MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413137545 · doi:10.1136/bmj-2024-083039

Medications for adults with type 2 diabetes: a living systematic review and network meta-analysis

2025· article· en· W4413137545 on OpenAlexaff
Kailei Nong, Britta Tendal Jeppesen, Qingyang Shi, Thomas Agoritsas, Gordon H. Guyatt, Heath White, Yiyuan Gao, Arnav Agarwal, Helen Macdonald, Xinyu Zou, Tanya Millard, Oliver Schnell, Nikolaus Marx, Frank C. Brosius, Steve McDonald, Matthew Quigley, Xin Tian, Qinlin Fan, Barbara White, Yunhe Mao, Xiaohui Pan, Changhai Liu, Chunjuan Zhai, Chi Yuan, Qiang Li, Jing An, Yu Gan, Yanyan Wang, Yinghui Jin, Feng Sun, Zhiming Zhu, Lars Rydén, Eberhard Standl, Tari Turner, Per Olav Vandvik, Sheyu Li

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMcMaster UniversityImpact
FundersWest China Hospital, Sichuan UniversityNational Institutes of HealthLilly DeutschlandMannKind CorporationStockholms Läns LandstingNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaBayerSichuan UniversityGilead SciencesNovo NordiskSanofiAbbott DiagnosticsEli Lilly and CompanyAstraZenecaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisConfidence intervalOdds ratioMEDLINEType 2 diabetesSystematic reviewPlaceboIntensive care medicineRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineLixisenatideKidney diseaseDiabetes mellitusLiraglutideAlternative medicinePathologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To provide up-to-date evidence on key benefits, harms, and uncertainties regarding medications for adults with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), using frequentist random effects and GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation) approaches. Updates are planned at least two times a year. DATA SOURCES: Medline and Embase, searched up to 31 July 2024 for the current iteration. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled trials of at least 24 weeks comparing one or more medications with standard treatment, placebo, or each other. RESULTS: The systematic review and NMA includes 493 168 participants from 869 trials (adding 53 trials since October 2022) reporting data for 13 drug classes (63 drugs) and 26 outcomes of interest. Regarding benefits, moderate to high certainty evidence confirms the well established cardiovascular and kidney benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), and finerenone (the last for patients with established chronic kidney disease). The most effective drugs in reducing body weight were tirzepatide (mean difference (MD) -8.63 kg (95% confidence interval -9.34 to -7.93); moderate certainty) and orforglipron (MD -7.87 kg (-10.24 to -5.50); low certainty), followed by eight other GLP-1RAs (high to moderate certainty). Absolute benefits of medications vary substantially depending on the baseline risk of cardiovascular and kidney outcomes; risk-stratified absolute effects of medications are summarised using an interactive multiple comparisons tool (https://matchit.magicevidence.org/250709dist-diabetes/#!/). Regarding medication-specific harms, SGLT-2 inhibitors increase genital infections (odds ratio (OR) 3.29 (95% CI 2.88 to 3.77); high certainty) and ketoacidosis due to diabetes (OR 2.08 (1.45 to 2.99); high certainty), and probably increase amputations (OR 1.27 (1.01 to 1.61); moderate certainty); tirzepatide and GLP-1RAs probably increase severe gastrointestinal events (most increased risk with tirzepatide (OR 4.21 (1.87 to 9.49); moderate certainty)); finerenone increases severe hyperkalaemia (OR 5.92 (3.02 to 11.62); high certainty); and thiazolidinediones increase major osteoporotic fractures and probably increase hospitalisation for heart failure. Sulfonylureas, insulin, and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors probably increase the risk of severe hypoglycaemia. There is low to very low certainty evidence for effects on other diabetes-related complications, including neuropathy and visual impairment. Despite interest in the issue, there is uncertainty about whether GLP-1RAs may reduce dementia (OR 0.92 (0.83 to 1.02); low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: This living systematic review provides a comprehensive summary of the cardiovascular, kidney, and weight loss benefits, as well as medication-specific harms of medications for adults with type 2 diabetes, including effects of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1RAs, finerenone and tirzepatide. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO number: CRD42022325948. A more detailed protocol is available at https://data.aliveevidence.org/records/q02rv-km486. READERS' NOTES: .

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.034
Bibliometrics0.0110.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations29
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207