Related Articles

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the efficacy of metformin in reducing BMI and cardiometabolic risk in obese children and adolescents without diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Double-blind RCTs of ≥6 months duration in obese subjects age ≤19 years without diabetes were included. Our primary outcomes of interest include changes in BMI and measures of insulin sensitivity.

RESULTS

Five trials met inclusion criteria (n = 320 individuals). Compared with placebo, metformin reduced BMI by 1.42 kg/m2 (95% CI 0.83–2.02) and homeostasis model assessment insulin of resistance (HOMA-IR) score by 2.01 (95% CI 0.75–3.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin appears to be moderately efficacious in reducing BMI and insulin resistance in hyperinsulinemic obese children and adolescents in the short term. Larger, longer-term studies in different populations are needed to establish its role in the treatment of overweight children.

Catherine Cornu and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of metformin efficacy on cardiovascular morbidity or mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes and showed that although metformin is considered the gold standard, its benefit/risk ratio remains uncertain.

Background

The UK Prospective Diabetes Study showed that metformin decreases mortality compared to diet alone in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Since then, it has been the first-line treatment in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes. However, metformin-sulphonylurea bitherapy may increase mortality.

Methods and Findings

This meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials evaluated metformin efficacy (in studies of metformin versus diet alone, versus placebo, and versus no treatment; metformin as an add-on therapy; and metformin withdrawal) against cardiovascular morbidity or mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes. We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane database. Primary end points were all-cause mortality and cardiovascular death. Secondary end points included all myocardial infarctions, all strokes, congestive heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, leg amputations, and microvascular complications. Thirteen randomised controlled trials (13,110 patients) were retrieved; 9,560 patients were given metformin, and 3,550 patients were given conventional treatment or placebo. Metformin did not significantly affect the primary outcomes all-cause mortality, risk ratio (RR) = 0.99 (95% CI: 0.75 to 1.31), and cardiovascular mortality, RR = 1.05 (95% CI: 0.67 to 1.64). The secondary outcomes were also unaffected by metformin treatment: all myocardial infarctions, RR = 0.90 (95% CI: 0.74 to 1.09); all strokes, RR = 0.76 (95% CI: 0.51 to 1.14); heart failure, RR = 1.03 (95% CI: 0.67 to 1.59); peripheral vascular disease, RR = 0.90 (95% CI: 0.46 to 1.78); leg amputations, RR = 1.04 (95% CI: 0.44 to 2.44); and microvascular complications, RR = 0.83 (95% CI: 0.59 to 1.17). For all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality, there was significant heterogeneity when including the UK Prospective Diabetes Study subgroups (I2 = 41% and 59%). There was significant interaction with sulphonylurea as a concomitant treatment for myocardial infarction (p = 0.10 and 0.02, respectively).

Conclusions

Although metformin is considered the gold standard, its benefit/risk ratio remains uncertain. We cannot exclude a 25% reduction or a 31% increase in all-cause mortality. We cannot exclude a 33% reduction or a 64% increase in cardiovascular mortality. Further studies are needed to clarify this situation.

Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

Editors' Summary

Background

Worldwide, more than 350 million people have diabetes, and this number is increasing rapidly. Diabetes is characterized by dangerous amounts of sugar (glucose) in the blood. Blood sugar levels are normally controlled by insulin, a hormone produced by the pancreas. In people with type 2 diabetes (the most common form of diabetes), blood sugar control fails because the fat and muscle cells that usually respond to insulin by removing excess sugar from the blood become less responsive to insulin. Type 2 diabetes can be controlled with diet and exercise and with antidiabetic pills, each of which works in a different way to maintain a healthy blood sugar level. Metformin, for example, stops the liver making glucose and increases the body's response to insulin, whereas sulfonylureas help the pancreas make more insulin. The long-term complications of diabetes, which include an increased risk of cardiovascular problems such as heart disease and stroke, reduce the life expectancy of people with diabetes by about ten years compared to people without diabetes.

Why Was This Study Done?

In 1998, a large randomized clinical trial called the UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS 34) reported that metformin in combination with dietary control reduced all-cause mortality in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes when compared to dietary control alone. Specifically, the risk of death from any cause among patients taking metformin was about a third lower than the risk of death among patients not taking metformin—a risk ratio (RR) of 0.64. This reduction in risk was significant (that is, it was unlikely to have occurred by chance) because its 95% confidence interval (95% CI; there is a 95% chance that the “true” RR lies within this interval) of 0.45–0.91 did not overlap 1.0. Given this finding, metformin is now recommended as the first-line treatment for type 2 diabetes. However, UKPDS 34 also reported an increase in death in non-overweight patients who took metformin plus sulfonylurea compared to those who took sulfonylurea alone (RR: 1.60; 95% CI: 1.02–2.52), a result considered non-significant by the UKPDS 34 researchers and largely ignored ever since. So do the benefits of metformin outweigh its risks? In this meta-analysis, the researchers re-evaluate the risk-to-benefit balance of metformin in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes. A meta-analysis is a statistical method that combines the results of several studies.

What Did the Researchers Do and Find?

The researchers identified 13 randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effect of metformin on cardiovascular morbidity (illness) and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes. More than 13,000 patients participated in these studies, three-quarters of whom received metformin and a quarter of whom received other treatments or a placebo. Compared to other treatments, metformin treatment had no effect on the risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.75–1.31) or cardiovascular mortality (RR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.67–1.64), the primary end points of this study. However, the results of the individual trials varied more than would be expected by chance (“heterogeneity”). Exclusion of the UKPDS 34 trial from the meta-analysis had no effect on the estimated risk ratio for all-cause mortality or cardiovascular deaths, but the heterogeneity disappeared. Finally, metformin treatment had no significant effect on the risk of cardiovascular conditions such as heart attacks, strokes, and heart failure; there was no heterogeneity among the trials for these secondary end points.

What Do These Findings Mean?

These findings show no evidence that metformin has any beneficial effect on all-cause mortality, on cardiovascular mortality, or on cardiovascular morbidity among patients with type 2 diabetes. These findings must be cautiously interpreted because only a few randomized controlled trials were included in this study, and only a few patients died or developed any cardiovascular illnesses. Importantly, however, from these findings, it is impossible to exclude beyond reasonable doubt the possibility that metformin causes up to a 25% reduction or a 31% increase in all-cause mortality. Similarly, these findings cannot exclude the possibility that metformin causes up to a 33% reduction or a 64% increase in cardiovascular mortality. Given that a large number of patients take metformin for many years as a first-line treatment for diabetes, further studies are urgently needed to clarify this situation.

Additional Information

Please access these web sites via the online version of this summary at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001204.

The International Diabetes Federation provides information about all aspects of diabetes

The US National Diabetes Information Clearinghouse provides information about diabetes for patients, health-care professionals, and the general public, including detailed information on diabetes medicines (in English and Spanish)

The UK National Health Service Choices web site provides information for patients and carers about type 2 diabetes and includes peoples stories about diabetes

The charity Diabetes UK also provides detailed information for patients and carers, including information on diabetes medications, and has a further selection of stories from people with diabetes

MedlinePlus provides links to further resources and advice about diabetes and about diabetes medicines; it also provides information about metformin (in English and Spanish)

The charity Healthtalkonline has interviews with people about their experiences of diabetes and of controlling diabetes with oral medications

OBJECTIVE

Metformin is the first-line oral medication recommended for glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. We reviewed the literature to quantify the effect of metformin treatment on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels in all types of diabetes and examine the impact of differing doses on glycemic control.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from 1950 to June 2010 for trials of at least 12 weeks’ duration in which diabetic patients were treated with either metformin monotherapy or as an add-on therapy. Data on change in HbA1c were pooled in a meta-analysis. Data from dose-comparison trials were separately pooled.

RESULTS

A total of 35 trials were identified for the main analysis and 7 for the dose-comparison analysis. Metformin monotherapy lowered HbA1c by 1.12% (95% CI 0.92–1.32; I2 = 80%) versus placebo, metformin added to oral therapy lowered HbA1c by 0.95% (0.77–1.13; I2 = 77%) versus placebo added to oral therapy, and metformin added to insulin therapy lowered HbA1c by 0.60% (0.30–0.91; I2 = 79.8%) versus insulin only. There was a significantly greater reduction in HbA1c using higher doses of metformin compared with lower doses of metformin with no significant increase in side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence supports the effectiveness of metformin therapy in a clinically important lowering of HbA1c used as monotherapy and in combination with other therapeutic agents. There is potential for using higher doses of metformin to maximize glycemic control in diabetic patients without increasing gastrointestinal effects.

Background and Aim. Diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease that has a great impact on patients and society. Metformin monotherapy is capable of maintaining a target glycemic control only for a short term. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of combination therapy of metformin with any antidiabetic agents in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. Methods. Reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of combination therapy of metformin with various antidiabetic agents in T2DM failing metformin alone were identified. Results. Eight studies were identified in our paper. Thiazolidinediones (TZDs) were as effective as dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors (DPP IV inhs) in reducing HbA1c value (pooled mean difference −0.03%; 95% CI −0.16 to 0.10%). In comparison between TZDs and sulphonylureas (SUs), TZDs reduced fasting plasma insulin (FPI) more effectively than SUs (pool mean difference −5.72 μU/mL; 95% CI −8.21 to −3.22 μU/mL, P < 0.00001), but no significant differences were detected in the effects on HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (pooled mean difference −2.19 mg/dL; 95% CI −11.32 to 6.94 mg/dL, P = 0.64). Conclusions. Our study showed that TZDs reduced FPG better than did DPP IV inhs and decreased FPI more than did SUs.

The rising rates of obesity in youth have concurrently led to an increase in the rates of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in this age group. However, there are limited data on the efficacy of different antidiabetic agents in youth. In this context, the Treatment Options for Type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth trial recently reported that the majority of obese children and adolescents 10-17-years old with newly diagnosed T2DM (T2DM duration less than 2 years) could not achieve HbA1c levels < 8% for more than 1 year with metformin monotherapy, metformin plus rosiglitazone combination, or metformin and lifestyle changes. These findings suggest that, in the majority of youth with T2DM, tight long-term glycemic control with oral agents is an elusive goal and that most patients will require treatment with insulin within a few years of diagnosis to achieve HbA1c targets and reduce the risk of macro- and microvascular complications. Therefore, reducing the incidence of T2DM by preventing pediatric obesity through the implementation of lifestyle changes in the community should be the primary objective of healthcare systems.

Background

Concomitant with the rise in childhood obesity there has been a significant increase in the number of adolescents with clinical features of insulin resistance and prediabetes. Clinical insulin resistance and prediabetes are likely to progress to type 2 diabetes and early atherosclerosis if not targeted for early intervention. There are no efficacy trials of lifestyle intervention in this group to inform clinical practice. The primary aim of this randomised control trial (RCT) is to determine the efficacy and effectiveness of two different structured lifestyle interventions differing in diet composition on insulin sensitivity, in adolescents with clinical insulin resistance and/or prediabetes treated with metformin.

Methods/design

This study protocol describes the design of an ongoing RCT. We are recruiting 108 (54 each treatment arm) 10 to 17 year olds with clinical features of insulin resistance and/or prediabetes, through physician referral, into a multi-centred RCT. All participants are prescribed metformin and participate in a diet and exercise program. The lifestyle program is the same for all participants except for diet composition. The diets are a high carbohydrate, low fat diet and a moderate carbohydrate, increased protein diet.

The program commences with an intensive 3 month dietary intervention, implemented by trained dietitians, followed by a 3 month intensive gym and home based exercise program, supervised by certified physical trainers. To measure the longer term effectiveness, after the intensive intervention trial participants are managed by either their usual physician or study physician and followed up by the study dietitians for an additional 6 months. The primary outcome measure, change in insulin sensitivity, is measured at 3, 6 and 12 months.

Discussion

Clinical insulin resistance and prediabetes in the paediatric population are rapidly emerging clinical problems with serious health outcomes. With appropriate management these conditions are potentially reversible or at least their progression can be delayed. This research study is the first trial designed to provide much needed data on the effective dietary management for this cohort. This study will inform clinical practice guidelines for adolescents with clinical insulin resistance and may assist in preventing metabolic complications, type 2 diabetes and early cardiovascular disease.

Trial registration

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registration Number ACTRN12608000416392

OBJECTIVE

In women with gestational diabetes mellitus, who were randomized to metformin or insulin treatment, pregnancy outcomes were similar (Metformin in Gestational diabetes [MiG] trial). Metformin crosses the placenta, so it is important to assess potential effects on growth of the children.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In Auckland, New Zealand, and Adelaide, Australia, women who had participated in the MiG trial were reviewed when their children were 2 years old. Body composition was measured in 154 and 164 children whose mothers had been randomized to metformin and insulin, respectively. Children were assessed with anthropometry, bioimpedance, and dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), using standard methods.

RESULTS

The children were similar for baseline maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes. In the metformin group, compared with the insulin group, children had larger mid-upper arm circumferences (17.2 ± 1.5 vs. 16.7 ± 1.5 cm; P = 0.002) and subscapular (6.3 ± 1.9 vs. 6.0 ± 1.7 mm; P = 0.02) and biceps skinfolds (6.03 ± 1.9 vs. 5.6 ± 1.7 mm; P = 0.04). Total fat mass and percentage body fat assessed by bioimpedance (n = 221) and DEXA (n = 114) were not different.

CONCLUSIONS

Children exposed to metformin had larger measures of subcutaneous fat, but overall body fat was the same as in children whose mothers were treated with insulin alone. Further follow-up is required to examine whether these findings persist into later life and whether children exposed to metformin will develop less visceral fat and be more insulin sensitive. If so, this would have significant implications for the current pandemic of diabetes.

Background

Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is widely applied, although the evidence base is weak. Previous reviews on medical interventions have shown that conclusions based on published data alone may no longer hold after consideration of unpublished data. The main objective of this study was to identify unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on NPWT within the framework of a systematic review.

Methods

RCTs comparing NPWT with conventional wound therapy were identified using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library. Every database was searched from inception to May 2005. The search was updated in December 2006. Reference lists of original articles and systematic reviews, as well as congress proceedings and online trial registers, were screened for clues to unpublished RCTs. Manufacturers of NPWT devices and authors of conference abstracts were contacted and asked to provide study information. Trials were considered nonrandomised if concealment of allocation to treatment groups was classified as "inadequate". The study status was classified as "completed", "discontinued", "ongoing" or "unclear". The publication status of completed or discontinued RCTs was classified as "published" if a full-text paper on final study results (completed trials) or interim results (discontinued trials) was available, and "unpublished" if this was not the case. The type of sponsorship was also noted for all trials.

Results

A total of 28 RCTs referring to at least 2755 planned or analysed patients met the inclusion criteria: 13 RCTs had been completed, 6 had been discontinued, 6 were ongoing, and the status of 3 RCTs was unclear. Full-text papers were available on 30% of patients in the 19 completed or discontinued RCTs (495 analysed patients in 10 published RCTs vs. 1154 planned patients in 9 unpublished RCTs). Most information about conference abstracts and unpublished study information referring to trials that were unpublished at the time these documents were generated was obtained from the manufacturer Kinetic Concepts Inc. (KCI) (19 RCTs), followed by The Cochrane Library (18) and a systematic review (15). We were able to obtain some information on the methods of unpublished RCTs, but results data were either not available or requests for results data were not answered; the results of unpublished RCTs could therefore not be considered in the review. One manufacturer, KCI, sponsored the majority of RCTs (19/28; 68%). The sponsorship of the remaining trials was unclear.

Conclusion

Multi-source comprehensive searches identify unpublished RCTs. However, lack of access to unpublished study results data raises doubts about the completeness of the evidence base on NPWT.

Background

A growing body of evidence has suggested that metformin potentially reduces the risk of cancer. Our objective was to enhance the precision of estimates of the effect of metformin on the risk of any-site and site-specific cancers in patients with diabetes.

Methods/Principal Findings

We performed a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for pertinent articles published as of October 12, 2011, and included them in a systematic review and meta-analysis. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) for overall cancer mortality and cancer incidence. Of the 21,195 diabetic patients reported in 6 studies (4 cohort studies, 2 RCTs), 991 (4.5%) cases of death from cancer were reported. A total of 11,117 (5.3%) cases of incident cancer at any site were reported among 210,892 patients in 10 studies (2 RCTs, 6 cohort studies, 2 case-control studies). The risks of cancer among metformin users were significantly lower than those among non-metformin users: the pooled RRs (95% confidence interval) were 0.66 (0.49–0.88) for cancer mortality, 0.67 (0.53–0.85) for all-cancer incidence, 0.68 (0.53–0.88) for colorectal cancer (n = 6), 0.20 (0.07–0.59) for hepatocellular cancer (n = 4), 0.67 (0.45–0.99) for lung cancer (n = 3).

Conclusion/Significance

The use of metformin in diabetic patients was associated with significantly lower risks of cancer mortality and incidence. However, this analysis is mainly based on observational studies and our findings underscore the more need for long-term RCTs to confirm this potential benefit for individuals with diabetes.

Introduction:

Targeting glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels below 7.0% is considered a primary goal of diabetes care, given its importance in obtaining a sustained reduction in microvascular, and possibly macrovascular complications.

Aim:

The aim of this review was to evaluate the clinical utility of a fixed dose combination of saxagliptin/metformin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Evidence review:

The combination of saxagliptin/metformin was well tolerated and produced sustained glycemic control for up to 76 weeks, with greater improvements in glycemic parameters compared with either drug alone. The saxagliptin/metformin combination also proved its non-inferiority compared with either sulfonylurea/metformin or sitagliptin/metformin combinations.

Place in therapy:

Clinical practice recommends lifestyle interventions together with starting metformin at the time that the type 2 diabetes mellitus is diagnosed. Once metformin fails to maintain glycemic control, the addition of DPP-4 inhibitors should be the logical choice because of their effects on HbA1c compared to the addition of a sulfonylurea or glitazone, and because of their positive effects on beta cell function and their neutral effects on body weight. Furthermore, DPP-4 inhibitors prevent the risk of hypoglycemia posed by sulfonylureas.

Introduction

One important aspect of a Systematic Review (SR) is to use a comprehensive search strategy to identify evidence such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from multiple sources. One particular concern is to find unpublished evidence to avoid publication bias. Traditional methods to identify RCTs which are mentioned in the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook include using Collaborative Review Group trial registers, checking reference lists, personal communication, electronic databases and hand searching. The Internet represents a potential additional source for identifying evidence for systematic reviews, but the actual use of the Internet for locating unpublished evidence has not been systematically studied.

Objectives

To determine whether and to which extent RCTs and other unpublished evidence useful for systematic reviews can be identified by searching the World-Wide-Web in addition to using traditional approaches mentioned in the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. To determine on which kind of web pages hints to unpublished RCTs could be located and to determine possible search strategies and tools for the Internet. To provide future directions for research in this area and for the development of specialised search engines.

Methods

A random sample of 8 completed, recently updated Cochrane Systematic Reviews (CSR) were selected and their search strategies were adapted for the World-Wide-Web. The Internet was searched and hints to potentially relevant unpublished or ongoing trials found on Web Pages were recorded and compared to unpublished evidence used in the original CSRs.

Results

Information on unpublished and ongoing trials could be found on the Internet for 4 of the 8 CSRs.

Conclusions

Searches on the Internet should be routinely included in the search strategies for CRs. New tools for locating ongoing trials (a specialised search engine) should be considered. A problem is how to deal with published evidence with questionable reliability found on the Internet that has not been published in peer-reviewed journals.

Type 2 diabetes is associated with obesity and is increasing at an alarming rate in youth. Although weight loss through lifestyle change is one of the primary treatment recommendations for adults with type 2 diabetes, the efficacy of this approach has not been tested with youth. This paper provides a summary of the reviews and meta-analyses of pediatric weight-loss interventions that informed the design and implementation of an intensive, family-based lifestyle weight management program for adolescents with type 2 diabetes and their families developed for the Treatment Options for type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth (TODAY) study. A total of 1092 youth have been screened, and 704 families have been randomized for inclusion in this 15-center clinical trial sponsored by the National Institutes of Health. The TODAY study is designed to test three approaches (metformin, metformin plus rosiglitazone and metformin plus an intensive lifestyle intervention) to the treatment of a diverse cohort of youth, 10–17 years of age, within 2 years of their diagnosis. The principal goal of the TODAY Lifestyle Program (TLP) is to decrease baseline weight of youth by 7–10% (or the equivalent for children who are growing in height) through changes in eating and physical activity habits, and to sustain these changes through ongoing treatment contact. The TLP is implemented by interventionists called Personal Activity and Nutrition Leaders (PALs) and delivered to youth with type 2 diabetes, and at least one family support person. The TLP provides a model for taking a comprehensive, continuous care approach to the treatment of severe overweight in youth with comorbid medical conditions such as type 2 diabetes.

Introduction:

Type 2 diabetes mellitus, a metabolic disease with increasing incidence, is one of the most important cardiovascular risk factors. Insulin resistance represents the common mechanism that leads to type 2 diabetes in obese subjects. Metformin and the thiazolidinediones, pioglitazone and rosiglitazone, are insulin-sensitizing agents available for treatment of type 2 diabetes. Large clinical trials have demonstrated the effectiveness of both metformin and pioglitazone in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The fixed-dose combination of metformin and pioglitazone appears to be a good option for treating diabetes in insulin-resistant patients.

Aims:

The purpose of this article is to review the place in therapy of a fixed-dose combination of pioglitazone and metformin in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes.

Evidence review:

The current evidence suggests that combined therapy may help to achieve the recommended goals in the management of diabetes. A fixed-dose formulation of pioglitazone and metformin may provide advantages in terms of glycemic control and other cardiovascular risk factors frequently associated with diabetes.

Place in therapy:

The current evidence shows that a fixed-dose formulation of pioglitazone and metformin offers an effective option for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes when monotherapy fails in the achievement of the recommended standards of care.

Background

Although there is general agreement that metformin should be used as first-line pharmacotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes, uncertainty remains regarding the choice of second-line therapy once metformin is no longer effective. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the comparative safety and efficacy of all available classes of antihyperglycemic therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS Previews, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized controlled trials published in English from 1980 to October 2009. Additional citations were obtained from grey literature and conference proceedings and through stakeholder feedback. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Key outcomes of interest were hemoglobin A1c, body weight, hypoglycemia, quality of life, long-term diabetes-related complications, serious adverse drug events and mortality. Mixed-treatment comparison and pairwise meta-analyses were conducted to pool trial results, when appropriate.

Results

We identified 49 active and non-active controlled randomized trials that compared 2 or more of the following classes of antihyperglycemic agents and weight-loss agents: sulfonylureas, meglitinides, thiazolidinediones (TZDs), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogues, insulins, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, sibutramine and orlistat. All classes of second-line antihyperglycemic therapies achieved clinically meaningful reductions in hemoglobin A1c (0.6% to 1.0%). No significant differences were found between classes. Insulins and insulin secretagogues were associated with significantly more events of overall hypoglycemia than the other agents, but severe hypoglycemia was rarely observed. An increase in body weight was observed with the majority of second-line therapies (1.8 to 3.0 kg), the exceptions being DPP-4 inhibitors, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors and GLP-1 analogues (0.6 to –1.8 kg). There were insufficient data available for diabetes complications, mortality or quality of life.

Interpretation

DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 analogues achieved improvements in glycemic control similar to those of other second-line therapies, although they may have modest benefits in terms of weight gain and overall hypoglycemia. Further long-term trials of adequate power are required to determine whether newer drug classes differ from older agents in terms of clinically meaningful outcomes.

Background:

Patients with type 2 diabetes have a 40% increased risk of bladder cancer. Thiazolidinediones, especially pioglitazone, may increase the risk. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the risk of bladder cancer among adults with type 2 diabetes taking thiazolidinediones.

Methods:

We searched key biomedical databases (including MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus) and sources of grey literature from inception through March 2012 for published and unpublished studies, without language restrictions. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies and case–control studies that reported incident bladder cancer among people with type 2 diabetes who ever (v. never) were exposed to pioglitazone (main outcome), rosiglitazone or any thiazolidinedione.

Results:

Of the 1787 studies identified, we selected 4 RCTs, 5 cohort studies and 1 case–control study. The total number of patients was 2 657 365, of whom 3643 had newly diagnosed bladder cancer, for an overall incidence of 53.1 per 100 000 person-years. The one RCT that reported on pioglitazone use found no significant association with bladder cancer (risk ratio [RR] 2.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91–6.13). The cohort studies of thiazolidinediones (pooled RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.04–1.26; I2 = 0%) and of pioglitazone specifically (pooled RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.07–1.39; I2 = 0%) showed significant associations with bladder cancer. No significant association with bladder cancer was observed in the two RCTs that evaluated rosiglitazone use (pooled RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.34–2.23; I2 = 0%).

Interpretation:

The limited evidence available supports the hypothesis that thiazolidinediones, particularly pioglitazone, are associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer among adults with type 2 diabetes.

Background

It is generally believed that exhaustive searches of bibliographic databases are needed for systematic reviews of health care interventions. The CENTRAL database of controlled trials (RCTs) has been built up by exhaustive searching. The CONSORT statement aims to encourage better reporting, and hence indexing, of RCTs. Our aim was to assess whether developments in the CENTRAL database, and the CONSORT statement, mean that a simplified RCT search strategy for identifying RCTs now suffices for systematic reviews of health care interventions.

Methods

RCTs used in the Cochrane reviews were identified. A brief RCT search strategy (BRSS), consisting of a search of CENTRAL, and then for variants of the word random across all fields (random$.af.) in MEDLINE and EMBASE, was devised and run. Any trials included in the meta-analyses, but missed by the BRSS, were identified. The meta-analyses were then re-run, with and without the missed RCTs, and the differences quantified. The proportion of trials with variants of the word random in the title or abstract was calculated for each year. The number of RCTs retrieved by searching with "random$.af." was compared to the highly sensitive search strategy (HSSS).

Results

The BRSS had a sensitivity of 94%. It found all journal RCTs in 47 of the 57 reviews. The missing RCTs made some significant differences to a small proportion of the total outcomes in only five reviews, but no important differences in conclusions resulted. In the post-CONSORT years, 1997–2003, the percentage of RCTs with random in the title or abstract was 85%, a mean increase of 17% compared to the seven years pre-CONSORT (95% CI, 8.3% to 25.9%). The search using random$.af. reduced the MEDLINE retrieval by 84%, compared to the HSSS, thereby reducing the workload of checking retrievals.

Conclusion

A brief RCT search strategy is now sufficient to locate RCTs for systematic reviews in most cases. Exhaustive searching is no longer cost-effective, because in effect it has already been done for CENTRAL.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the use of metformin in people with prediabetes (impaired glucose tolerance or impaired fasting glucose) would prevent or delay the onset of frank type 2 diabetes mellitus.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE was searched from January 1966 to the present, and articles meeting the selection criteria were hand searched.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials that involved administration of metformin to delay or prevent type 2 diabetes in individuals with impaired glucose tolerance or impaired fasting glucose were included. Development of diabetes was a required outcome measure; follow-up time of at least 6 months was required. Three studies met these criteria.

SYNTHESIS

The 3 studies varied in ethnicity of the population studied, in the rates of conversion to diabetes from prediabetes, and in the dose of metformin used. In general the studies were well done, although 2 of the 3 did not do true intention-to-treat analyses. A sensitivity analysis was completed by converting all data to intention-to-treat data and assuming a worst-case scenario for the people who were lost to follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Metformin decreases the rate of conversion from prediabetes to diabetes. This was true at higher dosage (850 mg twice daily) and lower dosage (250 mg twice or 3 times daily); in people of varied ethnicity; and even when a sensitivity analysis was applied to the data. The number needed to treat was between 7 and 14 for treatment over a 3-year period.

Background

To evaluate the clinical efficacy of sitagliptin for reducing plasma glucose levels in Korean subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus during a 14-week treatment period.

Methods

Our study design involved the addition of 100 mg sitagliptin once-daily to three ongoing combination therapy regimens and changing from glimepiride and metformin to sitagliptin and metformin.

Results

The addition of sitagliptin 100 mg/day produced a statistically significant reduction in mean HbA1c level (mean HbA1c reduction of 0.99±0.85%, P<0.01). In the group taking a combination of sitagliptin and metformin (n=143, initial mean HbA1c level=7.48%), the reductions in HbA1c, 2-hour postprandial glucose, and fasting glucose levels were 0.72±0.76% (P<0.01), 47±65 mg/dL (P<0.01), and 15±44 mg/dL (P<0.01), respectively. In the group taking a combination of sitagliptin, glimepiride, and metformin (n=125, initial mean HbA1c level=8.42%), the reductions in HbA1c, 2-hour postprandial glucose, and fasting glucose levels were 1.09±0.86% (P<0.01), 62±64 mg/dL (P<0.01), and 31±45 mg/dL (P<0.01), respectively. In the group taking a combination of sitagliptin, glimepiride, metformin, and α-glucosidase inhibitor (n=63, initial mean HbA1c level=9.19%), the reductions in HbA1c, 2-hour postprandial glucose, and fasting glucose levels were 1.27±0.70% (P<0.01), 72±65 mg/dL (P<0.01), and 35±51 mg/dL (P<0.01), respectively. In the group that had previous hypoglycemic events and that changed from glimepiride to sitagliptin, HbA1c level did not change but fasting glucose increased significantly (14±29 mg/dL, P<0.01).

Conclusion

Sitagliptin combination therapy for 14 weeks significantly improved glycemic control and was well-tolerated in Korean subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Background

Type 2 diabetes is treated in a stepwise manner, progressing from diet and physical activity to oral antidiabetic agents and insulin. The oral agent pioglitazone is licensed for use with insulin when metformin is contraindicated or not tolerated. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the extent to which adding pioglitazone to insulin-containing regimens produces benefits in terms of patient-relevant outcomes.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomised controlled trials comparing pioglitazone in combination with any insulin-containing regimen in comparison with the same insulin regimen alone in patients with type 2 diabetes. Outcomes investigated included HbA1c, hypoglycaemia, weight, and adverse events. Studies were selected, assessed and summarised according to standard systematic review methodology and in a meta-analysis. We included eight trials that examined the benefits of adding pioglitazone to an insulin regimen and studied a total of 3092 patients with type 2 diabetes. All studies included patients with previously inadequate glucose control. Trial duration was between 12 weeks and 34.5 months. The trials used pioglitazone doses of up to 45 mg/day. In our meta-analysis, the mean reduction in HbA1c was 0.58% (95% CI: −0.70, −0.46, p<0.00001). Hypoglycaemic episodes were slightly more frequent in the pioglitazone arms (relative risk 1.27; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.63, p = 0.06). Where reported, HDL-cholesterol tended to be increased with pioglitazone. Patients on pioglitazone tended to gain more weight than those who were not, with an average difference of almost 3 kg. Peripheral oedema was more frequent in the pioglitazone groups. None of the studies reported on fractures in women, and data on cardiovascular events were inconclusive, with most studies being too short or too small to assess these long-term outcomes.

Conclusions/Significance

When added to insulin regimens, pioglitazone confers a small advantage in terms of HbA1c in type 2 diabetes patients with previous inadequate glucose control, but at the cost of increased hypoglycaemia and weight gain. Other considerations include the risk of heart failure, fractures in women, a reduced insulin dose, and the net financial cost.

OBJECTIVES: To describe preliminary work undertaken for development of a nursing contribution to the Cochrane Collaboration. To ascertain whether there are randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on nursing care which need to be identified for inclusion in systematic reviews of the effects of health care. DESIGN: Searches by Medline (1966-94) and by hand of 11 nursing research journals from inception to the end of 1994 to identify RCTs and systematic reviews; and a comparison of searches by hand and by Medline for three nursing research journals. MAIN MEASURES: Total number of RCTs identified and number of RCTs published in nursing journals; the sensitivity of Medline searches; and aspects of nursing care evaluated by RCT. RESULTS: The work is ongoing and 522 reports of RCTs and 20 systematic reviews of effectiveness have been identified so far. The sensitivity of Medline searches for RCTs in nursing journals is as low as 36% for one journal and the lack of reference to research design in the title or abstract was the main reason for the lack of sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: There are RCTs that evaluate aspects of nursing care, and are published in nursing and non-nursing journals, and are largely undertaken by nurses. These must be reviewed in ongoing systematic reviews of the effects of health care (including those undertaken as part of the Cochrane Collaboration). Nursing journals must be hand searched to identify these studies as the lack of reference to study design in the titles and abstracts of nursing trials leads to poor indexing in electronic databases such as Medline.

Background

Tamoxifen has emerged as a potential management option for gynecomastia and breast pain due to non-steroidal antiandrogens, and it is considered an alternative to surgery or radiotherapy. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the benefits and harms of tamoxifen, in comparison to other treatment options, for either the prophylaxis or treatment of breast events induced by non-steroidal antiandrogens in prostate cancer patients.

Methods

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, reference lists, the abstracts of three major conferences and three trial registers to identify ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two authors independently screened the articles identified, assessed the trial quality and extracted data. The protocol was prospectively registered (CRD42011001320; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO).

Results

Four studies were identified. Tamoxifen significantly reduced the risk of suffering from gynecomastia (risk ratio 9RR0 0.10, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.22) or breast pain (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.17) at six months compared to untreated controls. Tamoxifen also showed a significant benefit for the prevention of gynecomastia (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.58) and breast pain (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.64) when compared to anastrozole after a median of 12 months. One study showed a significant benefit of tamoxifen for the prevention of gynecomastia (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.65) and breast pain (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.65) when compared with radiotherapy at six months. Radiotherapy increased the risk of suffering from nipple erythema and skin irritation, but there were no significant differences for any other adverse events (all P > 0.05).

Conclusions

The currently available evidence suggests good efficacy of tamoxifen for the prevention and treatment of breast events induced by non-steroidal antiandrogens. The impact of tamoxifen therapy on long-term adverse events, disease progression and survival remains unclear. Further large, well-designed RCTs, including long-term follow-ups, are warranted. Also, the optimal dose needs to be clarified.

Background: Currently, there is a lack of clarity in the literature as to whether there is a definitive difference between the effects of vitamins D2 and D3 in the raising of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D].

Objective: The objective of this article was to report a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have directly compared the effects of vitamin D2 and vitamin D3 on serum 25(OH)D concentrations in humans.

Design: The ISI Web of Knowledge (January 1966 to July 2011) database was searched electronically for all relevant studies in adults that directly compared vitamin D3 with vitamin D2. The Cochrane Clinical Trials Registry, International Standard Randomized Controlled Trials Number register, and clinicaltrials.gov were also searched for any unpublished trials.

Results: A meta-analysis of RCTs indicated that supplementation with vitamin D3 had a significant and positive effect in the raising of serum 25(OH)D concentrations compared with the effect of vitamin D2 (P = 0.001). When the frequency of dosage administration was compared, there was a significant response for vitamin D3 when given as a bolus dose (P = 0.0002) compared with administration of vitamin D2, but the effect was lost with daily supplementation.

Conclusions: This meta-analysis indicates that vitamin D3 is more efficacious at raising serum 25(OH)D concentrations than is vitamin D2, and thus vitamin D3 could potentially become the preferred choice for supplementation. However, additional research is required to examine the metabolic pathways involved in oral and intramuscular administration of vitamin D and the effects across age, sex, and ethnicity, which this review was unable to verify.

Background

The safety and effectiveness of CAM interventions are of great relevance to pediatric health care providers. The objective of this study is to identify sources of reported randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the field of pediatric complementary and alternative medicine (CAM).

Methods

Reports of RCTs were identified by searching Medline and 12 additional bibliographic databases and by reviewing the reference lists of previously identified pediatric CAM systematic reviews.

Results

We identified 908 reports of RCTs that included children under 18 and investigated a CAM therapy. Since 1965, there has been a steady growth in the number of these trials that are being published. The four journals that published the most reported RCTs are The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Pediatrics, Journal of Pediatrics, and Lancet. Medline, CAB Health, and Embase were the best database sources for identifying these studies; they indexed 93.2%, 58.4% and 42.2 % respectively of the journals publishing reports of pediatric CAM RCTs.

Conclusions

Those working or interested in the field of pediatric CAM should routinely search Medline, CAB Health and Embase for literature in the field. The four core journals identified above should be included in their collection.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the addition of vildagliptin to low-dose metformin and compare it to an uptitration of metformin in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients who have inadequate control with metformin monotherapy.

METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized to receive vildagliptin 100 mg qd or metformin (500 mg qd for 2 wk and then 500 mg bid) added to open label metformin 500 mg bid for the 24 wk. The primary endpoint was baseline to endpoint hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) change.

RESULTS: The adjusted mean change from baseline in HbA1c at the 24th wk was -0.51% in the vildagliptin/metformin group (mean baseline HbA1c: 7.4%) and -0.37% in the metformin monotherapy group (mean baseline HbA1c: 7.3%). The mean difference was -0.14% with 95% Confidence Interval (-0.24%, -0.05%). As non-inferiority (margin of 0.4%) was achieved, a test for superiority was performed. This test showed statistically significant superiority of the combination over monotherapy group (P = 0.002). Gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events were significantly more frequent in the metformin group than the combination group (21.0% vs 15.4%, P = 0.032).

CONCLUSION: In patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin up to 1000 mg daily, the addition of vildagliptin 100 mg daily achieved larger HbA1c reduction with fewer GI events than with increasing the metformin dose.

OBJECTIVE

Both in vitro and in vivo studies indicate that metformin inhibits cancer cell growth and reduces cancer risk. Recent epidemiological studies suggest that metformin therapy may reduce the risks of cancer and overall cancer mortality among patients with type 2 diabetes. However, data on its effect on colorectal cancer are limited and inconsistent. We therefore pooled data currently available to examine the association between metformin therapy and colorectal cancer among patients with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The PubMed and SciVerse Scopus databases were searched to identify studies that examined the effect of metformin therapy on colorectal cancer among patients with type 2 diabetes. Summary effect estimates were derived using a random-effects meta-analysis model.

RESULTS

The analysis included five studies comprising 108,161 patients with type 2 diabetes. Metformin treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of colorectal neoplasm (relative risk [RR] 0.63 [95% CI 0.50–0.79]; P < 0.001). After exclusion of one study that investigated colorectal adenoma, the remaining four studies comprised 107,961 diabetic patients and 589 incident colorectal cancer cases during follow-up. Metformin treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of colorectal cancer (0.63 [0.47–0.84]; P = 0.002). There was no evidence for the presence of significant heterogeneity between the five studies (Q = 4.86, P = 0.30; I2 = 18%).

CONCLUSIONS

From observational studies, metformin therapy appears to be associated with a significantly lower risk of colorectal cancer in patients with type 2 diabetes. Further investigation is warranted.