11.04.2015 Views

Relationship of Glycemia to Cardiovascular Disease ... - Lipids Online

Relationship of Glycemia to Cardiovascular Disease ... - Lipids Online

Relationship of Glycemia to Cardiovascular Disease ... - Lipids Online

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Non–UKPDS Trials:<br />

Metformin vs. Other Interventions<br />

RR (Fixed) 95% CI<br />

Study<br />

All-cause mortality<br />

DeFronzo 1995<br />

Hor<strong>to</strong>n 2000<br />

Sub<strong>to</strong>tal (95% CI)<br />

MET<br />

n/N<br />

1/210<br />

1/178<br />

388<br />

Favours<br />

Comparison Metformin<br />

0/209<br />

0/172<br />

381<br />

Favours Weight<br />

Comparison (%)<br />

49.6<br />

50.4<br />

100.0<br />

RR (fixed)<br />

95% CI<br />

2.99 [0.12, 72.88]<br />

2.90 [0.12, 70.69]<br />

2.94 [0.31, 28.16]<br />

Ischemic heart disease<br />

DeFronzo 1995<br />

1/210<br />

0/209<br />

25.2<br />

2.99 [0.12, 72.88]<br />

Hallsten 2002<br />

1/13<br />

0/14<br />

24.2<br />

3.21 [0.14, 72.55]<br />

Hor<strong>to</strong>n 2000<br />

1/178<br />

0/172<br />

25.5<br />

2.90 [0.12, 70.69]<br />

Teupe 1991<br />

1/50<br />

0/50<br />

25.1<br />

3.00 [0.13, 71.92]<br />

Sub<strong>to</strong>tal (95% CI)<br />

451<br />

445<br />

100.0<br />

3.02 [0.62, 14.75]<br />

0.01 0.1 1 10 100<br />

CI = confidence interval; MET = metformin; RR = relative risk;<br />

UKPDS = United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study<br />

Reprinted from Saenz A, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.<br />

2005;(3):CD002966, with permission from Wiley.<br />

Slide Source<br />

<strong>Lipids</strong> <strong>Online</strong> Slide Library<br />

www.lipidsonline.org<br />

Non–UKPDS Trials: Metformin vs. Other Interventions<br />

When one looks at metformin data in studies outside <strong>of</strong> the United Kingdom Prospective<br />

Diabetes Study, however, there apparently is no evidence <strong>of</strong> cardiovascular benefit, as in<br />

this meta-analysis conducted by Saenz et al. (2005). Furthermore, these other studies tend<br />

<strong>to</strong> have small numbers <strong>of</strong> patients.<br />

Reference:<br />

Saenz A, Fernandez-Esteban I, Mataix A, Ausejo M, Roque M, Moher D. Metformin<br />

monotherapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.<br />

2005;(3):CD002966.<br />

Non–UKPDS Trials:<br />

Metformin vs. Conventional Treatment<br />

RR (Fixed) 95% CI<br />

UKPDS<br />

Any diabetes-related<br />

outcomes<br />

MET<br />

n/N<br />

98/342<br />

Conventional Favours<br />

n/N metformin<br />

160/411<br />

Favours Weight<br />

comparison (%)<br />

100.0<br />

RR (fixed)<br />

95% CI<br />

0.74 [0.60, 0.90]<br />

Diabetes-related<br />

death<br />

28/342<br />

55/411<br />

100.0<br />

0.61 [0.40, 0.94]<br />

All-cause mortality<br />

50/342<br />

89/411<br />

100.0<br />

0.68 [0.49, 0.93]<br />

Myocardial infarction<br />

39/342<br />

73/411<br />

100.0<br />

0.64 [0.45, 0.92]<br />

Stroke<br />

12/342<br />

23/411<br />

100.0<br />

0.63 [0.32, 1.24]<br />

Peripheral vascular<br />

disease<br />

6/342<br />

9/411<br />

100.0<br />

0.80 [0.29, 2.23]<br />

Microvascular<br />

24/342<br />

38/411<br />

100.0<br />

0.76 [0.46, 1.24]<br />

0.2 0.5 1 2 5<br />

CI = confidence interval; MET = metformin; RR = relative risk;<br />

UKPDS = United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study<br />

Reprinted from Saenz A, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.<br />

2005;(3):CD002966, with permission from Wiley.<br />

Slide Source<br />

<strong>Lipids</strong> <strong>Online</strong> Slide Library<br />

www.lipidsonline.org<br />

Source: <strong>Lipids</strong> <strong>Online</strong> Slide Library (www.lipidsonline.org) Page 13 <strong>of</strong> 36<br />

© 2009 Baylor College <strong>of</strong> Medicine, Hous<strong>to</strong>n, Texas

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!