Dataset Information

Triple therapy in type 2 diabetes; a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Aims. The purpose was to evaluate the evidence for triple therapy regimen using medicines available in Australia for type 2 diabetes. Methods. A systematic literature review was performed to update the relevant evidence from 2002 to 2014 on triple therapy for type 2 diabetes. A multiple-treatments network meta-analysis was undertaken to summarise the comparative efficacy and harms of different triple therapies. Results. Twenty seven trials were identified, most were six months of duration. The following combinations were included in the network meta-analysis: metformin (MET) + sulfonylureas (SU) (used as reference combination); MET + SU+ dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4-i); MET + SU+ thiazolidinediones (TZD); MET + SU+ glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1-RA); MET + SU+ insulins; MET + TZD + DPP-4-i; and MET + SU+ sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2-i). For HbA1c reduction, all triple therapies were statistically superior to MET+SU dual therapy, except for MET + TZD + DPP-4-i. None of the triple therapy combinations demonstrated differences in HbA1c compared with other triple therapies. MET + SU + SGLT2-i and MET + SU + GLP-1-RA resulted in significantly lower body weight than MET + SU + DPP-4-i, MET+SU+insulin and MET + SU + TZDs; MET + SU + DPP-4-i resulted in significantly lower body weight than MET + SU + insulin and MET + SU + TZD. MET + SU + insulin, MET + SU + TZD and MET + SU + DPP-4-i increased the odds of hypoglycaemia when compared to MET + SU. MET + SU + GLP-1-RA reduced the odds of hypoglycaemia compared to MET + SU + insulin. Conclusion. Care when choosing a triple therapy combination is needed as there is often a risk of increased hypoglycaemia events associated with this regimen and there are very limited data surrounding the long-term effectiveness and safety of combined therapies.

SUBMITTER: Downes MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4675096 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Current international guidelines recommend aerobic, resistance, and combined exercises for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). In our study, we conducted a network meta-analysis to assess the comparative impact of different exercise training modalities on glycemic control, cardiovascular risk factors, and weight loss in patients with T2DM.We searched five electronic databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the differences between different exercise training modalities for patients with T2DM. The risk of bias in the included RCTs was evaluated according to the Cochrane tool. Network meta-analysis was performed to calculate mean difference the ratio of the mean and absolute risk differences. Data were analyzed using R-3.4.0.A total of 37 studies with 2208 patients with T2DM were included in our study. Both supervised aerobic and supervised resistance exercises showed a significant reduction in HbA1c compared to no exercise (0.30% lower, 0.30% lower, respectively), however, there was a less reduction when compared to combined exercise (0.17% higher, 0.23% higher). Supervised aerobic also presented more significant improvement than no exercise in fasting plasma glucose (9.38 mg/dl lower), total cholesterol (20.24 mg/dl lower), triacylglycerol (19.34 mg/dl lower), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (11.88 mg/dl lower). Supervised resistance showed more benefit than no exercise in improving systolic blood pressure (3.90 mmHg lower]) and total cholesterol (22.08 mg/dl lower]. In addition, supervised aerobic exercise was more powerful in improving HbA1c and weight loss than unsupervised aerobic (HbA1c: 0.60% lower; weight loss: 5.02 kg lower) and unsupervised resistance (HbA1c: 0.53% lower) exercises.Compared with either supervised aerobic or supervised resistance exercise alone, combined exercise showed more pronounced improvement in HbA1c levels; however, there was a less marked improvement in some cardiovascular risk factors. In terms of weight loss, there were no significant differences among the combined, supervised aerobic, and supervised resistance exercises.Our study protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO); registration number: CRD42017067518 .

Project description:BackgroundThe last international consensus on the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D) recommends SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists for patients with clinical cardiovascular (CV) disease; metformin remains the first-line glucose lowering medication. Last studies suggested beneficial effects of SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists compared to DPP-4 inhibitors, in secondary CV prevention. Recently, a potential benefit of SGLT-2 inhibitors in primary CV prevention also has been suggested. However, no comparison of all the new and the old hypoglycemic drugs is available on CV outcomes. We aimed to compare the effects of old and new hypoglycemic drugs in T2D, on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and mortality.Methods and findingsWe conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of clinical trials. Randomized trials, blinded or not, assessing contemporary hypoglycemic drugs on mortality or MACE in patients with T2D, were searched for in Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov. References screening and data extraction were done by multiple observers. Each drug was analyzed according to its therapeutic class. A random Bayesian network meta-analysis model was used. The primary outcomes were overall mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and MACE. Severe adverse events and severe hypoglycemia were also recorded. 175,966 patients in 34 trials from 1970 to 2018 were included. No trials evaluating glinides or alpha glucosidase inhibitors were found. 17 trials included a majority of patients with previous cardiovascular history, 16 trials a majority of patients without. Compared to control, SGLT-2 inhibitors were associated with a decreased risk of overall mortality (OR = 0.84 [95% CrI: 0.74; 0.95]), SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists with a decreased risk of MACE (OR = 0.89 [95% CrI: 0.81; 0.98] and OR = 0.88 [95% CrI: 0.81; 0.95], respectively). Compared to DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT-2 inhibitors were associated with a decreased risk of overall mortality (OR = 0.82 [95% CrI: 0.69; 0.98]), GLP-1 agonists with a decreased risk of MACE (OR = 0.88 [95% CrI: 0.79; 0.99]). Insulin was also associated with an increased risk of MACE compared to GLP-1 agonists (OR = 1.19 [95% CrI: 1.01; 1.42]). Insulin and sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of severe hypoglycemia. In the trials including a majority of patients without previous CV history, the comparisons of SGLT-2 inhibitors, metformin and control did not showed significant differences on primary outcomes. We limited our analysis at the therapeutic class level.ConclusionsSGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists have the most beneficial effects, especially in T2D patients with previous CV diseases. Direct comparisons of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists and metformin are needed, notably in primary CV prevention.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42016043823.

Project description:BackgroundGlycemic control is vital in the care of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and is significantly associated with the incidence of clinical complications. This Bayesian network analysis was conducted with an aim of evaluating the efficacy of scaling and root planning (SRP) and SRP?+?adjuvant treatments in improving glycemic control in chronic periodontitis (CP) and T2DM patients, and to guide clinical practice.MethodsWe searched the Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases up to 4 May 2018 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This was at least three months of the duration of study that involved patients with periodontitis and T2DM without other systemic diseases given SRP. Patients in the control group did not receive treatment or SRP combination with adjuvant therapy. Outcomes were given as HbA1c% and levels fasting plasma glucose (FPG). Random-effects meta-analysis and Bayesian network meta-analysis were conducted to pool RCT data. Cochrane's risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias.ResultsFourteen RCTs were included. Most were unclear or with high risk of bias. Compared to patients who did not receive treatment, patients who received periodontal treatments showed improved HbA1c% level, including SRP (the mean difference (MD) -0.399 95% CrI 0.088 to 0.79), SRP?+?antibiotic (MD 0.62, 95% CrI 0.18 to 1.11), SRP?+?photodynamic therapy (aPDT)?+?doxycycline (Doxy) (MD 1.082 95% CrI 0.13 to 2.077) and SRP?+?laser (MD 0.66 95% CrI 0.1037, 1.33). Among the different treatments, SRP?+?aPDT + Doxy ranked best. Regarding fasting plasma glucose (FPG), SRP did not show advantage over no treatment (MD 4.91 95% CI -?1.95 to 11.78) and SRP with adjuvant treatments were not better than SRP alone (MD -0.28 95% CI -8.66, 8.11).ConclusionThe results of this meta-analysis seem to support that periodontal treatment with aPDT + Doxy possesses the best efficacy in lowering HbA1c% of non-smoking CP without severe T2DM complications. However, longer-term well-executed, multi-center trails are required to corroborate the results.

Project description:BackgroundDespite the number of medications for type 2 diabetes, many people with the condition do not achieve good glycaemic control. Some existing glucose-lowering agents have adverse effects such as weight gain or hypoglycaemia. Type 2 diabetes tends to be a progressive disease, and most patients require treatment with combinations of glucose-lowering agents. The sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) receptor inhibitors are a new class of glucose-lowering agents.ObjectiveTo assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of the SGLT2 receptor inhibitors in dual or triple therapy in type 2 diabetes.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library (all sections); Science Citation Index; trial registries; conference abstracts; drug regulatory authorities; bibliographies of retrieved papers.Inclusion criteriaRandomised controlled trials of SGLT2 receptor inhibitors compared with placebo or active comparator in type 2 diabetes in dual or combination therapy.MethodsSystematic review. Quality assessment used the Cochrane risk of bias score.ResultsSeven trials, published in full, assessed dapagliflozin and one assessed canagliflozin. Trial quality appeared good. Dapagliflozin 10 mg reduced HbA1c by -0.54% (weighted mean differences (WMD), 95% CI -0.67 to -0.40) compared to placebo, but there was no difference compared to glipizide. Canagliflozin reduced HbA1c slightly more than sitagliptin (up to -0.21% vs sitagliptin). Both dapagliflozin and canagliflozin led to weight loss (dapagliflozin WMD -1.81 kg (95% CI -2.04 to -1.57), canagliflozin up to -2.3 kg compared to placebo).LimitationsLong-term trial extensions suggested that effects were maintained over time. Data on canagliflozin are currently available from only one paper. Costs of the drugs are not known so cost-effectiveness cannot be assessed. More data on safety are needed, with the Food and Drug Administration having concerns about breast and bladder cancers.ConclusionsDapagliflozin appears effective in reducing HbA1c and weight in type 2 diabetes, although more safety data are needed.

Dataset Information

Triple therapy in type 2 diabetes; a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets