Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 420

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Adverse Events Associated With Glucose-Lowering Drugs in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-analysis

Open access
Palmer, Suetonia C., Mavridis, Dimitris, Nicolucci, Antonio, Johnson, David W., Tonelli, Marcello, Craig, Jonathan C., Maggo, Jasjot, Gray, Vanessa, De Berardis, Giorgia, Ruospo, Marinella, Natale, Patrizia, Saglimbene, Valeria, Badve, Sunil V., Cho, Yeoungjee, Nadeau-Fredette, Annie-Claire, Burke, Michael, Faruque, Labib, Lloyd, Anita, Ahmad, Nasreen, Liu, Yuanchen, Tiv, Sophanny, Wiebe, Natasha, Strippoli, Giovanni F. M.·2016·JAMA

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Numerous glucose-lowering drugs are used to treat type 2 diabetes. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the relative efficacy and safety associated with glucose-lowering drugs including insulin. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases through March 21, 2016. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials of 24 weeks' or longer duration. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Random-effects network meta-analysis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was cardiovascular mortality. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, myocardial infarction, stroke, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1C) level, treatment failure (rescue treatment or lack of efficacy), hypoglycemia, and body weight. RESULTS: A total of 301 clinical trials (1,417,367 patient-months) were included; 177 trials (56,598 patients) of drugs given as monotherapy; 109 trials (53,030 patients) of drugs added to metformin (dual therapy); and 29 trials (10,598 patients) of drugs added to metformin and sulfonylurea (triple therapy). There were no significant differences in associations between any drug class as monotherapy, dual therapy, or triple therapy with odds of cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. Compared with metformin, sulfonylurea (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.18 [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.34]), thiazolidinedione (SMD, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.00 to 0.31]), DPP-4 inhibitor (SMD, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.13 to 0.52]), and α-glucosidase inhibitor (SMD, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.12 to 0.58]) monotherapy were associated with higher HbA1C levels. Sulfonylurea (odds ratio [OR], 3.13 [95% CI, 2.39 to 4.12]; risk difference [RD], 10% [95% CI, 7% to 13%]) and basal insulin (OR, 17.9 [95% CI, 1.97 to 162]; RD, 10% [95% CI, 0.08% to 20%]) were associated with greatest odds of hypoglycemia. When added to metformin, drugs were associated with similar HbA1C levels, while SGLT-2 inhibitors offered the lowest odds of hypoglycemia (OR, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.08 to 0.18]; RD, -22% [-27% to -18%]). When added to metformin and sulfonylurea, GLP-1 receptor agonists were associated with the lowest odds of hypoglycemia (OR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.39 to 0.94]; RD, -10% [95% CI, -18% to -2%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among adults with type 2 diabetes, there were no significant differences in the associations between any of 9 available classes of glucose-lowering drugs (alone or in combination) and the risk of cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. Metformin was associated with lower or no significant difference in HbA1C levels compared with any other drug classes. All drugs were estimated to be effective when added to metformin. These findings are consistent with American Diabetes Association recommendations for using metformin monotherapy as initial treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes and selection of additional therapies based on patient-specific considerations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2016.9400

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 35 references

Cited by

See all 420

Metadata

Authors
Palmer, S. C., Mavridis, D., Nicolucci, A., Johnson, D. W., Tonelli, M., Craig, J. C., Maggo, J., Gray, V., De Berardis, G., Ruospo, M., Natale, P., Saglimbene, V., Badve, S. V., Cho, Y., Nadeau-Fredette, A.-C., Burke, M., Faruque, L., Lloyd, A., Ahmad, N., Liu, Y., Tiv, S., Wiebe, N., & Strippoli, G. F. M.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2016-07-19
Volume
316
Issue
3
Pages
313
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2492974594
Cited by
420
References
35
FWCI
55.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Adverse Events Associated With Glucose-Lowering Drugs in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2016.9400
The paper
Palmer, S. C., Mavridis, D., Nicolucci, A., Johnson, D. W., Tonelli, M., Craig, J. C., Maggo, J., Gray, V., De Berardis, G., Ruospo, M., Natale, P., Saglimbene, V., Badve, S. V., Cho, Y., Nadeau-Fredette, A.-C., Burke, M., Faruque, L., Lloyd, A., Ahmad, N., . . . Strippoli, G. F. M. (2016). Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Adverse Events Associated With Glucose-Lowering Drugs in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-analysis. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.9400

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.