Supplementary Online Content

Similar documents
Efficacy and Safety of Initial Combination Therapy in Treatment-Naïve Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Incretin-based Therapies for Type 2 Diabetes Comparisons Between Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors

Scottish Medicines Consortium

CADTH Optimal use report

National Horizon Scanning Centre. Saxagliptin (BMS ) for type 2 diabetes. April 2008

Supplementary Online Content

COMMISSIONING POLICY RECOMMENDATION TREATMENT ADVISORY GROUP Policy agreed by (Vale of York CCG/date)

Joslin Diabetes Center Joslin Diabetes Forum 2013: The Impact of Comorbidities on Glucose Control Scenario 2: Reduced Renal Function

Scottish Medicines Consortium

Ipoglicemia: trattamento e strategie di prevenzione

Disclosure. Learning Objectives. Case. Diabetes Update: Incretin Agents in Diabetes-When to Use Them? I have no disclosures to declare

PROCEEDINGS CLINICAL RESEARCH AND EXPERIENCE WITH INCRETIN-BASED THERAPIES * Vivian A. Fonseca, MD, FRCP ABSTRACT

Practical Strategies for the Clinical Use of Incretin Mimetics CME/CE. CME/CE Released: 09/15/2009; Valid for credit through 09/15/2010

dapagliflozin 5mg and 10mg film-coated tablets (Forxiga ) SMC No. (799/12) Bristol-Myers Squibb / AstraZeneca

Glucose Control drug treatments

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE EXCELLENCE. Single Technology Appraisal. Canagliflozin in combination therapy for treating type 2 diabetes

CADTH THERAPEUTIC REVIEW New Drugs for Type 2 Diabetes: Second-Line Therapy Recommendations Report

Impact of Insulin Resistance, Body Mass Index, Disease Duration, and Duration of Metformin Use on the Efficacy of Vildagliptin

The first stop for professional medicines advice

New Drugs for Type 2 Diabetes: Second-Line Therapy Recommendations Report

Sulfoniluree e glinidi: pro e contro

Drug Class Review Newer Diabetes Medications and Combinations

CADTH Optimal Use Report

New Drug Evaluation: lixisenatide injection, subcutaneous

Oral Hypoglycemics and Risk of Adverse Cardiac Events: A Summary of the Controversy

YOU HAVE DIABETES. Angie O Connor Community Diabetes Nurse Specialist 25th September 2013

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Hypoglycaemia when adding sulphonylurea to metformin: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Diabetes Management DPP-4 Inhibitors

Supplementary Online Content

Index. Note: Page numbers of article titles are in boldface type.

LATE BREAKING STUDIES IN DM AND CAD. Will this change the guidelines?

Comparative Effectiveness of Dipeptidylpeptidase-4 Inhibitors in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Mixed Treatment Comparison

CAMBRIDGESHIRE JOINT PRESCRIBING GROUP DECISION DOCUMENT Recommendation made by CJPG to Commissioners and Prescribers

IDF Regions and global projections of the number of people with diabetes (20-79 years), 2013 and Diabetes Atlas -sixth Edition: IDF 2013

Dipeptidyl-Peptidase 4 (DPP-4) Inhibitors Drug Class Prior Authorization Protocol

Effective Health Care Program

Treatment Options for Diabetes: An Update

Horizon Scanning Technology Summary. Liraglutide for type 2 diabetes. National Horizon Scanning Centre. April 2007

Newer Drugs in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

What s New in Diabetes Medications. Jena Torpin, PharmD

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CLINICAL EXCELLENCE. Proposed Health Technology Appraisal

What s New in Diabetes Treatment. Disclosures

RESEARCH. Shanil Ebrahim, 7, 10, 12, 13 German Malaga, 14 Lorena P Rios, 15 Yingqiang Wang, 16 Qunfei Chen, 17 Gordon H Guyatt, 7, 18 Xin Sun 1

Sitagliptin: A component of incretin based therapy. Rezvan Salehidoost, M.D., Endocrinologist

Efficacy and Safety of Incretin-Based Therapies in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Early treatment for patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Incretin Hormones: Evolving Treatment Strategies For Type 2 Diabetes

Physiology of Normoglycemia

No Increased Cardiovascular Risk for Lixisenatide in ELIXA

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Diabetes Medications for Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

Anti-diabetic Treatment in Obese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Effects of Medication on Body Weight

Combination therapy with DPP-4 inhibitors and pioglitazone in type 2 diabetes: theoretical consideration and therapeutic potential

Volume : 05 Issue : 03 July-Sept Pages:

MANAGEMENT OF TYPE 2 DIABETES

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus hypoglycaemic agents

ABSTRACT. at their Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) recommended daily doses, added on to metformin and SU. Comprehensive

Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Agonists

Type Two Diabetes Mellitus Prescribing in New Zealand - What are we dispensing?

A Practical Approach to the Use of Diabetes Medications

Ahrén, Bo; Mathieu, Chantal; Bader, Giovanni; Schweizer, Anja; Foley, James E

Diabetes Treatment Update

New Treatment Options for Type 2 Diabetes: Incretin-Based Therapy

Data from an epidemiologic analysis of

Update on Agents for Type 2 Diabetes

The legally binding text is the original French version TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE OPINION. 2 December 2009

Chief of Endocrinology East Orange General Hospital

Essential Medicines List (EML) 2017

Abbreviations DPP-IV dipeptidyl peptidase IV DREAM Diabetes REduction Assessment with ramipril and rosiglitazone

The effective management of type 2

Liraglutide (Victoza) in combination with basal insulin for type 2 diabetes

Update on Agents for Type 2 Diabetes

Types of Diabetes that the Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor May Act Effectively and Safely

(Incretin) ( glucagon-like peptide-1 GLP-1 ) GLP-1. GLP-1 ( dipeptidyl peptidase IV DPP IV ) GLP-1 DPP IV GLP-1 exenatide liraglutide FDA 2 2 2

Modulating the Incretin System: A New Therapeutic Strategy for Type 2 Diabetes. Overview. Prevalence of Overweight in the U.S.

Oral Agents. Ian Gallen Consultant Community Diabetologist Royal Berkshire Hospital Reading UK

Patient Centric Treatment of Diabetes: The Role of GLP 1 Inhibitors

Wayne Gravois, MD August 6, 2017

How can we improve outcomes in Type 2 diabetes?

Update on Pharmacological Management in Type 2 Diabetes

Hot Topics: The Future of Diabetes Management Cutting Edge Medication and Technology-Based Care

Dr. Stanley Ho Medical Development Foundation Symposium Jan 2014 Advances in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus 2011

MOA: Long acting glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist

Achieving and maintaining good glycemic control is an

Review Article Effectiveness and Safety of Newer Antidiabetic Medications for Ramadan Fasting Diabetic Patients

A New Therapeutic Strategey for Type II Diabetes: Update 2008

Information for Patients

Reviewing Diabetes Guidelines. Newsletter compiled by Danny Jaek, Pharm.D. Candidate

Management of Type 2 Diabetes

Update on Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetic Management of the Cardiac Patient

Clinical Guidelines. Management of adult patients with diabetes undergoing endoscopic procedures

Management of Type 2 Diabetes. Why Do We Bother to Achieve Good Control in DM2. Insulin Secretion. The Importance of BP and Glucose Control

Oral Anti-diabetic Drugs in Older Adults with Diabetes

Dept of Diabetes Main Desk

The design of the liraglutide clinical trial programme

Diabetes Management Incretin Mimetics

Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia Consensus Statement on Perioperative Blood Glucose Management in Diabetic Patients Undergoing Ambulatory Surgery

Targeting Incretins in Type 2 Diabetes: Role of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and DPP-4 Inhibitors. Richard E. Pratley and Matthew Gilbert

Alia Gilani Health Inequalities Pharmacist

Transcription:

Supplementary Online Content Phung OJ, Scholle JM, Talwar M, Coleman CI. Effect of Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs Added to Therapy on Glycemic Control, Weight Gain, and Hypoglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes. JAMA. 2010;303(14):1410-1418. etable. e Characteristics of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus efigure 1. Overall Network Diagram of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus efigure 2. Network Diagram of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Change From e in A1c (%) With Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus efigure 3. Network Diagram of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating A1c Goal Achieved (RR) With Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus efigure 4. Network Diagram of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Change From e in Body Weight (kg) With Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus efigure 5. Network Diagram of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Overall Hypoglycemia (RR) With Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus efigure 6. Results of Mixed Treatment Comparison Meta-analysis Presented as Forest Plots This supplementary material has been provided by the authors to give readers additional information about their work.

etable. e Characteristics of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Study Name, Year N DeFronzo, 2009 10 N=370 Ferrannini, 2009 11 N=2789 Goodman, 2009 12 N=247 Nauck, 2009a 13 N=314 Nauck, 2009b 14 N = 608 Bolli, 2008 15,16 N=576 Jadad Score* Followup () Inclusion Criteria 2,2,1 24 A1c: 7-10% Dose: 1500-2550 Duration: 2 BMI: 40 1,2,1 52 A1c: 6.5-8.5% Dose: 1500 Duration: >4 BMI: 22-45 1,1,1 24 A1c: 7.5-11% Dose: 1500 Duration: 12 BMI: 22-40 2,1,1 26 A1c: 7-10% Dose: 1500 Duration: 12 BMI: 23-45 2,2,1 26 A1c: 7-11% (prestudy OAD monotherapy 3 ) or 7-10% (prestudy combination OAD 3 ) Dose: 3 week forced titration, final dose 2000 BID Duration: 3 following forced titration (6 total) BMI: 40 1,0,1 52 A1c: 7.5-11% Dose: 1500 Intervention s Evaluated Saxagliptin 5 Population Sample Characteristics size (Age, Males) 191 Age (yrs): 54.7 ± 9.6 Males (%): 53.9 Placebo 179 Age (yrs): 54.8 ± 10.2 Males (%): 53.6 Vildagliptin 100 Glimepiride up to 6 Vildagliptin 100 (in the morning) 1396 Age (yrs): 57.5 ± 9.06 Males (%): 52.8 1393 Age (yrs): 57.5±9.28 Males (%): 54.1 125 Age (yrs): 54.7 ± 10.3 Males (%): 52.8 Placebo 122 Age (yrs): 54.5 ± 9.7 Males (%): 67.2 Alogliptin 25 210 Age (yrs): 54 ± 11 Males (%): 54.3 Placebo 104 Age (yrs): 56 ± 11 Males (%): 48 Liraglutide 1.8 Glimepiride 4 242 Age (yrs): 57 ± 9 Males (%): 59 244 Age (yrs): 57 ±9 Males (%): 57 Placebo 122 Age (yrs): 56 ± 9 Males (%): 60 Vildagliptin 100 295 Age (yrs): 56.3 ± 9.3 Males (%): 61.7 e A1c (%) 8.1 ± 0.8 8.1 ± 7.31 ± 0.64 7.3 ± 0.65 e Fasting Plasma Glucose (l) e Weight (kg) 180 ± 47 87.3 ± 17.0 174 ± 44 87.1 ± 17.8 164.8 ± 41.2 164.8 ± 40.14 8.5 ± 1 194.4 ± 52.2 8.7 ± 7.9 ± 0.8 199.8 ± 50.4 e BMI ( ) 31.2 ± 4.7 31.6 ± 4.8 89.0 31.8 ± 5.27 88.6 31.7 ± 5.25 NR 31.7 ± 4.6 NR 31.7 ± 4.3 Duration of DM (years) 6.4 ± 4.7 NR 6.7 ± 5.6 NR 5.71 ± 5.18 5.75 ± 5.03 Metformi n Dose (mg) 1903.9 ± 413.5 1892.6 ± 408 NR 1889 ± 373.4 NR 1932.2 ± 410.7 171 ± 45 NR 32 ± 5 6 ± 4 1846 ± 470 8 ± 180 ± 50.4 NR 32 ± 6 6 ± 5 1868 ± 445 181.8 ± 41.4 NR 3 ± 4.6 180 ± 46.8 NR 31.2 ± 4.6 180 ± 41.4 NR 31.6 ± 4.4 196.2 ± 46.8 91.8 ± 18.5 32.2 ± 5.6 8 ± 5 NR 8 ± 5 NR 8 ± 6 NR 6.4 ± 4.9 2032 ± 454

Study Name, Year N Hamann, 2008 17 N=595 Khanolkar, 2008 18 N=50 Raz, 2008 19 N=190 Scott, 2008 20 N=273 Ahrén, 2007 21,22 N=71 Bosi, 2007 23 N=273 Jadad Score* Followup () Inclusion Criteria Duration: at least 4 week run-in BMI: 22-45 2,1,1 52 A1c: 7-10% Dose: >850 Duration: 8 BMI: 25 1,1,1 24 A1c: >6.5% Dose: 2000 Duration: 4 BMI: NR 2,1,1 30 A1c: 8-11% Dose: >1500 Duration: 6 BMI: 20 43 1,1,1 18 A1c: 7-11% Dose: 1500 Duration: 10 1,1,1 52 A1c: 7-9.5% Dose: 1500-3000 Duration: 3 BMI: 20 35 1,1,1 24 A1c: 7.5-11% Dose: 1500 Duration: 3 BMI: 22 45 Intervention s Evaluated Pioglitazone 30 Rosiglitazone 4 Glibenclimide 5 or Gliclazide 80 Rosiglitazone 4 Gliclazide 80 Sitagliptin 100 Population Sample Characteristics size (Age, Males) 281 Age (yrs): 57 ± 9.7 Males (%): 64.1 294 Age (yrs): 58.5 ± 9.6 Males (%): 53 301 Age (yrs): 59.3 ± 9.2 Males (%): 52 25 Age (yrs): 59 ± 39.54 Males (%): 56 25 Age (yrs): 56 ± 39.54 Males (%): 60 96 Age (yrs): 53.6 ± 9.5 Males (%): 51 Placebo 94 Age (yrs): 56.1 ± 9.5 Males (%): 41.5 Sitagliptin 100 Rosiglitazone 8 94 Age (yrs): 55.2 ± 9.8 Males (%): 55 87 Age (yrs): 54.8 ± 10.5 Males (%): 63 BMI: NR Placebo 92 Age (yrs): 55.3 ± 9.3 Males (%): 59 Vildagliptin 50 42 Age (yrs): 58.4 ± 9.2 Males (%): 61.9 Placebo 29 Age (yrs): 54.3 ± 12.2 Males (%): 75.9 Vildagliptin 100 143 Age (yrs): 53.9 ± 9.5 Males (%): 61.5 Placebo 130 Age (yrs): 54.5 ± 10.3 Males (%): 53.1 e A1c (%) e Fasting Plasma Glucose (l) e Weight (kg) 198 ± 48.6 91.2 ± 16.9 8 ± 189 ± 50.4 91.4 ± 17.1 8 ± 183.6 ± 52.2 7.33 ± 0.52 7.08 ± 0.69 9.3 ± 9.1 ± 0.8 88.9 ± 16.6 e BMI ( ) 32.1 ± 5.1 Duration of DM (years) Metformi n Dose (mg) 6.4 ± 5.2 2008 ± 450 33 ± 5.9 6.3 ± 5.4 NR 32.2 ± 4.9 NR NR 34.55 ± 8.83 NR NR 33.66 ± 8.18 201.6 ± 46.8 7.8 ± 157.5 ± 31.4 7.7 ± 0.8 7.7 ± 7.6 ± 0.6 7.8 ± 0.6 8.3 ± 81.5 ± 16.8 198 ± 43.2 81.2 ± 19.4 156.9 ± 31.6 83.1 ± 17.1 84.9 ± 18.5 160 ± 37.4 84.6 ± 16.5 172.8 ± 28.8 181.8 ± 32.4 178.2 ± 46.8 181.8 ± 43.2 30.1 ± 4.4 30.4 ± 5.3 30.3 ± 4.7 30.4 ± 5.5 NR 29.6 ± 3.7 NR 29.9 ± 3.6 NR 32.9 ± 5.0 NR 33.2 ± 6.1 6.4 ± 5.6 NR NR NR NR NR 6.5 NR 7.3 ± 5.3 NR 4.9 ± 3.5 NR 4.6 ± 4.0 NR 30 ± 4.5 5.4 ± 3.7 NR 5.8 ± 4.2 NR 4.6 ± 3.6 NR 5.8 ± 4.7 2099 ± 328 6.2 ± 5.3 2102 ± 320

Study Name, Year N Nauck, 2007 24 N=1172 Charbonnel, 2006 25 N=701 Garber, 2006 26 N=318 Ristic, 2006 27,28 N=213 DeFronzo, 2005 29 N=226 Feinglos, 2005 30 N=122 Jadad Score* Followup () Inclusion Criteria 1,1,1 52 A1c: 6.5-11% Dose: 1500 Duration: 2 BMI: NR 1,1,1 24 A1c: 7-10% Dose:1500 Duration: up to 19 BMI: NR 1,2,1 24 A1c: 7-12% Dose: 1500 Duration: 2 BMI: 23-45 2,2,1 52 A1c: 6.8-9% Dose:1000 Duration: >2 BMI: 20 35 1,2,1 30 A1c: 7.1-11% Dose: 1500 Duration: 3 BMI: 27 45 1,1,1 16 A1c: 7.0-8.5% Dose: 1000 Duration: 3 BMI: 27 38 Intervention s Evaluated Sitagliptin 100 Glipizide 5 (titrated up to a maximum of 20) Sitagliptin 100 Population Sample Characteristics size (Age, Males) 588 Age (yrs): 56.8 ± 9.3 Males (%): 57 584 Age (yrs): 56.6 ± 61.3 Males (%): 53.1 464 Age (yrs): 54.4 ± 10.4 Males (%): 55.8 Placebo 237 Age (yrs): 54.7 ± 9.7 Males (%): 59.5 Glibenclamide up to 10 Rosiglitazone up to 8 Nateglinide 180,360 or 540 Gliclazide 80,160 or 240 Exenatide 20 mcg/d 160 Age (yrs): 56 Males (%): 56 158 Age (yrs): 56 Males (%): 65 112 Age (yrs): 61.9 ± 1 Males (%): 56.3 101 Age (yrs): 61.5 ± 10.2 Males (%): 50.5 113 Age (yrs): 52 ± 11 Males (%): 60.2 Placebo 113 Age (yrs): 54 ± 9 Males (%): 59.3 Glipizide GITS 2.5 ay 61 Age (yrs): 57.7 ± 10.7 Males (%): 46 Placebo 61 Age (yrs): 58.8 ± 10 Males (%): 41 e A1c (%) 7.7 ± 7.6 ± 8.0 ± 0.8 8.0 ± 0.8 8.5 ± 1.2 7.65 ± 0.60 7.55 ± 0.57 8.2 ± 8.2 ± 7.45 ± 0.78 7.64 ± 0.78 e Fasting Plasma Glucose (l) 165.6 ± 41.4 163.8 ± 41.4 169.2 ± 41.4 174.6 ± 41.4 e Weight (kg) 89.5 ± 17.4 89.7 ± 17.5 86.7 ± 17.8 89.6 ± 17.5 e BMI ( ) 31.2 ± 5.0 31.3 ± 5.2 3 ± 5.3 31.5 ± 4.9 Duration of DM (years) 6.5 ± 6.1 NR 6.2 ± 5.4 NR 6.0 ± 5.0 NR 6.6 ± 5.5 NR 191 ± 52 93 ± 17 32 ± 5 5 ± 4 NR 188 ± 49 94 ± 18 32 ± 5 6 ± 5 NR 162.7 ± 27.5 153.7 ± 26.1 168 ± 46 101 ± 20 170 ± 40 100 ± 19 154 ± 31 90 ± 18.7 156 ± 31.2 90.8 ± 18.4 NR 28.6 ± 3.5 NR 30.0 ± 3.2 7.28 ± 6.34 6.31 ± 5.40 Metformi n Dose (mg) 1931 1834 34 ± 6 4.9 ± 4.7 NR 34 ± 6 6.6 ± 6.1 NR 31.7 ± 4.4 32.1 ± 4.9 6.5 1509 4.6 1513

Study Name, Year N Matthews, 2005 31 N=630 Jadad Score* Followup () Inclusion Criteria 1,2,1 52 A1c: 7.5-11% Dose: 50% of the maximum recommended dose or at the maximum tolerated dose Duration: 3 BMI: NR 1,1,1 26 A1c: NR Dose: 2500 Duration: initial 3-6 week titration phase prior to randomization BMI: NR 2,2,1 24 A1c: 6.8-11% Dose: 1500 Duration: 3 BMI: 20 35 2,2,1 20 A1c: NR Dose: 2550 Duration: 1 month BMI: 23-40 for females; 25-40 for males 2,2,0 32 A1c: 7.5-10.5% Dose: 1500-2500 Duration: 3 BMI: 23-40 2,1,1 26 A1c: NR Dose: 2500 Duration: NR BMI: 22-38 Gómez- Perez, 2002 32 N=70 Marre, 2002 33 N=312 Charpentier, 2001 34 N = 222 Van Gaal, 2001 35 N=152 Fonseca, 2000 36 N=223 Intervention s Evaluated Pioglitazone up to 45 Gliclazide up to 320 Rosiglitazone 8 Population Sample Characteristics size (Age, Males) 317 Age (yrs): 56 ± 9.2 Males (%): 50.8 313 Age (yrs): 57 ± 9.0 Males (%): 49.2 36 Age (yrs): 54.2 ± 9.3 Males (%): 19.4 Placebo 34 Age (yrs): 53.4 ± 7.5 Males (%): 29.4 Nateglinide 120 160 Age (yrs): 57.3 ± 10.5 Males (%): 61.3 Placebo 152 Age (yrs): 56.4 ± 10.3 Males (%): 55.3 Glimepiride 1 (titrated up to 2, 4 or 6 ) 147 Age (yrs): 56.8 Males (%): 59 Placebo 75 Age (yrs): 56.7 Males (%): 60 Miglitol up to 300 77 Age (yrs): 57.9 ± 10 Males (%): 42 Placebo 75 Age (yrs): 57.9 ± 8.5 Males (%): 49 Rosiglitazone 8 ay 110 Age (yrs): 58.3 ± 8.8 Males (%): 68.2 Placebo 113 Age (yrs): 58.8 ± 9.2 Males (%): 74.3 e A1c (%) 8.71 ± 8.53 ± 0.89 e Fasting Plasma Glucose (l) 212.4 ± 55.8 203.4 ± 46.8 e Weight (kg) 91.8 ± 16.2 92.7 ± 17.4 e BMI ( ) 32.6 ± 5.0 32.6 ± 5.8 NR NR NR 27.6 ± 3.2 Duration of DM (years) 5.8 ± 5.1 1726 5.5 ± 5.1 1705 10.7±7.0 NR NR NR NR 28.5±3.9 9.1±5.6 NR 8.18 178.2 ± 45.5 8.20 181.8 ± 44.5 6.4 ± 6.8 ± 1.2 8.5 ± 8.9 ± 1.5 8.6 ± 1.3 187.2 ± 32.4 190.8 ± 32.4 208.8 ± 48.6 208.8 ± 37.8 219.42 ± 54.9 213.66 ± 52.38 85.2 ± 13.91 84.9 ± 14.79 29.3 ± 3.5 29.6 ± 3.9 6.8 ± 5.5 NR 6.5 ± 6.5 NR 81.2 29.5 5.6 NR 82.2 29.2 7.0 NR Metformi n Dose (mg) NR 30 ± 4.0 NR 1807 ± 371 NR 29.7 ± 3.9 NR 29.8 ± 3.9 NR 30.3 ± 4.4 NR 1812 ± 396 8.3 ± 6.3 NR 7.3 ± 5.7 NR

Study Name, Year N Halimi, 2000 37 N=129 Moses, 1999 38,39 N = 54 Rosenstock, 1998 40 N = 148 Jadad Score* Followup () Inclusion Criteria 1,1,1 24 A1c: 7-11% Dose: 1700 or 2550 Duration: 2 BMI: 25-35 1,1,1 12 A1c: > 7.1% Dose: 1000 3000 Duration: > 6 BMI: 21 1,1,0 24 A1c: 7-10% Dose: 2000 or 2500 Duration:NR BMI: NR Intervention s Evaluated Acarbose up to 300 Population Sample Characteristics size (Age, Males) 59 Age (yrs): 56 ± 9.2 Males (%): 47 Placebo 70 Age (yrs): 55 ± 10 Males (%): 63 Repaglinide up to 12 27 Age (yrs): 57.2 ± 8.3 Males (%): 67 Placebo 27 Age (yrs): 57.8 ± 9.5 Males (%): 63 Acarbose up to 300 74 Age (yrs): 57.2 Males (%): 61 Placebo 74 Age (yrs): 55.9 Males (%): 49 e A1c (%) 8.6 ± 8.5 ± 8.3 ± 8.6 ± e Fasting Plasma Glucose (l) e Weight (kg) e BMI ( ) 189 ± 55.8 NR 30.1 ± 3.3 189 ± 48.6 NR 29.7 ± 3.3 184 ± 4 NR 33.2 ± 5.6 194.4 ± 54.54 NR 31.8 ± 6.0 Duration of DM (years) 9.5 ± 7.4 NR 9 ± 7.5 NR Metformi n Dose (mg) 5.9 ± 2.9 1800 ± 800 8.0 ± 6.2 1800 ± 700 8.46 203.7 94.4 32.4 7.2 NR 8.17 195.2 91.5 32.3 7.8 NR Values reported as mean±sd when available. * Jadad score presented as subscores for randomization (up to 2 points), double-blinding (up to 2 points), description of withdrawals (up to 1 point). These individual components can be summed to achieve the total Jadad score. Abbreviations: A1c=glycosylated hemoglobin; BMI=body mass index; NR=not reported; yrs=years

Placebo 3 studies Reference 12,29,32 1 study Reference 25,26 2 studies Reference 31,36,37 4 studies Reference 13,16,24,28 3 studies Reference 18,30,34 8 studies Reference 8,10,11,17-21,23 3 studies Reference 33,35,38 1 study Reference 12 2 studies Reference 12,27 2 studies Reference 9,22 2 studies Reference 14,15,18 efigure 1. Overall Network Diagram of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus All agents are in combination with metformin. Lines represent the presence of direct comparison trial(s). Abbreviations: AGI=alpha-glucosidase inhibitor; DPP-4=dipeptidyl peptidase-4; GLP- 1=glucagon-like peptide-1; SU=sulfonylurea; TZD=thiazolidinediones

Placebo N=4; -0.10 (-0.32, 0.11) -0.08 (-0.31, 0.13) N=1; 0.00 (-0.28, 0.28) -0.32 (-0.77, 0.12) N=3; -0.79 (-5, -0.43) -0.79 (-7, -0.62) N=3; -0 (-1.62, -0.38) -0.85 (-8, -0.66) N=2; -9 (-9, -0.78) -7 (-1.30, -0.65) -0.21 (-0.80, 0.36) N=1; -0.13 (-0.42, 0.16) -0.12 (-0.49, 0.25) -0.21 (-0.56, 0.14) N=2; -0.71 (-1.24, -0.18) -0.65 (-7, -0.36) -0.32 (-0.76, 0.14) N=2; -0.07 (-0.13, -0.01) -0.01 (-0.22, 0.22) N=2; -0.65 (-1, -0.19) -0.64 (-3, -0.26) -0.14 (-0.63, 0.34) N=8; -0.79 (-4, -0.63) -0.78 (-3, -0.64) -0.13 (-0.45, 0.20) -0.01 (-0.51, 0.48) -0.12 (-0.65, 0.42) N=2; -0.03 (-0.16, 0.10) -0.13 (-0.44, 0.16) -0.14 (-0.55, 0.26) -0.33 (-0.84, 0.17) -0.18 (-0.52, 0.17) efigure 2. Network Diagram of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Change From e in A1c (%) With Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus All agents are in combination with metformin. Solid lines represent the presence of direct evidence along with indirect evidence. Dotted lines represent the presence of indirect evidence only. Traditional pairwise meta-analysis results are reported as the top line in the format n=number of studies; change in A1c (95%CI). Mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis results, which combine both direct and indirect evidence are reported in the format change in A1c (95%CrI). Arrows represent the favored drug in the mixed-treatment comparison metaanalysis and results reported are referent to the arrow origin. Abbreviations: AGI=alpha-glucosidase inhibitor; DPP-4=dipeptidyl peptidase-4; GLP- 1=glucagon-like peptide-1; SU=sulfonylurea; TZD=thiazolidinediones

Placebo N=1; 1.27 (3, 1.58) 0 (0.69, 1.47) N=1; 7 (4, 1.46) 1.29 (0.79, 2.45) N=1; 3.38 (2.02, 5.83) 2.49 (1.95, 3.32) N=1; 1.69 (1.24, 2.33) 2.71 (1.74, 3.80) N=1; 3.96 (2.37, 6.79) 3.20 (2.01, 6.24) N=1; 1.33 (9, 1.82) 0 (0.68, 1.64) 1.21 (0.60, 1.92) 1.42 (0.73, 2.92) N=2; 1 (3, 0) 1 (0.79, 1.29) N=1; 3.20 (1.47, 7.58) 2.25 (1.48, 3.90) N=6; 2.44 (1.78, 3.33) 2.51 (2.04, 3.22) 2 (0.65, 1.72) 7 (0.71, 2.69) N=1; 5 (0, 1.47) 9 (0.67, 1.47) 1.27 (0.77, 2.45) efigure 3. Network Diagram of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating A1c Goal Achieved (RR) With Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus All agents are in combination with metformin. Solid lines represent the presence of direct evidence along with indirect evidence. Dotted lines represent the presence of indirect evidence only. Traditional pairwise meta-analysis results are reported as the top line in the format n=number of studies; relative risk (95%CI). Mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis results, which combine both direct and indirect evidence are reported in the format relative risk (95%CrI). Arrows represent the favored drug in the mixed-treatment comparison metaanalysis and results reported are referent to the arrow origin. Thus, results may not correspond to numerical results reported elsewhere. Results referent to the second agent in a comparison equal 1/RR. Abbreviations: AGI=alpha-glucosidase inhibitor; DPP-4=dipeptidyl peptidase-4; GLP- 1=glucagon-like peptide-1; SU=sulfonylurea; TZD=thiazolidinediones

Placebo N=2; 0.20 (-2.35, 2.74) -0.05 (-5, 4) -4.05 (-5.41, -2.75) N=2; -1.99 (-3.12, -0.86) -2.06 (-2.96, -5) N=1; -2.30 (-2.90, -1.70) -2.08 (-3.17, -8) N=2; -1.76 (-2.90, -0.62) -1.74 (-3.11, -0.48) -3.23 (-5.98, -0.48) -0.24 (-1.75, 1.46) -0.32 (-2.00, 1.60) N=2; -2.11 (-2.80, -1.42) -2.17 (-3.02, -1.32) N=2; -1 (-1.46, -0.35) -1.77 (-3.28, -0.46) -3.51 (-5.63, -1.70) N=1; -1.80 (-2.83, -0.77) -1.80 (-3.79, 0.21) -3.81 (-5.89, -1.66) N=4; -0.09 (-0.47, 0.30) -0.14 (-4, 0.63) -1.92 (-3.65, -0.40) -3.58 (-6.11, -1.20) -3.22 (-5.41, -9) N=2; -2.12 (-2.60, -1.63) -1.67 (-2.91, -0.46) -1.66 (-3.79, 0.54) -0.06 (-2.42, 2.46) -1.58 (-3.18, -0.07) efigure 4. Network Diagram of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Change From e in Body Weight (kg) With Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus All agents are in combination with metformin. Solid lines represent the presence of direct evidence along with indirect evidence. Dotted lines represent the presence of indirect evidence only. Traditional pairwise meta-analysis results are reported as the top line in the format n=number of studies; change in weight (95%CI). Mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis results, which combine both direct and indirect evidence are reported in the format change in weight (95%CrI). Arrows represent the favored drug in the mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis and results reported are referent to the arrow origin. Abbreviations: AGI=alpha-glucosidase inhibitor; DPP-4=dipeptidyl peptidase-4; GLP- 1=glucagon-like peptide-1; SU=sulfonylurea; TZD=thiazolidinediones

Placebo N=3; 0.11 (0.04, 0.29) 0.12 (0.04, 0.30) N=1; 0.17 (0.08, 0.36) 0.20 (0.04, 7) N=3; 0.38 (0.11, 1.32) 0.22 (0.09, 0.47 N=2; 2.04 (0.50, 8.23) 0.56 (0.19, 1.69) N=2; 4 (0.42, 2.12) 0.89 (0.22, 3.96) 0.73 (0.01, 19.50) N=1; 3 (0.51, 1.69) 0.60 (0.12, 2.22) 0.07 (0.01, 0.33) N=2; 0.13 (0.02, 6) 0.13 (0.02, 0.47) 0.12 (0.01, 0.79) N=2; 0.13 (0.09, 0.19) 0.14 (0.05, 0.36) N=2; 0.60 (0.08, 4.55) 0.42 (0.01, 9.00) 0.09 (0.001, 2.16) N=8; 0.67 (0.30, 1.50) 0.63 (0.26, 1.71) 0.08 (0.01, 0.37) 0.05 (7.69E-4, 1.56) 0.62 (0.10, 3.70) N=2; 0.65 (0.08, 5.26) 0 (0.24, 2.86) 0.65 (0.01, 16.67) 0.45 (0.01, 4.29) 0.69 (0.13, 4.00) efigure 5. Network Diagram of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Overall Hypoglycemia (RR) With Noninsulin Antidiabetic Drugs in Addition to in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus All agents are in combination with metformin. Solid lines represent the presence of direct evidence along with indirect evidence. Dotted lines represent the presence of indirect evidence only. Traditional pairwise meta-analysis results are reported as the top line in the format n=number of studies; relative risk (95%CI). Mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis results, which combine both direct and indirect evidence are reported in the format relative risk (95%CrI). Arrows in the mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis represent the favored drug and results reported are referent to the arrow origin. Thus, results may not correspond to numerical results reported elsewhere. Results referent to the second agent in a comparison equal 1/RR. Abbreviations: AGI=alpha-glucosidase inhibitor; DPP-4=dipeptidyl peptidase-4; GLP- 1=glucagon-like peptide-1; SU=sulfonylurea; TZD=thiazolidinediones

A. Change in A1c (%) B. A1c Goal Achieved -0.79 (-7, -0.62) 2.49 (1.95, 3.32) -0.65 (-7, -0.36) 2.25 (1.48, 3.90) -0.85 (-8, -0.66) 2.71 (1.74, 3.80) -0.64 (-3, -0.26) -0.78 (-3, -0.64) No data 2.51 (2.04, 3.22) -7 (-1.30, -0.65) 3.20 (2.01, 6.24) Placebo (Referent) Placebo (Referent) -2.0-1.5 - -0.5 0.0 0.5 Weighted Mean Difference (95% Credible Interval) 0.5 1 2 5 10 Relative Risk (95% Credible Interval) C. Change in Body Weight (kg) D. Overall Hypoglycemia 2.06 (5, 2.96) 4.57 (2.11, 11.45) 1.77 (0.46, 3.28) 7.50 (2.12, 41.52) 2.08 (8, 3.17) 0.56 (0.19, 1.69) -1.80 (-3.79, 0.21) 0.42 (0.01, 9.00) -0.14 (-4, 0.63) 0.63 (0.26, 1.71) -1.74 (-3.11, -0.48) 0.89 (0.22, 3.96) Placebo (Referent) Placebo (Referent) -5.0-2.5 0.0 2.5 5.0 Weighted Mean Difference (95% Credible Interval) 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 Relative Risk (95% Credible Interval) efigure 6. Results of Mixed Treatment Comparison Meta-analysis Presented as Forest Plots The squares represent the pooled effect size for each class of oral antidiabetic drug. Error bars represent 95% credible intervals (CrIs). The number of trials included in each mixed-treatment comparison analysis is as follows: A=26 trials, B=13 trials, C=15 trials, and D=24 trials. Abbreviations: AGI=alpha-glucosidase inhibitor; DPP-4=dipeptidyl peptidase-4; GLP- 1=glucagon-like peptide-1; SU=sulfonylurea; TZD=thiazolidinediones