Efficacy of pharmacologic interventions on magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Several agents are under investigation for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). We assessed the comparative efficacy of pharmacologic interventions for patients with NAFLD focusing on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) biomarkers. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL. We included randomized controlled trials of more than 12 weeks of intervention that recruited patients with biopsy-confirmed or MRI-confirmed NAFLD and assessed the efficacy of interventions on liver fat content (LFC) and fibrosis by means of MRI. We performed random-effects frequentist network meta-analyses and assessed confidence in our estimates using the CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) approach. RESULTS: We included 47 trials (8583 patients). Versus placebo, thiazolidinediones were the most efficacious for the absolute change in LFC, followed by vitamin E, fibroblast growth factor (FGF) analogs, and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) with mean differences ranging from -7.46% (95% confidence interval [-11.0, -3.9]) to -4.36% (-7.2, -1.5). No differences between drug classes were evident. Patients receiving GLP-1 RAs or glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP)/GLP-1 RAs were more likely to achieve ≥30% relative reduction in LFC. Among agents, efruxifermin produced the largest reduction in LFC compared to placebo [-13.5% (-18.5, -8.5)], followed by pioglitazone, while being superior to most interventions. The effect of interventions on magnetic resonance elastography assessed fibrosis was small and insignificant. The confidence in our estimates was low to very low. CONCLUSIONS: Several drug classes may reduce LFC in patients with NAFLD without a significant effect on fibrosis; nevertheless, trial duration was small, and confidence in the effect estimates was low.

The preclinical discovery and clinical evaluation of tirzepatide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Despite numerous antidiabetic medications available for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, a substantial percentage of patients fail to achieve optimal glycemic control. Furthermore, the escalating obesity pandemic underscores the urgent need for effective relevant pharmacotherapies. Tirzepatide, a novel dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist, offers a promising therapeutic option. AREAS COVERED: This review describes the discovery and clinical development of tirzepatide. Based on data from pivotal in vivo and in vitro studies, the authors present the pharmacodynamic profile of tirzepatide. Furthermore, they summarize data from the clinical trial programs that assessed the efficacy and safety of tirzepatide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes or obesity in a broad spectrum of patients, and discuss its therapeutic potential. EXPERT OPINION: Tirzepatide effectively reduces glucose levels and body weight in patients with type 2 diabetes and/or obesity, with a generally safe profile. Based on data from phase 3 clinical trials, several agencies have approved its use for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and obesity. Clinicians should be aware of possible adverse events, mainly mild-to-moderate gastrointestinal side effects. Overall, tirzepatide represents a promising treatment option for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Subcutaneously administered tirzepatide vs semaglutide for adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of s.c. administered tirzepatide vs s.c. administered semaglutide for adults of both sexes with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Cochrane up to 11 November 2023 for RCTs with an intervention duration of at least 12 weeks assessing s.c. tirzepatide at maintenance doses of 5 mg, 10 mg or 15 mg once weekly, or s.c. semaglutide at maintenance doses of 0.5 mg, 1.0 mg or 2.0 mg once weekly, in adults with type 2 diabetes, regardless of background glucose-lowering treatment. Eligible trials compared any of the specified doses of tirzepatide and semaglutide against each other, placebo or other glucose-lowering drugs. Primary outcomes were changes in HbA1c and body weight from baseline. Secondary outcomes were achievement of HbA1c target of ≤48 mmol/mol (≤6.5%) or <53 mmol/mol (<7.0%), body weight loss of at least 10%, and safety outcomes including gastrointestinal adverse events and severe hypoglycaemia. We used version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (ROB 2) to assess the risk of bias, conducted frequentist random-effects network meta-analyses and evaluated confidence in effect estimates utilising the Confidence In Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework. RESULTS: A total of 28 trials with 23,622 participants (44.2% female) were included. Compared with placebo, tirzepatide 15 mg was the most efficacious treatment in reducing HbA1c (mean difference -21.61 mmol/mol [-1.96%]) followed by tirzepatide 10 mg (-20.19 mmol/mol [-1.84%]), semaglutide 2.0 mg (-17.74 mmol/mol [-1.59%]), tirzepatide 5 mg (-17.60 mmol/mol [-1.60%]), semaglutide 1.0 mg (-15.25 mmol/mol [-1.39%]) and semaglutide 0.5 mg (-12.00 mmol/mol [-1.09%]). In between-drug comparisons, all tirzepatide doses were comparable with semaglutide 2.0 mg and superior to semaglutide 1.0 mg and 0.5 mg. Compared with placebo, tirzepatide was more efficacious than semaglutide for reducing body weight, with reductions ranging from 9.57 kg (tirzepatide 15 mg) to 5.27 kg (tirzepatide 5 mg). Semaglutide had a less pronounced effect, with reductions ranging from 4.97 kg (semaglutide 2.0 mg) to 2.52 kg (semaglutide 0.5 mg). In between-drug comparisons, tirzepatide 15 mg, 10 mg and 5 mg demonstrated greater efficacy than semaglutide 2.0 mg, 1.0 mg and 0.5 mg, respectively. Both drugs increased incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events compared with placebo, while neither tirzepatide nor semaglutide increased the risk of serious adverse events or severe hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Our data show that s.c. tirzepatide had a more pronounced effect on HbA1c and weight reduction compared with s.c. semaglutide in people with type 2 diabetes. Both drugs, particularly higher doses of tirzepatide, increased gastrointestinal adverse events. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42022382594.

Reporting of adverse events of treatment interventions in multiple myeloma: an overview of systematic reviews.

The present study is an overview of systematic reviews focusing on adverse events of antimyeloma treatments. It provides a systematic description of adverse events as they are reported in the systematic reviews as well as a critical appraisal of included reviews. We conducted a comprehensive literature search in the most widely used electronic databases looking for systematic reviews that had an adverse event of an antimyeloma treatment intervention as primary outcome. Two independent reviewers conducted selection of included studies and data extraction on predesigned online forms and assessed study quality using AMSTAR 2. Overall corrected covered area (CCA) was calculated to examine the overlap of primary studies across systematic reviews. After screening eligible studies, 23 systematic reviews were included in this overview. Seven reviews with overall CCA of 14.7% examined cardiovascular adverse events of different drugs, including immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors (mainly carfilzomib). Nine focused on infections, presenting with overall CCA of 5.8%, each one focused on a different drug or drug class. Three studied thromboembolism in patients treated either with lenalidomide, any immunomodulatory drug, or with daratumumab and had an overall CCA equal to 1.5%. Four more reviews focused on bortezomib-associated neurotoxicity, carfilzomib-associated renal toxicity, or second primary malignancies as an adverse event of lenalidomide or anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody treatment. The quality of included studies as judged by AMSTAR 2 was mostly critically low. Absence of a priori registered protocol and formal assessment of risk of bias of included primary studies were the most common shortcomings. Reporting of antimyeloma drug-associated toxicity is supported by multiple systematic reviews; nevertheless, methodological quality of existing reviews is mostly low.

Management of type 2 diabetes with the dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonist tirzepatide: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Tirzepatide is a novel dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) currently under review for marketing approval. Individual trials have assessed the clinical profile of tirzepatide vs different comparators. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of tirzepatide for type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and ClinicalTrials.gov up until 27 October 2021 for randomised controlled trials with a duration of at least 12 weeks that compared once-weekly tirzepatide 5, 10 or 15 mg with placebo or other glucose-lowering drugs in adults with type 2 diabetes irrespective of their background glucose-lowering treatment. The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline. Secondary efficacy outcomes included change in body weight, proportion of individuals reaching the HbA1c target of <53 mmol/mol (<7.0%), ≤48 mmol/mol (≤6.5%) or <39 mmol/mol (<5.7%), and proportion of individuals with body weight loss of at least 5%, 10% or 15%. Safety outcomes included hypoglycaemia, gastrointestinal adverse events, treatment discontinuation due to adverse events, serious adverse events, and mortality. We used version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials to assess risk of bias for the primary outcome. RESULTS: Seven trials (6609 participants) were included. A dose-dependent superiority in lowering HbA1c was evident with all three tirzepatide doses vs all comparators, with mean differences ranging from -17.71 mmol/mol (-1.62%) to -22.35 mmol/mol (-2.06%) vs placebo, -3.22 mmol/mol (-0.29%) to -10.06 mmol/mol (-0.92%) vs GLP-1 RAs, and -7.66 mmol/mol (-0.70%) to -12.02 mmol/mol (-1.09%) vs basal insulin regimens. Tirzepatide was more efficacious in reducing body weight; reductions vs GLP-1 RAs ranged from 1.68 kg with tirzepatide 5 mg to 7.16 kg with tirzepatide 15 mg. Incidence of hypoglycaemia with tirzepatide was similar vs placebo and lower vs basal insulin. Nausea was more frequent with tirzepatide vs placebo, especially with tirzepatide 15 mg (OR 5.60 [95% CI 3.12, 10.06]), associated with higher incidence of vomiting (OR 5.50 [95% CI 2.40, 12.59]) and diarrhoea (OR 3.31 [95% CI 1.40, 7.85]). Odds of gastrointestinal events were similar between tirzepatide and GLP-1 RAs, except for diarrhoea with tirzepatide 10 mg (OR 1.51 [95% CI 1.07, 2.15]). Tirzepatide 15 mg led to higher discontinuation rate of study medication due to adverse events regardless of comparator, while all tirzepatide doses were safe in terms of serious adverse events and mortality. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: A dose-dependent superiority on glycaemic efficacy and body weight reduction was evident with tirzepatide vs placebo, GLP-1 RAs and basal insulin. Tirzepatide did not increase the odds of hypoglycaemia but was associated with increased incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events. Study limitations include presence of statistical heterogeneity in the meta-analyses for change in HbA1c and body weight, assessment of risk of bias solely for the primary outcome, and generalisation of findings mainly to individuals who are overweight or obese and already on metformin-based background therapy. PROSPERO registration no. CRD42021283449.

Oral semaglutide for type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide, a novel glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, for patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and grey literature sources up to July 1, 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral semaglutide with placebo or other antidiabetic agents. The primary outcome was change from baseline in HbA1c. Secondary outcomes included change from baseline in body weight and blood pressure, cardiovascular endpoints, severe hypoglycaemia, gastrointestinal adverse events and diabetic retinopathy. We synthesized results using weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We included 11 RCTs with 9890 patients in the systematic review. Compared with placebo, oral semaglutide reduced HbA1c and body weight (WMD -0.89%, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.71 and - 2.99 kg, 95% CI -3.69 to -2.30, respectively). Oral semaglutide was also superior to other active comparators (including liraglutide, empagliflozin and sitaglipitin) in terms of lowering HbA1c (WMD -0.35%, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.26) and reduction of body weight (WMD -1.48 kg, 95% CI -2.28 to -0.67), and had a favourable effect on systolic blood pressure. Compared with placebo, oral semaglutide reduced all-cause mortality (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.92) and cardiovascular mortality (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.98), and had a neutral effect on myocardial infarction, stroke, severe hypoglycaemia and diabetic retinopathy. However, treatment with oral semaglutide increased the incidence of nausea, vomiting and diarrhea, while events of acute pancreatitis were rare. CONCLUSIONS: Oral semaglutide can effectively and safely reduce blood glucose, body weight and systolic blood pressure. Nevertheless, it is associated with increased incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events. Further research is needed to clarify its long-term safety and comparative effectiveness against other antidiabetic agents.

Performance of Baveno VI and Expanded Baveno VI Criteria for Excluding High-Risk Varices in Patients With Chronic Liver Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We aimed to assess the accuracy of Baveno VI criteria for identification of high-risk varices (HRVs) and varices of any size in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD). METHODS: We performed a systematic search of publications through December 2018 for studies that assessed the accuracy of Baveno VI criteria for screening for varices in patients with cACLD. We used hierarchical models to synthesize evidence. We also conducted a post hoc analysis to assess the accuracy of Εxpanded Baveno VI criteria. We appraised the confidence in estimates using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: We identified 30 studies (8469 participants). Pooled values of Baveno VI criteria for HRVs (26 studies) were a sensitivity of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.95-0.98) and a specificity of 0.32 (95% CI, 0.26-0.39). Pooled sensitivity of Εxpanded Baveno VI criteria for HRVs (12 studies) was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85-0.93) and specificity was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.45-0.57). In 1000 patients with cACLD, with a prevalence of HRVs of 20%, Baveno VI criteria would prevent endoscopy in 262 patients, but 6 patients with HRVs would be missed. Instead, use of the Εxpanded Baveno VI criteria would result in 428 patients avoiding endoscopy, but 20 patients with HRVs would be missed. The credibility of our findings is moderate or low, mainly owing to the retrospective design of most studies. CONCLUSIONS: Baveno VI criteria have high diagnostic accuracy as a triage test for screening for HRVs in patients with cACLD. Expanded Baveno VI criteria could reduce the proportion of unnecessary endoscopies further, nevertheless with a higher rate of missed HRVs.

Tofacitinib for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and its impact on quality of life in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing tofacitinib with placebo or any active comparator. We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and gray literature for articles published up to May 2017. We synthesized data using a fixed-effect model. We conducted subgroup analysis based on prior exposure to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF). We summarized the strength of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: We included three trials with 1220 participants. Compared with placebo, tofacitinib was effective in inducing clinical remission (odds ratio [OR] 3.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.29-6.44, I2: 41%, GRADE: moderate), clinical response (OR 2.95, 95%CI 2.21-3.95, I2: 0%, GRADE: high), mucosal healing (OR 2.70, 95%CI 1.81-4.03, I2: 0%, GRADE: high). Tofacitinib was effective in both anti-TNF-naïve and -experienced patients. Tofacitinib had a favorable effect on quality of life. There were no significant differences in the safety profile in terms of the incidence of any or serious adverse events compared to placebo. The risk for infections was increased (OR 1.51, 95%CI 1.05-2.19, I2: 0%, GRADE: moderate), but the incidence of serious infections did not differ between tofacitinib and placebo. CONCLUSION: In patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis, short-term treatment with tofacitinib is effective for induction of remission and improvement of quality of life.

Semaglutide for type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: To assess the efficacy and safety of semaglutide, a recently approved glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) for type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched major electronic databases and grey literature sources for randomized controlled trials comparing semaglutide with placebo or other antidiabetic agents. Primary outcome was change from baseline in HbA1c. Secondary endpoints included change from baseline in body weight, blood pressure, heart rate and incidence of hypoglycaemia, gastrointestinal adverse effects, pancreatitis and diabetic retinopathy. RESULTS: A total of 6 placebo-controlled and 7 active-controlled studies with subcutaneous semaglutide were included. We identified only 1 trial with oral semaglutide. Compared with placebo, subcutaneous semaglutide 0.5 and 1 mg reduced HbA1c by 1.01% (95% CI, 0.56-1.47) and 1.38% (1.05-1.70), respectively. Both doses demonstrated superior glycaemic efficacy compared to other antidiabetic agents, including sitagliptin, exenatide, liraglutide, dulaglutide and insulin glargine. Semaglutide also had a beneficial effect on body weight (mean difference vs placebo -4.11 kg, 95% CI -4.85 to -3.37 for semaglutide 1 mg) and systolic blood pressure. We did not observe increased hypoglycaemia rates with semaglutide; nevertheless, we noted an increased incidence of nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea. Cases of pancreatitis were infrequent and the odds ratio for diabetic retinopathy compared with placebo was 1.32 (95% CI, 0.98-1.77). CONCLUSIONS: Semaglutide is a potent once-weekly GLP-1 RA, significantly reducing HbA1c, body weight and systolic blood pressure. However, it is associated with increased incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events. Results for pancreatitis and retinopathy require further assessment in post-approval pharmacovigilance studies.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Fecal Immunochemical Test in Patients at Increased Risk for Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis.

Importance: The potential role of the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) for screening patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) has not yet been elucidated. Objective: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of FIT for CRC or advanced neoplasia (AN) in asymptomatic patients at above-average risk. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and gray literature sources through August 2016. Study Selection: Diagnostic studies evaluating the accuracy of FIT for CRC or AN in patients with a personal or familial history of CRC using colonoscopy as the reference standard. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two authors (A.K. and P.P.) independently extracted data and evaluated study quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool, and evaluated the quality of the body of evidence by means of GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Hierarchical models were used to synthesize available evidence. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the diagnostic performance of FIT for detecting CRC or AN. Results: We included 12 studies (6204 participants). Seven studies were deemed at high or unclear risk of bias. The average sensitivity of FIT for CRC was 93% (95% CI, 53%-99%), and the average specificity was 91% (95% CI, 89%-92%), yielding a positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 10.30 (CI 7.7-13.9) and a negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of 0.08 (95% CI, 0.01-0.75) (GRADE: very low). The average sensitivity of FIT for AN was 48% (95% CI, 39%-57%); and the average specificity was 93% (95% CI, 91%-94%), yielding an LR+ of 6.55 (95% CI, 5.0-8.5) and an LR- of 0.57 (95% CI, 0.48-0.67) (GRADE: very low). Subgroup analyses indicated that FIT cutoff values between 15- and 25-µg/g feces provided the best combination of sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of CRC (93% and 94%, respectively). Quantitative and 1-sample FIT showed adequate test performance, but data on other FIT brands and multiple samples were insufficient. Conclusions and Relevance: The FIT has high overall diagnostic accuracy for CRC but moderate accuracy for AN in patients at above-average personal or familial risk. Heterogeneity and wide confidence intervals limit the trustworthiness of our findings.

The use of statins alone, or in combination with pioglitazone and other drugs, for the treatment of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease/non-alcoholic steatohepatitis and related cardiovascular risk. An Expert Panel Statement.

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), the most common liver disease, is characterized by accumulation of fat (>5% of the liver tissue), in the absence of alcohol abuse or other chronic liver diseases. It is closely related to the epidemic of obesity, metabolic syndrome or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). NAFLD can cause liver inflammation and progress to non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), fibrosis, cirrhosis or hepatocellular cancer (HCC). Nevertheless, cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the most common cause of death in NAFLD/NASH patients. Current guidelines suggest the use of pioglitazone both in patients with T2DM and in those without. The use of statins, though considered safe by the guidelines, have very limited use; only 10% in high CVD risk patients are on statins by tertiary centers in the US. There are data from several animal studies, 5 post hoc analyses of prospective long-term survival studies, and 5 rather small biopsy proven NASH studies, one at baseline and on at the end of the study. All these studies provide data for biochemical and histological improvement of NAFLD/NASH with statins and in the clinical studies large reductions in CVD events in comparison with those also on statins and normal liver. Ezetimibe was also reported to improve NAFLD. Drugs currently in clinical trials seem to have potential for slowing down the evolution of NAFLD and for reducing liver- and CVD-related morbidity and mortality, but it will take time before they are ready to be used in everyday clinical practice. The suggestion of this Expert Panel is that, pending forthcoming randomized clinical trials, physicians should consider using a PPARgamma agonist, such as pioglitazone, or, statin use in those with NAFLD/NASH at high CVD or HCC risk, alone and/or preferably in combination with each other or with ezetimibe, for the primary or secondary prevention of CVD, and the avoidance of cirrhosis, liver transplantation or HCC, bearing in mind that CVD is the main cause of death in NAFLD/NASH patients.

Association between response rates and survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. A systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We performed a systematic review and meta-regression analysis of randomized control trials to investigate the association between response to initial treatment and survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). METHODS: Response outcomes included complete response (CR) and the combined outcome of CR or very good partial response (VGPR), while survival outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). We used random-effect meta-regression models and conducted sensitivity analyses based on definition of CR and study quality. RESULTS: Seventy-two trials were included in the systematic review, 63 of which contributed data in meta-regression analyses. There was no association between OS and CR in patients without autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) (regression coefficient: .02, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.06, 0.10), in patients undergoing ASCT (-.11, 95% CI -0.44, 0.22) and in trials comparing ASCT with non-ASCT patients (.04, 95% CI -0.29, 0.38). Similarly, OS did not correlate with the combined metric of CR or VGPR, and no association was evident between response outcomes and PFS. Sensitivity analyses yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-regression analysis suggests that there is no association between conventional response outcomes and survival in patients with newly diagnosed MM.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of tests to predict wound healing in diabetic foot.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review summarized the evidence on noninvasive screening tests for the prediction of wound healing and the risk of amputation in diabetic foot ulcers. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus from database inception to October 2011. We pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and compared test performance. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Eight tests were used to predict wound healing in this setting, including ankle-brachial index (ABI), ankle peak systolic velocity, transcutaneous oxygen measurement (TcPo2), toe-brachial index, toe systolic blood pressure, microvascular oxygen saturation, skin perfusion pressure, and hyperspectral imaging. For the TcPo2 test, the pooled DOR was 15.81 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.36-74.45) for wound healing and 4.14 (95% CI, 2.98-5.76) for the risk of amputation. ABI was also predictive but to a lesser degree of the risk of amputations (DOR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.65-5.05) but not of wound healing (DOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.40-2.64). It was not feasible to perform meta-analysis comparing the remaining tests. The overall quality of evidence was limited by the risk of bias and imprecision (wide CIs due to small sample size). CONCLUSIONS: Several tests may predict wound healing in the setting of diabetic foot ulcer; however, most of the available evidence evaluates only TcPo2 and ABI. The overall quality of the evidence is low, and further research is needed to provide higher quality comparative effectiveness evidence.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of glycemic control for the prevention of diabetic foot syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to synthesize the available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) estimating the relative efficacy and safety of intensive vs less intensive glycemic control in preventing diabetic foot syndrome. METHODS: We used the umbrella design (systematic review of systematic reviews) to identify eligible RCTs. Two reviewers determined RCT eligibility and extracted descriptive, methodologic, and diabetic foot outcome data. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool outcome data across studies, and the I(2) statistic was used to quantify heterogeneity. RESULTS: Nine RCTs enrolling 10,897 patients with type 2 diabetes were included and deemed to be at moderate risk of bias. Compared with less intensive glycemic control, intensive control (hemoglobin A1c, 6%-7.5%) was associated with a significant decrease in risk of amputation (relative risk [RR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.94; I(2) = 0%). Intensive control was significantly associated with slower decline in sensory vibration threshold (mean difference, -8.27; 95% CI, -9.75 to -6.79). There was no effect on other neuropathic changes (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.75-1.05; I(2) = 32%) or ischemic changes (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.67-1.26; I(2) = 0%). The quality of evidence is likely moderate. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with less intensive glycemic control therapy, intensive control may decrease the risk of amputation in patients with diabetic foot syndrome. The reported risk reduction is likely overestimated because the trials were open and the decision to proceed with amputation could be influenced by glycemic control.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of débridement methods for chronic diabetic foot ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Several methods of débridement of diabetic foot ulcers are currently used. The relative efficacy of these methods is not well established. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to find the best available evidence for the effect of débridement on diabetic foot wound outcomes. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus through October 2011 for randomized controlled studies (RCTs) and observational comparative studies. RESULTS: We identified 11 RCTs and three nonrandomized studies reporting on 800 patients. The risk of bias was moderate overall. Meta-analysis of three RCTs showed that autolytic débridement significantly increased the healing rate (relative risk [RR], 1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-2.64). Meta-analysis of four studies (one RCT) showed that larval débridement reduced amputation (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.21-0.88) but did not increase complete healing (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.84-1.91). Surgical débridement was associated with shorter healing time compared with conventional wound care (one RCT). Insufficient evidence was found for comparisons between autolytic and larval débridement (one RCT), between ultrasound-guided and surgical débridement, and between hydrosurgical and surgical débridement. CONCLUSIONS: The available literature supports the efficacy of several débridement methods, including surgical, autolytic, and larval débridement. Comparative effectiveness evidence between these methods and supportive evidence for other methods is of low quality due to methodologic limitations and imprecision. Hence, the choice of débridement method at the present time should be based on the available expertise, patient preferences, the clinical context and cost.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of adjunctive therapies in diabetic foot ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Multiple adjunctive therapies have been proposed to accelerate wound healing in patients with diabetes and foot ulcers. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the best available evidence supporting the use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), arterial pump devices, and pharmacologic agents (pentoxifylline, cilostazol, and iloprost) in this setting. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus through October 2011. Pairs of independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Predefined outcomes of interest were complete wound healing and amputation. RESULTS: We identified 18 interventional studies; of which 9 were randomized, enrolling 1526 patients. The risk of bias in the included studies was moderate. In multiple randomized trials, the addition of HBOT to conventional therapy (wound care and offloading) was associated with increased healing rate (Peto odds ratio, 14.25; 95% confidence interval, 7.08-28.68) and reduced major amputation rate (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.89), compared with conventional therapy alone. In one small trial, arterial pump devices had a favorable effect on complete healing compared with HBOT and in another small trial compared with placebo devices. Neither iloprost nor pentoxifylline had a significant effect on amputation rate compared with conventional therapy. No comparative studies were identified for cilostazol in diabetic foot ulcers. CONCLUSIONS: There is low- to moderate-quality evidence supporting the use of HBOT as an adjunctive therapy to enhance diabetic foot ulcer healing and potentially prevent amputation. However, there are only sparse data regarding the efficacy of arterial pump devices and pharmacologic interventions.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of off-loading methods for diabetic foot ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Increased plantar foot pressure is one of several key factors that lead to diabetic foot ulcers. Multiple methods have been proposed to relieve this pressure and thus enhance wound healing and potentially prevent relapse. We aimed in this systematic review to find the best available evidence for off-loading methods. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus through October 2011. Pairs of independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Predefined outcomes of interest included complete wound healing, time to complete wound healing, amputation, infection, and relapse rates. RESULTS: We identified 19 interventional studies, of which 13 were randomized controlled trials, including data from 1605 patients with diabetic foot ulcers using an off-loading method. The risk of bias in the included studies was moderate. This analysis demonstrated improved wound healing with total contact casting over removable cast walker, therapeutic shoes, and conventional therapy. There was no advantage of irremovable cast walkers over total contact casting. There was improved healing with half-shoe compared with conventional wound care. Therapeutic shoes and insoles reduced relapse rate in comparison with regular footwear. Data were sparse regarding other off-loading methods. CONCLUSIONS: Although based on low-quality evidence (ie, evidence warranting lower certainty), benefits are demonstrated for use of total contact casting and irremovable cast walkers in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. Reduced relapse rate is demonstrated with various therapeutic shoes and insoles in comparison with regular footwear.

Update on long-term efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are a novel class of antihyperglycaemic agents with an insulin-independent mode of action. Dapagliflozin is a member of the SGLT2 inhibitors class that has received marketing authorization in Europe and the US for use in patients with type 2 diabetes. This review summarizes current evidence from clinical trials assessing the clinical efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin, and presents data regarding its cost-effectiveness. Treatment with dapagliflozin results in similar reduction in haemoglobin A1c with other oral antihyperglycaemic drugs, which is preserved over 4 years of treatment. However, compared with most antidiabetic agents, dapagliflozin provides additional clinical benefits including body weight loss and blood pressure reduction. Moreover, treatment with dapagliflozin does not increase risk for hypoglycaemia, but is associated with increased incidence of mild to moderate urinary and genital tract infections. A pivotal outcomes trial of dapagliflozin is expected to clarify its effect on cardiovascular endpoints, whilst a causative relationship between dapagliflozin and select malignancies is unlikely. Finally, based on recent economic evaluations dapagliflozin seems to be a cost-effective option for type 2 diabetes in some settings.

Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of liver iron overload: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Guidelines advocate use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to estimate concentrations of iron in liver, to identify patients with iron overload, and to guide titration of chelation therapy. However, this recommendation was not based on a systematic synthesis and analysis of the evidence for MRI's diagnostic accuracy. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of MRI in identifying liver iron overload in patients with hereditary hemochromatosis, hemoglobinopathy, or myelodysplastic syndrome; liver biopsy analysis was used as the reference standard. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, the Cochrane Library, and gray literature, and computed summary receiver operating curves by fitting hierarchical models. We assessed methodologic quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. RESULTS: Our final analysis included 20 studies (819 patients, total). Sensitivity and specificity values varied greatly, ranging from 0.00 to 1.00 and from 0.50 to 1.00, respectively. Because of substantial heterogeneity and variable positivity thresholds, we calculated only summary receiver operating curves (and summary estimate points for studies that used the same MRI sequences). T2 spin echo and T2* gradient-recalled echo MRI sequences accurately identified patients without liver iron overload (liver iron concentration > 7 mg Fe/g dry liver weight) (negative likelihood ratios, 0.10 and 0.05 respectively). However, these MRI sequences are less accurate in establishing a definite diagnosis of liver iron overload (positive likelihood ratio, 8.85 and 4.86, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Based on a meta-analysis, measurements of liver iron concentration by MRI may be accurate enough to rule out iron overload, but not to definitely identify patients with this condition. Most studies did not use explicit and prespecified MRI thresholds for iron overload, therefore some patients may have been diagnosed inaccurately with this condition. More studies are needed of standardized MRI protocols and to determine the effects of MRI surveillance on the development of chronic liver disease and patient survival.