Comparation of fixed-ratio (IDegLira and iGlarLixi) versus free combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist for uncontrolled type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-10 DOI:10.1111/jebm.12620
Junling Weng, Ying Tao, Zian Xu, Shanyan Zhou, Dunming Xiao, Zhixu Zhu, Ruizhi Zheng, Yi Yang, Yingyao Chen
{"title":"Comparation of fixed-ratio (IDegLira and iGlarLixi) versus free combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist for uncontrolled type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Junling Weng, Ying Tao, Zian Xu, Shanyan Zhou, Dunming Xiao, Zhixu Zhu, Ruizhi Zheng, Yi Yang, Yingyao Chen","doi":"10.1111/jebm.12620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the fixed-ratio combination (FRC) and free combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and four Chinese databases were searched for relevant studies from inception to April 13, 2023. Phase III clinical trials involving FRC or free combination in patients with uncontrolled T2DM were included. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to evaluate the effects of FRC and free combination. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to evaluate the risk-of-bias. The primary outcomes were changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), body weight, and incident hypoglycemia. Secondary outcomes included changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023409585).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-two trials with 23,619 patients were included in the NMA, and treatments were categorized as FRC, free combination and NOINSGLP (neither FRC nor free combination). The forest plots revealed comparable HbA1c control (mean difference (MD) = 0.07%, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.17 to -0.30) between free combination and FRC. However, there were significant differences in the body weight (MD = -2.06 kg; 95% CI: -3.34 to -0.77), SBP (MD = -1.22 mmHg; 95% CI: -2.41 to -0.04), and DBP (MD = -1.09 mmHg; 95% CI: -1.94 to -0.24) between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with uncontrolled T2DM, the safety and efficacy of FRC and free combination therapy were comparable. The use of FRC is justifiable in patients requiring free combination.</p>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jebm.12620","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the fixed-ratio combination (FRC) and free combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and four Chinese databases were searched for relevant studies from inception to April 13, 2023. Phase III clinical trials involving FRC or free combination in patients with uncontrolled T2DM were included. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to evaluate the effects of FRC and free combination. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to evaluate the risk-of-bias. The primary outcomes were changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), body weight, and incident hypoglycemia. Secondary outcomes included changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023409585).

Results: Forty-two trials with 23,619 patients were included in the NMA, and treatments were categorized as FRC, free combination and NOINSGLP (neither FRC nor free combination). The forest plots revealed comparable HbA1c control (mean difference (MD) = 0.07%, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.17 to -0.30) between free combination and FRC. However, there were significant differences in the body weight (MD = -2.06 kg; 95% CI: -3.34 to -0.77), SBP (MD = -1.22 mmHg; 95% CI: -2.41 to -0.04), and DBP (MD = -1.09 mmHg; 95% CI: -1.94 to -0.24) between the two groups.

Conclusions: In patients with uncontrolled T2DM, the safety and efficacy of FRC and free combination therapy were comparable. The use of FRC is justifiable in patients requiring free combination.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
固定比例(IDegLira 和 iGlarLixi)与基础胰岛素和胰高血糖素样肽-1 受体激动剂自由组合治疗不受控制的 2 型糖尿病的比较:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。
研究目的本研究旨在评估基础胰岛素和胰高血糖素样肽-1 受体激动剂(GLP-1RA)固定比例组合(FRC)和自由组合在 2 型糖尿病(T2DM)患者中的安全性和有效性:检索了 PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、The Cochrane Library 和四个中文数据库中从开始到 2023 年 4 月 13 日的相关研究。研究纳入了针对未受控制的 T2DM 患者的 FRC 或自由组合的 III 期临床试验。采用网络荟萃分析(NMA)评估 FRC 和自由联合用药的效果。Cochrane 协作组织的工具用于评估偏倚风险。主要结果是血红蛋白 A1c (HbA1c)、体重和低血糖事件的变化。次要结果包括收缩压(SBP)和舒张压(DBP)的变化。本研究已在 PROSPERO(CRD42023409585)注册:42项试验共23619名患者被纳入NMA,治疗方法分为FRC、自由组合和NOINSGLP(既非FRC也非自由组合)。森林图显示,自由联合疗法与自由联合疗法的 HbA1c 控制率相当(平均差 (MD) = 0.07%,95% 置信区间 (CI):-0.17 至 -0.30)。然而,两组患者的体重(MD = -2.06 kg;95% CI:-3.34 至 -0.77)、SBP(MD = -1.22 mmHg;95% CI:-2.41 至 -0.04)和 DBP(MD = -1.09 mmHg;95% CI:-1.94 至 -0.24)存在显著差异:结论:在未得到控制的 T2DM 患者中,FRC 和自由联合疗法的安全性和有效性相当。对于需要自由联合疗法的患者,使用 FRC 是合理的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine
Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
1.40%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: The Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine (EMB) is an esteemed international healthcare and medical decision-making journal, dedicated to publishing groundbreaking research outcomes in evidence-based decision-making, research, practice, and education. Serving as the official English-language journal of the Cochrane China Centre and West China Hospital of Sichuan University, we eagerly welcome editorials, commentaries, and systematic reviews encompassing various topics such as clinical trials, policy, drug and patient safety, education, and knowledge translation.
期刊最新文献
Rapid review: A review of methods and recommendations based on current evidence. A computable biomedical knowledge system: Toward rapidly building candidate-directed acyclic graphs. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake among adults living with HIV in the eastern coast of Tanzania: A nested cross-sectional study. Real-world experience of Fuzheng Yiqing granule as chemoprophylaxis against COVID-19 infection among close contacts: A prospective cohort study. Reconciling conflicting evidence in the evaluation of the MitraClip system: Assessment of and response to the MITRA-FR and COAPT trials by key stakeholders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1