{"title":"胰岛素增敏剂治疗2型糖尿病的疗效和安全性:一项网络meta分析","authors":"Gerile Huang, Yujie Li, YuQi Shang, Huiduo Wang, Wenjing Zhang, Hao Guo","doi":"10.1007/s00228-025-03882-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Thiazolidinediones (TZDs), including pioglitazone and rosiglitazone, and non-TZD insulin sensitisers (chiglitazar sodium) demonstrate potential; however, their comparative efficacy and safety remain unclear. We aimed to analyse the efficacy and safety of commonly used insulin sensitisers, including chiglitazar sodium, sitagliptin, pioglitazone, and rosiglitazone for treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A computer-based search was conducted in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, the VIP database, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from the establishment date of each database to January 2025. Included study quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve was calculated for each outcome indicator to compare the efficacy and safety of different interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In reducing haemoglobin A1c, 8 mg of rosiglitazone was superior over 100 mg sitagliptin, 30 mg pioglitazone, and 15 mg pioglitazone (P < 0.05), with no significant differences among the remaining medications. To reduce fasting plasma glucose, 45 mg of pioglitazone was more effective than any dosage of chiglitazar sodium, sitagliptin, or rosiglitazone (P < 0.05). Regarding safety, the incidence rate of adverse reactions was higher with 45 mg of pioglitazone than with 8 mg of rosiglitazone (P < 0.05), with no significant differences in adverse events among other medications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with placebo, all four drugs were safe and effective in the treatment of T2DM. High-dose TZDs may be more effective than mitiglinide and sitagliptin. However, 45 mg of pioglitazone was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events, warranting close monitoring of its safety profile.</p>","PeriodicalId":11857,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":"1493-1506"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of insulin sensitisers for treating type 2 diabetes: a network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Gerile Huang, Yujie Li, YuQi Shang, Huiduo Wang, Wenjing Zhang, Hao Guo\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00228-025-03882-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Thiazolidinediones (TZDs), including pioglitazone and rosiglitazone, and non-TZD insulin sensitisers (chiglitazar sodium) demonstrate potential; however, their comparative efficacy and safety remain unclear. We aimed to analyse the efficacy and safety of commonly used insulin sensitisers, including chiglitazar sodium, sitagliptin, pioglitazone, and rosiglitazone for treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A computer-based search was conducted in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, the VIP database, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from the establishment date of each database to January 2025. Included study quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve was calculated for each outcome indicator to compare the efficacy and safety of different interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In reducing haemoglobin A1c, 8 mg of rosiglitazone was superior over 100 mg sitagliptin, 30 mg pioglitazone, and 15 mg pioglitazone (P < 0.05), with no significant differences among the remaining medications. To reduce fasting plasma glucose, 45 mg of pioglitazone was more effective than any dosage of chiglitazar sodium, sitagliptin, or rosiglitazone (P < 0.05). Regarding safety, the incidence rate of adverse reactions was higher with 45 mg of pioglitazone than with 8 mg of rosiglitazone (P < 0.05), with no significant differences in adverse events among other medications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with placebo, all four drugs were safe and effective in the treatment of T2DM. High-dose TZDs may be more effective than mitiglinide and sitagliptin. However, 45 mg of pioglitazone was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events, warranting close monitoring of its safety profile.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1493-1506\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-025-03882-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-025-03882-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Efficacy and safety of insulin sensitisers for treating type 2 diabetes: a network meta-analysis.
Purpose: Thiazolidinediones (TZDs), including pioglitazone and rosiglitazone, and non-TZD insulin sensitisers (chiglitazar sodium) demonstrate potential; however, their comparative efficacy and safety remain unclear. We aimed to analyse the efficacy and safety of commonly used insulin sensitisers, including chiglitazar sodium, sitagliptin, pioglitazone, and rosiglitazone for treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).
Methods: A computer-based search was conducted in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, the VIP database, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from the establishment date of each database to January 2025. Included study quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve was calculated for each outcome indicator to compare the efficacy and safety of different interventions.
Results: In reducing haemoglobin A1c, 8 mg of rosiglitazone was superior over 100 mg sitagliptin, 30 mg pioglitazone, and 15 mg pioglitazone (P < 0.05), with no significant differences among the remaining medications. To reduce fasting plasma glucose, 45 mg of pioglitazone was more effective than any dosage of chiglitazar sodium, sitagliptin, or rosiglitazone (P < 0.05). Regarding safety, the incidence rate of adverse reactions was higher with 45 mg of pioglitazone than with 8 mg of rosiglitazone (P < 0.05), with no significant differences in adverse events among other medications.
Conclusion: Compared with placebo, all four drugs were safe and effective in the treatment of T2DM. High-dose TZDs may be more effective than mitiglinide and sitagliptin. However, 45 mg of pioglitazone was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events, warranting close monitoring of its safety profile.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology publishes original papers on all aspects of clinical pharmacology and drug therapy in humans. Manuscripts are welcomed on the following topics: therapeutic trials, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, pharmacogenetics, drug metabolism, adverse drug reactions, drug interactions, all aspects of drug development, development relating to teaching in clinical pharmacology, pharmacoepidemiology, and matters relating to the rational prescribing and safe use of drugs. Methodological contributions relevant to these topics are also welcomed.
Data from animal experiments are accepted only in the context of original data in man reported in the same paper. EJCP will only consider manuscripts describing the frequency of allelic variants in different populations if this information is linked to functional data or new interesting variants. Highly relevant differences in frequency with a major impact in drug therapy for the respective population may be submitted as a letter to the editor.
Straightforward phase I pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic studies as parts of new drug development will only be considered for publication if the paper involves
-a compound that is interesting and new in some basic or fundamental way, or
-methods that are original in some basic sense, or
-a highly unexpected outcome, or
-conclusions that are scientifically novel in some basic or fundamental sense.