ArticleThe journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease2025
Comparative efficacy and safety of antidiabetic agents in Alzheimer's disease: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurovascular Actions of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors and Their Implications for Cognitive Dysfunction in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.Clinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Review
- Smart Drug-Delivery Approaches for Enhanced Management of Comorbid Conditions in Alzheimer's Disease.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Liraglutide and Exenatide in Alzheimer's Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cognitive Outcomes.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder with limited treatment options. Emerging evidence suggests that antidiabetic agents may offer neuroprotective effects by targeting shared pathophysiological mechanisms such as insulin resistance and neuroinflammation. However, the comparative efficacy, and safety of these agents in the treatment of AD remain unclear.
objectivesThis study aimed to systematically evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of antidiabetic agents for improving cognitive outcomes, reducing amyloid-β (Aβ) deposition, and managing adverse effects in patients with AD, using a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases to identify RCTs examining the effects of antidiabetic agents in patients with AD. The primary outcomes included cognitive performance (e.g., MMSE scores), Aβ deposition (measured via CSF biomarkers), and safety/adverse effects. A network meta-analysis was performed to integrate direct and indirect evidence, ranking interventions using Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.
resultsA total of 26 studies, involving 7,361 participants, were included in the analysis. The interventions evaluated included insulin detemir (both low-dose and high-dose), liraglutide, exenatide, metformin, and pioglitazone. Both low-dose insulin detemir (mean difference: 2.10, 95 % CI: 1.04 to 3.15), high-dose insulin detemir (mean difference: 1.40, 95 % CI: -0.07 to 2.88), exenatide (mean difference: 1.19, 95 % CI: 0.06 to 2.32), and metformin combined with exenatide (mean difference: 1.06, 95 % CI: -1.68 to 3.80) showed cognitive improvements compared to placebo. Among these, low-dose insulin detemir demonstrated the most significant improvement. In terms of reducing Aβ deposition, metformin ranked highest in effectiveness, with the highest SUCRA score (84.6), followed by high-dose insulin detemir (SUCRA: 54.1). Low-dose insulin detemir (SUCRA: 51.1) also demonstrated moderate efficacy. Low-dose insulin detemir showed some reduction in Aβ deposition (mean difference: -0.31, 95 % CI: -2.82 to 2.20), although statistical significance was limited. Liraglutide exhibited the highest rate of study treatment withdrawal (mean difference: 1.97, 95 % CI: -0.07 to 4.00), while pioglitazone demonstrated the lowest withdrawal rates (mean difference: 0.07, 95 % CI: -0.03 to 0.17).
conclusionsThis network meta-analysis provides valuable insights into the comparative efficacy and safety of antidiabetic agents in AD. Low-dose insulin detemir demonstrated the most significant cognitive improvement and a moderate effect on reducing Aβ deposition. Metformin emerged as the most effective agent for reducing Aβ levels, though its effects on cognitive function were less pronounced. Safety profiles varied, with liraglutide associated with the highest rate of treatment withdrawals, while pioglitazone demonstrated the lowest incidence of treatment-related discontinuations. These findings support the potential use of antidiabetic agents, particularly insulin detemir, as a therapeutic option for AD, although further studies are needed to confirm their long-term benefits and safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.