Effects of exercise, metformin, and their combination on glucose metabolism in individuals with impaired glycemic control: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Tong Zhao, Qize Yang, Joshua F Feuerbacher, Bizhu Yu, Christian Brinkmann, Sulin Cheng, Wilhelm Bloch, Moritz Schumann
{"title":"Effects of exercise, metformin, and their combination on glucose metabolism in individuals with impaired glycemic control: A systematic review and network meta-analysis","authors":"Tong Zhao, Qize Yang, Joshua F Feuerbacher, Bizhu Yu, Christian Brinkmann, Sulin Cheng, Wilhelm Bloch, Moritz Schumann","doi":"10.1101/2024.01.22.24301604","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare the efficacy of exercise, metformin, and their combination on glucose metabolism in individuals with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and rank these treatments by exercise modality and metformin dosage. Design: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources: Embase, Web of Science, PubMed/MEDLINE, and SPORTDiscus were searched until February 2023. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise, metformin, or their combined treatments in individuals with prediabetes or T2DM were included. Analyses: We estimated pooled mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for five glucose metabolism variables (i.e., hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c], 2-h glucose during oral glucose tolerance test [OGTT], fasting glucose, fasting insulin, and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance [HOMA-IR]) via a random effect model. Subgroup analyses were conducted for prediabetes and T2DM populations. Results: We identified 15,872 eligible articles and finally included 375 articles with 378 RCTs, comprising 30,884 participants. When all individuals were pooled, metformin had greater effects than exercise in improving HbA1c (MD −0.65 95% CI [−0.77 to −0.53] vs −0.38 [−0.45 to −0.32] %), 2-h glucose during OGTT (−1.16 [−1.67 to −0.65] vs −0.76 [−1.15 to −0.37]), fasting glucose (−0.99 [−1.14 to −0.83] vs −0.57 [−0.65 to −0.48] mmol/L), and fasting insulin (−2.28 [−3.03 to −1.53] vs −1.47 [−1.85 to −1.09] μU/mL), but not in HOMA-IR (−0.36 [−0.77 to 0.04] vs −0.73 [−0.90 to −0.57]). A similar pattern was observed for the subgroup of T2DM patients; however, in prediabetes, exercise showed better efficacy than metformin in HbA1c (−0.17 [−0.23 to −0.11] vs −0.09 [−0.20 to 0.01] %) and 2-h glucose (−0.68 [−1.01 to −0.35] vs −0.04 [−0.51 to 0.43] mmol/L). Exercise + metformin showed a greater efficacy than exercise alone in improving HbA1c (−0.79 [−1.27 to −0.30] %) and fasting glucose (−0.76 [−1.25 to −0.26] mmol/L) when all individuals were pooled. Considering exercise modalities, aerobic interval exercise was most efficient in improving fasting glucose (−0.82 [−1.06 to −0.59] mmol/L), HbA1c (−0.61 [−0.77 to −0.44] %), fasting insulin (−2.22 [−3.34 to −1.10] μU/mL), and HOMA-IR (−0.95 [−1.39 to −0.51]). The confidence in evidence was mostly low or very low. Conclusion: The use of exercise, metformin, and their combination are all effective in improving glucose metabolism in individuals with impaired glycemic control, such as prediabetes or T2DM, but the efficacy varies in the five outcome parameters (i.e., HbA1c, OGTT 2-h glucose, fasting glucose, fasting insulin, and HOMA-IR). The efficacy was modified by exercise modality, metformin dosage, and severity of impaired glycemic control. Future clinical trials may further investigate the specific components of the interactive effects of exercise and metformin, such as the timing of exercise and metformin administration, the drug delivery method as well as the effect of additional exercise variables (e.g., exercise frequency and volume). PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023400622.","PeriodicalId":501122,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Sports Medicine","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.22.24301604","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the efficacy of exercise, metformin, and their combination on glucose metabolism in individuals with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and rank these treatments by exercise modality and metformin dosage. Design: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources: Embase, Web of Science, PubMed/MEDLINE, and SPORTDiscus were searched until February 2023. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise, metformin, or their combined treatments in individuals with prediabetes or T2DM were included. Analyses: We estimated pooled mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for five glucose metabolism variables (i.e., hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c], 2-h glucose during oral glucose tolerance test [OGTT], fasting glucose, fasting insulin, and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance [HOMA-IR]) via a random effect model. Subgroup analyses were conducted for prediabetes and T2DM populations. Results: We identified 15,872 eligible articles and finally included 375 articles with 378 RCTs, comprising 30,884 participants. When all individuals were pooled, metformin had greater effects than exercise in improving HbA1c (MD −0.65 95% CI [−0.77 to −0.53] vs −0.38 [−0.45 to −0.32] %), 2-h glucose during OGTT (−1.16 [−1.67 to −0.65] vs −0.76 [−1.15 to −0.37]), fasting glucose (−0.99 [−1.14 to −0.83] vs −0.57 [−0.65 to −0.48] mmol/L), and fasting insulin (−2.28 [−3.03 to −1.53] vs −1.47 [−1.85 to −1.09] μU/mL), but not in HOMA-IR (−0.36 [−0.77 to 0.04] vs −0.73 [−0.90 to −0.57]). A similar pattern was observed for the subgroup of T2DM patients; however, in prediabetes, exercise showed better efficacy than metformin in HbA1c (−0.17 [−0.23 to −0.11] vs −0.09 [−0.20 to 0.01] %) and 2-h glucose (−0.68 [−1.01 to −0.35] vs −0.04 [−0.51 to 0.43] mmol/L). Exercise + metformin showed a greater efficacy than exercise alone in improving HbA1c (−0.79 [−1.27 to −0.30] %) and fasting glucose (−0.76 [−1.25 to −0.26] mmol/L) when all individuals were pooled. Considering exercise modalities, aerobic interval exercise was most efficient in improving fasting glucose (−0.82 [−1.06 to −0.59] mmol/L), HbA1c (−0.61 [−0.77 to −0.44] %), fasting insulin (−2.22 [−3.34 to −1.10] μU/mL), and HOMA-IR (−0.95 [−1.39 to −0.51]). The confidence in evidence was mostly low or very low. Conclusion: The use of exercise, metformin, and their combination are all effective in improving glucose metabolism in individuals with impaired glycemic control, such as prediabetes or T2DM, but the efficacy varies in the five outcome parameters (i.e., HbA1c, OGTT 2-h glucose, fasting glucose, fasting insulin, and HOMA-IR). The efficacy was modified by exercise modality, metformin dosage, and severity of impaired glycemic control. Future clinical trials may further investigate the specific components of the interactive effects of exercise and metformin, such as the timing of exercise and metformin administration, the drug delivery method as well as the effect of additional exercise variables (e.g., exercise frequency and volume). PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023400622.
运动、二甲双胍及其组合对血糖控制受损者葡萄糖代谢的影响:系统综述和网络荟萃分析
目的比较运动、二甲双胍及其联合疗法对糖尿病前期和 2 型糖尿病 (T2DM) 患者糖代谢的疗效,并根据运动方式和二甲双胍剂量对这些疗法进行排序。设计:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。数据来源对 Embase、Web of Science、PubMed/MEDLINE 和 SPORTDiscus 进行检索,直至 2023 年 2 月。选择研究的资格标准:纳入针对糖尿病前期或 T2DM 患者的运动、二甲双胍或其联合疗法的随机对照试验 (RCT)。分析:我们通过随机效应模型估算了五个糖代谢变量(即血红蛋白 A1c [HbA1c]、口服葡萄糖耐量试验 [OGTT]期间的 2 小时血糖、空腹血糖、空腹胰岛素和胰岛素抵抗的稳态模型评估 [HOMA-IR])的集合平均差 (MD) 及 95% 置信区间 (CI)。对糖尿病前期和 T2DM 患者进行了分组分析。结果:我们确定了 15,872 篇符合条件的文章,最终纳入了 375 篇文章,其中包括 378 项 RCT,共有 30,884 名参与者。37])、空腹血糖(-0.99 [-1.14 to -0.83] vs -0.57 [-0.65 to -0.48]毫摩尔/升)和空腹胰岛素(-2.28 [-3.03 to -1.53] vs -1.47 [-1.85 to -1.09] μU/毫升),但 HOMA-IR (-0.36 [-0.77 to 0.04] vs -0.73 [-0.90 to -0.57])没有变化。在 T2DM 患者亚组中也观察到类似的模式;然而,在糖尿病前期患者中,运动对 HbA1c(-0.17 [-0.23 至 -0.11] vs -0.09 [-0.20 至 0.01] %)和 2 h 血糖(-0.68 [-1.01 至 -0.35] vs -0.04 [-0.51 至 0.43] mmol/L)的疗效优于二甲双胍。在改善 HbA1c(-0.79 [-1.27 至 -0.30]%)和空腹血糖(-0.76 [-1.25 至 -0.26]毫摩尔/升)方面,运动+二甲双胍比单独运动更有效。考虑到运动方式,有氧间歇运动在改善空腹血糖(-0.82 [-1.06 to -0.59] mmol/L)、HbA1c(-0.61 [-0.77 to -0.44]%)、空腹胰岛素(-2.22 [-3.34 to -1.10] μU/mL)和HOMA-IR(-0.95 [-1.39 to -0.51])方面最为有效。证据可信度大多较低或很低。结论运动、二甲双胍及其联合用药均能有效改善血糖控制受损者(如糖尿病前期或 T2DM)的糖代谢,但在五个结果参数(即 HbA1c、OGTT 2-h 血糖、空腹血糖、空腹胰岛素和 HOMA-IR)方面的疗效各不相同。运动方式、二甲双胍剂量和血糖控制受损的严重程度都会影响疗效。未来的临床试验可能会进一步研究运动与二甲双胍交互效应的具体组成部分,如运动和服用二甲双胍的时间、给药方法以及其他运动变量(如运动频率和运动量)的影响。PROSPERO 注册号CRD42023400622。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信