8%) had less tolerability events than ISM (16.4%) (RR, 0.386; 95% CI, 0.26-0.58).

Conclusion: China PDS demonstrates that in a real-life setting, VM was effective in glycemic control and was well tolerated when compared with ISM.

L. Chen: None. Y. Han: None. D. Hu: None. H. Jin: None. N. Yang: None. X. Shi: None. Q. Li: None. L. Liang: None. L. Zang: None. M. Liu: None. J. He: None. Y. Mu: None.

Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. More information is available at