Foroutan N1,2, Muratov S1,2, Levine M1,2

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
What is a review? An article which looks at a question or subject and seeks to summarise and bring together evidence on a health topic.
Advertisements

In the name of GOD In the name of GOD.
Introducing... Reproduced and modified from a presentation produced by Zoë Debenham from the original presentation created by Kate Light, Cochrane Trainer.
Rattan Juneja MD¹; Michael E. Stuart, MD 2,3 ; Sheri A. Strite 3 Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana¹ University of Washington,
Systematic review of the ‘added value’ for well-being of physical activity in outdoor natural environments Ruth Garside Senior Lecturer in Evidence Synthesis.
Meta-Analysis: Low-dose dopamine Increases urine output but does not prevent renal dysfunction or death Annals of Internal Medicine 2005; 142:
Felix I. Zemel, MPH DrPH Student Tufts University School of Medicine.
An analysis of early insulin glargine added to metformin with or without sulfonylurea: impact on glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia.
Systematic Reviews.
How to Analyze Systematic Reviews: practical session Akbar Soltani.MD. Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS) Shariati Hospital
Evidence Based Medicine Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Ross Lawrenson.
Should developing countries continue to use older drugs for essential hypertension? A prescription survey in South Africa suggested that prescribers were.
Amori, R. E. et al. JAMA 2007;298: Efficacy and Safety of Incretin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes Systematic Review and Meta-analysis 亀田総合病院 1 年目初期研修医.
RevMan for Registrars Paul Glue, Psychological Medicine What is EBM? What is EBM? Different approaches/tools Different approaches/tools Systematic reviews.
EBM Conference (Day 2). Funding Bias “He who pays, Calls the Tune” Some Facts (& Myths) Is industry research more likely to be published No Is industry.
Objectives  Identify the key elements of a good randomised controlled study  To clarify the process of meta analysis and developing a systematic review.
Sifting through the evidence Sarah Fradsham. Types of Evidence Primary Literature Observational studies Case Report Case Series Case Control Study Cohort.
Systematic Review Krit Pongpirul, MD, MPH. Johns Hopkins University.
Journal Club Alcohol, Other Drugs, and Health: Current Evidence November-December 2012.
Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Chapter 18 Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Figure 1. Hazard ratios for progression-free survival analyzed with fixed effect model. Table 1: Relevant trials Table 2. Methodological quality Conclusions.
2012 實證醫學系統課程 第一組 報告 吳敏誠、鍾宜倫、凌久惠 2012/08/07. Acyclovir for treating primary herpetic gingivostomatitis(Review) Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 4.
Selenium supplementation for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a Cochrane review Clinical
Efficacy of Colchicine When Added to Traditional Anti- Inflammatory Therapy in the Treatment of Pericarditis Efficacy of Colchicine When Added to Traditional.
A Summary of a Systematic Review Robert Williams, LCSW, BCD University of Utah.
Meta-analysis Overview
Contact: Patrick Phillips,
Dr Mohammed Babsail, Dr Bhavin Bakrania
FIGURE 3. FOREST PLOT AFTER CONTROLLING FOR NETWORK INCONSISTENCY
Effectiveness of yoga for hypertension: Systematic review and meta-analysis Marshall Hagins, PT, PhD1, Rebecca States,
Psychosocial Combined with Agonist Maintenance Treatments versus Agonist Maintenance Treatments Alone for Treatment of Opioid Dependence (Review) Amato,
Figure 1: Flow diagram of study selection.
Systematic review of Present clinical reality
Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire McGill Pain Questionnaire
How to Find Systematic Reviews
Effects of Uric acid- lowering therapy on renal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis Nephrol Dial Transplant (2014) 29: Vaughan Washco.
NURS3030H NURSING RESEARCH IN PRACTICE MODULE 7 ‘Systematic Reviews’’
General Physical Health Advice for People with Serious Mental Illness
Rachel Morell1, Simon Rosenbaum1,2 and Belinda J Parmenter1
Figure 5. Treatment of the checkpoint inhibitor related toxicity
Disclosure belangen NHG spreker
Neal B, et al. Diabetes Care 2015;38:403–411
Supplementary Table 1. PRISMA checklist
#696 Implants with Sinus Augmentation-The Merit of Bone Grafting? A Systematic Review Karim M. Fawzy El-Sayed1, 2 Dagmar E. Slot3 Shaimaa Nasr1 Samah Bahaa1.
Fatimah Al-Ani 1,2,. MD MRCP, Jose Maria Bastida Bermejo3,
M.Vooijs, P.Siemonsma, I.Heus, J.Sont, A.Rövekamp, N. van Meeteren
Prognostic factors for musculoskeletal injury identified through medical screening and training load monitoring in professional football (soccer): a systematic.
Lifestyle factors in the development of diabetes among African immigrants in the UK: A systematic review Alloh T. Folashade Faculty of Health and Social.
Evaluation of biologically equivalent dose escalation, clinical outcome, and toxicity in prostate cancer radiotherapy: A meta-analysis of 12,000 patients.
The efficacy of using CAD for detection of
Geir Smedslund, Ph.D.: Diakonhjemmet Hospital (DH)
Pearls Presentation Use of N-Acetylcysteine For prophylaxis of Radiocontrast Nephrotoxicity.
Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors work by blocking the reabsorption of filtered glucose in the kidneys. This leads to glucosuria and improved.
Clinical Application of Incretin-Based Therapy: Therapeutic Potential, Patient Selection and Clinical Use  David M. Kendall, MD, Robert M. Cuddihy, MD,
Safety and Efficacy of Incretin-Based Therapies in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and CKD: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis  Patricia M.
Introduction to Systematic Reviews
Things to Remember… PubMed
Writing Cochrane Protocol Cochrane Thailand Workshop 2017
A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials of Manual Thrombectomy in ST elevation myocardial infarction Investigators: Ashraf Alazzoni,
Therapeutic writing for eating disorders: A systematic review
RESEARCH Effects of Medium-Chain Triglycerides on Weight Loss and Body Composition: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Karen Mumme, PGDipSc.
قطب قلب اصفهان 12/8/2016.
What is a review? An article which looks at a question or subject and seeks to summarise and bring together evidence on a health topic. Ask What is a review?
Does cinnamon reduce fasting blood glucose in Type II diabetics?
Effectiveness of Systemic Treatments for Pyoderma Gangrenosum: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies & Clinical Trials ACR Partridge1, JW Bai1,
Effects of treatment for psoriasis on circulating levels of leptin, adiponectin and resistin: a systematic review and meta-analysis Kyriakou, A. Patsatsi,
Surgical re-excision versus observation for histologically dysplastic nevi: a systematic review of associated clinical outcomes K.T. Vuong1, J. Walker2,
Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis -Part 2-
Fig. 1. Antihyperglycemic therapy algorithm for adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The algorithm stratifies the choice of medications.
Introduction to Systematic Reviews
Presentation transcript:

Foroutan N1,2, Muratov S1,2, Levine M1,2 Clinical efficacy and safety of metformin-based combination therapy with dipeptidyl peptidase - 4 inhibitors versus sulfonylurea in type 2 diabetes mellitus Foroutan N1,2, Muratov S1,2, Levine M1,2 1PATH Research Institute, St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, Hamilton, Ontario; 2Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario BACKGROUND Methods (Cont.) Metformin is the most commonly prescribed first-line oral hyperglycemic agent (OHA) in patients with type 2 diabetes with a low potency of development of hypoglycaemia. However, metformin fails to maintain glycemic control for a long period of time and thus additional therapies as second-line medications are required. Sulfonylureas (SUs) are the most common adjunctive second-line therapeutic drugs particularly in patients failing to achieve or maintain glycaemic control on metformin mono-therapy but can cause adverse events such as hypoglycaemia and weight gain. Over the last decade clinical studies have shown that “Dipeptidyl peptidases (DPP)-4 inhibitors” as an alternative to SU may have a better safety and efficacy profile as a second-line adjunctive therapy added to metformin. Softwares: Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager (RevMan®) Analysis Version 5.3 statistical software was applied for meta-analysis. GRADEprofiler® (GRADE Working Group) was used to assess the quality of evidence per outcome and ultimately to create the summary of findings table and evidence profile. Figure 2: Efficacy results RESULTS Methodological quality and risk of bias The included studies (Fig 1.) were found to be of “low to moderate” quality. The body of evidence in general was judged to be at low risk of bias Quality of evidence per outcome were reported as “moderate” based upon the quality of evidence for critical outcome (hypoglycemia) Figure 1 : PRISMA flow diagram Records identified through database searching (n =3561) Records after duplicates removed (n = 3081) Records excluded not meeting inclusion criteria (n =3047) Full-text articles assessed for eligibility (n = 34) Full-text articles excluded, with reasons (n =24) - Non-RCTs (n=9) - Conference proceedings & unpublished trials (n=3) - Trials do not meet inclusion (PICOS) criteria (n=6) - Same study with multiple articles (n=3) - Post-hoc analyses (n=2) - <12 week follow-up (n=1)  Studies included in qualitative synthesis (n =10) Studies included in quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis) (n = 10) Records passed title & abstract screening (n = 34) OBJECTIVE To compare the safety and efficacy of DPP-4 inhibitors versus sulfonylurea as second- line adjunctive therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with metformin mono-therapy. Figure 3: Safety results Methods Efficacy Assessment (HbA1c% change score) : As illustrated in figure 2, the meta-analysis results showed a non-significant difference between the test and the control groups (MD=0.06, 95% CI -0.00- 0.13, P=0.07) from the 10 studies evaluating HbA1c% (difference from baseline) in 10,139 subjects. Following a sensitivity analysis that was performed to test the robustness of the results, stratifying into high risk of bias (for missing data >20%) and low risk studies, the results changed to a significant difference in favor of SUs and heterogeneity (I2) decreased from 73% to less than 48% in the low risk subgroup. A systematic review of published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in humans, in any language, was performed in MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1980 to June 2015. Study inclusion criteria based upon the following PICOS description: Population: adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus requiring an OHA added to metformin because of inadequate glycemic control (HbA1c > 6.5%, fasting plasma glucose >7 mmol/L or 2-hour postprandial glucose > 10 mmol/L) Intervention: any DPP-4 inhibitor (alogliptin, linagliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, and vildagliptin), in the treatment of type 2 diabetes (as second-line therapy) Comparator(s): any Sulfonylurea compound Outcome(s): HbA1c (%) (mean change from baseline) and Hypoglycemic event (proportion of patients who experienced at least one hypoglycemic event defined as a finger-stick glucose value ≤50 mg/dl with associated symptoms) Study type(s): RCTs in humans, published in any language, with at least 12 weeks follow-up duration. Study selection and quality assessment: Two review authors independently selected the studies and assessed risk of bias for the included RCTs using the “Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias tool” and abstracted data using a study-specific data extraction form. Statistical analysis: A direct comparison meta-analysis using a random effect model was conducted to calculate mean differences in treatment effects and risk ratio (RR) -with 95% confidence interval- between DPP-4 inhibitors and sulfonylurea. CONCLUSIONS The present study is the first systematic-review/ meta-analysis comparing safety and efficacy of all DPP-4 inhibitors as a group (alogliptin, linagliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, and vildagliptin) with sulfonylureas as adjunctive second-line therapy added to metformin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. With respect to efficacy, the review shows no significant difference between DPP4-inhibitors and sulfonylurea when either is added to metformin mono-therapy. In contrast, the safety assessment analysis showed a significant decrease in the risk of hypoglycemic events in patients using DPP4-inhibitors. Future research activities should include an economic and financial analysis of DPP-4 inhibitors compared with SUs, as the medication added to metformin mono-therapy in type 2 diabetic patients with inadequate glycemic control. That would inform policy makers and clinicians with a comprehensive efficacy, safety and economic-financial impact of each treatment. Safety assessment (hypoglycemic event rate): Figure 3 shows the results of the meta- analysis of eight RCTs involving 10,616 diabetic patients, with at least one hypoglycemic event during the follow-up period. Patients on metformin plus DPP-4inhibitors were found to experience significantly fewer hypoglycemic events compared to the metformin plus sulfonylurea group (RR= 0.15; 95% CI, 0.11-0.22; P<0.00001). There was substantial heterogeneity (I2=77%), but by removing two outliers and one high risk of bias study, the heterogeneity (I2) equaled zero for the remaining 5 studies. The result from these five studies was similar to the 8 study analysis for hypoglycemic event rates (RR= 0.12; 95% CI, 0.1-0.15; P<0.00001).