-
European Journal of Investigation in... Aug 2023This review aimed to investigate the metabolic alterations associated with psychopharmacological treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders, which can significantly impact... (Review)
Review
This review aimed to investigate the metabolic alterations associated with psychopharmacological treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders, which can significantly impact patients' physical health and overall quality of life. The study utilized the PRISMA methodology and included cross-sectional, retrospective studies, and randomized clinical trials from reputable databases like SCOPUS, CLARIVATE, SCIENCE DIRECT, and PUBMED. Out of the 64 selected studies, various psychotropic drug classes were analyzed, including antidepressants, anticonvulsants, and antipsychotics. Among the antidepressants, such as amitriptyline, Imipramine, and clomipramine, weight gain, constipation, and cardiovascular effects were the most commonly reported metabolic adverse effects. SSRI antidepressants like Fluoxetine, Sertraline, Citalopram, Escitalopram, and Paroxetine exhibited a high prevalence of gastrointestinal and cardiac alterations. Regarding anticonvulsants, valproic acid and Fosphenytoin were associated with adverse reactions such as weight gain and disturbances in appetite and sleep patterns. As for antipsychotics, drugs like Clozapine, Olanzapine, and Risperidone were linked to weight gain, diabetes, and deterioration of the lipid profile. The findings of this review emphasize the importance of continuous monitoring for adverse effects, particularly considering that the metabolic changes caused by psychopharmacological medications may vary depending on the age of the patients. Future research should focus on conducting field studies to further expand knowledge on the metabolic effects of other commonly prescribed psychotropic drugs. Overall, the study highlights the significance of understanding and managing metabolic alterations induced by psychopharmacological treatment to enhance patient care and well-being.
PubMed: 37623307
DOI: 10.3390/ejihpe13080110 -
Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome Oct 2023This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 24 weeks of semaglutide treatment in patients with non-alcoholic fatty... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 24 weeks of semaglutide treatment in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) or non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH).
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant studies. The primary outcome was the change in the serum alanine transaminase level. The secondary outcomes were changes in liver stiffness, liver function test parameters, metabolic parameters, and safety. Pooled mean differences and relative risks were calculated using random-effects models.
RESULTS
Six hundred studies were screened and eight were included (n = 2413). Semaglutide treatment showed a reduction in serum alanine transaminase [mean difference: 14.07 U/L (95% CI: 19.39 to -8.75); p < 0.001] and aspartate transaminase [mean difference: 6.89 U/L (95% CI: 9.14 to -4.63); p < 0.001] levels. There was a significant improvement in liver fat content [mean difference: 4.97% (95% CI: 6.65 to -3.29); p < 0.001] and liver stiffness [mean difference: 0.96 kPa (95% CI: 1.87 to -0.04); p = 0.04]. There were significant improvements in the glycated hemoglobin level and the lipid profile. However, the risk of serious adverse events [relative risk: 1.54 (95% CI: 1.02 to 2.34); p = 0.04] was high following semaglutide treatment as compared to placebo; the most common ones were gastrointestinal (nausea and vomiting, dyspepsia, decreased appetite, constipation, and diarrhea) and gallbladder-related diseases.
CONCLUSION
Treatment with 24 weeks of semaglutide could significantly improve liver enzymes, reduce liver stiffness, and improve metabolic parameters in patients with NAFLD/NASH. However, the gastrointestinal adverse effects could be a major concern.
Topics: Humans; Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease; Alanine Transaminase; Liver; Glucagon-Like Peptides
PubMed: 37717295
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsx.2023.102849 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2023Pharmacological interventions are frequently used for people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) to manage behaviours of concern, including irritability, aggression, and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pharmacological interventions are frequently used for people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) to manage behaviours of concern, including irritability, aggression, and self-injury. Some pharmacological interventions might help treat some behaviours of concern, but can also have adverse effects (AEs).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and AEs of pharmacological interventions for managing the behaviours of irritability, aggression, and self-injury in ASD.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 11 other databases and two trials registers up to June 2022. We also searched reference lists of relevant studies, and contacted study authors, experts and pharmaceutical companies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of participants of any age with a clinical diagnosis of ASD, that compared any pharmacological intervention to an alternative drug, standard care, placebo, or wait-list control.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Primary outcomes were behaviours of concern in ASD, (irritability, aggression and self-injury); and AEs. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, and tolerability and acceptability. Two review authors independently assessed each study for risk of bias, and used GRADE to judge the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 131 studies involving 7014 participants in this review. We identified 26 studies as awaiting classification and 25 as ongoing. Most studies involved children (53 studies involved only children under 13 years), children and adolescents (37 studies), adolescents only (2 studies) children and adults (16 studies), or adults only (23 studies). All included studies compared a pharmacological intervention to a placebo or to another pharmacological intervention. Atypical antipsychotics versus placebo At short-term follow-up (up to 6 months), atypical antipsychotics probably reduce irritability compared to placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.25 to -0.55, 12 studies, 973 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), which may indicate a large effect. However, there was no clear evidence of a difference in aggression between groups (SMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.89 to 0.01; 1 study, 77 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Atypical antipsychotics may also reduce self-injury (SMD -1.43, 95% CI -2.24 to -0.61; 1 study, 30 participants; low-certainty evidence), possibly indicating a large effect. There may be higher rates of neurological AEs (dizziness, fatigue, sedation, somnolence, and tremor) in the intervention group (low-certainty evidence), but there was no clear evidence of an effect on other neurological AEs. Increased appetite may be higher in the intervention group (low-certainty evidence), but we found no clear evidence of an effect on other metabolic AEs. There was no clear evidence of differences between groups in musculoskeletal or psychological AEs. Neurohormones versus placebo At short-term follow-up, neurohormones may have minimal to no clear effect on irritability when compared to placebo (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.00; 8 studies; 466 participants; very low-certainty evidence), although the evidence is very uncertain. No data were reported for aggression or self -injury. Neurohormones may reduce the risk of headaches slightly in the intervention group, although the evidence is very uncertain. There was no clear evidence of an effect of neurohormones on any other neurological AEs, nor on any psychological, metabolic, or musculoskeletal AEs (low- and very low-certainty evidence). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)-related medications versus placebo At short-term follow-up, ADHD-related medications may reduce irritability slightly (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.01; 10 studies, 400 participants; low-certainty evidence), which may indicate a small effect. However, there was no clear evidence that ADHD-related medications have an effect on self-injury (SMD -0.62, 95% CI -1.63 to 0.39; 1 study, 16 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No data were reported for aggression. Rates of neurological AEs (drowsiness, emotional AEs, fatigue, headache, insomnia, and irritability), metabolic AEs (decreased appetite) and psychological AEs (depression) may be higher in the intervention group, although the evidence is very uncertain (very low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between groups for any other metabolic, neurological, or psychological AEs (very low-certainty evidence). No data were reported for musculoskeletal AEs. Antidepressants versus placebo At short-term follow-up, there was no clear evidence that antidepressants have an effect on irritability (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.18; 3 studies, 267 participants; low-certainty evidence). No data for aggression or self-injury were reported or could be included in the analysis. Rates of metabolic AEs (decreased energy) may be higher in participants receiving antidepressants (very low-certainty evidence), although no other metabolic AEs showed clear evidence of a difference. Rates of neurological AEs (decreased attention) and psychological AEs (impulsive behaviour and stereotypy) may also be higher in the intervention group (very low-certainty evidence) although the evidence is very uncertain. There was no clear evidence of any difference in the other metabolic, neurological, or psychological AEs (very low-certainty evidence), nor between groups in musculoskeletal AEs (very low-certainty evidence). Risk of bias We rated most of the studies across the four comparisons at unclear overall risk of bias due to having multiple domains rated as unclear, very few rated as low across all domains, and most having at least one domain rated as high risk of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence suggests that atypical antipsychotics probably reduce irritability, ADHD-related medications may reduce irritability slightly, and neurohormones may have little to no effect on irritability in the short term in people with ASD. There was some evidence that atypical antipsychotics may reduce self-injury in the short term, although the evidence is uncertain. There was no clear evidence that antidepressants had an effect on irritability. There was also little to no difference in aggression between atypical antipsychotics and placebo, or self-injury between ADHD-related medications and placebo. However, there was some evidence that atypical antipsychotics may result in a large reduction in self-injury, although the evidence is uncertain. No data were reported (or could be used) for self-injury or aggression for neurohormones versus placebo. Studies reported a wide range of potential AEs. Atypical antipsychotics and ADHD-related medications in particular were associated with an increased risk of metabolic and neurological AEs, although the evidence is uncertain for atypical antipsychotics and very uncertain for ADHD-related medications. The other drug classes had minimal or no associated AEs.
Topics: Child; Adult; Adolescent; Humans; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Quality of Life; Antipsychotic Agents; Antidepressive Agents; Aggression; Self-Injurious Behavior; Fatigue; Neurotransmitter Agents
PubMed: 37811711
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011769.pub2 -
Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research Apr 2024One in five individuals live with chronic pain globally, which often co-occurs with sleep problems, anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders. Although these...
One in five individuals live with chronic pain globally, which often co-occurs with sleep problems, anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders. Although these conditions are commonly managed with cannabinoid-based medicines (CBM), health care providers report lack of information on the risks, benefits, and appropriate use of CBM for therapeutic purposes. We present these clinical practice guidelines to help clinicians and patients navigate appropriate CBM use in the management of chronic pain and co-occurring conditions. We conducted a systematic review of studies investigating the use of CBM for the treatment of chronic pain. Articles were dually reviewed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Clinical recommendations were developed based on available evidence from the review. and have also been provided to support clinical application. The GRADE system was used to rate the strength of recommendations and quality of evidence. From our literature search, 70 articles met inclusion criteria and were utilized in guideline development, including 19 systematic reviews and 51 original research studies. Research typically demonstrates moderate benefit of CBM in chronic pain management. There is also evidence for efficacy of CBM in the management of comorbidities, including sleep problems, anxiety, appetite suppression, and for managing symptoms in some chronic conditions associated with pain including HIV, multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia, and arthritis. All patients considering CBM should be educated on risks and adverse events. Patients and clinicians should work collaboratively to identify appropriate dosing, titration, and administration routes for each individual. PROSPERO no. 135886.
Topics: Humans; Cannabinoids; Cannabis; Chronic Pain; Cannabinoid Receptor Agonists; Hallucinogens; Sleep Wake Disorders
PubMed: 36971587
DOI: 10.1089/can.2021.0156 -
Advances in Nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) Sep 2023Ghrelin is an orexigenic hormone primarily released by the stomach and has 2 isoforms: acylated ghrelin (AG) and de-acylated ghrelin (DAG), that appear to have different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ghrelin is an orexigenic hormone primarily released by the stomach and has 2 isoforms: acylated ghrelin (AG) and de-acylated ghrelin (DAG), that appear to have different functions in humans.
OBJECTIVES
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between plasma concentrations of total ghrelin (TG), AG, and DAG and perceptions of hunger in healthy adults.
METHODS
The following criteria were used for inclusion: 1) sample contained adults ≥18 y of age, 2) body mass index [BMI kg/m] was ≥18.5, 3) ghrelin was sampled through blood, 4) subjective hunger was measured on a validated scale, 5) study reported a Pearson product correlation of ghrelin or had relevant figure(s) for data extraction, 6) participants were healthy with no overt disease, 7) protocols contained no physical activity or weight loss medication that suppressed appetite, 8) interventions were conducted without environmental manipulations. Moderators assessed were age, BMI, percentage of body fat (%BF), macronutrient content of test meals, energy intake (kcals), sex, and ghrelin isoform (AG, DAG, or TG).
RESULTS
The analysis included 47 studies (110 trials, n = 1799, age: 31.4 ± 12.0 y, BMI: 26.0 ± 4.75 kg/m) and measured AG (n = 47 trials), DAG (n = 12 trials), and TG (n = 51 trials). The overall model indicated that ghrelin concentrations and perceptions of hunger were moderately correlated (r = 0.43, P < 0.001), and ghrelin isoform significantly moderated this relationship (AG: r = 0.60, P < 0.001; TG: r = 0.215, P = 0.01; DAG: r = 0.53, P = 0.695). Other significant moderators included age (b = -0.02, P = 0.01), BMI (b = -0.03, P = 0.05), %BF (b = -0.03, P = 0.05), energy intake (b = 0.0003, P = 0.04), and percentage of carbohydrates of test meals (b = 0.008, P = 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Ghrelin is associated with perceptions of hunger in humans, and this relationship is strengthened when AG is isolated; thus, AG may have a large impact on hunger signals in various populations. Future research should attempt to understand the role of DAG in hunger sensations.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Young Adult; Child, Preschool; Hunger; Ghrelin; Energy Intake; Body Mass Index; Perception; Appetite
PubMed: 37536563
DOI: 10.1016/j.advnut.2023.07.011 -
Avicenna Journal of Phytomedicine 2023Cinnamon is extracted from the inner bark of Cinnamomum trees. Recent studies have indicated that cinnamon is a safe and cost-effective treatment for improving body... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Cinnamon is extracted from the inner bark of Cinnamomum trees. Recent studies have indicated that cinnamon is a safe and cost-effective treatment for improving body weight, lipid profiles, insulin resistance, and blood pressure. This systematic review aimed to summarize the effect of cinnamon supplementation on adipokines and appetite-regulating hormones
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This comprehensive literature search was conducted using databases such as PubMed, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and Google Scholar up to March 2022 without any limitation. The quality of eligible studies was evaluated through the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias
RESULTS
This systematic review included six clinical trial studies (363 participants), among which, only one study was performed on children, and two investigations were conducted on obese participants. A decreasing effect was found in the level of leptin and visfatin after cinnamon supplementation. Two out of three studies examined adiponectin levels and revealed non-significant effects of cinnamon consumption on this parameter. Two studies evaluated ghrelin levels and found an increase after cinnamon supplementation. The result of cinnamon supplementation on other biomarkers such as glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, glucagon-like peptide 1, and resistin was inconsistent.
CONCLUSION
The result of this systematic review indicated the increasing effect of cinnamon supplementation on ghrelin levels and decreasing effect on leptin and visfatin levels. However, more clinical data are required to clarify the beneficial effects of cinnamon on adipokines levels due to the controversial findings of the studies.
PubMed: 38089418
DOI: 10.22038/AJP.2022.21538 -
Psychiatry Research May 2024Psychotherapies assisted by psychedelic substances have shown promising results in the treatment of psychiatric disorders. The aim of this systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Psychotherapies assisted by psychedelic substances have shown promising results in the treatment of psychiatric disorders. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate safety data in human subjects. We carried out a search on MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO databases between 2000 and 2022. Standardized mean differences between different dose ranges and between acute and subacute phases were calculated for cardiovascular data after psychedelic administration. Risk differences were calculated for serious adverse events and common side effects. Thirty studies were included in this meta-analysis. There were only nine serious adverse events for over 1000 administrations of psychedelic substances (one during the acute phase and 8 during the post-acute phase). There were no suicide attempts during the acute phase and 3 participants engaged in self-harm during the post-acute phase. There was an increased risk for elevated heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure for all dose range categories, as well as an increased risk of nausea during the acute phase. Other common side effects included headaches, anxiety, and decreased concentration or appetite. This meta-analysis demonstrates that psychedelics are well-tolerated, with a low risk of emerging serious adverse events in a controlled setting with appropriate inclusion criteria.
Topics: Humans; Hallucinogens; Psychotherapy; Anxiety; Anxiety Disorders; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 38579460
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2024.115880 -
Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology Jul 2023We performed a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of T-DXd in the treatment of HER2-expressing solid tumours. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
We performed a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of T-DXd in the treatment of HER2-expressing solid tumours.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library and collected studies published before March 17, 2023, on T-DXd for HER2-expressing tumours for a meta-analysis. We performed a subgroup analysis based on the different cancer types and the doses used.
RESULTS
There were 11 studies including 1349 HER2-expressing patients in this meta-analysis. The pooled ORR was 47.91%, and the pooled DCR was 87.01%. The mPFS and mOS combined were 9.63 and 10.71 months, respectively. The most common adverse reactions in grades 1-2 were decreased appetite (49.3%) and vomiting (43.0%). The netropemia (31.2%) and leukopenia (31.2%) were the most common grade 3 and higher adverse reactions. Subgroup analysis showed that breast cancer had the best ORR and DCR, with 66.96 and 96.52%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, the efficacy of T-DXd in treating HER2-expressing solid tumours is encouraging, especially breast and non-small cell lung cancers, and has an acceptable safety profile. However, concerns remain about potentially serious treatment adverse events (e.g. interstitial lung disease/pneumonia). More well-designed, large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to demonstrate our study.
Topics: Female; Humans; Breast Neoplasms; Camptothecin; Immunoconjugates; Lung Neoplasms; Receptor, ErbB-2; Trastuzumab
PubMed: 37114934
DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyad036 -
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and... Apr 2024There is no consensus on the optimal endpoint(s) in cancer cachexia trials. Endpoint variation is an obstacle when comparing interventions and their clinical value. The... (Review)
Review
There is no consensus on the optimal endpoint(s) in cancer cachexia trials. Endpoint variation is an obstacle when comparing interventions and their clinical value. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and evaluate endpoints used to assess appetite and dietary intake in cancer cachexia clinical trials. A search for studies published from 1 January 1990 until 2 June 2021 was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Eligible studies examined cancer cachexia treatment versus a comparator in adults with assessments of appetite and/or dietary intake as study endpoints, a sample size ≥40 and an intervention lasting ≥14 days. Reporting was in line with PRISMA guidance, and a protocol was published in PROSPERO (2022 CRD42022276710). This review is part of a series of systematic reviews examining cachexia endpoints. Of the 5975 articles identified, 116 were eligible for the wider review series and 80 specifically examined endpoints of appetite (65 studies) and/or dietary intake (21 studies). Six trials assessed both appetite and dietary intake. Appetite was the primary outcome in 15 trials and dietary intake in 7 trials. Median sample size was 101 patients (range 40-628). Forty-nine studies included multiple primary tumour sites, while 31 studies involved single primary tumour sites (15 gastrointestinal, 7 lung, 7 head and neck and 2 female reproductive organs). The most frequently reported appetite endpoints were visual analogue scale (VAS) and numerical rating scale (NRS) (40%). The appetite item from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) C30/C15 PAL (38%) and the appetite question from North Central Cancer Treatment Group anorexia questionnaire (17%) were also frequently applied. Of the studies that assessed dietary intake, 13 (62%) used food records (prospective registrations) and 10 (48%) used retrospective methods (24-h recall or dietary history). For VAS/NRS, a mean change of 1.3 corresponded to Hedge's g of 0.5 and can be considered a moderate change. For food records, a mean change of 231 kcal/day or 11 g of protein/day corresponded to a moderate change. Choice of endpoint in cachexia trials will depend on factors pertinent to the trial to be conducted. Nevertheless, from trials assessed and available literature, NRS or EORTC QLQ C30/C15 PAL seems suitable for appetite assessments. Appetite and dietary intake endpoints are rarely used as primary outcomes in cancer cachexia. Dietary intake assessments were used mainly to monitor compliance and are not validated in cachexia populations. Given the importance to cachexia studies, dietary intake endpoints must be validated before they are used as endpoints in clinical trials.
Topics: Humans; Appetite; Cachexia; Eating; Neoplasms; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Retrospective Studies; Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38343065
DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.13434 -
Cureus Sep 2023This systematic review and meta-analysis determine how frequently and how seriously gastrointestinal manifestations affect people with type 2 diabetes mellitus on... (Review)
Review
This systematic review and meta-analysis determine how frequently and how seriously gastrointestinal manifestations affect people with type 2 diabetes mellitus on tirzepatide. Tirzepatide is a recently developed drug that attempts to enhance type 2 diabetics' ability to regulate their blood sugar levels and promote weight reduction. Despite its potential benefits, clinical trials have revealed that the medication may lead to gastrointestinal side effects, including nausea, vomiting, decreased appetite, dyspepsia, constipation, and diarrhea. These side effects may negatively affect the drug's efficacy and patient tolerance. A comprehensive search of electronic databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, was conducted to find pertinent studies reporting on the frequency and severity of gastrointestinal symptoms in type 2 diabetes patients receiving tirzepatide. This systematic review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed. Six randomized controlled trials with a total of 4,586 patients were included. Most patients received tirzepatide to regulate their blood sugar levels and promote weight reduction, and the comparators were placebo, glucagon-like peptide one receptor agonists drugs, and insulin degludec. The dose of tirzepatide was 5mg, 10mg, and 15mg weekly. The incidence rate of nausea in patients who receive tirzepatide was 20.43%, while the incidence rate in the comparators was 10.47%, and it was significantly higher in the tirzepatide arm than in the comparators (RR, 2.90; 95% CI, 1.89 to 4.44; P ≤ 0.00001). The incidence rate of vomiting in patients who receive tirzepatide was 9.05%, while the rate in the comparators was 4.86%, and it was significantly higher in the tirzepatide arm than in the comparators (RR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.67 to 4.36; P ≤ 0.0001). The incidence rate of constipation in patients who receive tirzepatide was 2.54%, while the rate in the comparators was 0.856%, and it was significantly higher in the tirzepatide arm than in the comparators (RR, 3.08; 95% CI, 1.83 to 5.20; P ≤ 0.0001). The incidence rate of decreased appetite in patients who receive tirzepatide was 9.64%, while the rate in the comparators was 2.88%, and it was significantly higher in the tirzepatide arm than in the comparators (RR, 5.04; 95% CI, 3.01 to 8.45; P ≤ 0.00001). The incidence rate of diarrhea in patients who receive tirzepatide was 16.24%, while the rate in the comparators was 8.63%, and it was significantly higher in the tirzepatide arm than in the comparators (RR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.60 to 2.68; P ≤ 0.00001). The incidence rate of dyspepsia in patients who receive tirzepatide was 7.13%, while the rate in the comparators was 3.31%, and it was significantly higher in the tirzepatide arm than in the comparators (RR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.58 to 4.01; P ≤ 0.0001). Tirzepatide usage is linked to a significant prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms, including nausea, constipation, decreased appetite, dyspepsia, diarrhea, and vomiting, in people with type 2 diabetes. These findings may influence clinical decision-making and patient counseling on the use of tirzepatide and have significant implications for the medication's tolerance and efficacy. To find ways to reduce these negative effects and improve therapy for type 2 diabetes patients, more research is required.
PubMed: 37908927
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.46091