Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparative table of clinical trials and studies, investigating the safety of treatment with gliptins and glitazones

From: Comparative analysis of therapeutic efficiency and costs (experience in Bulgaria) of oral antidiabetic therapies based on glitazones and gliptins

Author

Treatment

Change in mean body weight

Bolli et al., 2009 [31]

VIL + MET

↑ 0.2 kg, non-significant

PIO + MET

↑ 2.6 kg, P < 0.001

Jindal et al., 2015 [1]

VIL + MET

No change in body weight

PIO + MET

↑1.2 ± 0.5 kg

Chawla et al., 2013 [25]

SIT + MET

↓ 0.58 kg, statistically significant

PIO + MET

↑0.90 kg, statistically significant

Russell-Jones et al., 2012 [18]

EQW

↓ 2.0 kg

MET

↓ 2.0 kg (P = 0.892 vs. EQW)

PIO

↑ 1.5 kg (P < 0.001 vs. EQW)

SIT

↓ 0.8 kg (P < 0.001 vs. EQW)

Rosenstock et al., 2007 [19]

VIL

↑ 0.2 ± 0.3 kg

PIO

↑ 1.5 ± 0.3 kg

VIL + PIO (50/15 mg)

↑ 1.4 ± 0.3 kg

↑ 2.1 ± 0.3 kg

VIL + PIO (100/30 mg)

  

Risk of fractures

Bone et al., 2013 [50]

PIO

BMD of total proximal femur (primary and point):

PLB

Least squares mean from baseline: −0.69 % PIO, −0.14 % PLB (P = 0.170) statistically non-significant

Bone remodeling markers:

statistically non-significant between-group differences

Bazelier et al., 2012 [46]

Biguanide or Sulfonyluerum

↓ risk HR = 1.15, 95 % CI 1.13–1.18

Biguanide and Sulfonyluerum

↓ risk HR = 1.00, 95 % CI 0.96–1.04

TZDs

↑ risk HR = 1.27, 95 % CI 1.06–1.52

Insulin

↑ risk HR = 1.25, 95 % CI 1.20–1.31

Glintborg et al., 2008 [47]

PIO

↓BMD [geometric means (−2 to +2SD): lumbar spine 1.140 (0.964–1.348) vs. 1.127 (0.948–1.341)g/cm2 (average decline 1.1 %) and femoral neck 0.966 (0.767–1.217) vs. 0.952 (0.760–1.192)g/cm2 (average decline 1.4 %), both p < 0.05]

PLB

Meier et al., 2008 [48]

PIO

↑ hip and nonvertebral osteoporotic fractures OR = 2.59, 95 % CI 0.96–7.01

ROSI

↑ hip and nonvertebral osteoporotic fractures OR = 2.38, 95 % CI 1.39–4.09

Colhoun et al., 2012 [49]

PIO

↑hip fractures risk OR = 1.18, 95 % CI 1.00–1.40

ROSI

↑hip fractures risk OR = 1.16, 95 % CI 1.06–1.26

Bunck et al., 2012 [53]

VIL

Bone resorption marker: S-CTx (cross-linked C-terminal telopeptide): between-group ratio 1.15 ± 0.17, P = 0.320 serum alkaline phosphatase, calcium and phosphate - unaffected

PLB

Monami et al., 2011 [52]

DPP-4

↑ risk of bone fractures Mantel Haenszel odds ratio [MH-OR] 0.60, 95 % CI 0.37–0.99, P = 0.045

PLB, other treatments

  

Risk of cardiovascular complications

Dormandy et al., 2005 [55]

PIO

↓ all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and stroke (main secondary endpoint)

↑ HF (11 % vs. 8 %, p < 0.0001)

PLB

 

Wilcox et al., 2007 [56]

PIO

↓ fatal or nonfatal stroke (HR = 0.53, 95 % CIs = 0.34–0.85; P = 0.0085)

↓ cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke (HR = 0.72, 95 % CIs = 0.53–1.00; P = 0.0467)

PLB

 

Nissen et al., 2007 [57]

ROSI

↑ myocardial infarction (OR = 1.43, 95 % CI, 1.03–1.98; P = 0.03)

↑ death from cardiovascular causes (OR = 1.64, 95 % CI, 0.98–2.74; P = 0.06)

Control group

 

Lincoff et al., 2007 [59]

PIO

↓ death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (OR = 1.43, 95 % CI, 1.03–1.98; P = 0.03)

↑ HF (НR, 1.41; 95 % CI, 1.14–1.76; P = 0.002)

Control group

 

Gallagher et al., 2011 [63]

PIO

 

ROSI

↑ death (RR 1.20; 95 % CI 1.08–1.34)

↑ HF (RR 1.73; 95 % CI 1.19–2.51)

Breunig et al., 2014 [62]

PIO

 

ROSI

↑ HF (HR = 1,79, 95 % CI = 1.16–2.76, P = 0.009)

MET

 

Seong et al., 2015 [61]

PIO + MET

↓risk of CVD 0.89 (95 % CI, 0.81–0.99)

↓risk of IS 0.81 (95 % CI, 0.67–0.99)

↑risk of HF 4.81 (95 % CI, 3.53–6.56)

DPP-4i + MET

 

Scirica et al., 2013 [65]

SAXA

↑ HF (HR 1.27; 95 % CI, 1.07–1.51; P = 0.007)

Scirica et al., 2014 [66]

PLB

 

Monami et al., 2014 [67]

DPP-4 inhibitors

↑ HF (MH-OR: 1.19[1.03; 1.37]; p = 0.015).

Control group

 

Clifton P, 2014 [68]

DPP-4 inhibitors

↑ HF

Control group

 

Wang et al., 2014 [69]

SIT

↑ HF (HR: 1.09, 95 % CI: 1.06–1.11, P < 0.001).

Control group

 

Chen et al., 2014 [70]

SIT

↑ recurrent myocardial infarction (HR, 1.73; 95 % CI, 1.15–2.58; P = 0.008)

↑ percutaneous coronary revascularization (HR, 1.43; 95 % CI, 1.04–1.95; P = 0.026)

Control group

 
  

Effects on liver

Belfort et al., 2006 [72]

PIO

↓alanine transaminase (by 58 % vs. 34 %, P < 0.001)

↑hepatic insulin sensitivity (by 48 % vs. 14 %, P = 0.008)

↓liver fat (by 54 % vs. 0 %, P < 0.001)

↓liver inflammation (P = 0.008)

↓ballooning necrosis (P = 0.02)

Fibrosis not improved (P = 0.08)

PLB

 

Aithal et al., 2008 [73]

PIO

↓ hepatocellular injury (P = 0.005)

↓Mallory-Denk bodies (P = 0.004)

↓ alanine aminotransferase level (−10.9 vs −36.2 u/L; P = 0.009)

↓ gamma-glutamyltransferase level (−9.4 vs −41.2 u/L; P = 0.002)

↓ ferritin (−11.3 vs −90.5 μg/L; P = 0.01)

Fibrosis improved (P = 0.05)

PLB

 

Sanyal et al., 2010 [74]

PIO

↓ serum alanine and aspartate aminotransferase levels (P < 0.001)

↓ insulin resistance (P = 0.03)

↓ liver inflammation (P = 0.004)

↓ ballooning necrosis (P = 0.08)

Fibrosis not improved (P = 0.12)

PLB

 

Ohki et al., 2012 [77]

SIT

↓ aspartate aminotransferase (P = 0.47)

↓ alanine aminotransaminase (P = 0.03)

↓ gamma-glutamyltransferase (P = 0.01)

PIO

↓ aspartate aminotransferase (P < 0.01)

↓ alanine aminotransaminase (P < 0.01)

↓ gamma-glutamyltransferase (P < 0.01)

Iwasaki et al., 2011 [75]

SIT

↓ alanine transaminase, aspartate aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyltransferase

Itou et al., 2012 [76]

SIT – case report

↓ alanine transaminase, aspartate aminotransferase

↓ insulin resistance

↓ liver fat

  

Risk of development of oncological disease

Azoulay et al., 2013 [2]

PIO

↑ bladder cancer (RR 1.83, 95 % CI 1.10–3.05)

Wei et al., 2013 [87]

PIO

↓ bladder cancer (HR, 1.16, 95 % CI 0.83, 1.62)

Active control

 

Govindarajan et al., 2007 [34]

PIO

↓lung cancer (RR, 0.67; 95 % CI, 0.51–0.87)

Active control

 

Mazzone et al., 2012 [56]

TZDs

↓ lung cancer (OR 0.86, 95 % CI 0.4–1.85, p = 0.14)

MET

↓ lung cancer (OR 0.48, 95 % CI 0.28–0.81, p = 0.006)

Nelson et al., 2014 [31]

SIT - case report

↑ pancreatitis

Girgis and Champion, 2011 [81]

VIL - case report

↑ acute pancreatitis

Singh et al., 2013 [27]

EQW/SIT

↑acute pancreatitis (OR 2.01, 95 % CI [1.37–3.18], P = 0.01)

Engel et al., 2013 [45]

SIT Comparator agent

Rates of malignancy (−0.05 (95 % CI −0.41, 0.30)

Rate of category of pancreatic cancer (adenocarcinoma of pancreas, pancreatic carcinoma, pancreatic carcinoma metastatic) (0.05 and 0.06 events per 100 patient-years in the sitagliptin and nonexposed groups, respectively)

  1. ROSI rosiglitazone, SAXA saxagliptin, АLO alogliptin, BMD bone mineral density, CVD cardiovascular disease, IS ischemic stroke