Evidence Hub

SGLT2i Dual Therapy with Metformin (Met) for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM)—Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-analysis (NMA)

A. Mcneill, G. Davies, E. Kruger, Timothy Reason, F. Ejzykowicz, Hakima Hannachi, N. Cater, Euan Mcleod

Diabetes, 2018

Abstract

Objective: Indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of ertugliflozin (ertu) from the VERTIS MET and FACTORIAL trials to other SGLT2i as an add-on to MET. Methods: Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched through to end 2016 for RCTs of 24-26 weeks duration in T2DM patients with uncontrolled A1C on MET. Comparators to ertu 5mg and 15mg were low and high doses of SGLT2i licensed in Europe and USA: canagliflozin (cana), dapagliflozin (dapa) and empagliflozin (empa). Included outcomes vs. placebo at 24-26 weeks were change in A1C, weight, systolic blood pressure (SBP), A1C <7% and safety outcomes (urinary tract infections [UTIs], genital mycotic infections [GMIs], hypoglycemic events and patients with ≥1 adverse event [AE]). Evidence synthesis used both fixed effect (FE) and random effects (RE) Bayesian NMA, with model selection informed by guidelines. Credible intervals (CrI), analogous to 95% confidence intervals, were used to determine significance. Results: The NMA included 7 RCTs. Ertu was significantly more effective in reducing A1C than dapa doses (ertu 5mg vs. dapa 5mg mean difference (MD): -0.22%, CrI -0.42, -0.02; ertu 15mg vs. dapa 10mg MD:-0.26%, CrI -0.46, -0.06) and ertu 15mg was superior to empa 25mg (MD: -0.23%, CrI -0.44, -0.03). There were no further significant differences between ertu and other SGLT2i for change in A1C, SBP, weight, A1C <7%, UTIs or ≥1 AEs. Limited number of hypoglycemic and GMI events in placebo comparators resulted in…

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.

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