Evidence mapPaperPMID 31237921Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

GLUcose COntrol Safety & Efficacy in type 2 DIabetes, a systematic review and NETwork meta-analysis.

Guillaume Grenet, Shams Ribault, Giao Bao Nguyen, Faustine Glais, Augustin Metge, Thomas Linet, Behrouz Kassai-Koupai, Catherine Cornu, Théodora Bejan-Angoulvant, Sylvie Erpeldinger and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Guillaume GrenetService de Pharmacotoxicologie, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-5237-2581
Shams RibaultUniversité de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Giao Bao NguyenUniversité de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Faustine GlaisUniversité de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Augustin MetgeUniversité de Lyon, Lyon, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5842-6934
Thomas LinetUniversité de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Behrouz Kassai-KoupaiService de Pharmacotoxicologie, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Catherine CornuService de Pharmacotoxicologie, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Théodora Bejan-AngoulvantCHRU de Tours, Service de Pharmacologie Médicale-Tours, France.
Sylvie ErpeldingerUniversité Lyon 1, CNRS, UMR5558, Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, Lyon, France.
Rémy BoussageonDépartement de Médecine Générale, Faculté de Médecine et de Pharmacie, Université de Poitiers-Poitiers, France.
Aurore GouraudService de Pharmacotoxicologie, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Fabrice BonnetCHU Rennes, Université de Rennes 1-Rennes, France.
Michel CucheratService de Pharmacotoxicologie, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Philippe MoulinFédération d'endocrinologie, maladies métaboliques, diabète et nutrition, INSERM UMR 1060 CARMEN Hospices Civils de Lyon, Université Lyon 1- Lyon, France.
François GueyffierService de Pharmacotoxicologie, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes · FRHospices Civils de Lyon · FRUniversité de Poitiers · FRUniversité de Tours · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe last international consensus on the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D) recommends SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists for patients with clinical cardiovascular (CV) disease; metformin remains the first-line glucose lowering medication. Last studies suggested beneficial effects of SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists compared to DPP-4 inhibitors, in secondary CV prevention. Recently, a potential benefit of SGLT-2 inhibitors in primary CV prevention also has been suggested. However, no comparison of all the new and the old hypoglycemic drugs is available on CV outcomes. We aimed to compare the effects of old and new hypoglycemic drugs in T2D, on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and mortality. METHODS AND

findingsWe conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of clinical trials. Randomized trials, blinded or not, assessing contemporary hypoglycemic drugs on mortality or MACE in patients with T2D, were searched for in Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov. References screening and data extraction were done by multiple observers. Each drug was analyzed according to its therapeutic class. A random Bayesian network meta-analysis model was used. The primary outcomes were overall mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and MACE. Severe adverse events and severe hypoglycemia were also recorded. 175,966 patients in 34 trials from 1970 to 2018 were included. No trials evaluating glinides or alpha glucosidase inhibitors were found. 17 trials included a majority of patients with previous cardiovascular history, 16 trials a majority of patients without. Compared to control, SGLT-2 inhibitors were associated with a decreased risk of overall mortality (OR = 0.84 [95% CrI: 0.74; 0.95]), SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists with a decreased risk of MACE (OR = 0.89 [95% CrI: 0.81; 0.98] and OR = 0.88 [95% CrI: 0.81; 0.95], respectively). Compared to DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT-2 inhibitors were associated with a decreased risk of overall mortality (OR = 0.82 [95% CrI: 0.69; 0.98]), GLP-1 agonists with a decreased risk of MACE (OR = 0.88 [95% CrI: 0.79; 0.99]). Insulin was also associated with an increased risk of MACE compared to GLP-1 agonists (OR = 1.19 [95% CrI: 1.01; 1.42]). Insulin and sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of severe hypoglycemia. In the trials including a majority of patients without previous CV history, the comparisons of SGLT-2 inhibitors, metformin and control did not showed significant differences on primary outcomes. We limited our analysis at the therapeutic class level.

conclusionsSGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists have the most beneficial effects, especially in T2D patients with previous CV diseases. Direct comparisons of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists and metformin are needed, notably in primary CV prevention.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42016043823.

Indexed as

AgedBlood GlucoseClinical Trials as TopicDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedTreatment OutcomeBlood Glucose

Identifiers

PMID31237921
PMCPMC6592598
OpenAlexW2953696397

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.