scholarly journals Canagliflozin, dapagliflozin and empagliflozin monotherapy for treating type 2 diabetes: systematic review and economic evaluation

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rhona Johnston ◽  
Olalekan Uthman ◽  
Ewen Cummins ◽  
Christine Clar ◽  
Pamela Royle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Weight Loss ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Glycaemic Control ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sglt2 Inhibitors ◽  
First Choice ◽  
Tract Infections

Background Most people with type 2 diabetes are overweight, so initial treatment is aimed at reducing weight and increasing physical activity. Even modest weight loss can improve control of blood glucose. If drug treatment is necessary, the drug of first choice is metformin. However, some people cannot tolerate metformin, which causes diarrhoea in about 10%, and it cannot be used in people with renal impairment. This review appraises three of the newest class of drugs for monotherapy when metformin cannot be used, the sodium–glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. Objective To review the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin (Farxiga, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Luton, UK), canagliflozin (Invokana, Janssen, High Wycombe, UK) and empagliflozin (Jardiance, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ingelheim, Germany/Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA), in monotherapy in people who cannot take metformin. Sources MEDLINE (1946 to February 2015) and EMBASE (1974 to February 2015) for randomised controlled trials lasting 24 weeks or more. For adverse events, a wider range of studies was used. Three manufacturers provided submissions. Methods Systematic review and economic evaluation. A network meta-analysis was carried out involving the three SGLT2 inhibitors and key comparators. Critical appraisal of submissions from three manufacturers. Results We included three trials of dapagliflozin and two each for canagliflozin and empagliflozin. The trials were of good quality. The canagliflozin and dapagliflozin trials compared them with placebo, but the two empagliflozin trials included active comparators. All three drugs were shown to be effective in improving glycaemic control, promoting weight loss and lowering blood pressure (BP). Limitations There were no head-to-head trials of the different flozins, and no long-term data on cardiovascular outcomes in this group of patients. Most trials were against placebo. The trials were done in patient groups that were not always comparable, for example in baseline glycated haemoglobin or body mass index. Data on elderly patients were lacking. Conclusions Dapagliflozin, canagliflozin and empagliflozin are effective in improving glycaemic control, with added benefits of some reductions in BP and weight. Adverse effects are urinary and genital tract infections in a small proportion of users. In monotherapy, the three drugs do not appear cost-effective compared with gliclazide or pioglitazone, but may be competitive against sitagliptin (Januvia, Merck Sharp & Dohme Limited, Kenilworth, NJ, USA). Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of low and very low carbohydrate diets for type 2 diabetes remission: systematic review and meta-analysis of published and unpublished randomized trial data

BMJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. m4743
Author(s):  
Joshua Z Goldenberg ◽  
Andrew Day ◽  
Grant D Brinkworth ◽  
Junko Sato ◽  
Satoru Yamada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Weight Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Low Carbohydrate ◽  
Remission Of Diabetes

Abstract Objective To determine the efficacy and safety of low carbohydrate diets (LCDs) and very low carbohydrate diets (VLCDs) for people with type 2 diabetes. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Searches of CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, CAB, and grey literature sources from inception to 25 August 2020. Study selection Randomized clinical trials evaluating LCDs (<130 g/day or <26% of a 2000 kcal/day diet) and VLCDs (<10% calories from carbohydrates) for at least 12 weeks in adults with type 2 diabetes were eligible. Data extraction Primary outcomes were remission of diabetes (HbA 1c <6.5% or fasting glucose <7.0 mmol/L, with or without the use of diabetes medication), weight loss, HbA 1c , fasting glucose, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included health related quality of life and biochemical laboratory data. All articles and outcomes were independently screened, extracted, and assessed for risk of bias and GRADE certainty of evidence at six and 12 month follow-up. Risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random effects meta-analysis. Outcomes were assessed according to a priori determined minimal important differences to determine clinical importance, and heterogeneity was investigated on the basis of risk of bias and seven a priori subgroups. Any subgroup effects with a statistically significant test of interaction were subjected to a five point credibility checklist. Results Searches identified 14 759 citations yielding 23 trials (1357 participants), and 40.6% of outcomes were judged to be at low risk of bias. At six months, compared with control diets, LCDs achieved higher rates of diabetes remission (defined as HbA 1c <6.5%) (76/133 (57%) v 41/131 (31%); risk difference 0.32, 95% confidence interval 0.17 to 0.47; 8 studies, n=264, I 2 =58%). Conversely, smaller, non-significant effect sizes occurred when a remission definition of HbA 1c <6.5% without medication was used. Subgroup assessments determined as meeting credibility criteria indicated that remission with LCDs markedly decreased in studies that included patients using insulin. At 12 months, data on remission were sparse, ranging from a small effect to a trivial increased risk of diabetes. Large clinically important improvements were seen in weight loss, triglycerides, and insulin sensitivity at six months, which diminished at 12 months. On the basis of subgroup assessments deemed credible, VLCDs were less effective than less restrictive LCDs for weight loss at six months. However, this effect was explained by diet adherence. That is, among highly adherent patients on VLCDs, a clinically important reduction in weight was seen compared with studies with less adherent patients on VLCDs. Participants experienced no significant difference in quality of life at six months but did experience clinically important, but not statistically significant, worsening of quality of life and low density lipoprotein cholesterol at 12 months. Otherwise, no significant or clinically important between group differences were found in terms of adverse events or blood lipids at six and 12 months. Conclusions On the basis of moderate to low certainty evidence, patients adhering to an LCD for six months may experience remission of diabetes without adverse consequences. Limitations include continued debate around what constitutes remission of diabetes, as well as the efficacy, safety, and dietary satisfaction of longer term LCDs. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020161795.

Durability of glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta‐analysis for its association with body weight changes

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 208-217
Author(s):  
Danpei Li ◽  
HuaJie Zou ◽  
Ping Yin ◽  
Wenjun Li ◽  
Junyu He ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Body Weight ◽  
Glycaemic Control ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Weight Changes ◽  
Body Weight Changes

Effectiveness of smartphone technologies on glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes: systematic review with meta-analysis of 17 trials

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 825-838 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. X. Y. Wu ◽  
J. C. Y. Kee ◽  
D. E. Threapleton ◽  
R. C. W. Ma ◽  
V. C. K. Lam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Glycaemic Control ◽  
Meta Analysis
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document