| Literature DB >> 24740143 |
Renfan Xu1, Shasha Zhang2, Anyu Tao3, Guangzhi Chen2, Muxun Zhang1.
Abstract
Observational studies have revealed that higher serum vitamin E concentrations and increased vitamin E intake and vitamin E supplementation are associated with beneficial effects on glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, whether vitamin E supplementation exerts a definitive effect on glycaemic control remains unclear. This article involves a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of vitamin E to better characterise its impact on HbA1c, fasting glucose and fasting insulin. PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were electronically searched from the earliest possible date through April 2013 for all relevant studies. Weighted mean difference (WMD) was calculated for net changes using fixed-effects or random-effects models. Standard methods for assessing statistical heterogeneity and publication bias were used. Fourteen randomised controlled trials involving individual data on 714 subjects were collected in this meta-analysis. Increased vitamin E supplementation did not result in significant benefits in glycaemic control as measured by reductions in HbA1c, fasting glucose and fasting insulin. Subgroup analyses revealed a significant reduction in HbA1c (-0.58%, 95% CI -0.83 to -0.34) and fasting insulin (-9.0 pmol/l, 95% CI -15.90 to -2.10) compared with controls in patients with low baseline vitamin E status. Subgroup analyses also demonstrated that the outcomes may have been influenced by the vitamin E dosage, study duration, ethnic group, serum HbA1c concentration, and fasting glucose control status. In conclusion, there is currently insufficient evidence to support a potential beneficial effect of vitamin E supplementation on improvements of HbA1c and fasting glucose and insulin concentrations in subjects with T2DM.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24740143 PMCID: PMC3989270 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0095008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Flow diagram of the process of article selection for meta-analysis.
Characteristic of experimental trials included in the meta-analysis.
| Trial | Country | Vitamin E group intervention | Control group | Duration weeks(n) | Study Size(n) | Mean age (year) | Male(%) | Diabetes duration(years) | Trial design | Baseline HbA1c(%) | Baseline FPG(mmol/l) | Baseline Vit E (mmol/l) | ||||
| T | C | T | C | T | C | T | C | |||||||||
| Paolisso 1993 | Italy | d-α-tocopherol 900 mg/d | Placebo | 12 | 25 | 25 | 71.3 | 71.3 | — | — | 8.4 | 8.4 | C1 | 7.0 | 8.2 | 16.3 |
| Reaven 1995 | USA | dl-α-tocopherol 1600 IU/d | Placebo | 10 | 10 | 11 | 60.8 | 61.8 | 100 | 100 | 8.6 | 8.3 | P | 7.7 | 9.9 | 35 |
| Tutuncu 1998 | Turkey | dl-α-tocopherol acetate 900 mg/d | Placebo | 24 | 11 | 10 | 51.2 | 59.3 | 18.2 | 10 | 8.8 | 8.9 | P | 7.5 | 7.2 | — |
| Gazis 1999 | UK | α-tocopherol 1600 IU/d | Placebo | 8 | 23 | 25 | 56.4 | 57.9 | 65.2 | 84 | 4.3 | 4.8 | P | 6.9 | 9.6 | 27.8 |
| Paolisso 2000 | Italy | Vitamin E 600 mg | Placebo | 8 | 20 | 20 | 58.3 | 56.7 | 45 | 60 | 7.8 | 7.8 | P | 7.7 | 8.3 | 16.9 |
| Manzella 2001 | Italy | All-rac-α-tocopherolAcetate 600 mg/d | Sodium citrate | 16 | 25 | 25 | 64.3 | 65.1 | — | — | — | — | P | 8.2 | 9.1 | 7.1 |
| Park 2002 | Korea | α-tocopherol 200 mg/d | Digestive pill | 8 | 48 | 50 | 49.4 | 49.5 | 56.3 | 62.8 | 7.9 | 8.3 | P | 10.9 | 10.4 | 25.5 |
| Chen 2004 | China | Vitamin E 200 mg | Placebo | 52 | 41 | 41 | 52 | 52.4 | 51.2 | 48.8 | <1 | <1 | P | 7.6 | — | — |
| Economides 2005 | USA | All-rac-α-tocopherol Acetate 1800 IU/d | Soybeanoil | 24 | 25 | 20 | 59 | 59 | 56.7 | 56.7 | 9 | 9 | P | 7.2 | — | 28.9 |
| Ble-Castillo 2005 | Mexico | α-tocopherol 800 IU/d | Corn strach | 6 | 13 | 21 | 51.3 | 55.3 | 0 | 0 | <14 | <14 | P | 10.9 | 12.8 | — |
| Baliarsingh 2005 | India | Tocotrienols 6 mg/kg | Rice brain oil | 8 | 10 | 9 | 48.5 | 52.6 | 50 | 55.6 | 5.3 | 4.3 | C1 | 7.6 | 6.3 | — |
| Boshtam 2005 | Iran | Vitamin E 200 IU/d | Placebo | 27 | 50 | 50 | 52.8 | 54.5 | — | — | 5.7 | 13.3 | P | 9.9 | 10.8 | 10.5 |
| Ward 2007 | Australia | RRR-α-tocopherol or mixd tocopherols 500 mg/d | Soy bean oil | 6 | 37 | 18 | 61 | 62 | 67.5 | 88.9 | — | — | P | — | 7.3 | — |
| de Oliveira 2011 | Brazil | α-tocopherol 800 IU/d | Placebo | 16 | 25 | 26 | 62 | 63 | 72 | 57.7 | — | — | P | — | 7.2 | 4.7 |
FPG: fasting plasma glucose; vitE: vitamin E; mixed tocopherols: 60%γ-,25% δ- and 15% α-tocopherol; HbA1c: glycated hemoglobin; USA: United States of America; UK: The United Kingdom; T:treatment group; C: control group; C1: crossover design; P: Parallel design.
Figure 2Forest plot of randomised controlled trials investigate the effect of vitamin E supplementation on HbA1c.
Figure 3Forest plot of randomised controlled trials investigate the effect of vitamin E supplementation on fasting glucose.
Figure 4Forest plot of randomised controlled trials investigate the effect of vitamin E supplementation on fasting insulin.
Subgroup analyses of HbA1c, fasting glucose and fasting insulin stratified by previously defined study characteristics.
| Variables | HbA1c(%) | Fasting glucose(mmol/l) | Fasting insulin(pmol/l) | ||||||
| No.of tirals | Mean difference(95%CI) | P for heterogeneity | No.of tirals | Mean difference(95%CI) | P for heterogeneity | No.of tirals | Mean difference(95%CI) | P for heterogeneity | |
| Subgroup analysis | |||||||||
| Vitamin E dose | |||||||||
| ≤400 mg/d | 4 | −0.0(−0.52,0.51) | 0.04 | 3 | 0.01(−0.85,0.87) | 0.23 | 2 | −6.56(−19.50,6.38) | 0.35 |
| >400 mg/d | 8 | −0.35(−0.63,−0.07) | 0.01 | 9 | 0.15(−0.38,0.68) | <0.0001 | 4 | −4.13(−14.48,6.21) | <0.0001 |
| Duration | |||||||||
| Shorter term (<12 wk) | 6 | −0.17(−0.35,0.01) | 0.62 | 7 | 0.31(−0.68,1.29) | <0.001 | 3 | 0.33(−5.49,4.82) | 0.33 |
| Longer term (≥12 wk) | 6 | −0.33(−0.79,0.13) | 0.0004 | 5 | −0.14(−0.78,0.50) | <0.001 | 3 | −9.0(−15.90, −2.10) | 0.32 |
| BaselineHbA1c (%) | |||||||||
| <8 | 8 | −0.12(−0.49,0.25) | 0.0002 | 6 | −0.55(−0.81, −0.29) | 0.19 | 1 | 1.00(−2.16,4.16) | - |
| ≥8 | 4 | −0.49(−0.71, −0.28) | 0.5 | 4 | 0.95(−0.70,2.59) | <0.001 | 5 | −10.67(−12.31, −9.02) | 0.64 |
| Baseline fasting glucose (mmol/l) | |||||||||
| <8 | 2 | −1.18(−3.60,1.25) | 0.009 | 4 | −0.22(−0.78,0.35) | 0.87 | 2 | 0.44(−22.95,23.82) | 0.64 |
| ≥8 | 8 | −0.44(−0.62, −0.26) | 0.27 | 8 | 0.21(−0.34,0.77) | <0.0001 | 4 | −5.15(−14.48,4.18) | <0.0001 |
| Ethnicity | |||||||||
| Asian | 5 | −0.21(−0.84,0.43) | 0.004 | 4 | −0.10(−0.67,0.46) | 0.39 | 2 | −6.56(−19.50,6.38) | 0.35 |
| Western | 7 | −0.34(−0.58, −0.09) | 0.05 | 8 | 0.15(−0.4,0.7) | <0.0001 | 4 | −4.13(−14.48,6.21) | <0.0001 |
| Baseline serum Vitamin E(mmol/l) | |||||||||
| Normal | 6 | −0.23(−0.56,0.09) | 0.08 | 5 | −0.57(−0.87, −0.28) | 0.16 | 2 | −2.23(−12.42,7.96) | 0.15 |
| Low | 2 | −0.58(−0.83, −0.34) | 0.77 | 3 | 0.01(−0.13,0.15) | 0.39 | 3 | −9.0(−15.90, −2.10) | 0.32 |
Summary of effect sizes (weighted mean difference) for secondary outcomes.
| Variables | No. of comparison | Sample size | Net change(95%CI) | P | Test for heterogenenity | ||
| T | C | I2(%) | P | ||||
| HOMA index | 3 | 70 | 71 | −0.32(−0.65,0.01) | 0.06 | 89 | 0.0001 |
| Postprandial glucose | 3 | 69 | 69 | −0.20(−1.07,0.67) | 0.65 | 0 | 0.77 |
| Triglyceride(mmol/l) | 8 | 201 | 212 | −0.02(−0.29,0.25) | 0.90 | 96 | <0.0001 |
| Total-C(mmol/l) | 9 | 254 | 252 | −0.29(−0.85,0.27) | 0.31 | 99 | <0.0001 |
| HDL-c(mmol/l) | 9 | 217 | 223 | −0.00(−0.03,0.02) | 0.70 | 20 | 0.27 |
| LDL-c(mmol/l) | 8 | 192 | 203 | −0.24(−0.78,0.29) | 0.37 | 98 | <0.0001 |
HOMA, homeostasis model assessment; Total-C, total cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol;LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol; CI, confidence interval. T: treatment group; C: control group.
Quality assessment of included studies.
| Authors | Randomisation | Allocation concealment | Random sequence generation | Blinding | Reporing of withdrawals | Jaded score |
| Paolisso 1993 | Y | U | U | Y | Y | 3 |
| Reaven 1995 | Y | U | U | Y | Y | 3 |
| Tutuncu 1998 | Y | U | U | Y | U | 2 |
| Gazis 1999 | Y | U | U | Y | Y | 3 |
| Paolisso 2000 | Y | U | U | Y | Y | 3 |
| Manzella 2001 | Y | U | U | Y | U | 2 |
| Park 2002 | Y | U | U | Y | Y | 3 |
| Chen 2004 | Y | U | Y | U | Y | 3 |
| Economides 2005 | Y | U | U | Y | Y | 3 |
| Ble-Castillo 2005 | Y | U | U | Y | Y | 3 |
| Baliarsingh 2005 | Y | U | U | Y | Y | 3 |
| Boshtam 2005 | Y | U | U | Y | U | 2 |
| Ward 2007 | Y | U | Y | Y | Y | 4 |
| Oliveira 2011 | Y | U | U | Y | U | 2 |
Y, yes; U, unclear; Randomisation:the study described as randomized; Random sequence generation: the correct method for generation of random numbers computer random numbers table, shuffled cards or tossed coins, and minimization; Allocation concealment: Adequate concealment was that up to the point of treatment (eg, central randomisation); Double-blinding: masking to both researchers and patients; Reporting of withdrawals: The numbers and reasons for withdrawal in each group had to be stated for a point to be awarded.