Efficacy and Safety of the Novel Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor Gemigliptin in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis

Dutta, Deep; Agarwal, Anshita; Maisnam, Indira; Singla, Rajiv; Khandelwal, Deepak; Sharma, Meha

doi:10.3803/enm.2020.818

Cited by 34 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The details have been elaborated in another meta-analysis carried out by our group and published elsewhere. [ 11 ]…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The details of how risk of bias assessment was done has already been elaborated elsewhere. [ 11 ] Quality assessment of the included studies was also conducted using the Jadad scale which consisted of three domains: randomization (0–2 points), blinding (0–2 points), and an account of all the patients (0–1 point). We classified the quality of RCTs as good (4–5 points), fair (3 points), or poor (0–2 points).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine for managing glycemia in type-2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Dutta¹,

Jindal

Mehta³

et al. 2022

Journal of Postgraduate Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: No Cochrane meta-analysis with grading of evidence is available on use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in type-2 diabetes (T2DM). This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of HCQ in T2DM. Methods: Electronic databases were searched using a Boolean search strategy: ((hydroxychloroquine) OR (chloroquine*)) AND ((diabetes) OR (“diabetes mellitus”) OR (glycemia) OR (glucose) OR (insulin)) for studies evaluating hydroxychloroquine for glycemic control in T2DM. The primary outcome was a change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). The secondary outcomes were changes in other glycemic/lipid parameters and adverse effects. Results: Data from 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (3 having placebo as controls [passive controls] and 8 having anti-diabetes medications as controls [active controls]) involving 2,723 patients having a median follow-up of 24 weeks were analyzed. About 54.54% of the RCTs were of poor quality as evaluated by the Jadad scale. The performance bias and detection bias were at high risk in 63.64% of the RCTs. The HbA1c reduction with HCQ was marginally better compared to the active (mean differences [MD]-0.17% [95%, CI:-0.30–-0.04; P =0.009; I 2 =89%; very low certainty of evidence, VLCE]), and passive (MD-1.35% [95%CI:-2.10–-0.59; P =0.005; I 2 =74%]) controls. A reduction in fasting glucose (MD-16.63mg/dL[95%, CI: -25.99 – -7.28mg/dL; P <0.001; I 2 =97%;VLCE]) and post-prandial glucose [MD -8.41mg/dL (95%CI: -14.71 – -2.12mg/dL; P =0.009; I 2 =87%;VLCE]), appeared better with HCQ compared to active controls. The total adverse events (risk ratio [RR]0.93 [95% CI:0.68–1.28]; P =0.65; I 2 =66%) were not different with HCQ compared to the controls. Conclusion: The routine use of HCQ in T2DM cannot be recommended based on the current evidence.

show abstract

“…The details have been elaborated in another meta-analysis carried out by our group and published elsewhere. [ 11 ]…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine for managing glycemia in type-2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Dutta¹,

Jindal

Mehta³

et al. 2022

Journal of Postgraduate Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Details have been elaborated elsewhere. [ 8 ] Patient characteristics of the included studies are elaborated in Supplementary Table 1 .…”

Section: Ethodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three authors independently assessed the risk of bias using the risk of bias assessment tool in Review Manager (Revman) Version 5.3 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK 2014) software. The details of the different biases looked into have already been elaborated elsewhere,[ 8 ] and for this meta-analysis, they have been elaborated in Figure 2a and 2b .…”

Section: Ethodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficacy and safety of novel twincretin tirzepatide a dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist in the management of type-2 diabetes: A Cochrane meta-analysis

Dutta¹,

Surana²,

Singla³

et al. 2021

Indian Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Till date, there is no Cochrane meta-analysis available which has analyzed efficacy and safety of tirzepatide in type-2 diabetes. This meta-analysis was undertaken to address this knowledge gap. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving people with diabetes receiving tirzepatide compared to a placebo/active comparator. Primary outcome was to evaluate changes in HbA1c. Secondary outcomes were to evaluate alterations in blood–glucose, glycemic targets, weight, lipids, and adverse events. Results: From 34 articles initially screened, data from six RCTs involving 3484 patients were analyzed. Over 12–52 weeks, individuals receiving tirzepatide had significantly greater lowering of HbA1c [mean difference (MD) = -0.75% (95% confidence interval (CI): -1.05 to -0.45); P < 0.01; I 2 = 100%], fasting glucose [MD = -0.75 mmol/L (95% CI: -1.05 to– -0.45); P < 0.01; I 2 = 100%], 2-h post-prandial-glucose [MD = -0.87 mmol/L (95% CI: -1.12 to -0.61); P < 0.01; I 2 = 99%], weight [MD = -8.63 kg (95% CI: -12.89 to -4.36); P < 0.01; I 2 = 100%], body mass index [MD = -1.80 kg/m 2 (95% CI: -2.39 to -1.21); P < 0.01; I 2 = 99%], and waist circumference [MD = -4.43 cm (95% CI: -5.31 to -3.55); P < 0.01; I 2 = 95%] as compared to dulaglutide, semaglutide, degludec, or glargine. Patients receiving tirzepatide had higher odds of achieving HbA1c <6.5% compared to active controls [odds ratio (OR) = 4.39 (95% CI: 2.44–7.92); P < 0.01; I 2 = 90%]. Tirzepatide use had significantly higher odds of weight loss >5% [OR = 19.18 (95% CI: 2.34–157.17); P < 0.01; I 2 = 99%], >10% [OR = 21.40 (95% CI: 2.36–193.94); P < 0.01; I 2 = 98%], and >15% [OR = 32.84 (95% CI: 2.27–474.33); P = 0.01; I 2 = 96%] compared to active-control group. Treatment-emergent adverse events [risk ratio (RR) = 1.43 (95% CI: 1.14–1.80); P < 0.01; I 2 = 40%] and severe adverse events [RR = 1.00 (95% CI: 0.64–1.57); P = 1.00; I 2 = 49%] were not different. High data heterogeneity and the presence of publication bias limits the grading of current data from “moderate to low.” Conclusion: ...

show abstract

Orforglipron, a novel non‐peptide oral daily glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist as an anti‐obesity medicine: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Dutta,

Nagendra,

Anne

et al. 2024

Obesity Science & Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundOrforglipron is a novel once‐daily oral non‐peptide glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist with several recently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating its role in diabetes and obesity. No meta‐analysis has analyzed the efficacy and safety of orforglipron; this meta‐analysis aimed to address this knowledge gap.MethodsA systematic search was conducted in electronic databases to identify RCTs that included individuals with obesity who were administered orforglipron and compared to either a placebo or an active comparator. The primary outcome of interest was the percent change in body weight.ResultsFrom 12 initially screened articles, data from three RCTs involving 774 people were analyzed with a follow‐up duration of up to 36 weeks. Compared to placebo, patients receiving orforglipron 12 mg/day (mean difference (MD), MD −5.48%, 95% CI [−7.64, −3.33], p < 0.01), 24 mg/day (MD −8.51%, 95% confidence interval (CI) [−9.88, −7.14], p < 0.01), 36 mg/day (MD −8.84%, 95% CI [−11.68, −6.00], p < 0.01) and 45 mg/day (MD −8.24%, 95% CI [−12.84, −3.63], p < 0.01) had a significantly greater percent reduction in body weight. The percentage of patients being able to achieve >15% weight loss from baseline was significantly higher with orforglipron 24 mg/day [Odds ratio (OR) 21.90 (95% CI [4.06, 118.15], p = 0.0003), 36 mg/day (OR 17.43, 95% CI [3.18, 95.66], p = 0.001) and 45 mg/day (OR 23.17, 95% CI [4.37, 123.03], p = 0.0002). Total but not severe adverse events were significantly higher with all the doses of orforglipron compared to placebo, with the hazard ratios being higher with higher doses. Gastrointestinal side‐effects were predominant side effects, being dose‐dependent, with nausea, vomiting, constipation, and gastroesophageal reflux being the predominant ones.ConclusionOrforglipron at 24–45 mg/day doses is an effective weight loss medication. The efficacy versus side effect profile suggests that 24–36 mg/day is the most optimal dose for orforglipron as an anti‐obesity medicine.

show abstract

Efficacy and Safety of the Novel Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor Gemigliptin in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis

Cited by 34 publications

References 27 publications

Efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine for managing glycemia in type-2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine for managing glycemia in type-2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Efficacy and safety of novel twincretin tirzepatide a dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist in the management of type-2 diabetes: A Cochrane meta-analysis

Orforglipron, a novel non‐peptide oral daily glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist as an anti‐obesity medicine: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About