Abstract
We assessed the efficacy of noninsulin antidiabetic medications used in current clinical practice (metformin, sulfonylureas, α-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, glinides, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists) to reach the HbA1c target <7% in people with type 2 diabetes. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception through April 2011 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving noninsulin antidiabetic drugs. RCTs had to report the effect of any diabetes medication on the HbA1c levels, to include at least 30 subjects in every arm of the study, and to last at least 12 weeks. Data were summarized across studies using random-effects meta-regression. We found 137 RCTs with 205 arms and 39,845 patients. The proportion of patients who achieved the HbA1c goal ranged from 25.9% (95% CI 18.5–34.9) with α-glucosidase inhibitors to 48.6% (95% CI, 53.6) with GLP-1 analogs. Baseline HbA1c was the major determinant of the proportion of patients at HbA1c goal. The meta-regression model with mean baseline HbA1c value, concomitant drug use, and class of drugs as covariates explained almost 67% of the between-study variability. A nomogram was developed to estimate the proportion of patients at target for each noninsulin drug class: for a baseline HbA1c level of 7.5%, all noninsulin drugs, except α-glucosidase inhibitors, achieved the HbA1c goal <7% in more than 50% of patients. Starting or intensifying pharmacological therapy at baseline HbA1c 8% or less was associated with more than 50% of patients at HbA1c goal for most noninsulin drugs.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2009) Diabetes data and trends. http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/incidence/fig1.htm. Accessed 1 Oct 2011
National Center for Health Statistics (2009) Health, United States: with special feature on medical technology. Hyattsville, MD
Executive Summary (2011) Standards of medical care in diabetes. Diabetes Care 34(Suppl 1):S4–S10
Nathan DM, Buse J, Davidson MB et al (2009) American diabetes association; European association for the study of diabetes. Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the initiation and adjustment of therapy: a consensus statement from the American diabetes association and the European association for the study of diabetes. Diabetes Care 32(1):193–203
Rodbard HW, Jellinger PS, Davidson JA et al (2009) Statement by an American association of clinical endocrinologists/American college of endocrinology consensus panel on type 2 diabetes mellitus: an algorithm for glycemic control. Endocr Pract 15(7):540–559
Canadian Diabetes Association (2008) Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and management of diabetes in Canada. Can J Diabetes 32(Suppl 1):S1–S201
Centre for Clinical Practice at NICE (2009) Type 2 diabetes: newer agents. NICE short clinical guideline 87 Issue date
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 151(4):W65–W94
Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D et al (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17(1):1–12
Stuart A, Ord JK (1994) Kendall’s advanced theory of statistics, 6th edn. Edward Arnold, London
Deeks JJAD, Bradburn MJ (2001) Statistical methods for examining heterogeneity and combining results from several studies in meta-analysis. In: Egger MD-SG, Altman DG (eds) Systematic reviews in health care. BMJ Publishing, London, pp 285–312
Van Houwelingen HC, Arends LR, Stijnen T (2002) Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. Stat Med 21(4):589–624
Thompson SG, Sharp SJ (1999) Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Stat Med 18(20):2693–2708
Higgins JP, Thompson SG (2004) Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression. Stat Med 23(11):1663–1682
Cimino A, Giorda C, Meloncelli I, et al (2006) AMD annals: quality indicators in diabetes care in Italy. http://ebookbrowse.com/2006-annali-amd-ita-pdf-d70659475. p 30. Last accessed Sept 2011
Alexander GC, Sehgal NL, Moloney RM, Stafford RS (2008) National trends in treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, 1994–2007. Arch Intern Med 168(19):2088–2094
Phung OJ, Scholle JM, Talwar M, Coleman CI (2010) Effect of noninsulin antidiabetic drugs added to metformin therapy on glycemic control, weight gain, and hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes. JAMA 303(14):1410–1418
Bennett WL, Maruthur MN, Singh S et al (2011) Comparative effectiveness and safety of medications for type 2 diabetes: an update including new drugs and 2-drug combinations. Ann Intern Med 154(9):602–613
Esposito K, Cozzolino D, Bellastella G et al (2011) Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and HbA1c target of <7% in type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diab Obes Metab 13(7):594–603
National Committee for Quality Assurance: The state of health care quality 2010 report [article online]. Washington, DC, National Committee for Quality Assurance. Available from http://web.ncqa.org. Last accessed April 2011. http://www.ncqa.org/portals/0/state%20of%20health%20care/2010/sohc%202010%20-%20full2.pdf
Selvin E, Bolen S, Yeh H-C et al (2008) Cardiovascular outcomes in trials of oral diabetes medications. Arch Intern Med 168(19):2070–2080
Fu AZ, Qiu Y, Davies MJ, Radican L, Engel SS (2011) Treatment intensification in patients with type 2 diabetes who failed metformin monotherapy. Diab Obes Metab 13(8):765–769
Acknowledgments
This study was supported in part by the Second University of Naples. The funding source had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation of review of the manuscript; or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Conflict of interest
No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Esposito, K., Chiodini, P., Ceriello, A. et al. A nomogram to estimate the proportion of patients at hemoglobin A1c target <7% with noninsulin antidiabetic drugs in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review of 137 randomized controlled trials with 39 845 patients. Acta Diabetol 51, 305–311 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00592-012-0370-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00592-012-0370-9