BACKGROUND: Clinicians and patients need updated evidence on the comparative effectiveness and safety of diabetes medications to make informed treatment choices. PURPOSE: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of monotherapy (thiazolidinediones, metformin, sulfonylureas, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 [DPP-4] inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 [SGLT-2] inhibitors, and glucagon-like peptide-1 [GLP-1] receptor agonists) and selected metformin-based combinations in adults with type 2 diabetes. DATA SOURCES: English-language studies from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, indexed from inception through March 2015 (MEDLINE search updated through December 2015). STUDY SELECTION: Paired reviewers independently identified 179 trials and 25 observational studies of head-to-head monotherapy or metformin-based combinations. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently assessed study quality and serially extracted data and graded the strength of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Cardiovascular mortality was lower for metformin versus sulfonylureas; the evidence on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity, and microvascular complications was insufficient or of low strength. Reductions in hemoglobin A1c values were similar across monotherapies and metformin-based combinations, except that DPP-4 inhibitors had smaller effects. Body weight was reduced or maintained with metformin, DPP-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and SGLT-2 inhibitors and increased with sulfonylureas, thiazolidinediones, and insulin (between-group differences up to 5 kg). Hypoglycemia was more frequent with sulfonylureas. Gastrointestinal adverse events were highest with metformin and GLP-1 receptor agonists. Genital mycotic infections were increased with SGLT-2 inhibitors. LIMITATION: Most studies were short, with limited ability to assess rare safety and long-term clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The evidence supports metformin as first-line therapy for type 2 diabetes, given its relative safety and beneficial effects on hemoglobin A1c, weight, and cardiovascular mortality (compared with sulfonylureas). On the basis of less evidence, results for add-on therapies to metformin were similar to those for monotherapies. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
BACKGROUND: Clinicians and patients need updated evidence on the comparative effectiveness and safety of diabetes medications to make informed treatment choices. PURPOSE: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of monotherapy (thiazolidinediones, metformin, sulfonylureas, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 [DPP-4] inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 [SGLT-2] inhibitors, and glucagon-like peptide-1 [GLP-1] receptor agonists) and selected metformin-based combinations in adults with type 2 diabetes. DATA SOURCES: English-language studies from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, indexed from inception through March 2015 (MEDLINE search updated through December 2015). STUDY SELECTION: Paired reviewers independently identified 179 trials and 25 observational studies of head-to-head monotherapy or metformin-based combinations. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently assessed study quality and serially extracted data and graded the strength of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Cardiovascular mortality was lower for metformin versus sulfonylureas; the evidence on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity, and microvascular complications was insufficient or of low strength. Reductions in hemoglobin A1c values were similar across monotherapies and metformin-based combinations, except that DPP-4 inhibitors had smaller effects. Body weight was reduced or maintained with metformin, DPP-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and SGLT-2 inhibitors and increased with sulfonylureas, thiazolidinediones, and insulin (between-group differences up to 5 kg). Hypoglycemia was more frequent with sulfonylureas. Gastrointestinal adverse events were highest with metformin and GLP-1 receptor agonists. Genital mycotic infections were increased with SGLT-2 inhibitors. LIMITATION: Most studies were short, with limited ability to assess rare safety and long-term clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The evidence supports metformin as first-line therapy for type 2 diabetes, given its relative safety and beneficial effects on hemoglobin A1c, weight, and cardiovascular mortality (compared with sulfonylureas). On the basis of less evidence, results for add-on therapies to metformin were similar to those for monotherapies. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Authors: L S Vest; F M Koraishy; Z Zhang; N N Lam; M A Schnitzler; V R Dharnidharka; D Axelrod; A S Naik; T A Alhamad; B L Kasiske; G P Hess; K L Lentine Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2018-06-29 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Adarsh Ravishankar; Tianshun Zhang; Bruce R Lindgren; Ronda S Farah; Zigang Dong; Noah I Goldfarb Journal: Int J Dermatol Date: 2020-03-11 Impact factor: 2.736
Authors: Bennett G Childs; Martina Gluscevic; Darren J Baker; Remi-Martin Laberge; Dan Marquess; Jamie Dananberg; Jan M van Deursen Journal: Nat Rev Drug Discov Date: 2017-07-21 Impact factor: 84.694
Authors: Scott J Pilla; Jodi B Segal; G Caleb Alexander; Cynthia M Boyd; Nisa M Maruthur Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 5.562
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