Reappraisal of metformin efficacy in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
- PMID: 22509138
- PMCID: PMC3323508
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001204
Reappraisal of metformin efficacy in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Abstract
Background: The UK Prospective Diabetes Study showed that metformin decreases mortality compared to diet alone in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Since then, it has been the first-line treatment in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes. However, metformin-sulphonylurea bitherapy may increase mortality.
Methods and findings: This meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials evaluated metformin efficacy (in studies of metformin versus diet alone, versus placebo, and versus no treatment; metformin as an add-on therapy; and metformin withdrawal) against cardiovascular morbidity or mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes. We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane database. Primary end points were all-cause mortality and cardiovascular death. Secondary end points included all myocardial infarctions, all strokes, congestive heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, leg amputations, and microvascular complications. Thirteen randomised controlled trials (13,110 patients) were retrieved; 9,560 patients were given metformin, and 3,550 patients were given conventional treatment or placebo. Metformin did not significantly affect the primary outcomes all-cause mortality, risk ratio (RR)=0.99 (95% CI: 0.75 to 1.31), and cardiovascular mortality, RR=1.05 (95% CI: 0.67 to 1.64). The secondary outcomes were also unaffected by metformin treatment: all myocardial infarctions, RR=0.90 (95% CI: 0.74 to 1.09); all strokes, RR=0.76 (95% CI: 0.51 to 1.14); heart failure, RR=1.03 (95% CI: 0.67 to 1.59); peripheral vascular disease, RR=0.90 (95% CI: 0.46 to 1.78); leg amputations, RR=1.04 (95% CI: 0.44 to 2.44); and microvascular complications, RR=0.83 (95% CI: 0.59 to 1.17). For all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality, there was significant heterogeneity when including the UK Prospective Diabetes Study subgroups (I(2)=41% and 59%). There was significant interaction with sulphonylurea as a concomitant treatment for myocardial infarction (p=0.10 and 0.02, respectively).
Conclusions: Although metformin is considered the gold standard, its benefit/risk ratio remains uncertain. We cannot exclude a 25% reduction or a 31% increase in all-cause mortality. We cannot exclude a 33% reduction or a 64% increase in cardiovascular mortality. Further studies are needed to clarify this situation.
Conflict of interest statement
MC received fees for consulting from BMS and Servier. MC also received fees for speaking from AstraZeneca. All other authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Figures
Comment in
-
Metformin may not reduce cardiovascular risk or all-cause mortality.Evid Based Med. 2013 Apr;18(2):e13. doi: 10.1136/eb-2012-100836. Epub 2012 Aug 14. Evid Based Med. 2013. PMID: 22893655 No abstract available.
References
-
- Wild S, Green A, Sicree R, King H. Global prevalence of diabetes: estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:1047–1053. - PubMed
-
- UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Effect of Intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34). Lancet. 1998;352:854–865. - PubMed
-
- National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Type 2 diabetes: the management of type 2 diabetes. 2008. May, Available: http://www.nice.org.uk/CG66. Accessed 18 May 2011.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
