首页> 外文期刊>The Lancet >Incident diabetes in clinical trials of antihypertensive drugs: a network meta-analysis.
【24h】

Incident diabetes in clinical trials of antihypertensive drugs: a network meta-analysis.

机译:抗高血压药物临床试验中的突发性糖尿病:网络荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

BACKGROUND: The effect of different classes of antihypertensive drugs on incident diabetes mellitus is controversial because traditional meta-analyses are hindered by heterogeneity across trials and the absence of trials comparing angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors with angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB). We therefore undertook a network meta-analysis, which accounts for both direct and indirect comparisons to assess the effects of antihypertensive agents on incident diabetes. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review up to Sept 15, 2006, and identified 48 randomised groups of 22 clinical trials with 143,153 participants who did not have diabetes at randomisation and so were eligible for inclusion in our analysis. 17 trials enrolled patients with hypertension, three enrolled high-risk patients, and one enrolled those with heart failure. The main outcome was the proportion of patients who developed diabetes. FINDINGS: Initial drug therapy used in the trials (and the number of patients with diabetes of the total number at risk) included: an ARB (1189 of 14,185, or 8.38%), ACE inhibitor (1618 of 22,941, or 7.05%), calcium-channel blocker (CCB, 2791 of 38,607, or 7.23%), placebo (1686 of 24,767, or 6.81%), beta blocker (2705 of 35,745, or 7.57%), or diuretic (998 of 18,699, or 5.34%). With an initial diuretic as the standard of comparison (eight groups), the degree of incoherence (a measure of how closely the entire network fits together) was small (omega=0.000017, eight degrees of freedom). The odds ratios were: ARB (five groups) 0.57 (95% CI 0.46-0.72, p<0.0001); ACE inhibitor (eight groups) 0.67 (0.56-0.80, p<0.0001); CCB (nine groups): 0.75 (0.62-0.90, p=0.002); placebo (nine groups) 0.77 (0.63-0.94, p = 0.009); beta blocker (nine groups) 0.90 (0.75-1.09, p=0.30). These estimates changed little in many sensitivity analyses. INTERPRETATION: The association of antihypertensive drugs with incident diabetes is therefore lowest for ARB and ACE inhibitors followed by CCB and placebo, beta blockers and diuretics in rank order.
机译:背景:不同类型的降压药对糖尿病的影响是有争议的,因为传统的荟萃分析受到试验间异质性的阻碍,并且缺乏将血管紧张素转化酶(ACE)抑制剂与血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)进行比较的试验。因此,我们进行了网络荟萃分析,该分析说明了直接和间接比较,以评估降压药对糖尿病的影响。方法:直到2006年9月15日,我们进行了系统的审查,确定了48个随机组,共22个临床试验,其中143,153名参与者没有随机分组的糖尿病,因此有资格纳入我们的分析。高血压患者17例,高危患者3例,心力衰竭患者1例。主要结局是患糖尿病的患者比例。结果:试验中使用的初始药物疗法(以及处于危险总数的糖尿病患者人数)包括:ARB(1189,占14185,或8.38%),ACEI抑制剂(1618,占22,941,或7.05%),钙通道阻滞剂(CCB,2791,38,607,或7.23%),安慰剂(1,686,24,767,或6.81%),β受体阻滞剂(2,705,35,745,或7.57%),或利尿剂(998,18,699,或5.34%) 。以初始利尿剂为比较标准(八组),不连贯程度(衡量整个网络紧密配合的程度)很小(ω= 0.000017,八个自由度)。优势比为:ARB(五组)0.57(95%CI 0.46-0.72,p <0.0001); ACE抑制剂(8组)0.67(0.56-0.80,p <0.0001); CCB(9组):0.75(0.62-0.90,p = 0.002);安慰剂(9组)0.77(0.63-0.94,p = 0.009); β受体阻滞剂(九组)0.90(0.75-1.09,p = 0.30)。在许多敏感性分析中,这些估计值变化不大。解释:因此,对于ARB和ACE抑制剂,降压药物与糖尿病的相关性最低,其次是CCB和安慰剂,β受体阻滞剂和利尿剂。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号