α-葡萄糖苷酶抑制剂用于预防或延缓2型糖尿病高危人群发生2型糖尿病及其相关并发症。

Alpha-glucosidase inhibitors for prevention or delay of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its associated complications in people at increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus.

作者信息

Moelands Suzanne Vl, Lucassen Peter Lbj, Akkermans Reinier P, De Grauw Wim Jc, Van de Laar Floris A

机构信息

Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, PO Box 9101, Nijmegen, Netherlands, 6500 HB.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Dec 28;12(12):CD005061. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005061.pub3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (AGI) reduce blood glucose levels and may thus prevent or delay type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and its associated complications in people at risk of developing of T2DM.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of AGI in people with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), impaired fasting blood glucose (IFG), moderately elevated glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) or any combination of these.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the reference lists of systematic reviews, articles and health technology assessment reports. The date of the last search of all databases was December 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with a duration of one year or more, comparing AGI with any pharmacological glucose-lowering intervention, behaviour-changing intervention, placebo or no intervention in people with IFG, IGT, moderately elevated HbA1c or combinations of these.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors read all abstracts and full-text articles or records, assessed quality and extracted outcome data independently. One review author extracted data, which were checked by a second review author. We resolved discrepancies by consensus or involvement of a third review author. For meta-analyses we used a random-effects model with assessment of risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effect estimates. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence by using the GRADE instrument.

MAIN RESULTS

For this update of the Cochrane Review (first published 2006, Issue 4) we included 10 RCTs (11,814 participants), eight investigating acarbose and two investigating voglibose, that included people with IGT or people "at increased risk for diabetes". The trial duration ranged from one to six years. Most trials compared AGI with placebo (N = 4) or no intervention (N = 4).Acarbose reduced the incidence of T2DM compared to placebo: 670 out of 4014 people (16.7%) in the acarbose groups developed T2DM, compared to 812 out of 3994 people (20.3%) in the placebo groups (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.89; P < 0.0001; 3 trials; 8008 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial including participants with coronary heart disease and IGT contributed 64% of cases for this outcome. Acarbose reduced the risk of T2DM compared to no intervention: 7 out 75 people (9.3%) in the acarbose groups developed T2DM, compared to 18 out of 65 people (27.7%) in the no-intervention groups (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.69; P = 0.004; 2 trials; 140 participants; very low-certainty evidence).Acarbose compared to placebo did not reduce or increase the risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.18; P = 0.86; 3 trials; 8069 participants; very low-certainty evidence), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.10; P = 0.26; 3 trials; 8069 participants; very low-certainty evidence), serious adverse events (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.29; P = 0.13; 2 trials; 6625 participants; low-certainty evidence), non-fatal stroke (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.74; P = 0.43; 1 trial; 1368 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or congestive heart failure (RR of 0.87; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.12; P = 0.40; 2 trials; 7890 participants; low-certainty evidence). Acarbose compared to placebo reduced non-fatal myocardial infarction: one out of 742 participants (0.1%) in the acarbose groups had a non-fatal myocardial infarction compared to 15 out of 744 participants (2%) in the placebo groups (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.53; P = 0.007; 2 trials; 1486 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Acarbose treatment showed an increased risk of non-serious adverse events (mainly gastro-intestinal events), compared to placebo: 751 of 775 people (96.9%) in the acarbose groups experienced an event, compared to 723 of 775 people (93.3%) in the placebo groups (RR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.06; P = 0.0008; 2 trials; 1550 participants). Acarbose compared to no intervention showed no advantage or disadvantage for any of these outcome measures (very low-certainty evidence).One trial each compared voglibose with placebo (1780 participants) or diet and exercise (870 participants). Voglibose compared to placebo reduced the incidence of T2DM: 50 out of 897 participants (5.6%) developed T2DM, compared to 106 out of 881 participants (12%) in the placebo group (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.64; P < 0.0001; 1 trial; 1778 participants; low-certainty evidence). For all other reported outcome measures there were no clear differences between voglibose and comparator groups. One trial with 90 participants compared acarbose with diet and exercise and another trial with 98 participants reported data on acarbose versus metformin. There were no clear differences for any outcome measure between these two acarbose interventions and the associated comparator groups.None of the trials reported amputation of lower extremity, blindness or severe vision loss, end-stage renal disease, health-related quality of life, time to progression to T2DM, or socioeconomic effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: AGI may prevent or delay the development of T2DM in people with IGT. There is no firm evidence that AGI have a beneficial effect on cardiovascular mortality or cardiovascular events.

摘要

背景

α-葡萄糖苷酶抑制剂(AGI)可降低血糖水平,因此可能预防或延缓2型糖尿病(T2DM)的发生及其在T2DM高危人群中的相关并发症。

目的

评估AGI对糖耐量受损(IGT)、空腹血糖受损(IFG)、糖化血红蛋白A1c(HbA1c)中度升高或这些情况任意组合的人群的影响。

检索方法

我们检索了Cochrane系统评价数据库、MEDLINE、Embase、ClinicalTrials.gov、世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台,以及系统评价、文章和卫生技术评估报告的参考文献列表。所有数据库的最后检索日期为2017年12月。

选择标准

我们纳入了为期一年或更长时间的随机对照试验(RCT),比较AGI与任何降糖药物干预、行为改变干预、安慰剂或不干预对IFG、IGT、HbA1c中度升高或这些情况组合的人群的影响。

数据收集与分析

两名综述作者阅读了所有摘要、全文文章或记录,独立评估质量并提取结局数据。一名综述作者提取数据,由另一名综述作者进行核对。我们通过达成共识或由第三位综述作者参与来解决分歧。对于Meta分析,我们使用随机效应模型,对二分类结局评估风险比(RRs),对连续性结局评估均值差(MDs),效应估计采用95%置信区间(CIs)。我们使用GRADE工具评估证据的总体质量。

主要结果

在本次Cochrane综述更新(首次发表于2006年第4期)中,我们纳入了10项RCT(11814名参与者),其中8项研究阿卡波糖,2项研究伏格列波糖,纳入了IGT患者或“糖尿病风险增加”的人群。试验持续时间为1至6年。大多数试验将AGI与安慰剂(4项)或不干预(4项)进行了比较。与安慰剂相比,阿卡波糖降低了T2DM的发病率:阿卡波糖组4014人中670人(16.7%)发生T2DM,而安慰剂组3994人中812人(20.3%)发生T2DM(RR 0.82,95%CI 0.75至0.89;P<0.0001;3项试验;8008名参与者;中等确定性证据)。一项纳入冠心病和IGT患者的试验贡献了该结局64%的病例。与不干预相比,阿卡波糖降低了T2DM的风险:阿卡波糖组75人中7人(9.3%)发生T2DM,而不干预组65人中18人(27.7%)发生T2DM(RR 0.31,95%CI 0.14至0.69;P = 0.004;2项试验;140名参与者;极低确定性证据)。与安慰剂相比,阿卡波糖未降低或增加全因死亡率(RR 0.98,95%CI 0.82至1.18;P = 0.86;3项试验;8069名参与者;极低确定性证据)、心血管死亡率(RR 0.88;95%CI 0.71至1.10;P = 0.26;3项试验;8069名参与者;极低确定性证据)、严重不良事件(RR 1.12,95%CI 0.97至1.29;P = 0.13;2项试验;6625名参与者;低确定性证据)、非致命性卒中(RR 0.50,95%CI 0.09至2.74;P = 0.43;1项试验;1368名参与者;极低确定性证据)或充血性心力衰竭(RR 0.87;95%CI 0.63至1.12;P = 0.40;2项试验;7890名参与者;低确定性证据)的风险。与安慰剂相比,阿卡波糖降低了非致命性心肌梗死的发生率:阿卡波糖组742名参与者中有1人(0.1%)发生非致命性心肌梗死,而安慰剂组744名参与者中有15人(2%)发生(RR 0.10,95%CI 0.02至0.53;P = 0.007;2项试验;1486名参与者;极低确定性证据)。与安慰剂相比,阿卡波糖治疗显示非严重不良事件(主要是胃肠道事件)的风险增加:阿卡波糖组775人中751人(96.9%)发生事件,而安慰剂组775人中723人(93.3%)发生事件(RR 1.04;95%CI 1.01至1.06;P = 0.0008;2项试验;1550名参与者)。与不干预相比,阿卡波糖在这些结局指标上均无优势或劣势(极低确定性证据)。各有一项试验分别将伏格列波糖与安慰剂(1780名参与者)或饮食和运动(870名参与者)进行了比较。与安慰剂相比,伏格列波糖降低了T2DM的发病率:897名参与者中有50人(5.6%)发生T2DM,而安慰剂组881名参与者中有106人(12%)发生(RR 0.46,95%CI 0.34至0.64;P<0.0001;1项试验;1778名参与者;低确定性证据)。对于所有其他报告的结局指标,伏格列波糖组与对照分组之间无明显差异。一项有90名参与者的试验将阿卡波糖与饮食和运动进行了比较,另一项有98名参与者的试验报告了阿卡波糖与二甲双胍对比的数据。在这两种阿卡波糖干预措施与相关对照分组之间,任何结局指标均无明显差异。没有试验报告下肢截肢、失明或严重视力丧失、终末期肾病、健康相关生活质量、进展为T2DM的时间或社会经济影响。

作者结论

AGI可能预防或延缓IGT人群中T2DM的发生。没有确凿证据表明AGI对心血管死亡率或心血管事件有有益影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索