-
Current Medical Research and Opinion May 2016Aims The efficacy and safety of sodium-glucose linked transporters (SGLT2s) plus metformin and a sulfonylurea (MET + SU) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
UNLABELLED
Aims The efficacy and safety of sodium-glucose linked transporters (SGLT2s) plus metformin and a sulfonylurea (MET + SU) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in patients who fail to achieve glycemic control with MET + SU, relative to other triple therapies licensed in the EU, were estimated. Methods A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving anti-diabetes treatments added to MET + SU were conducted.
RESULTS
Of 2236 abstracts identified through a systematic literature review, 30 RCTs published between 2003 and 2013 were included. RCTs ranged from 12 to 52 weeks in duration, included 28 to 1274 patients, were of parallel design, and most were open-label. Comparators included placebo (reference treatment), SGLT2 inhibitors, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, thiazolidinediones (TZDs), alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (AGIs), meglitinides, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) analogues, and basal, bolus, and biphasic insulin, all added on to MET + SU, as well as basal and biphasic insulin added to MET and monotherapy. The mean change (%) in HbA1c levels compared to placebo was -0.86 for SGLT2 inhibitors, -0.68 for DPP-4 inhibitors, -0.93 for TZDs, and -1.07 for GLP-1 analogues, respectively. Only SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 analogues led to a weight loss (-1.71 kg and -1.14 kg, respectively) and decrease in systolic blood pressure (SBP; -3.73 mmHg and -2.90 mmHg, respectively), while all other treatments showed either an increase or no changes in weight or SBP. Conclusion SGLT2 inhibitors are at least as effective as other classes of antidiabetic agents at controlling HbA1c levels, while providing the additional benefits of weight loss and reducing SBP. Additionally, since the risk of hypoglycemia is similar or reduced with SGLT2 inhibitors, patients do not have to trade off efficacy for tolerability. Similar findings were observed for GLP-1 analogues.
Topics: Blood Glucose; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Hypoglycemia; Hypoglycemic Agents; Metformin; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfonylurea Compounds; Thiazolidinediones
PubMed: 26700585
DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2015.1135110 -
Digestive and Liver Disease : Official... Jan 2021The efficacy of antidiabetic agents for the treatment of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) remains unclear. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The efficacy of antidiabetic agents for the treatment of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) remains unclear.
AIM
To conduct a meta-analysis to study the efficacy of pioglitazone and three novel anti-diabetic agents: glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, and dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors in treating NAFLD.
METHODS
Online databases were searched in May 2020 for randomized clinical trials. Results from random-effects meta-analysis are presented as weighted mean differences (WMDs) or standard mean differences (SMDs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
Twenty-six studies (n=946 NAFLD patients) were included. Reductions in ALT were seen with all four drugs: pioglitazone (MD -38.41, p<0.001), SGLT2 inhibitors (MD -16.17, p<0.001), GLP-1 agonists (MD -27.98, p=0.04) and DPP-4 inhibitors (MD -7.41, p<0.001). Pioglitazone (SMD -1.01; p<0.001) and GLP-1 agonists (SMD -2.53, p=0.03) also demonstrated significant improvements in liver steatosis. SGLT2 inhibitors (SMD -4.64, p=0.06) and DPP-4 (SMD -2.49, p=0.06) inhibitors trended towards reduced steatosis; however, these results were non-significant.
CONCLUSION
Pioglitazone demonstrates significant improvements in transaminases and liver histology in both diabetic and non-diabetic NAFLD patients. Early evidence from diabetic NAFLD patients suggests that novel antidiabetics may lead to improvements in liver enzymes and hepatic steatosis, and this should encourage further research into possible utility of these drugs in treating NAFLD.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Liver; Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease; Obesity; Pioglitazone; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32912770
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2020.08.021 -
The Lancet. Diabetes & Endocrinology Mar 2020Considering the global burden of diabetes and associated cardiovascular disease, an urgent need exists for the best treatment, which should be based on the best... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Considering the global burden of diabetes and associated cardiovascular disease, an urgent need exists for the best treatment, which should be based on the best available evidence. We examined the association between glucose-lowering medications and a broad range of cardiovascular outcomes, and assessed the strength of evidence for these associations.
METHODS
For this umbrella review we searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials examining the cardiovascular safety of glucose-lowering medications. Cardiovascular outcomes examined included major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, unstable angina, and atrial fibrillation. For each meta-analysis, we estimated the relative risk (RR) and 95% CI. We also created an evidence map showing the plausible benefits or harms of each intervention and the certainty of the evidence.
FINDINGS
We examined 232 meta-analyses evaluating ten classes of diabetes drugs. We identified six risk and 38 protective associations showing a high strength of evidence. Six associations increased the risk of cardiovascular disease, including glimepiride (stroke [RR 2·01; 95% CI 1·02-3·98]), rosiglitazone (myocardial infarction [1·28; 1·02-1·62] and heart failure [1·72, 1·31-2·27]), and pioglitazone (heart failure [1·40; 1·16-1·69]). 38 associations decreased the risk of cardiovascular disease, including glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists as a class (major adverse cardiovascular events [RR 0·88; 95% CI 0·84-0·92], death from cardiovascular disease [0·87; 0·81-0·94], myocardial infarction [0·92; 0·86-0·99], stroke [0·84; 0·77-0·93], and heart failure [0·90; 0·83-0·99]), albiglutide (major adverse cardiovascular events [0·81; 0·68-0·96], myocardial infarction [0·77; 0·64-0·92], and heart failure [0·71; 0·55-0·93]), dulaglutide (stroke [0·78; 0·64-0·96]), exenatide (major adverse cardiovascular events [0·91; 0·83-1·00]), liraglutide (major adverse cardiovascular events [0·86; 0·77-0·96]), semaglutide (major adverse cardiovascular events [0·76; 0·62-0·92] and stroke [0·67; 0·45-1·00]), sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors as a class (major adverse cardiovascular events [0·87; 0·82-0·93], death from cardiovascular disease [0·82; 0·75-0·90], myocardial infarction [0·86; 0·78-0·94], and heart failure [0·68; 0·63-0·73]), canagliflozin (major adverse cardiovascular events [0·84; 0·75-0·93], death from cardiovascular disease [0·82; 0·71-0·96], and heart failure [0·65; 0·54-0·78]), dapagliflozin (heart failure [0·70; 0·60-0·82]), empagliflozin (major adverse cardiovascular events [0·85; 0·77-0·94], death from cardiovascular disease [0·62; 0·50-0·78], and heart failure [0·64; 0·53-0·77]), and pioglitazone (major adverse cardiovascular events [0·84; 0·74-0·96], myocardial infarction [0·80; 0·67-0·95], and stroke [0·79; 0·65-0·95]).
INTERPRETATION
We found varied levels of evidence for the associations between diabetes drugs and cardiovascular outcomes; some drugs raised the risk of cardiovascular disease, whereas others showed benefit.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Diabetes Mellitus; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Incidence; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Prognosis
PubMed: 32006518
DOI: 10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30422-X -
Clinical Pharmacokinetics Nov 2022An ever-growing body of evidence supports the impact of cytokine modulation on the patient's phenotypic drug response. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze... (Review)
Review
The Cytokine Release Syndrome and/or the Proinflammatory Cytokines as Underlying Mechanisms of Downregulation of Drug Metabolism and Drug Transport: A Systematic Review of the Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Victim Drugs of this Drug-Disease Interaction Under Different Clinical Conditions.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
An ever-growing body of evidence supports the impact of cytokine modulation on the patient's phenotypic drug response. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze the clinical studies that assessed the pharmacokinetics of victim drugs of this drug-disease interaction in the presence of different scenarios of cytokine modulation in comparison with baseline conditions.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review by searching the PubMed-MEDLINE database from inception until February 2022 to retrieve prospective and/or retrospective observational studies, population pharmacokinetic studies, phase I studies, and/or case series/reports that investigated the impact of cytokine modulation on the pharmacokinetic behavior of victim drugs. Only studies providing quantitative pharmacokinetic data of victim drugs by comparing normal status versus clinical conditions with documented cytokine modulation or by assessing the influence of anti-inflammatory biological agents on metabolism and/or transport of victim drugs were included.
RESULTS
Overall, 26 studies were included. Rheumatoid arthritis (6/26; 23.1%) and sepsis (5/26; 19.2%) were the two most frequently investigated pro-inflammatory clinical scenarios. The victim drug most frequently assessed was midazolam (14/26; 53.8%; as a probe for cytochrome P450 [CYP] 3A4). Cytokine modulation showed a moderate inhibitory effect on CYP3A4-mediated metabolism (area under the concentration-time curve increase and/or clearance decrease between 1.98-fold and 2.59-fold) and a weak-to-moderate inhibitory effect on CYP1A2, CYP2C9, and CYP2C19-mediated metabolism (in the area under the concentration-time curve increase or clearance decrease between 1.29-fold and 1.97-fold). Anti-interleukin-6 agents showed remarkable activity in counteracting downregulation of CYP3A4-mediated activity (increase in the area under the concentration-time curve between 1.75-fold and 2.56-fold).
CONCLUSIONS
Cytokine modulation may cause moderate or weak-to-moderate downregulation of metabolism/transport of victim drugs, and this may theoretically have relevant clinical consequences.
Topics: Humans; Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A; Cytokine Release Syndrome; Cytokines; Down-Regulation; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Drug Interactions
PubMed: 36059001
DOI: 10.1007/s40262-022-01173-8 -
JAMA Apr 2018The comparative clinical efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists, and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Association Between Use of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors, Glucagon-like Peptide 1 Agonists, and Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 Inhibitors With All-Cause Mortality in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
IMPORTANCE
The comparative clinical efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists, and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors for treatment of type 2 diabetes is unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacies of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists, and DPP-4 inhibitors on mortality and cardiovascular end points using network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials, and published meta-analyses from inception through October 11, 2017.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials enrolling participants with type 2 diabetes and a follow-up of at least 12 weeks were included, for which SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists, and DPP-4 inhibitors were compared with either each other or placebo or no treatment.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were screened by 1 investigator and extracted in duplicate by 2 investigators. A Bayesian hierarchical network meta-analysis was performed.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome: all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes: cardiovascular (CV) mortality, heart failure (HF) events, myocardial infarction (MI), unstable angina, and stroke; safety end points: adverse events and hypoglycemia.
RESULTS
This network meta-analysis of 236 trials randomizing 176 310 participants found SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute risk difference [RD], -1.0%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.80 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.71 to 0.89]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.6%; HR, 0.88 [95% CrI, 0.81 to 0.94]) were associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality than the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, -0.9%; HR, 0.78 [95% CrI, 0.68 to 0.90]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.5%; HR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.96]) were associated with lower mortality than were DPP-4 inhibitors. DPP-4 inhibitors were not significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality (absolute RD, 0.1%; HR, 1.02 [95% CrI, 0.94 to 1.11]) than were the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, -0.8%; HR, 0.79 [95% CrI, 0.69 to 0.91]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.5%; HR, 0.85 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.94]) were significantly associated with lower CV mortality than were the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors were significantly associated with lower rates of HF events (absolute RD, -1.1%; HR, 0.62 [95% CrI, 0.54 to 0.72]) and MI (absolute RD, -0.6%; HR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.97]) than were the control groups. GLP-1 agonists were associated with a higher risk of adverse events leading to trial withdrawal than were SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, 5.8%; HR, 1.80 [95% CrI, 1.44 to 2.25]) and DPP-4 inhibitors (absolute RD, 3.1%; HR, 1.93 [95% CrI, 1.59 to 2.35]).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this network meta-analysis, the use of SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists was associated with lower mortality than DPP-4 inhibitors or placebo or no treatment. Use of DPP-4 inhibitors was not associated with lower mortality than placebo or no treatment.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Glucagon-Like Peptide 1; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors
PubMed: 29677303
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2018.3024 -
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth Nov 2015While inferior to oxytocin injection in both efficacy and safety, orally administered misoprostol has been included in the World Health Organization Model List of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
While inferior to oxytocin injection in both efficacy and safety, orally administered misoprostol has been included in the World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines for use in the prevention of postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) in low-resource settings. This study evaluates the costs and health outcomes of use of oral misoprostol to prevent PPH in settings where injectable uterotonics are not available.
METHODS
A cost-consequences analysis was conducted from the international health system perspective, using data from a recent Cochrane systematic review and WHO's Mother-Baby Package Costing Spreadsheet in a hypothetical cohort of 1000 births in a mixed hospital (40% births)/community setting (60% births). Costs were estimated based on 2012 US dollars.
RESULTS
Using oxytocin in the hospital setting and misoprostol in the community setting in a cohort of 1000 births, instead of oxytocin (hospital setting) and no treatment (community setting), 22 cases of PPH could be prevented. Six fewer women would require additional uterotonics and four fewer women a blood transfusion. An additional 130 women would experience shivering and an extra 42 women fever. Oxytocin/misoprostol was found to be cost saving (US$320) compared to oxytocin/no treatment. If misoprostol is used in both the hospital and community setting compared with no treatment (i.e. oxytocin not available in the hospital setting), 37 cases of PPH could be prevented; ten fewer women would require additional uterotonics; and six fewer women a blood transfusion. An additional 217 women would experience shivering and 70 fever. The cost savings would be US$533. Sensitivity analyses indicate that the results are sensitive to the incidence of PPH-related outcomes, drug costs and the proportion of hospital births.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings confirm that, even though misoprostol is not the optimum choice in the prevention of PPH, misoprostol could be an effective and cost-saving choice where oxytocin is not or cannot be used due to a lack of skilled birth attendants, inadequate transport and storage facilities or where a quality assured oxytocin product is not available. These benefits need to be weighed against the large number of additional side effects such as shivering and fever, which have been described as tolerable and of short duration.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Female; Fever; Humans; Labor Stage, Third; Misoprostol; Oxytocics; Oxytocin; Parturition; Postpartum Hemorrhage; Pregnancy; Shivering
PubMed: 26596797
DOI: 10.1186/s12884-015-0749-z -
Advances in Therapy Oct 2023Evidence from cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) for newer antidiabetic drugs is increasingly influencing revised recommendations for second-line therapy in type 2... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Evidence from cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) for newer antidiabetic drugs is increasingly influencing revised recommendations for second-line therapy in type 2 diabetes (T2D). This systematic review aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of newer antidiabetic drugs specified as sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i), glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) for T2D in a second-line setting.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines, and all relevant published studies were searched comprehensively in electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and International Health Technology Assessment database published from April 2023. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 reporting checklists.
RESULTS
We included 28 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Overall reporting of the identified studies largely met CHEERS 2022 recommendations. The CORE and Cardiff models were the most frequently utilized for pharmacoeconomic evaluation in T2D. Four studies consistently discovered that SGLT2i was more cost-effective than GLP-1RA in T2D who were not adequately controlled by metformin monotherapy. Four studies compared GLP-1RA with DPP-4i, sufonylurea (SU), or insulin. Except for one that demonstrated SU was cost-effective, all were GLP-1RA. Five studies revealed that SGLT2i was more cost-effective than DPP-4i or SU. Eleven studies indicated that DPP-4i was more cost-effective than traditional antidiabetic drugs. Four additional studies explored the cost-effectiveness of various antidiabetic drugs as second-line options, indicating that SU, SGLT2i, or meglitinides were more economically advantageous. The most common driven factors were the cost of new antidiabetic drugs.
CONCLUSION
Newer antidiabetic drugs as second line are the cost-effective option for T2D from the cost-effectiveness perspective, especially SGLT2i.
Topics: Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Metformin; Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor
PubMed: 37515713
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-023-02612-z -
Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism Mar 2017To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality associated with sulphonylureas (SUs) vs other... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality associated with sulphonylureas (SUs) vs other glucose lowering drugs in patients with T2DM (T2DM).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review of Medline, Embase, Cochrane and clinicaltrials.gov was conducted for studies comparing SUs with placebo or other antihyperglycaemic drugs in patients with T2DM. A cloglog model was used in the Bayesian framework to obtain comparative hazard ratios (HRs) for the different interventions. For the analysis of observational data, conventional fixed-effect pairwise meta-analyses were used.
RESULTS
The systematic review identified 82 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 26 observational studies. Meta-analyses of RCT data showed an increased risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular-related mortality for SUs compared with all other treatments combined (HR 1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.44 and HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.21-1.77, respectively). The risk of myocardial infarction was significantly higher for SUs compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (HR 2.54, 95% CI 1.14-6.57 and HR 41.80, 95% CI 1.64-360.4, respectively). The risk of stroke was significantly higher for SUs than for DPP-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists, thiazolidinediones and insulin.
CONCLUSIONS
The present meta-analysis showed an association between SU therapy and a higher risk of major cardiovascular disease-related events compared with other glucose lowering drugs. Results of ongoing RCTs, which should be available in 2018, will provide definitive results on the risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality associated with SUs vs other antihyperglycaemic drugs.
Topics: Bayes Theorem; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cause of Death; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors; Glucagon-Like Peptide 1; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin; Mortality; Myocardial Infarction; Proportional Hazards Models; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors; Stroke; Sulfonylurea Compounds; Survival Rate; Thiazolidinediones
PubMed: 27862902
DOI: 10.1111/dom.12821 -
Journal of Sports Sciences Feb 2020High-intensity-interval-training (HIIT) has been suggested to have beneficial effects in multiple populations across individual systematic reviews, although there is a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
High-intensity-interval-training (HIIT) has been suggested to have beneficial effects in multiple populations across individual systematic reviews, although there is a lack of clarity in the totality of the evidence whether HIIT is effective and safe across different populations and outcomes. The aim of this meta-review was to establish the benefits, safety and adherence of HIIT interventions across all populations from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Major databases were searched for systematic reviews (with/without meta-analyses) of randomised & non-randomised trials that compared HIIT to a control. Thirty-three systematic reviews (including 25 meta-analyses) were retrieved encompassing healthy subjects and people with physical health complications. Evidence suggested HIIT improved cardiorespiratory fitness, anthropometric measures, blood glucose and glycaemic control, arterial compliance and vascular function, cardiac function, heart rate, some inflammatory markers, exercise capacity and muscle mass, versus non-active controls. Compared to active controls, HIIT improved cardiorespiratory fitness, some inflammatory markers and muscle structure. Improvements in anxiety and depression were seen compared to pre-training. Additionally, no acute injuries were reported, and mean adherence rates surpassed 80% in most systematic reviews. Thus, HIIT is associated with multiple benefits. Further large-scale high-quality studies are needed to reaffirm and expand these findings. ACSM: American College of Sports Medicine; BMI: Body Mass Index; BNP: Brain Natriuretic Peptide; BP: Blood Pressure; CAD: Coronary Artery Disease; CHD: Coronary Heart Disease; COPD: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease; CRP: c- reactive Protein; CVD: Cardiovascular Disease; DBP: Diastolic Blood Pressure; ES: Effect Size; FAS: Reduced Fatty Acid Synthase; FATP-1: Reduced Fatty Acid Transport Protein 1; FMD: Flow Mediated Dilation; Hs-CRP: High-sensitivity c- reactive Protein; HDL: High Density Lipoprotein; HIIT: High-Intensity Interval Training; HOMA: Homoeostatic Model Assessment; HR: Heart Rate; HTx: Heart Transplant Recipients; IL-6: Interleukin-6; LDL: Low Density Lipoprotein; LV: Left Ventricular; LVEF: Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction; MD: Mean Difference; MetS: Metabolic Syndrome; MPO: Myeloperoxidase; MICT: Moderate-Intensity Continuous Training; NO: Nitric Oxide; NRCT: Non-Randomised Controlled Trial; PA: Physical Activity; PAI-1: Plasminogen-activator-inhibitor-1; QoL: Quality of Life; RCT: Randomised Controlled Trial; RoB: Risk of Bias; RPP: Rate Pressure Product; RT: Resistance Training; SBP: Systolic Blood Pressure; SD: Standardised Difference; SMD: Standardised Mean Difference; TAU: Treatment-As-Usual; T2DM: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus; TC: Total Cholesterol; TG: Triglycerides; TNF-alfa: Tumour Necrosis Factor alpha; UMD: Unstandardised Mean Difference; WC: Waist Circumference; WHR: Waist-to-Hip Ratio; WMD: Weighted Mean Difference: HIIT may improve cardiorespiratory fitness, cardiovascular function, anthropometric variables, exercise capacity, muscular structure and function, and anxiety and depression severity in healthy individuals and those with physical health disorders.Additionally, HIIT appears to be safe and does not seem to be associated with acute injuries or serious cardiovascular events.
Topics: Anthropometry; Anxiety; Biomarkers; Cardiorespiratory Fitness; Depression; Exercise Tolerance; High-Intensity Interval Training; Humans; Inflammation; Mental Health; Muscle, Skeletal; Quality of Life
PubMed: 31889469
DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2019.1706829 -
Medicine Jul 2021Sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have been demonstrated to be able to improve the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy of 5 sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor and 7 glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists interventions on cardiorenal outcomes in type 2 diabetes patients: A network meta-analysis based on cardiovascular or renal outcome trials.
BACKGROUND
Sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have been demonstrated to be able to improve the cardiovascular and renal prognosis in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the relative efficacy of various SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 RAs on cardiorenal outcomes is unestablished.
METHODS
We searched PubMed and Embase for relevant cardiovascular or renal outcome trials (CVOTs). Endpoints of interest were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), cardiovascular death (CVD), all-cause death (ACD), kidney function progression (KFP), and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to produce pooled hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We calculated the probability values of surface under the cumulative ranking curve to rank active and placebo interventions.
RESULTS
Fourteen COVTs were included in analysis. Sotagliflozin (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.61-0.94), subcutaneous semaglutide, and albiglutide lowered MACE versus lixisenatide among others. Sotagliflozin (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40-0.89), canagliflozin, and empagliflozin lowered HHF versus subcutaneous semaglutide among others. Dapagliflozin and empagliflozin lowered KFP versus exenatide among others. Empagliflozin and oral semaglutide lowered CVD versus dapagliflozin among others. Sotagliflozin (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47-0.91) and albiglutide lowered MI versus ertugliflozin among others. Sotagliflozin (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.37-0.85) and subcutaneous semaglutide lowered stroke versus empagliflozin among others. Oral semaglutide and empagliflozin lowered ACD versus subcutaneous semaglutide among others. The maximum surface under the cumulative ranking curve values followed sotagliflozin, subcutaneous semaglutide, and albiglutide in lowering MACE; sotagliflozin, canagliflozin, and empagliflozin in lowering HHF; dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in lowering KFP; empagliflozin and oral semaglutide in lowering CVD; sotagliflozin and albiglutide in lowering MI; sotagliflozin and subcutaneous semaglutide in lowering stroke; and oral semaglutide and empagliflozin in lowering ACD.
CONCLUSIONS
This updated network meta-analysis reproduced the findings in the first network meta-analysis, and moreover revealed that sotagliflozin was one of the most effective drugs as for lowering MI, stroke, MACE, and HHF, whereas ertugliflozin was not. These findings will provide the according evidence regarding the usage of specific SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 RAs in T2D patients for prevention of specific cardiorenal endpoints.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor; Heart; Humans; Kidney; Network Meta-Analysis; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34397684
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000026431