MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410084713 · doi:10.1007/s40520-025-03017-4

Comparative efficacy and safety of antidiabetic drugs for obese patients with knee osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2025· review· en· W4410084713 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guangyao Jiang, Xiangyu Yang, Guanghui Zhu, Tang Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueAging Clinical and Experimental Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialMEDLINEPhysical therapyAlternative medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Obesity-related knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a significant public health concern, affecting quality of life. Recent evidence suggests some antidiabetic drugs may help manage KOA in obese patients due to their anti-inflammatory and weight-reducing effects. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of antidiabetic drugs for managing pain and adverse events in obese KOA patients through a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: A systematic search of multiple databases identified relevant RCTs on antidiabetic drugs for KOA. Treatment efficacy was assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score improvement, and safety was evaluated based on the incidence of serious adverse events. The Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA) scores were used to rank the treatments, and effect sizes were reported as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: A total of nine RCTs were included in the analysis. For pain relief, metformin demonstrated the largest effect size with a mean difference of - 1.13 (95% CI - 1.48, - 0.78) compared to usual care, followed by Metformin-Phosphatidylcholine (MFPH) (- 0.92, 95% CI - 1.70, - 0.13) and semaglutide (- 0.90, 95% CI - 1.48, - 0.32). In terms of safety, usual care exhibited the lowest risk of adverse events, with liraglutide (0.09, 95% CI - 0.74, 0.92) and semaglutide (0.21, 95% CI - 0.46, 0.88) also showing favorable safety profiles. The SUCRA rankings further supported these findings, with metformin ranking highest for efficacy (SUCRA: 86.8%) and usual care ranking highest for safety (SUCRA: 75.7%). However, these rankings should be interpreted alongside the effect sizes and clinical context to fully assess the trade-offs between efficacy and safety across interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Metformin and MFPH are promising for managing KOA pain in obese patients. Semaglutide offers a balanced efficacy and safety profile, while liraglutide may be a safe option for selected patients. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and assess long-term outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0350.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.236
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAging Clinical and Experimental ResearchSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207