Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Metformin Versus the Other Oral Antidiabetic Drugs in Japanese Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Network Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Although metformin is recommended as a first-line treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Western countries, no specific treatment is recommended in Japan, and various agents are used. Metformin has long been used at low doses in Japan, and information regarding its effect at the maximum maintenance dose is lacking. Here, we compared the efficacy and safety of metformin at 1500 mg/day with those of the other oral anti-diabetic drugs (OADs) approved in Japan.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials comparing a change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline at 12 weeks or later (ΔHbA1c) among OADs (including placebo) as a first-line treatment in adult patients with T2D were selected by systematic review with comprehensive searching of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Ichushi Web, and EMBASE and manual searching of clinical trial registries. The ΔHbA1c and incidence of hypoglycemia were compared among OAD treatments using Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). The relative risk (RR) of the incidence of hypoglycemia was determined relative to that of placebo.

Results

Forty-six randomized controlled trials were identified in the systematic review, and 37 studies, comprising 38 different types of treatments, including placebos, were selected for the NMA of ΔHbA1c. Compared with metformin 1500 mg/day, 20 OAD treatments were significantly less effective in reducing HbA1c from baseline (differences from metformin 1500 mg/day: 0.40-0.96%). Two treatments (glimepiride 2 mg/day and pioglitazone 45 mg/day) showed greater mean reductions in HbA1c from baseline than metformin 1500 mg/day (- 0.38% and - 0.03%), although these differences were not significant. Regarding the incidence of hypoglycemia, only pioglitazone 30 mg/day among 31 treatments showed a lower RR (< - 0.01), whereas 23 treatments showed a significantly higher RR (1.02-66.71) than metformin 1500 mg/day.

Conclusion

The NMA suggested a preferable efficacy and safety profile of metformin 1500 mg/day compared with the other OADs approved in Japan.

SUBMITTER: Nishimura R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8799586 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionTwo studies were carried out to investigate the efficacy and safety of luseogliflozin added to existing oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) in Japanese type 2 diabetic patients inadequately controlled with OAD monotherapy.Materials and methodsIn the trial involving add-on to sulfonylureas (study 03-1), patients were randomly assigned to receive luseogliflozin 2.5 mg or a placebo for a 24-week double-blind period, followed by a 28-week open-label period. In the open-label trial involving add-on to other OADs; that is, biguanides, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, glinides and ?-glucosidase inhibitors (study 03-2), patients received luseogliflozin for 52 weeks.ResultsIn study 03-1, luseogliflozin significantly decreased glycated hemoglobin at the end of the 24-week double-blind period compared with the placebo (-0.88%, P < 0.001), and glycated hemoglobin reduction from baseline at week 52 was -0.63%. In study 03-2, luseogliflozin added to other OADs significantly decreased glycated hemoglobin from baseline at week 52 (-0.52 to -0.68%, P < 0.001 for all OADs). Bodyweight reduction was observed in all add-on therapies, even with agents associated with weight gain, such as sulfonylureas and thiazolidinediones. Most adverse events were mild in severity. When added to a sulfonylurea, incidences of hypoglycemia during the double-blind period were 8.7% and 4.2% for luseogliflozin and placebo, respectively, but no major hypoglycemic episodes occurred. The frequency and incidences of adverse events of special interest for sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and adverse events associated with combined OADs were acceptable.ConclusionsAdd-on therapies of luseogliflozin to existing OADs improved glycemic control, reduced bodyweight and were well tolerated in Japanese type 2 diabetic patients. These trials were registered with the Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center (add on to sulfonylurea: JapicCTI-111507; add on to other OADs: JapicCTI-111508).

Project description:The safety and efficacy of different drugs in treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) patients who could not maintain normal glucose level only through diet and exercise remains to be debated. We performed this network meta-analysis (NAM) to compare and rank different antidiabetic drugs in glucose level control and pregnancy outcomes in GDM patients.We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase up to December 31, 2016. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to different drugs in the treatment of GDM patients were enrolled. We extracted the relevant information and assessed the risk of bias with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We did pair-wise meta-analyses using the fixed-effects model or random-effects model and then adopted random-effects NAM combining both direct and indirect evidence within a Bayesian framework, to calculate the odds ratio (OR) or standardized mean difference (SMD) and to draw a surface under the cumulative ranking curve of the neonatal and maternal outcomes of different treatments in GDM patients.Thirty-two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this NAM, including 6 kinds of treatments (metformin, metformin plus insulin, insulin, glyburide, acarbose, and placebo). The results of the NAM showed that regarding the incidence of macrosomia and LGA, metformin had lower incidence than glyburide (OR, 0.5411 and 0.4177). In terms of the incidence of admission to the NICU, insulin had higher incidence compared with glyburide (OR, 1.844). As for the incidence of neonatal hypoglycemia, metformin had lower incidence than insulin and glyburide (OR, 0.6331 and 0.3898), and insulin was lower than glyburide (OR, 0.6236). For mean birth weight, metformin plus insulin was lower than insulin (SMD, -0.5806), glyburide (SMD, -0.7388), and placebo (SMD, -0.6649). Besides, metformin was observed to have lower birth weight than glyburide (SMD, 0.2591). As for weight gain, metformin and metformin plus insulin were lower than insulin (SMD, -0.9166, -1.53). Ranking results showed that glyburide might be the optimum treatment regarding average glucose control, and metformin is the fastest in glucose control for GDM patients; glyburide have the highest incidence of macrosomia, preeclampsia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, shortest gestational age at delivery, and lowest mean birth weight; metformin (plus insulin when required) have the lowest incidence of macrosomia, PIH, LGA, RDS, low gestational age at delivery, and low birth weight. Besides, insulin had the highest incidence of NICU admission, acarbose had the lowest risk of neonatal hypoglycemia.Our study concluded that metformin is fastest in glucose control, with a more favorable pregnancy outcomes-would be a better option, but its rate of glucose control is the lowest.However, glyburide is the optimumtreatment regarding the rate of glucose control, but withmore adverse outcomes. This NAMbased on 32 RCTs will strongly help to guide further development of management for GDM patients, clinicians should carefully balance the risk-benefit profile of different treatments according to various situations.

Project description:IntroductionWhen first line therapy with metformin is insufficient for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), the optimal adjunctive therapy is unclear. We assessed the efficacy and safety of adjunctive antidiabetic agents in patients with inadequately controlled T2D on metformin alone.Materials and methodsA search of MEDLINE and CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov, regulatory websites was performed. We included randomized controlled trials of 3-12 months duration, evaluating Food and Drug Administration or European Union approved agents (noninsulin and long acting, once daily basal insulins) in patients experiencing inadequate glycemic control with metformin monotherapy (? 1500 mg daily or maximally tolerated dose for ? 4 weeks). Random-effects network meta-analyses were used to compare the weighted mean difference for changes from baseline in HbA1c, body weight (BW) and systolic blood pressure (SBP), and the risk of developing hypoglycemia, urinary (UTI) and genital tract infection (GTI).ResultsSixty-two trials evaluating 25 agents were included. All agents significantly reduced HbA1c vs. placebo; albeit not to the same extent (range, 0.43% for miglitol to 1.29% for glibenclamide). Glargine, sulfonylureas (SUs) and nateglinide were associated with increased hypoglycemia risk vs. placebo (range, 4.00-11.67). Sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 analogs, miglitol and empagliflozin/linagliptin significantly reduced BW (range, 1.15-2.26 kg) whereas SUs, thiazolindinediones, glargine and alogliptin/pioglitazone caused weight gain (range, 1.19-2.44 kg). SGLT2 inhibitors, empagliflozin/linagliptin, liraglutide and sitagliptin decreased SBP (range, 1.88-5.43 mmHg). No therapy increased UTI risk vs. placebo; however, SGLT2 inhibitors were associated with an increased risk of GTI (range, 2.16-8.03).ConclusionsAdding different AHAs to metformin was associated with varying effects on HbA1c, BW, SBP, hypoglycemia, UTI and GTI which should impact clinician choice when selecting adjunctive therapy.