Madsen Kasper S, Chi Yuan, Metzendorf Maria-Inti, Richter Bernd, Hemmingsen Bianca
University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Blegdamsvej 3B, Copenhagen N, Denmark, 2200.
University Hospital Zurich and University of Zurich, Institute for Complementary and Integrative Medicine, Sonneggstrasse 6, Zurich, Beijing, Switzerland, 8006.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Dec 3;12(12):CD008558. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008558.pub2.
The projected rise in the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) could develop into a substantial health problem worldwide. Whether metformin can prevent or delay T2DM and its complications in people with increased risk of developing T2DM is unknown.
To assess the effects of metformin for the prevention or delay of T2DM and its associated complications in persons at increased risk for the T2DM.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and the reference lists of systematic reviews, articles and health technology assessment reports. We asked investigators of the included trials for information about additional trials. The date of the last search of all databases was March 2019.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a duration of one year or more comparing metformin with any pharmacological glucose-lowering intervention, behaviour-changing intervention, placebo or standard care in people with impaired glucose tolerance, impaired fasting glucose, moderately elevated glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) or combinations of these.
Two review authors read all abstracts and full-text articles and records, assessed risk of bias and extracted outcome data independently. We used a random-effects model to perform meta-analysis and calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effect estimates. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
We included 20 RCTs randomising 6774 participants. One trial contributed 48% of all participants. The duration of intervention in the trials varied from one to five years. We judged none of the trials to be at low risk of bias in all 'Risk of bias' domains. Our main outcome measures were all-cause mortality, incidence of T2DM, serious adverse events (SAEs), cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or stroke, health-related quality of life and socioeconomic effects.The following comparisons mostly reported only a fraction of our main outcome set. Fifteen RCTs compared metformin with diet and exercise with or without placebo: all-cause mortality was 7/1353 versus 7/1480 (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.41 to 3.01; P = 0.83; 2833 participants, 5 trials; very low-quality evidence); incidence of T2DM was 324/1751 versus 529/1881 participants (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.65; P < 0.001; 3632 participants, 12 trials; moderate-quality evidence); the reporting of SAEs was insufficient and diverse and meta-analysis could not be performed (reported numbers were 4/118 versus 2/191; 309 participants; 4 trials; very low-quality evidence); cardiovascular mortality was 1/1073 versus 4/1082 (2416 participants; 2 trials; very low-quality evidence). One trial reported no clear difference in health-related quality of life after 3.2 years of follow-up (very low-quality evidence). Two trials estimated the direct medical costs (DMC) per participant for metformin varying from $220 to $1177 versus $61 to $184 in the comparator group (2416 participants; 2 trials; low-quality evidence). Eight RCTs compared metformin with intensive diet and exercise: all-cause mortality was 7/1278 versus 4/1272 (RR 1.61, 95% CI 0.50 to 5.23; P = 0.43; 2550 participants, 4 trials; very low-quality evidence); incidence of T2DM was 304/1455 versus 251/1505 (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.37; P = 0.42; 2960 participants, 7 trials; moderate-quality evidence); the reporting of SAEs was sparse and meta-analysis could not be performed (one trial reported 1/44 in the metformin group versus 0/36 in the intensive exercise and diet group with SAEs). One trial reported that 1/1073 participants in the metformin group compared with 2/1079 participants in the comparator group died from cardiovascular causes. One trial reported that no participant died due to cardiovascular causes (very low-quality evidence). Two trials estimated the DMC per participant for metformin varying from $220 to $1177 versus $225 to $3628 in the comparator group (2400 participants; 2 trials; very low-quality evidence). Three RCTs compared metformin with acarbose: all-cause mortality was 1/44 versus 0/45 (89 participants; 1 trial; very low-quality evidence); incidence of T2DM was 12/147 versus 7/148 (RR 1.72, 95% CI 0.72 to 4.14; P = 0.22; 295 participants; 3 trials; low-quality evidence); SAEs were 1/51 versus 2/50 (101 participants; 1 trial; very low-quality evidence). Three RCTs compared metformin with thiazolidinediones: incidence of T2DM was 9/161 versus 9/159 (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.40; P = 0.98; 320 participants; 3 trials; low-quality evidence). SAEs were 3/45 versus 0/41 (86 participants; 1 trial; very low-quality evidence). Three RCTs compared metformin plus intensive diet and exercise with identical intensive diet and exercise: all-cause mortality was 1/121 versus 1/120 participants (450 participants; 2 trials; very low-quality evidence); incidence of T2DM was 48/166 versus 53/166 (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.92; P = 0.49; 332 participants; 2 trials; very low-quality evidence). One trial estimated the DMC of metformin plus intensive diet and exercise to be $270 per participant compared with $225 in the comparator group (94 participants; 1 trial; very-low quality evidence). One trial in 45 participants compared metformin with a sulphonylurea. The trial reported no patient-important outcomes. For all comparisons there were no data on non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or microvascular complications. We identified 11 ongoing trials which potentially could provide data of interest for this review. These trials will add a total of 17,853 participants in future updates of this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Metformin compared with placebo or diet and exercise reduced or delayed the risk of T2DM in people at increased risk for the development of T2DM (moderate-quality evidence). However, metformin compared to intensive diet and exercise did not reduce or delay the risk of T2DM (moderate-quality evidence). Likewise, the combination of metformin and intensive diet and exercise compared to intensive diet and exercise only neither showed an advantage or disadvantage regarding the development of T2DM (very low-quality evidence). Data on patient-important outcomes such as mortality, macrovascular and microvascular diabetic complications and health-related quality of life were sparse or missing.
预计2型糖尿病(T2DM)发病率的上升可能会在全球范围内演变成一个严重的健康问题。二甲双胍能否预防或延缓T2DM发病风险增加人群患T2DM及其并发症尚不清楚。
评估二甲双胍对预防或延缓T2DM发病风险增加人群患T2DM及其相关并发症的效果。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库、MEDLINE、Scopus、ClinicalTrials.gov、世界卫生组织(WHO)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。我们向纳入试验的研究者询问了其他试验的信息。所有数据库的最后检索日期为2019年3月。
我们纳入了为期一年或更长时间的随机对照试验(RCT),这些试验比较了二甲双胍与任何降糖药物干预、行为改变干预、安慰剂或标准治疗,受试对象为糖耐量受损、空腹血糖受损、糖化血红蛋白A1c(HbA1c)中度升高或这些情况组合的人群。
两位综述作者阅读了所有摘要、全文文章和记录,独立评估偏倚风险并提取结局数据。我们使用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析,计算二分结局的风险比(RRs)和连续结局的平均差(MDs),效应估计采用95%置信区间(CIs)。我们使用GRADE评估证据的确定性。
我们纳入了20项RCT,共6774名参与者。一项试验贡献了所有参与者的48%。试验中的干预持续时间从1年到5年不等。我们判断所有试验在所有“偏倚风险”领域均未处于低偏倚风险。我们的主要结局指标包括全因死亡率、T2DM发病率、严重不良事件(SAEs)、心血管死亡率、非致命性心肌梗死或中风、健康相关生活质量和社会经济影响。以下比较大多仅报告了我们主要结局集的一部分。15项RCT比较了二甲双胍与饮食和运动加或不加安慰剂:全因死亡率为7/1353 vs 7/1480(RR 1.11,95%CI 0.41至3.01;P = 0.83;2833名参与者,5项试验;极低质量证据);T2DM发病率为324/1751 vs 529/1881名参与者(RR 0.50,95%CI 0.38至0.65;P < 0.001;3632名参与者,12项试验;中等质量证据);SAEs报告不足且多样,无法进行荟萃分析(报告的数字为4/118 vs 2/191;309名参与者;4项试验;极低质量证据);心血管死亡率为1/1073 vs 4/1082(2416名参与者;2项试验;极低质量证据)。一项试验报告在3.2年的随访后健康相关生活质量无明显差异(极低质量证据)。两项试验估计二甲双胍组每位参与者的直接医疗费用(DMC)在220美元至1177美元之间,而对照组为61美元至184美元(2416名参与者;2项试验;低质量证据)。8项RCT比较了二甲双胍与强化饮食和运动:全因死亡率为7/1278 vs 4/1272(RR 1.61,95%CI 0.50至5.23;P = 0.43;2550名参与者,4项试验;极低质量证据);T2DM发病率为304/1455 vs 251/1505(RR 0.80,95%CI 0.47至1.37;P = 0.42;2960名参与者,7项试验;中等质量证据);SAEs报告稀少且无法进行荟萃分析(一项试验报告二甲双胍组SAEs为1/44,强化运动和饮食组为0/36)。一项试验报告二甲双胍组1/1073名参与者与对照组2/1079名参与者死于心血管原因。一项试验报告无参与者因心血管原因死亡(极低质量证据)。两项试验估计二甲双胍组每位参与者的DMC在220美元至1177美元之间,而对照组为225美元至3628美元(2400名参与者;2项试验;极低质量证据)。3项RCT比较了二甲双胍与阿卡波糖:全因死亡率为1/44 vs 0/45(89名参与者;1项试验;极低质量证据);T2DM发病率为12/147 vs 7/148(RR 1.72,95%CI 0.72至4.14;P = 0.22;295名参与者;3项试验;低质量证据);SAEs为1/51 vs 2/50(101名参与者;1项试验;极低质量证据)。3项RCT比较了二甲双胍与噻唑烷二酮类药物:T2DM发病率为9/161 vs 9/159(RR 0.99,95%CI 0.41至2.40;P = 0.98;320名参与者;3项试验;低质量证据)。SAEs为3/45 vs 0/41(86名参与者;1项试验;极低质量证据)。3项RCT比较了二甲双胍加强化饮食和运动与单纯强化饮食和运动:全因死亡率为1/121 vs 1/120名参与者(450名参与者;2项试验;极低质量证据);T2DM发病率为48/166 vs 53/166(RR 0.55,95%CI 0.10至2.92;P = 0.49;332名参与者;2项试验;极低质量证据)。一项试验估计二甲双胍加强化饮食和运动的DMC为每位参与者270美元,而对照组为225美元(94名参与者;1项试验;极低质量证据)。一项45名参与者的试验比较了二甲双胍与磺脲类药物。该试验未报告对患者重要的结局。对于所有比较,均无关于非致命性心肌梗死、非致命性中风或微血管并发症的数据。我们确定了11项正在进行的试验,这些试验可能会为本综述提供有价值的数据。在本综述的未来更新中,这些试验将总共增加17853名参与者。
与安慰剂或饮食和运动相比,二甲双胍降低或延缓了T2DM发病风险增加人群患T2DM的风险(中等质量证据)。然而,与强化饮食和运动相比,二甲双胍并未降低或延缓T2DM的风险(中等质量证据)。同样,与单纯强化饮食和运动相比,二甲双胍与强化饮食和运动联合使用在T2DM发生方面既无优势也无劣势(极低质量证据)。关于死亡率、大血管和微血管糖尿病并发症以及健康相关生活质量等对患者重要的结局数据稀少或缺失。