Evidence Hub

Glycaemic control and adverse events in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with metformin + sulphonylurea: a meta-analysis

Belsey J, Krishnarajah G

Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2008

1,364 participants

Abstract

AIM: The aim of this study was to quantify the effect of a sulphonylurea on glycaemic control and the risk adverse events when incorporated into the treatment regimen of patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin.

METHODS: A systematic review was carried out to identify randomized controlled trials of sulphonylurea therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes whose glycaemic control was inadequate after maximal treatment with metformin. Data on reductions in haemoglobin A(1C) (HbA(1C)), fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and risk of hypoglycaemic events were extracted from each study and pooled in meta-analyses. Data on weight change were also extracted and tabulated.

RESULTS: Six studies including 1364 patients were identified. Based on random effects meta-analysis, the pooled estimate of change in HbA(1C) from baseline was 0.9% (95% CI 0.7-1.1, p = 0.00011 vs. baseline) and for change in FPG from baseline was 1.8 mmol/l (95% CI 1.1-2.5, p = 0.0026 vs. baseline). The odds of experiencing a hypoglycaemic event was significantly higher in sulphonylurea-treated patients than in those on comparator treatments (OR = 5.3, 95% CI 1.7-16.3, p = 0.03). Mean weight change ranged from +2.5 to -0.1 kg, depending on the comparator treatment.

CONCLUSIONS: This analysis has demonstrated that, in patients with type 2 diabetes whose control is inadequate on metformin monotherapy, the magnitude of incremental HbA(1C) reduction achieved by the addition of a sulphonylurea is…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,364 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free