Cargando…

Efficacy and Safety of Metformin Versus the Other Oral Antidiabetic Drugs in Japanese Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: Although metformin is recommended as a first-line treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Western countries, no specific treatment is recommended in Japan, and various agents are used. Metformin has long been used at low doses in Japan, and information regarding its effect...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nishimura, Rimei, Taniguchi, Mayumi, Takeshima, Tomomi, Iwasaki, Kosuke
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8799586/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34846709
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01979-1
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Although metformin is recommended as a first-line treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Western countries, no specific treatment is recommended in Japan, and various agents are used. Metformin has long been used at low doses in Japan, and information regarding its effect at the maximum maintenance dose is lacking. Here, we compared the efficacy and safety of metformin at 1500 mg/day with those of the other oral anti-diabetic drugs (OADs) approved in Japan. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials comparing a change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline at 12 weeks or later (ΔHbA1c) among OADs (including placebo) as a first-line treatment in adult patients with T2D were selected by systematic review with comprehensive searching of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Ichushi Web, and EMBASE and manual searching of clinical trial registries. The ΔHbA1c and incidence of hypoglycemia were compared among OAD treatments using Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). The relative risk (RR) of the incidence of hypoglycemia was determined relative to that of placebo. RESULTS: Forty-six randomized controlled trials were identified in the systematic review, and 37 studies, comprising 38 different types of treatments, including placebos, were selected for the NMA of ΔHbA1c. Compared with metformin 1500 mg/day, 20 OAD treatments were significantly less effective in reducing HbA1c from baseline (differences from metformin 1500 mg/day: 0.40–0.96%). Two treatments (glimepiride 2 mg/day and pioglitazone 45 mg/day) showed greater mean reductions in HbA1c from baseline than metformin 1500 mg/day (− 0.38% and − 0.03%), although these differences were not significant. Regarding the incidence of hypoglycemia, only pioglitazone 30 mg/day among 31 treatments showed a lower RR (< − 0.01), whereas 23 treatments showed a significantly higher RR (1.02–66.71) than metformin 1500 mg/day. CONCLUSION: The NMA suggested a preferable efficacy and safety profile of metformin 1500 mg/day compared with the other OADs approved in Japan. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01979-1.