ABSTRACT
Objective:To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi in the treatment of type 2 diabetes, providing evidence-based support for rational clinical medication.Methods:A systematic review was conducted by retrieving articles from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Sinomed, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases to collect randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi(intervention group) with placebo or other anti-hyperglycemic drugs(control group) in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The search was conducted from the inception of the databases up to August 2022. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. Results:A total of 11 studies with 6 392 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis showed that in terms of efficacy, compared to insulin and GLP-1RAs, iGlarLixi demonstrated better reduction in patients′ HbA 1C levels(Insulin group WMD=-0.40, 95% CI -0.54--0.27, P<0.001; GLP-1RAs group WMD=-0.86, 95% CI -1.05--0.68, P<0.001), increased HbA 1C target rate(Insulin group OR=2.83, 95% CI 2.00-3.99, P<0.001; GLP-1RAs group OR=6.45, 95% CI 4.81-8.64, P<0.001), increased HbA 1C control rate without weight gain(Insulin group OR=3.00, 95% CI 2.43-3.71, P<0.001; GLP-1RAs group OR=2.67, 95% CI 1.76-4.06, P<0.001). Furthermore, iGlarLixi showed an advantage in weight reduction compared to the insulin group and demonstrated superior reduction in fasting plasma glucose compared to the GLP-1RAs group. In terms of safety, the incidence of hypoglycemic events in the iGlarLixi group was similar to that in the insulin group, but the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events was higher than that in the insulin group. There was no difference in the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events compared with GLP-1RAs, but the incidence of hypoglycemic events was higher in the iGlarLixi group. The incidence of serious adverse events was similar to that in the insulin and GLP-1RAs groups(Insulin group OR=0.94, 95% CI 0.71-1.23, P=0.640; GLP-1RAs group OR=0.97, 95% CI 0.61-1.52, P=0.880). Conclusion:iGlarLixi is superior to insulin but inferior to GLP-1RAs in reducing body weight, and the overall incidence of adverse events is not significantly different from that of insulin and GLP-1RAs, indicating that iGlarLixi is well tolerated and safe, and has a good clinical application prospect.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous bolus of tenecteplase in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke （AIS）， in order to provide evidence-based support for the clinic’s choice of intravenous thrombolytic drugs. METHODS Randomized controlled trials （RCTs） about the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase versus alteplase （control） in the treatment of AIS were collected from PubMed， Embase， the Cochrane Library， Web of Science， Sinomed， CNKI， Wanfang Data， and VIP during the inception to June 2022. Two evaluators independently screened the literature， extracted data from the literature， assessed the bias risk of included study， and then conduct meta-analysis by using Stata 15 software. RESULTS A total of 8 literature were included， involving 2 129 patients. Meta-analysis results showed that the early improvement rate of neurological function [OR（95%CI）＝2.44（1.09，5.46），P＝0.030] and the good rate of neurological function recovery （modified Rankin scale score 0-2 after 90 days of intravenous thrombolysis treatment） [OR（95%CI）＝1.54（1.00，2.36），P＝0.048] were higher in 0.25 mg/kg tenecteplase group （medium dose） than alteplase group. According to meta-analysis of other outcome indicators （including recanalization rate， percentage of reperfusion lesions， excellent rate of neurological function recovery， the incidence rate of bleeding， the incidence rate of symptomatic intraventricular hemorrhage and all-cause mortality rate within 90 d）， the tenecteplase group had no statistically significant difference with alteplase group （P＞0.05）. CONCLUSIONS Compared with alteplase， medium dose of tenecteplase has some advantages in terms of early neurological function improvement and neurological function recovery， and it does not increase the risk of adverse events.