-
Obesity Reviews : An Official Journal... May 2012Obesity is a major health hazard and despite lifestyle modification, many patients frequently regain any lost body weight. The use of western anti-obesity drugs has been... (Review)
Review
Obesity is a major health hazard and despite lifestyle modification, many patients frequently regain any lost body weight. The use of western anti-obesity drugs has been limited by side effects including mood changes, suicidal thoughts, and gastrointestinal or cardiovascular complications. The effectiveness and safety of traditional Chinese medicine including Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) and acupuncture provide an alternative established therapy for this medical challenge. In this systematic review, we used standard methodologies to search, review, analyse and synthesize published data on the efficacy, safety and relapse of weight regain associated with use of CHM and acupuncture. We also examined the rationale, mechanisms and potential utility of these therapies. A total of 12 electronic databases, including Chinese, English, Korean and Japanese, were searched up to 28 February 2010. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for CHM and/or acupuncture with comparative controls were considered. We used the Jadad scale to assess methodological qualities, the random effect model in the pooled analysis of therapeutic efficacy to adjust for heterogeneity and funnel plots to explore publication bias. After screening 2,545 potential articles from the electronic databases, we identified 96 RCTs; comprising of 49 trials on CHM treatment, 44 trials on acupuncture treatment and 3 trials on combined therapy for appraisal. There were 4,861 subjects in the treatment groups and 3,821 in the control groups, with treatment duration ranging from 2 weeks to 4 months. Of the 77 publications written in Chinese, 75 had a Jadad score <3, while 16 of the 19 English publications had a Jadad score of >3. Efficacy was defined as body weight reduction ≥ 2 kg or body mass index (BMI) reduction ≥ 0.5 kg/m(2) . Compared with placebo or lifestyle modification, CHM and acupuncture exhibited respective 'risk ratio' (RR) of 1.84 (95% CI: 1.37-2.46) and 2.14 (95% CI: 1.58-2.90) in favour of body weight reduction, with a mean difference in body weight reduction of 4.03 kg (95% CI: 2.22-5.85) and 2.76 kg (95% CI: 1.61-3.83) and a mean difference in BMI reduction of 1.32 kg m(-2) (95% CI: 0.78-1.85) and 2.02 kg m(-2) (95% CI: 0.94-3.10), respectively. Compared with the pharmacological treatments of sibutramine, fenfluramine or orlistat, CHM and acupuncture exhibited an RR of 1.11 (95% CI: 0.96-1.28) and 1.14 (95% CI: 1.03-1.25) in body weight reduction, mean difference in body weight reduction of 0.08 kg (95% CI: -0.58 to 0.74) and 0.65 kg (95% CI: -0.61 to 1.91), and mean difference in BMI reduction of 0.18 kg m(-2) (95% CI: -0.39 to 0.75) and 0.83 kg m(-2) (95% CI: 0.29-1.37), respectively. There were fewer reports of adverse effects and relapses of weight regain in CHM intervention studies conducted in China than studies conducted outside China. CHM and acupuncture were more effective than placebo or lifestyle modification in reducing body weight. They had a similar efficacy as the Western anti-obesity drugs but with fewer reported adverse effects. However, these conclusions were limited by small sample size and low quality of methodologies.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Anti-Obesity Agents; Complementary Therapies; Humans; Medicine, Chinese Traditional; Obesity; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 22292480
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2011.00979.x -
Journal of the American Society of... Feb 2018Obesity and high blood pressure (BP) are strongly related and weight loss is mightily associated with a significant BP decrease. The aim of the present meta-analysis was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Obesity and high blood pressure (BP) are strongly related and weight loss is mightily associated with a significant BP decrease. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate and quantify the BP decrease associated with orlistat use in randomized controlled trials. The search included PubMed-Medline, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases by up to June 05, 2017, to identify randomized controlled trials investigating the impact of orlistat on blood pressure. Quantitative data synthesis was performed using a random-effects model, with weighed mean difference and 95% confidence interval as summary statistics. Meta-regression and leave-one-out sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the modifiers of treatment response. Our meta-analysis included 27 randomized controlled clinical trials which comprehended overall 8150 subjects (4419 in the orlistat group and 3731 in the control one). We observed a statistically significant decreasing effect of orlistat on both systolic BP (-1.15 mmHg [-2.11, -0.19]) and diastolic BP (-1.07 mmHg [-1.69, -0.45]), regardless of its dosage. Significant associations were found between changes in systolic BP and diastolic BP with treatment duration but not with corresponding baseline BP values. In conclusion, Orlistat use contributes weight loss associated decrease in BP in overweight and obese subjects.
Topics: Anti-Obesity Agents; Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Determination; Humans; Hypertension; Obesity; Orlistat; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Weight Loss
PubMed: 29275922
DOI: 10.1016/j.jash.2017.12.002 -
Obesity Reviews : An Official Journal... May 2024This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of anti-obesity agents for hormonal, reproductive, metabolic, and psychological outcomes in polycystic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of anti-obesity agents for hormonal, reproductive, metabolic, and psychological outcomes in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) to inform the 2023 update of the International Evidence-based Guideline on PCOS. We searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycInfo, and CINAHL until July 2022 with a 10-year limit to focus on newer agents. Eleven trials (545 and 451 participants in intervention and control arms respectively, 12 comparisons) were included. On descriptive analyses, most agents improved anthropometric outcomes; liraglutide, semaglutide and orlistat appeared superior to placebo for anthropometric outcomes. Meta-analyses were possible for two comparisons (exenatide vs. metformin and orlistat + combined oral contraceptive pill [COCP] vs. COCP alone). On meta-analysis, no differences were identified between exenatide versus metformin for anthropometric, biochemical hyperandrogenism, and metabolic outcomes, other than lower fasting blood glucose more with metformin than exenatide (MD: 0.10 mmol/L, CI 0.02-0.17, I = 18%, 2 trials). Orlistat + COCP did not improve metabolic outcomes compared with COCP alone (fasting insulin MD: -8.65 pmol/L, -33.55 to 16.26, I = 67%, 2 trials). Published data examining the effects of anti-obesity agents in women with PCOS are very limited. The role of these agents in PCOS should be a high priority for future research.
Topics: Female; Humans; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Anti-Obesity Agents; Contraceptives, Oral, Combined; Orlistat; Exenatide; Metformin; Hypoglycemic Agents
PubMed: 38355887
DOI: 10.1111/obr.13704 -
European Neuropsychopharmacology : the... Sep 2016Metabolic complications are commonly found in people treated with clozapine. Reviews on the management of this problem have generally drawn conclusions by grouping... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Metabolic complications are commonly found in people treated with clozapine. Reviews on the management of this problem have generally drawn conclusions by grouping different types of studies involving patients treated with various different antipsychotics. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for clozapine-induced obesity or metabolic syndrome. Two researchers independently searched PubMed and Embase for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of treatments for clozapine-induced obesity or metabolic syndrome. All other types of studies were excluded. We only included RCTs where more than 50% of participants were taking clozapine. We identified 15 RCTs. Effective pharmacological treatments for clozapine-induced obesity and metabolic syndrome include metformin, aripiprazole, and Orlistat (in men only). Meta-analysis of three studies showed a robust effect of metformin in reducing body mass index and waist circumference but no effects on blood glucose, triglyceride levels, or HDL levels. In addition, there is limited evidence for combined calorie restriction and exercise as a non-pharmacological alternative for the treatment of clozapine-induced obesity, but only in an in-patient setting. Rosiglitazone, topiramate, sibutramine, phenylpropanolamine, modafinil, and atomoxetine have not shown to be beneficial, despite reports of efficacy in other populations treated with different antipsychotics. We conclude that randomised-controlled trial data support the use of metformin, aripiprazole, and Orlistat (in men only) for treating clozapine-induced obesity. Calorie restriction in combination with an exercise programme may be effective as a non-pharmacological alternative. Findings from trials in different populations should not be extrapolated to people being treated with clozapine.
Topics: Anti-Obesity Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Clozapine; Humans; Metabolic Syndrome; Obesity; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27496573
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2016.07.010 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jan 2008About a third of the US population and a quarter of the UK population are obese, with increased risks of hypertension, dyslipidaemia, diabetes, CVD, osteoarthritis, and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
About a third of the US population and a quarter of the UK population are obese, with increased risks of hypertension, dyslipidaemia, diabetes, CVD, osteoarthritis, and some cancers. Less than 10% of overweight or obese adults aged 40-49 years revert to a normal body weight after 4 years. Nearly 5 million US adults used prescription weight-loss medication between 1996 and 1998, but a quarter of all users were not overweight.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of drug treatments in adults with obesity, and of bariatric surgery in adults with morbid obesity? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to February 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 38 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: orlistat, phentermine, rimonabant, sibutramine, bariatric surgery compared with medical interventions, gastric bypass, gastric banding, vertical banded gastroplasty, biliopancreatic diversion, and sleeve gastrectomy .
Topics: United States
PubMed: 19450339
DOI: No ID Found -
International Journal of Obesity and... Dec 2003Safe and effective strategies to curb rising obesity prevalence rates are urgently needed and medications may play a more prominent role in future therapeutic regimens. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Safe and effective strategies to curb rising obesity prevalence rates are urgently needed and medications may play a more prominent role in future therapeutic regimens.
OBJECTIVE
To review systematically the long-term efficacy and safety of approved antiobesity medications.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Current Science Meta-register of Controlled Trials, and reference lists of original studies and reviews were searched. Drug manufacturers and two obesity experts were contacted. No language restrictions were imposed.
STUDY SELECTION
Double-blind, randomized controlled studies of approved antiobesity medications with follow-up periods of 1 y or greater were eligible for inclusion.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two reviewers independently assessed all potentially relevant studies for inclusion and methodological quality using standardized abstraction forms.
RESULTS
A total of 11orlistat (n=6021) and three sibutramine (n=929) studies met inclusion criteria. Attrition rates averaged 33% in orlistat studies and 48% in sibutramine studies. A random effects model was used for meta-analysis. Compared to placebo, orlistat-treated patients displayed a 2.7 kg (95% CI: 2.3-3.1 kg) or 2.9% (95% CI: 2.3-3.4%) greater reduction in weight and patients on sibutramine displayed a 4.3 kg (95% CI: 3.6-4.9 kg) or 4.6% (95% CI: 3.8-5.4%) greater weight reduction after 1 y of follow-up. The number of patients achieving 10% or greater weight loss was 12% (95% CI: 8-16%) higher with orlistat and 15% (95% CI: 4-27%) higher with sibutramine compared to placebo. Orlistat caused gastrointestinal side effects and sibutramine increased blood pressure and pulse rate.
CONCLUSION
There is a relative paucity of long-term studies of antiobesity agents. In weight loss trials of 1-y duration, orlistat and sibutramine appear modestly effective in promoting weight loss. Longer, more methodologically rigorous studies that are powered to examine end points such as mortality and cardiovascular morbidity are required.
Topics: Anti-Obesity Agents; Cyclobutanes; Humans; Lactones; Obesity; Orlistat; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 12975638
DOI: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0802475 -
The American Journal of Clinical... Dec 2004Obesity is a growing health concern in Canada and the United States, and pharmacologic therapies such as orlistat are being more commonly prescribed to assist with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Changes in body weight and serum lipid profile in obese patients treated with orlistat in addition to a hypocaloric diet: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials.
BACKGROUND
Obesity is a growing health concern in Canada and the United States, and pharmacologic therapies such as orlistat are being more commonly prescribed to assist with weight loss.
OBJECTIVE
Our goal was to assess the efficacy and safety of orlistat compared with either placebo or an active control with regard to weight loss and serum lipid changes in overweight patients.
DESIGN
We performed a systematic literature search of MEDLINE (1966 through December 2003) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Relevant trials and reviews were searched by hand. Randomized trials comparing orlistat and a control and reporting changes in weight loss, serum lipids (total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, LDL:HDL, and triacylglycerols), or both in overweight and obese patients [body mass index (in kg/m2) > or =25] were included.
RESULTS
Twenty-eight randomized trials met our inclusion criteria. Seventeen studies including 10,041 patients compared 3 x 120 mg orlistat/d with placebo or an inactive control along with a hypocaloric diet over a 1-y period. Relative risks (RRs) associated with clinically significant weight losses of 5% and 10% were 1.74 (95% CI: 1.57, 1.91) and 1.96 (1.74, 2.21), both favoring orlistat. Improvement in total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and LDL:HDL were also greater with orlistat. Gastrointestinal events were more common with orlistat than with placebo [RR: 1.46 (1.37, 1.55)].
CONCLUSION
Our findings suggest that 3 x 120 mg orlistat/d is effective for improving both weight loss and serum lipid profiles in obese patients at low and high cardiovascular disease risk and in obese patients with type 2 diabetes.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Obesity Agents; Body Weight; Diet, Reducing; Energy Intake; Female; Humans; Lactones; Lipids; Male; Middle Aged; Obesity; Orlistat; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Safety; Treatment Outcome; Weight Loss
PubMed: 15585756
DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/80.6.1461 -
Obesity Reviews : An Official Journal... Jun 2012The study aims to compare anti-obesity interventions in a single evidence synthesis framework. Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
The study aims to compare anti-obesity interventions in a single evidence synthesis framework. Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of orlistat, rimonabant or sibutramine reporting weight or body mass index (BMI) change from baseline at 3, 6 or 12 months. A mixed treatment comparison was used to combine direct and indirect trial evidence. Ninety-four studies involving 24,808 individuals were included; 83 trials included data on weight change and 41 on BMI change. All results are in comparison with placebo. The active drugs were all effective at reducing weight and BMI. At 3 months, orlistat reduced weight by -2.65 kg (95% credibility interval -4.00 kg, -1.31 kg). For sibutramine, 15 mg gave a greater reduction than 10 mg at 12 months, -6.35 kg versus -5.42 kg, respectively. Rimonabant reduced weight by -11.23 kg at 3 months and -4.55 kg at 12 months. Lifestyle advice alone also reduced weight at 6 and 12 months, but was less effective than the pharmacological interventions. In conclusion, modest weight reductions were seen for all pharmacological interventions. Those interventions which have now been withdrawn from use (sibutramine and rimonabant) seem to be the most effective, implying that there may be a place in clinical practice for similar drugs if side effects could be avoided.
Topics: Anti-Obesity Agents; Body Mass Index; Cyclobutanes; Humans; Lactones; Life Style; Obesity; Orlistat; Piperidines; Pyrazoles; Rimonabant; Treatment Outcome; Weight Loss
PubMed: 22288431
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2011.00981.x -
Gastroenterology Apr 2018We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the overall and comparative effects of weight-loss medications approved by the Food and Drug... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the overall and comparative effects of weight-loss medications approved by the Food and Drug Administration for long-term use on cardiometabolic risk profiles of obese adults.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature review through February 28, 2017 to identify randomized clinical trials of the effects of Food and Drug Administration-approved weight-loss medications (ie, orlistat, lorcaserin, naltrexone-bupropion, phentermine-topiramate, and liraglutide) administered to obese adults for 1 year or more, compared with placebo or another active agent. Outcomes of interest included changes in blood glucose (fasting blood glucose [FBG] and hemoglobin A1c), cholesterol profile (low-density lipoprotein and high-density lipoproteins), blood pressure (BP; systolic/diastolic), and waist circumference (WC). We performed pair-wise and network meta-analyses with outcomes reported as weighted and standardized mean differences. Quality of evidence was rated using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).
RESULTS
In a meta-analysis of 28 randomized controlled trials (29,018 participants; median body mass index, 36.1 kg/m), we associated weight-loss medications with a modest decrease in FBG (weighted mean difference, 4.0 mg/dL; 95% confidence interval, -4.4 to -3.6 mg/dL) and WC (weighted mean difference, reduction of 3.3 cm; 95% confidence interval, -3.5 to -3.1 cm), without clinically meaningful changes in systolic/diastolic BP or cholesterol profile vs placebo (standardized mean difference <0.2); effects varied among drugs. Phentermine-topiramate use was associated with a substantial decrease in WC and a modest decrease in FBG, hemoglobin A1c, and BP, and had minimal effect on cholesterol. Liraglutide use was associated with a substantial decrease in FBG, hemoglobin A1c, and WC, and a minimal effect on BP and cholesterol. Naltrexone-bupropion use was associated with moderate increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, but had a minimal effect on FBG and WC. Orlistat use was associated with a decrease in low-density lipoprotein and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. No drug improved all cardiometabolic risk factors.
CONCLUSIONS
In a systematic review and network meta-analysis, we found Food and Drug Administration-approved weight-loss medications to have only modest positive effects on cardiometabolic risk profile. Further research is needed to evaluate the long-term cardiometabolic benefits of these medications.
PROSPERO
CRD42016039486.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Obesity Agents; Biomarkers; Blood Glucose; Blood Pressure; Female; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Lipids; Male; Metabolic Syndrome; Middle Aged; Obesity; Protective Factors; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Waist Circumference; Weight Loss
PubMed: 29305933
DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.12.024 -
Health Technology Assessment... May 2004To undertake a systematic review of the long-term effects of obesity treatments on body weight, risk factors for disease, and disease. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To undertake a systematic review of the long-term effects of obesity treatments on body weight, risk factors for disease, and disease.
METHODS
The study encompassed three systematic reviews that examined different aspects of obesity treatments. (1) A systematic review of obesity treatments in adults where the methods of the Cochrane Collaboration were applied and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a follow-up of at least 1 year were evaluated. (2) A systematic epidemiological review, where studies were sought on long-term effects of weight loss on morbidity and/or mortality, and examined through epidemiological modelling. (3) A systematic economic review that sought reports with both costs and outcomes of treatment, including recent reports that assessed the cost-effectiveness of pharmaceutical and surgical interventions. A Markov model was also adopted to examine the cost-effectiveness of a low-fat diet and exercise intervention in adults with obesity and impaired glucose tolerance.
RESULTS
The addition of the drugs orlistat or sibutramine was associated with weight loss and generally improved risk factors, apart from diastolic blood pressure for sibutramine. Metformin was associated with decreased mortality after 10 years in obese people with type 2 diabetes. Low-fat diets were associated with continuing weight loss for 3 years and improvements in risk factors, as well as prevention of type 2 diabetes and improved control of hypertension. Insufficient evidence was available to demonstrate the benefits of low calorie or very low calorie diets. The addition of an exercise or behaviour programme to diet was associated with improved weight loss and risk factors for at least 1 year. Studies combining low-fat diets, exercise and behaviour therapy suggested improved hypertension and cardiovascular disease. Family therapy was associated with improved weight loss for 2 years compared to individual therapy. There was insufficient evidence to conclude that individual therapy was more beneficial than group therapy. Weight lost more quickly (within 1 year), from the epidemiology review, may be more beneficial with respect to the risk of mortality. The effects of intentional weight loss need further investigation. Weight loss from surgical and non-surgical interventions for people suffering from obesity was associated with decreased risk of development of diabetes, and a reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol and blood pressure, in the long term. Targeting high-risk individuals with drugs or surgery was likely to result in a cost per additional life-year or quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of no more than 13,000 British pounds. There was also suggestive evidence of cost saving from treatment of people with type 2 diabetes with metformin. Targeting surgery on people with severe obesity and impaired glucose tolerance was likely to be more cost-effective at 2329 British pounds per additional life-year. Economic modelling over 6 years for diet and exercise for people with impaired glucose tolerance was associated with a high initial cost per additional QALY, but by the sixth year the cost per QALY was 13,389 British pounds. Results did not include cost savings from diseases other than diabetes, and therefore may be conservative.
CONCLUSIONS
The drugs orlistat and sibutramine appear beneficial for the treatment of adults with obesity, and metformin for obese patients with type 2 diabetes. Exercise and/or behaviour therapy appear to improve weight loss when added to diet. Low-fat diets with exercise, or with exercise and behaviour therapy are associated with the prevention of type 2 diabetes and hypertension. Long-term weight loss in epidemiological studies was associated with reduced risk of type 2 diabetes, and may be beneficial for cardiovascular disease. Low-fat diets and exercise interventions in individuals at risk of obesity-related illness are of comparable cost to drug treatments. Long-term pragmatic RCTs of obesity treatments in populations with obesity-related illness or at high risk of developing such illness are needed (to include an evaluation of risk factors, morbidity, quality of life and economic evaluations). Drug trials that include dietary advice, plus exercise and/or behaviour therapy are also needed. Research exploring effective types of exercise, diet or behaviour and also interventions to prevent obesity in adults is required.
Topics: Anti-Obesity Agents; Behavior Therapy; Caloric Restriction; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Cyclobutanes; Diet, Fat-Restricted; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Lactones; Markov Chains; Metformin; Obesity; Orlistat; Physical Fitness; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors
PubMed: 15147610
DOI: 10.3310/hta8210