Comparative Effectiveness of Adding Alogliptin to Metformin Plus Sulfonylurea with Other DPP-4 Inhibitors in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Stephen Kay, Amanda Strickson, Jorge Puelles, Ross Selby, Eugene Benson, Keith Tolley, Stephen Kay, Amanda Strickson, Jorge Puelles, Ross Selby, Eugene Benson, Keith Tolley

Abstract

Introduction: Alogliptin is an oral antihyperglycemic agent that is a selective inhibitor of the enzyme dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4), approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). There currently exists no comparative data to support the use of alogliptin in combination with metformin (met) and sulfonylurea (SU). A decision-focused network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to compare the relative efficacy and safety of alogliptin 25 mg once daily to other DPP-4 inhibitors as part of a triple therapy regimen for patients inadequately controlled on metformin and SU dual therapy.

Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify published papers of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared alogliptin with other DPP-4 inhibitors (linagliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, and vildagliptin) at their Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) recommended daily doses, added on to metformin and SU. Comprehensive comparative analysis involving frequentist meta-analysis and Bayesian NMA compared alogliptin to each DPP-4 inhibitor separately and collectively as a group. Quasi-random effect models were introduced when random effect models could not be estimated.

Results: The review identified 2186 articles, and 94 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Eight RCTs contained appropriate data for inclusion in the NMA. All analyses over all trial population sets produced very similar results, and show that alogliptin 25 mg is as least as effective (as measured by change in HbA1c from baseline, but supported by other outcome measures: change in body weight and FPG from baseline) and safe (as measured by incidence of hypoglycemia and adverse events leading to study discontinuation) as all the other DPP-4 inhibitors in triple therapy.

Conclusion: This decision-focused systematic review and NMA demonstrated alogliptin 25 mg daily to have similar efficacy and safety compared to other DPP-4 inhibitors, for the treatment of T2DM in adults inadequately controlled on metformin and SU. (Funded by Takeda Development Centre Americas; EXAMINE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00968708).

Keywords: Alogliptin once daily; DPP-4 inhibitor; Network meta-analysis; Systematic review; Triple therapy; Type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
HbA1c (%) change from baseline: main analysis set—network plot
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
HbA1c (%) change from baseline: main analysis set—forest plot of frequentist meta-analysis showing individual trial results and grouped DPP-4 treatments against placebo fixed and random effect models (all with metformin + SU). MD mean difference
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
HbA1c (%) change from baseline: main analysis set fixed and quasi-random (between-trial SD fixed at 0.17) effects models forest plot—pairwise differences between DPP-4 treatments (with metformin + SU)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
HbA1c (%) change from baseline: main analysis set forest plot—mean differences between alogliptin and other grouped DPP-4 treatments (with metformin + SU) under various random and fixed effects models
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
HbA1c change from baseline: main analysis set (fixed effects model)—leverage versus deviance residual plot incorporating model fit statistics. Values that lie outside the drawn smooth parabola with a constant of 3 (the red curves) can generally be identified as contributing to the model’s poor fit
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
HbA1c (%) change from baseline: main analysis set excluding two outlier studies with higher baseline HbA1c values—pairwise differences between DPP-4 treatments (with metformin + SU) under fixed, partial pooling, and quasi-random effects (SD = 0.2) model assumptions
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Body weight (kg) change from baseline: forest plot of frequentist meta-analysis showing individual trial results and grouped DPP-4 treatments against placebo fixed and random effects models (all with metformin + SU)
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Body weight (kg) change from baseline: main analysis set—fixed and quasi-random (between-trial SD fixed at 0.25 kg) effects models forest plot. Pairwise differences between DPP-4 treatments (with metformin + SU)
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
Incidence of hypoglycemic events: forest plot of frequentist meta-analysis showing individual trial results and grouped DPP-4 treatments against placebo, fixed and random effect models (all with metformin + SU)
Fig. 10
Fig. 10
Incidence of hypoglycemic events: main analysis set; fixed and quasi-random (between-trial SD fixed at 1) effects models forest plot. Pairwise comparisons between DPP-4 treatments (with metformin + SU) measured by log odds ratios
Fig. 11
Fig. 11
Adverse events leading to study discontinuation: forest plot of frequentist meta-analysis showing individual trial results and grouped DPP-4 treatments against placebo, fixed and random effects models (all with metformin + SU)
Fig. 12
Fig. 12
Adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation; main analysis set; fixed and quasi-random (between-trial SD fixed at 0.5) effects models. Forest plot of pairwise comparisons between DPP-4 treatments (with metformin + SU) measured by log odds ratios

References

    1. European Medicines Agency. CHMP assessment report. Vipidia. EMA/CHMP/207780/2013. 25 July 2013.
    1. Nauck MA, Ellis GC, Fleck PR, Wilson CA, Mekki Q. Efficacy and safety of adding the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor alogliptin to metformin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Int J Clin Pract. 2009;63(1):46–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2008.01933.x.
    1. Pratley RE, Reusch JE, Fleck PR, Wilson CA, Mekki Q. Efficacy and safety of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor alogliptin added to pioglitazone in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2009;25(10):2361–2371. doi: 10.1185/03007990903156111.
    1. Hermansen K, Kipnes M, Luo E, Fanurik D, Khatami H, Stein P. Efficacy and safety of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, sitagliptin, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on glimepiride alone or on glimepiride and metformin. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2007;9(5):733–745. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2007.00744.x.
    1. Owens DR, Swallow R, Dugi KA, Woerle HJ. Efficacy and safety of linagliptin in persons with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by a combination of metformin and sulphonylurea: a 24-week randomized study. Diabet Med. 2011;28(11):1352–1361. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03387.x.
    1. Lukashevich V, Del PS, Araga M, Kothny W. Efficacy and safety of vildagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with dual combination of metformin and sulphonylurea. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2014;16(5):403–409. doi: 10.1111/dom.12229.
    1. Moses RG, Kalra S, Brook D, et al. A randomized controlled trial of the efficacy and safety of saxagliptin as add-on therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycaemic control on metformin plus a sulphonylurea. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2014;16(5):443–450. doi: 10.1111/dom.12234.
    1. Bosi E, Ellis GC, Wilson CA, Fleck PR. Alogliptin as a third oral antidiabetic drug in patients with type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycaemic control on metformin and pioglitazone: a 52-week, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group study. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2011;13(12):1088–1096. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2011.01463.x.
    1. White WB, Cannon CP, Heller SR, et al. Alogliptin after acute coronary syndrome in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(14):1327–1335. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1305889.
    1. Heller SR, Cannon CP, Howitt H, Khunti K, Bergenstal RM, White WB. Alogliptin in triple therapy with metformin and sulphonylureas provides significant reductions in HbA1c and is well tolerated; an analysis from the EXAMINE trial. Abstract. Presented at the 76th American Diabetes Association, June 10–14, 2016. New Orleans, LA, USA. 2016.
    1. Scheen AJ, Charpentier G, Ostgren CJ, Hellqvist A, Gause-Nilsson I. Efficacy and safety of saxagliptin in combination with metformin compared with sitagliptin in combination with metformin in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2010;26(7):540–549. doi: 10.1002/dmrr.1114.
    1. Tricco AC, Antony J, Khan PA, et al. Safety and effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors versus intermediate-acting insulin or placebo for patients with type 2 diabetes failing two oral antihyperglycaemic agents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2014;4(12):e005752. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005752.
    1. Downes MJ, Bettington EK, Gunton JE, Turkstra E. Triple therapy in type 2 diabetes; a systematic review and network meta-analysis. PeerJ. 2015;3:e1461. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1461.
    1. Lozano-Ortega G, Goring S, Bennett HA, Bergenheim K, Sternhufvud C, Mukherjee J. Network meta-analysis of treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus following failure with metformin plus sulfonylurea. Curr Med Res Opin. 2016;32(5):807–816. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2015.1135110.
    1. Lee CM, Woodward M, Colagiuri S. Triple therapy combinations for the treatment of type 2 diabetes—a network meta-analysis. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2016;116:149–158. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2016.04.037.
    1. National Institute of Health and Care Excellence. The guidelines manual (appendices). Appendix C: Methodology checklist: systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Manchester: NICE; 2009.
    1. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD). Systematic reviews: CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in healthcare. York: University of York; 2009.
    1. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1–e34. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006.
    1. National Institute of Health and Care Excellence. Single technology appraisal (STA). Specification for manufacturer/sponsor submission of evidence. Manchester: NICE; 2012.
    1. American Diabetes Association Standards of medical care in diabetes—2006. Diabetes Care. 2006;29(suppl 1):s4–s42.
    1. Chaudhry ZW, Gannon MC, Nuttall FQ. Stability of body weight in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2006;29(3):493–497. doi: 10.2337/diacare.29.03.06.dc05-1703.
    1. Feldstein AC, Nichols GA, Smith DH, et al. Weight change in diabetes and glycemic and blood pressure control. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(10):1960–1965. doi: 10.2337/dc08-0426.
    1. McAdam-Marx C, Mukherjee J, Bellows BK, et al. Evaluation of the relationship between weight change and glycemic control after initiation of antidiabetic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes using electronic medical record data. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014;103(3):402–411. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2013.12.038.
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0. Available from . The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.
    1. Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Caldwell DM, Lu G, Ades AE. Evidence synthesis for decision making 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making. 2013;33(5):641–656. doi: 10.1177/0272989X12455847.
    1. Dias S, Sutton AJ, Welton NJ, Ades AE. Evidence synthesis for decision making 3: heterogeneity–subgroups, meta-regression, bias, and bias-adjustment. Med Decis Making. 2013;33(5):618–640. doi: 10.1177/0272989X13485157.
    1. Dias S, Sutton AJ, Ades AE, Welton NJ. Evidence synthesis for decision making 2: a generalized linear modeling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Med Decis Making. 2013;33(5):607–617. doi: 10.1177/0272989X12458724.
    1. Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Ades AE. Evidence synthesis for decision making 1: introduction. Med Decis Making. 2013;33(5):597–606. doi: 10.1177/0272989X13487604.
    1. Lunn D, Barrett J, Sweeting M, Thompson S. Fully Bayesian hierarchical modelling in two stages, with application to meta-analysis. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 2013;62(4):551–572. doi: 10.1111/rssc.12007.
    1. Europeans Medicine Agency. Guideline on clinical investigation of medicinal products in the treatment or prevention of diabetes mellitus. CPMP/EWP/1080/00. 2012.
    1. Gelman A, Hill J, Yajima M. Why we (usually) don’t have to worry about multiple comparisons. J Res Educ Eff. 2012;5:189–211.
    1. Hong AR, Lee J, Ku EJ, et al. Comparison of vildagliptin as an add-on therapy and sulfonylurea dose-increasing therapy in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes using metformin and sulfonylurea (VISUAL study): a randomized trial. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2015;109(1):141–148. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2015.04.019.
    1. . A study in China evaluating the safety and efficacy of adding sitagliptin to stable therapy with sulphonylurea with or without metformin in participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) (MK-0431-253). 2016.
    1. Chen X, Wang J, Huang X, Tan Y, Deng S, Fu Y. Effects of vildaglpitin vs. saxagliptin on daily acute glucose fluctuation in Chinese type 2 diabetics inadequately controlled with dual combination of metformin and sulphonylurea. Abstract 1230-P. Presented at the 75th American Diabetes Association, June 5–9, 2015. Boston, MA, USA, A318. 2015.
    1. National Institute of Health and Care Excellence. NICE clinical guideline (NG28): type 2 diabetes in adults: management. Manchester: NICE; 2015.
    1. Craddy P, Palin HJ, Johnson KI. Comparative effectiveness of dipeptidylpeptidase-4 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and mixed treatment comparison. Diabetes Ther. 2014;5(1):1–41. doi: 10.1007/s13300-014-0061-3.
    1. Gerrald KR, Van SE, Wines RC, Runge T, Jonas DE. Saxagliptin and sitagliptin in adult patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2012;14(6):481–492. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2011.01540.x.
    1. Goossen K, Graber S. Longer term safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2012;14(12):1061–1072. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2012.01610.x.
    1. Mearns ES, Saulsberry WJ, White CM, et al. Efficacy and safety of antihyperglycaemic drug regimens added to metformin and sulphonylurea therapy in type 2 diabetes: a network meta-analysis. Diabet Med. 2015;32(12):1530–1540. doi: 10.1111/dme.12837.
    1. Perez A, Franch J, Fuster E, Paz S, Prades M, Granell M. Efficacy and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: systematic review and meta-analysis. Value Health. 2014;17(7):A335–A336. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.08.645.
    1. Wilding JP, Blonde L, Leiter LA, et al. Efficacy and safety of canagliflozin by baseline HbA1c and known duration of type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Complic. 2015;29(3):438–444. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2014.12.016.
    1. Esposito K, Chiodini P, Capuano A, Maiorino MI, Bellastella G, Giugliano D. Baseline glycemic parameters predict the hemoglobin A1c response to DPP-4 inhibitors: meta-regression analysis of 78 randomized controlled trials with 20,053 patients. Endocrine. 2014;46(1):43–51. doi: 10.1007/s12020-013-0090-0.
    1. Zhang L, Feng Y, List J, Kasichayanula S, Pfister M. Dapagliflozin treatment in patients with different stages of type 2 diabetes mellitus: effects on glycaemic control and body weight. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2010;12(6):510–516. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2010.01216.x.
    1. Bloomgarden ZT, Dodis R, Viscoli CM, Holmboe ES, Inzucchi SE. Lower baseline glycemia reduces apparent oral agent glucose-lowering efficacy: a meta-regression analysis. Diabetes Care. 2006;29(9):2137–2139. doi: 10.2337/dc06-1120.
    1. Scottish Medicines Consortium. Alogliptin detailed advice document no. 937/14. 08 August 2014.
    1. All Wales Therapeutics and Toxicology Centre. AWMSG Secretariat Assessment Report. Alogliptin (Vipidia®) 6.25 mg, 12.5 mg and 25 mg film-coated tablets. Reference number: 857. 2014.
    1. British National Fomulary. BNF July 2016.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonner