You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 4, Issue 12
  • Safety and effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors versus intermediate-acting insulin or placebo for patients with type 2 diabetes failing two oral antihyperglycaemic agents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Article Text

Article menu
XML
Diabetes and endocrinology
Research
Safety and effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors versus intermediate-acting insulin or placebo for patients with type 2 diabetes failing two oral antihyperglycaemic agents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
  1. Andrea C Tricco1,
  2. Jesmin Antony1,
  3. Paul A Khan1,
  4. Marco Ghassemi1,
  5. Jemila S Hamid2,
  6. Huda Ashoor1,
  7. Erik Blondal1,
  8. Charlene Soobiah1,
  9. Catherine H Yu1,
  10. Brian Hutton3,
  11. Brenda R Hemmelgarn4,
  12. David Moher3,
  13. Sumit R Majumdar5,
  14. Sharon E Straus1,6
  1. 1Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  2. 2Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  3. 3Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute and the Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
  4. 4Departments of Medicine and Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
  5. 5Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  6. 6Department of Geriatric Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  1. Correspondence to Dr Sharon E Straus; sharon.straus{at}utoronto.ca

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors versus intermediate-acting insulin for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and poor glycaemic control despite treatment with two oral agents.

Setting Studies were multicentre and multinational.

Participants Ten studies including 2967 patients with T2DM.

Interventions Studies that examined DPP-4 inhibitors compared with each other, intermediate-acting insulin, no treatment or placebo in patients with T2DM.

Primary and secondary outcome measures Primary outcome was glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Secondary outcomes were healthcare utilisation, body weight, fractures, quality of life, microvascular complications, macrovascular complications, all-cause mortality, harms, cost and cost-effectiveness.

Results 10 randomised clinical trials with 2967 patients were included after screening 5831 titles and abstracts, and 180 full-text articles. DPP-4 inhibitors significantly reduced HbA1c versus placebo in network meta-analysis (NMA; mean difference (MD) −0.62%, 95% CI −0.93% to −0.33%) and meta-analysis (MD −0.61%, 95% CI −0.81% to −0.41%), respectively. Significant differences in HbA1c were not observed for neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin versus placebo and DPP-4 inhibitors versus NPH insulin in NMA. In meta-analysis, no significant differences were observed between DPP-4 inhibitors and placebo for severe hypoglycaemia, weight gain, cardiovascular disease, overall harms, treatment-related harms and mortality, although patients receiving DPP-4 inhibitors experienced less infections (relative risk 0.72, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.91).

Conclusions DPP-4 inhibitors were superior to placebo in reducing HbA1c levels in adults with T2DM taking at least two oral agents. Compared with placebo, no safety signals were detected with DPP-4 inhibitors and there was a reduced risk of infection. There was no significant difference in HbA1c observed between NPH and placebo or NPH and DPP-4 inhibitors.

Trial registration number PROSPERO # CRD42013003624.

  • systematic review
  • meta-analysis

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005752

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Supplementary materials

    • Supplementary Data

      This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

      Files in this Data Supplement: