Siew Pheng Chan1, Stephen Colagiuri2. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Electronic address: chansp@ummc.edu.my. 2. The Boden Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Abstract
AIMS: Sulfonylureas are well positioned in treating type 2 diabetes, after lifestyle modification and metformin. The sulfonylurea gliclazide was given preference over glibenclamide in older people with type 2 diabetes in the World Health Organization model list of essential medicines. Consequently, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of the efficacy and safety of gliclazide versus other oral insulinotropic agents (sulfonylureas, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, and glinides) was performed. METHODS: Two reviewers searched MEDLINE for studies of ≥12 weeks duration in adults with type 2 diabetes. The key search word was "gliclazide", filtered with "randomized controlled trial", "human" and "19+ years". Differences were explored in mean change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) from baseline (primary outcome) and risk of hypoglycemia (secondary outcome) between gliclazide and other oral insulinotropic agents; and other sulfonylureas. RESULTS: Nine out of 181 references reported primary outcomes, of which 7 reported secondary outcomes. Gliclazide lowered HbA1c more than other oral insulinotropic agents, with a weighted mean difference of -0.11% (95%, CI -0.19 to -0.03%, P=0.008, I(2)=60%), though not more than other sulfonylureas (-0.12%; 95%, CI -0.25 to 0.01%, P=0.07, I(2)=77%). Risk of hypoglycemia with gliclazide was not different to other insulinotropic agents (RR 0.85; 95%, CI 0.66 to 1.09, P=0.20, I(2)=61%) but significantly lower than other sulfonylureas (RR 0.47; 95%, CI 0.27 to 0.79, P=0.004, I(2)=0%). CONCLUSION: Compared with other oral insulinotropic agents, gliclazide significantly reduced HbA1c with no difference regarding hypoglycemia risk. Compared with other sulfonylureas, HbA1c reduction with gliclazide was not significantly different, but hypoglycemia risk was significantly lower.
AIMS: Sulfonylureas are well positioned in treating type 2 diabetes, after lifestyle modification and metformin. The sulfonylurea gliclazide was given preference over glibenclamide in older people with type 2 diabetes in the World Health Organization model list of essential medicines. Consequently, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of the efficacy and safety of gliclazide versus other oral insulinotropic agents (sulfonylureas, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, and glinides) was performed. METHODS: Two reviewers searched MEDLINE for studies of ≥12 weeks duration in adults with type 2 diabetes. The key search word was "gliclazide", filtered with "randomized controlled trial", "human" and "19+ years". Differences were explored in mean change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) from baseline (primary outcome) and risk of hypoglycemia (secondary outcome) between gliclazide and other oral insulinotropic agents; and other sulfonylureas. RESULTS: Nine out of 181 references reported primary outcomes, of which 7 reported secondary outcomes. Gliclazide lowered HbA1c more than other oral insulinotropic agents, with a weighted mean difference of -0.11% (95%, CI -0.19 to -0.03%, P=0.008, I(2)=60%), though not more than other sulfonylureas (-0.12%; 95%, CI -0.25 to 0.01%, P=0.07, I(2)=77%). Risk of hypoglycemia with gliclazide was not different to other insulinotropic agents (RR 0.85; 95%, CI 0.66 to 1.09, P=0.20, I(2)=61%) but significantly lower than other sulfonylureas (RR 0.47; 95%, CI 0.27 to 0.79, P=0.004, I(2)=0%). CONCLUSION: Compared with other oral insulinotropic agents, gliclazide significantly reduced HbA1c with no difference regarding hypoglycemia risk. Compared with other sulfonylureas, HbA1c reduction with gliclazide was not significantly different, but hypoglycemia risk was significantly lower.
Authors: Harald Sourij; Roland Edlinger; Friedrich Prischl; Martin Auinger; Alexandra Kautzky-Willer; Marcus D Säemann; Rudolf Prager; Martin Clodi; Guntram Schernthaner; Gert Mayer; Rainer Oberbauer; Alexander R Rosenkranz Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Ana Luiza Pereira Moreira Mori; Renata Cunha Carvalho; Patricia Melo Aguiar; Maria Goretti Farias de Lima; Magali da Silva Pacheco Nobre Rossi; José Fernando Salvador Carrillo; Egídio Lima Dórea; Sílvia Storpirtis Journal: Int J Clin Pharm Date: 2017-02-10
Authors: Melanie J Davies; David A D'Alessio; Judith Fradkin; Walter N Kernan; Chantal Mathieu; Geltrude Mingrone; Peter Rossing; Apostolos Tsapas; Deborah J Wexler; John B Buse Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Sanjay Kalra; Silver Bahendeka; Rakesh Sahay; Sujoy Ghosh; Fariduddin Md; Abbas Orabi; Kaushik Ramaiya; Sameer Al Shammari; Dina Shrestha; Khalid Shaikh; Sachitha Abhayaratna; Pradeep K Shrestha; Aravinthan Mahalingam; Mazen Askheta; Aly Ahmed A Rahim; Fatimah Eliana; Hari K Shrestha; Sandeep Chaudhary; Nancy Ngugi; Jean Claude Mbanya; Than Than Aye; Tint Swe Latt; Zhanay A Akanov; Abbas Raza Syed; Nikhil Tandon; A G Unnikrishnan; S V Madhu; Ali Jawa; Subhankar Chowdhury; Sarita Bajaj; Ashok Kumar Das Journal: Indian J Endocrinol Metab Date: 2018 Jan-Feb
Authors: Carlo Bruno Giorda; Emanuela Orsi; Salvatore De Cosmo; Antonio Carlo Bossi; Catia Guerzoni; Stefania Cercone; Barbara Gilio; Franco Cavalot Journal: Diabetes Ther Date: 2020-07-30 Impact factor: 2.945