Tarry-Adkins Jane L, Grant Imogen D, Ozanne Susan E, Reynolds Rebecca M, Aiken Catherine E
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The Rosie Hospital and NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0SW, UK.
Metabolic Research Laboratories and MRC Metabolic Diseases Unit, Wellcome Trust-MRC Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Diabetes Ther. 2021 Jul;12(7):1901-1914. doi: 10.1007/s13300-021-01058-2. Epub 2021 Jun 2.
Metformin is among the most frequently prescribed drugs worldwide for a variety of indications. Although metformin has several important advantages, for example being easy to store and administer, it is associated with a high incidence of gastrointestinal side effects. Slower-release formulations of metformin may reduce the incidence of side effects while maintaining efficacy; however, there is a lack of systematic evidence available to guide head-to-head comparisons between different metformin formulations.
PubMed, Web of Science, OVID EMBASE, MEDLINE, The Cochrane database and Clinicaltrials.gov were systematically searched (from inception to 25 January 2021). Trials that randomized adult participants to extended-release formulation of metformin (met-XR), delayed-release (met-DR) or immediate-release metformin (met-IR) were included. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for eligibility and risk-of-bias, with conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. Outcome measures were change in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), body weight, BMI, lipid profile and side effects. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models.
Fifteen studies (n = 3765) met eligibility criteria. There was no significant difference between the efficacy of met-IR, met-XR or met-DR in changing FPG (p = 0.93). A non-significant reduction in mean body weight was observed in individuals randomized to met-XR vs. met-IR (- 1.03 kg, 95% CI - 2.12 to 0.05, p = 0.06). Individuals randomized to met-XR vs. met-IR had lower low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels (- 5.73 mg/dl, 95% CI - 7.91 to - 3.56, p < 0.00001). Gastrointestinal (GI) side effects were markedly reduced in patients randomised to met-DR vs. met-IR (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26-0.80, p = 0.006).
Our results demonstrate equal efficacy of longer-acting formulations (met-XR, met-DR) versus immediate-release metformin formulations in terms of glycaemic control. There were insufficient studies available to compare the efficacy of different metformin formulations outside of diabetes care. However met-XR was associated with reduced serum LDL cholesterol concentrations, while met-DR was strongly associated with reduced GI side effects, which could improve drug compliance.
二甲双胍是全球范围内因各种适应症而最常处方的药物之一。尽管二甲双胍有几个重要优点,例如易于储存和给药,但它与胃肠道副作用的高发生率相关。二甲双胍的缓释制剂可能会降低副作用的发生率,同时保持疗效;然而,缺乏系统的证据来指导不同二甲双胍制剂之间的直接比较。
对PubMed、科学网、OVID EMBASE、MEDLINE、Cochrane数据库和Clinicaltrials.gov进行了系统检索(从数据库建立至2021年1月25日)。纳入了将成年参与者随机分配至二甲双胍缓释制剂(met-XR)、迟释制剂(met-DR)或速释二甲双胍(met-IR)的试验。两名评审员独立评估文章的 eligibility 和偏倚风险,如有冲突由第三名评审员解决。观察指标为空腹血糖(FPG)、糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)、体重、BMI、血脂谱和副作用的变化。使用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。
15项研究(n = 3765)符合纳入标准。met-IR、met-XR或met-DR在改变FPG方面的疗效无显著差异(p = 0.93)。随机分配至met-XR与met-IR的个体平均体重有非显著降低(-1.03 kg,95% CI -2.12至0.05,p = 0.06)。随机分配至met-XR与met-IR的个体低密度脂蛋白(LDL)胆固醇水平较低(-5.73 mg/dl,95% CI -7.91至-3.56,p < 0.00001)。随机分配至met-DR与met-IR的患者胃肠道(GI)副作用明显减少(OR 0.45,95% CI 0.26 - 0.80,p = 0.006)。
我们的结果表明,在血糖控制方面,长效制剂(met-XR、met-DR)与速释二甲双胍制剂的疗效相当。在糖尿病护理之外,可用于比较不同二甲双胍制剂疗效的研究不足。然而,met-XR与血清LDL胆固醇浓度降低相关,而met-DR与GI副作用减少密切相关,这可能会提高药物依从性。