Dataset Information

Comparison of Glucose-Lowering Drugs as Second-Line Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Multiple glucose-lowering drugs are available as add-ons to metformin for a second-line treatment for type 2 diabetes. However, no systematic and comparative data are available for them in China. We aimed to compare the effects of glucose-lowering drugs added to metformin in China.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, and Chongqing VIP from 1 January 2000 until 31 December 2020 were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials comparing a glucose-lowering drug added to metformin with metformin in Chinese type 2 diabetes patients. Drug classes included sulfonylureas (SUs), glinides (NIDEs), thiazolidinediones (TZDs), α-glucosidase inhibitors (AGIs), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4is), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), and insulins (INSs). Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and appraised the risk of bias.

Results

315 trials were included. In patients receiving metformin alone, the addition of NIDEs produced the greatest additional HbA1c reductions (1.29%; 95% CI 0.97, 1.60); while INSs yielded both the largest additional FPG reductions (1.58 mmol/L; 95% CI 1.22, 1.94) and 2 hPG reductions (2.52 mmol/L; 95% CI 1.83, 3.20). INS add-ons also conferred the largest additional HDL-C increases (0.40 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.16, 0.64), whereas AGI add-ons generated the greatest TC reductions (1.08 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.78, 1.37). The greatest incremental SBP reductions (6.65 mmHg; 95% CI 4.13, 9.18) were evident with SGLT2i add-ons. GLP-1RA add-ons had the greatest BMI reductions (1.96 kg/m², 95% CI 1.57, 2.36), meanwhile with the lowest (0.54 time) hypoglycemia risk. Overall, only the GLP-1RA add-ons demonstrated a comprehensive beneficial effect on all outcomes. Furthermore, our results corroborated intraclass differences among therapies. Given the limited evidence, we could not reach a conclusion about the optimal therapies regarding mortality and vascular outcomes.

Conclusion

The results suggested a potential treatment hierarchy for clinicians and patients, with the GLP-1RA add-ons being most preferred based on their favorable efficacy and safety profiles; and provided a unified hierarchy of evidence for conducting country-specific cost-effectiveness analyses.

SUBMITTER: Gu S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9504435 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of Glucose-Lowering Drugs as Second-Line Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Gu Shuyan S Hu Xiaoqian X Zhen Xuemei X Shi Lizheng L Shao Hui H Sun Xueshan X Gu Yuxuan Y Huang Minzhuo M Dong Hengjin H

Journal of clinical medicine 20220916 18

<h4>Background</h4>Multiple glucose-lowering drugs are available as add-ons to metformin for a second-line treatment for type 2 diabetes. However, no systematic and comparative data are available for them in China. We aimed to compare the effects of glucose-lowering drugs added to metformin in China.<h4>Methods</h4>PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, and Chongqing VIP from 1 January 2000 until 31 December 2020 were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials comparin ...[more]

PMID: 36143082

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionObesity increases the risk of comorbidities and diabetes-related complications and, consequently, efforts to prevent and reduce excess weight in people with type 1 diabetes are essential. The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis is to assess the effect of adjunctive glucose-lowering drugs on body weight and other important health outcomes in people with type 1 diabetes.Methods and analysisThis systematic review and network meta-analysis will include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the use of adjunctive glucose-lowering drugs for treatment of people with type 1 diabetes. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform will be searched from inception to present. Key eligibility criteria include: RCT study design; adult participants with type 1 diabetes; treatment with a glucose-lowering drug for ≥24 weeks; and comparison of the intervention to placebo, usual care or another glucose-lowering drug. The primary outcome is change in body weight. Other major outcomes include change in HbA1c and total daily insulin dose and risk of hypoglycaemia and other adverse events. Dual study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be performed. Results from the meta-analysis will be presented as weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes. Sources of heterogeneity will be explored by subgroup and sensitivity analysis. A network meta-analysis for the primary outcome will be performed using an arm-based random-effects model based on the Bayesian framework while assessing for transitivity across studies and consistency between direct and indirect estimates. The overall quality of the evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach for each outcome.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical assessment is required. The results of this review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentation.Prospero registration numberCRD42020158676.

Project description:ObjectiveType 2 diabetes is more common in adults, but is becoming the major concern in children and adolescent recently. This study aimed to provide additional pharmaceutical management for children and adolescents with type 2 diabetes by assessing the efficacy and safety of several glucose-lowering drugs.MethodsSearches were performed in PubMed, Medline, Ovid, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov that reported the efficacy and safety of drugs for children and adolescents with type 2 diabetes. Pooled effects were calculated by frequentist fixed effects network meta-analyses and additive network meta-analyses.ResultsA total of 12 trials assessing eight glucose-lowering drugs were included, which compose of seven trials with monotherapy and five trials with combination therapies. Network meta-analysis results showed compared to placebo, saxagliptin+metformin (mean difference (MD) -1.91% [-2.85%, -0.97%]), liraglutide+metformin (MD -1.45% [-1.65%, -1.26%]), and liraglutide (MD -0.90% [-1.35%, -0.45%]) were the top 3 drugs that significantly reduced hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). Sitagliptin+metformin, dapagliflozin, exenatide-2mcg, linagliptin-5mg, metformin, exenatide-5/10mcg, glimepiride, and sitagliptin also showed significant reduction in HbA1c. There were no significant differences between treatments in the incidence of adverse events, except that liraglutide+metformin had significant adverse effect such as abdominal pain. In addition, dapagliflozin, sitagliptin+metformin, and saxagliptin+metformin showed better efficacy compared with FDA-approved drugs.ConclusionsThe top 10 treatments of type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents aged 10-17 years were saxagliptin+metformin, liraglutide+metformin, liraglutide, dapagliflozin, exenatide-2 mcg, sitagliptin+metformin, linagliptin-5 mg, linagliptin-1 mg, metformin, and exenatide-5/10 mcg.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=284897, identifier CRD42021284897.

Project description:Summary Background Summarized data of cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs) of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have shown a reduction in major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), whether these benefits are extended in certain risk groups (elderly or obese patients or those with a longer duration of diabetes) or certain minorities (Black participants) are not clearly established. We aimed to provide overall hazard ratios (HRs) estimates for MACE of SGLT2i and GLP-1 RAs stratified by age (< 65 years vs. ≥ 65 years and < 75 years vs. ≥ 75 years), sex (male vs. female), race (Black vs. White, Black vs. Asian, and White vs. Asian), body mass index (BMI: < 30 kg/m2 vs. ≥ 30 kg/m2), and duration of diabetes (< 10 years vs. ≥ 10 years). Methods We performed a MEDLINE database search from inception up to July 31, 2022 to identify all placebo-controlled phase 3 CVOTs that evaluated the efficacy of SGLT2i and GLP-1 RAs on vascular events at least 1-year after randomisation in participants with type 2 diabetes, and we selected those reporting hazard ratios (HRs) for the specific risk groups for MACE. Differences on MACE in risk groups were examined using a random-effect meta-analysis. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022347901). Findings A total of 11 studies fulfilled the prespecified criteria, comprising 96,580 patients with T2D were included. Of these patients, 61,975 (64.2%) were male, 34,605 (35.8%) were female, and race groups included 74,982 (77.6%) White, 7760 (8.0%) Asian, and 4023 (4.2%) Black. In two SGLT2i trials, the HR (95% CI) for long-term diabetes duration more than10 years versus short duration was 0.84 (0.77–0.93) vs. 1.02 (0.89–1.16), respectively (Pinteraction = 0.03). In four SGLT2i trials, the MACE benefit was similar by sex (Pinteraction = 0.13), age (Pinteraction = 0.36), BMI (Pinteraction = 0.69), and race groups (Pinteraction = 0.86 between Black and White, Pinteraction = 0.98 between Black and Asian, and Pinteraction = 0.69 between White and Asian). For GLP-1 RAs, the MACE benefit from the seven trials tended to be greater for Asian (0.71, [0.58–0.87]) than for White (0.87, [0.81–0.94]), (Pinteraction = 0.07). In two GLP-1 RAs trials, the MACE outcome was reduced by 22% (0.78, 0.63–0.95) in elderly patients (≥ 75 years) while no difference was observed in those < 75 years (0.87; 0.75–1.01), (Pinteraction = 0.37). In the remaining risk groups, the MACE benefit was similar by sex (Pinteraction = 0.37), age < 65 years (Pinteraction = 0.80), duration of diabetes (Pinteraction = 0.70), and race (Pinteraction = 0.57 between Black and White, and Pinteraction = 0.15 between Black and Asian), BMI (Pinteraction = 0.78). Risk of bias was lower, and overall heterogeneity was high for sex with SGLT2i, and moderate to low for the remaining comparisons, with a I2 values ranging from 0% to 54%. Interpretation In patients with type 2 diabetes at highest risk of cardiovascular disease or established cardiovascular disease, a greater benefit on MACE was found for elderly patients and for Asian individuals compared with White individuals with GLP-1 RAs, and those with a long duration of diabetes with SGLT2i. These findings could help in providing guidance for treatment prescription and facilitate selection and stratification of patients for future CVOTs. Furthermore, pooled individual patient-level data are urgently needed to support our conclusions, and to derive definitive evidence. Funding None.

Project description:IntroductionEvidence from cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) for newer antidiabetic drugs is increasingly influencing revised recommendations for second-line therapy in type 2 diabetes (T2D). This systematic review aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of newer antidiabetic drugs specified as sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i), glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) for T2D in a second-line setting.MethodsA systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines, and all relevant published studies were searched comprehensively in electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and International Health Technology Assessment database published from April 2023. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 reporting checklists.ResultsWe included 28 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Overall reporting of the identified studies largely met CHEERS 2022 recommendations. The CORE and Cardiff models were the most frequently utilized for pharmacoeconomic evaluation in T2D. Four studies consistently discovered that SGLT2i was more cost-effective than GLP-1RA in T2D who were not adequately controlled by metformin monotherapy. Four studies compared GLP-1RA with DPP-4i, sufonylurea (SU), or insulin. Except for one that demonstrated SU was cost-effective, all were GLP-1RA. Five studies revealed that SGLT2i was more cost-effective than DPP-4i or SU. Eleven studies indicated that DPP-4i was more cost-effective than traditional antidiabetic drugs. Four additional studies explored the cost-effectiveness of various antidiabetic drugs as second-line options, indicating that SU, SGLT2i, or meglitinides were more economically advantageous. The most common driven factors were the cost of new antidiabetic drugs.ConclusionNewer antidiabetic drugs as second line are the cost-effective option for T2D from the cost-effectiveness perspective, especially SGLT2i.

Project description:Background: There are multiple glucose-lowering drugs available as alternative initial monotherapy for type 2 diabetes patients with contraindications or intolerance to metformin. However, little comparative and systematic data are available for them as initial monotherapy. This study estimated and compared the treatment effects of glucose-lowering drugs as initial monotherapy for type 2 diabetes. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, Chongqing VIP, and WanFang Data from 1 January 1990 until 31 December 2020 were searched for randomized controlled trials which compared a glucose-lowering drug with placebo/lifestyle-intervention for type 2 diabetes. Drug classes included metformin, sulfonylureas (SUs), thiazolidinediones (TZDs), glinides (NIDEs), α-glucosidase inhibitors (AGIs), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4is), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), insulins (INSs), and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs). Results: A total of 185 trials were included, identifying 38,376 patients from 56 countries across six continents. When choosing an initial drug monotherapy alternative to metformin, SUs were most efficacious in reducing HbA1c (−1.39%; 95% CI −1.63, −1.16) and FPG (−2.70 mmol/L; 95% CI −3.18, −2.23), but increased hypoglycemia risks (5.44; 95% CI 2.11, 14.02). GLP-1RAs were most efficacious in reducing BMI (−1.05 kg/m2; 95% CI −1.81, −0.29) and TC (−0.42 mmol/L; 95% CI −0.61, −0.22). TZDs were most efficacious in increasing HDL-C (0.12 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.07, 0.17). SGLT2is were most efficacious in lowering SBP (−4.18 mmHg; 95% CI −4.84, −3.53). While AGIs conferred higher risk of AE-induced discontinuations (2.57; 95% CI 1.64, 4.03). Overall, only GLP-1RAs showed an integrated beneficial effect on all outcomes. Our results also confirmed the intraclass differences in treatment effects across drugs. Most trials were short-term, and no significant differences in mortality, total vascular events, myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, or diabetic nephropathy were observed across drug classes. Conclusions: Our results suggest a potential treatment hierarchy for decision-makers, with GLP-1RAs being the preferred alternative therapy to metformin regarding their favorable efficacy and safety profiles.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Glucose-Lowering Drugs as Second-Line Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Comparison of Glucose-Lowering Drugs as Second-Line Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets