Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Mar 29;9(1):5389.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-41854-2.

Efficacy and Safety of Pioglitazone Monotherapy in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Efficacy and Safety of Pioglitazone Monotherapy in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Fahmida Alam et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Pioglitazone, the only thiazolidinedione drug in clinical practice is under scrutiny due to reported adverse effects, it's unique insulin sensitising action provides rationale to remain as a therapeutic option for managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing pioglitazone monotherapy with monotherapies of other oral antidiabetic drugs for assessing its efficacy and safety in T2DM patients. Mean changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), and mean changes in fasting blood sugar (FBS) level, body weight (BW) and homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) were primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Safety outcomes were changes in lipid parameters, blood pressure and incidences of adverse events. Metafor package of R software and RevMan software based on random-effects model were used for analyses. We included 16 randomised controlled trials. Pioglitazone monotherapy showed equivalent efficacy as comparators in reducing HbA1c by 0.05% (95% CI: -0.21 to 0.11) and greater efficacy in reducing FBS level by 0.24 mmol/l (95% CI: -0.48 to -0.01). Pioglitazone showed similar efficacy as comparators in reducing HOMA-IR (WMD: 0.05, 95% CI: -0.49 to 0.59) and increasing high-density lipoprotein level (WMD: 0.02 mmol/l, 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.10). Improved blood pressure (WMD: -1.05 mmHg, 95% CI: -4.29 to 2.19) and triglycerides level (WMD: -0.71 mmol/l, 95% CI: -1.70 to 0.28) were also observed with pioglitazone monotherapy. There was a significant association of pioglitazone with increased BW (WMD: 2.06 kg, 95% CI: 1.11 to 3.01) and risk of oedema (RR: 2.21, 95% CI: 1.48 to 3.31), though the risk of hypoglycaemia was absolutely lower (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.80). Meta-analysis supported pioglitazone as an effective treatment option for T2DM patients to ameliorate hyperglycaemia, adverse lipid metabolism and blood pressure. Pioglitazone is suggested to prescribe following individual patient's needs. It can be a choice of drug for insulin resistant T2DM patients having dyslipidaemia, hypertension or history of cardiovascular disease.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of study selection process.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Risk of bias summary. Presentation of the risk of bias summary of the review author’s judgments about each risk of bias item for each included study. Studies in green or + are at low risk of bias.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plots showing effects of pioglitazone monotherapy versus comparator monotherapy on the primary (change in HbA1c) and secondary (change in FBS) glycaemic outcomes. Weighted mean difference in change from baseline in HbA1c (a) and FBS (b).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Galbraith plots illustrating the source of heterogeneity among included studies in HbA1c (a) and FBS (b) outcomes.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Contour-enhanced funnel plots of the included studies showing no evidence of publication bias in HbA1c (a) and FBS (b) outcomes.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Trim and fill funnel plots showing absence of missing studies and verifying no evidence of publication bias in HbA1c (a) and FBS (b) outcomes.

References

    1. Haffner SM, et al. Insulin sensitivity in subjects with type 2 diabetes. Relationship to cardiovascular risk factors: the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study. Diabetes Care. 1999;22:562–568. doi: 10.2337/diacare.22.4.562. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lebovitz H. Insulin resistance: definition and consequences. Exp. Clin. Endocrinol. Diabetes. 2001;109:S135–S148. doi: 10.1055/s-2001-18576. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Nissen SE, Wolski K. Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes. N. Engl. J. Med. 2007;356:2457–2471. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa072761. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Home PD, et al. Rosiglitazone evaluated for cardiovascular outcomes in oral agent combination therapy for type 2 diabetes (RECORD): a multicentre, randomised, open-label trial. Lancet. 2009;373:2125–2135. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60953-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pavo I, et al. Effect of pioglitazone compared with metformin on glycemic control and indicators of insulin sensitivity in recently diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2003;88:1637–1645. doi: 10.1210/jc.2002-021786. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms