Problem Is the problem a priority? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
Yes | Different guidelines propose different algorithms for the pharmacological treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes and renal insufficiency30. However, there are relatively few randomized controlled trials exploring the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents in patients with chronic renal failure | |
Desirable Effects How substantial are the desirable anticipated effects? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
Varies |
Effects of different classes of drugs, as reported in direct comparisons27 (only statistical significant results are reported): 52-week HbA1c: compared to metformin GLP-1 RA: − 0.2% Acarbose: + 0.4% 104-week HbA1c: compared to metformin SGLT-2i: − 0.2% Sulfonylureas: + 0.1% Insulin: + 0.4% Overall effects of different classes on MACE 28 : Metformina: − 48%; GLP-1 RA: − 11%; SGLT-2i: − 11% Overall effects of different classes on all-cause mortality: GLP-1 RA: − 11%; SGLT-2i: − 14%; Sulfonylureas: + 11%. Although the increased risk of mortality did not reach statistical significance in any of the trials considered, the overall mortality (combining all the trials using a meta-analytical approach) for sulfonylureas was higher in comparison with placebo/other classes Quality of life GLP-1RA are associated with improved quality of life in comparison with DPP-4 inhibitors or insulin |
The effects on MACE and all-cause mortality derive from RCTs performed on patients with previous cardiovascular events |
Undesirable Effects How substantial are the undesirable anticipated effects? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
Varies | Severe hypoglycemia: Sulphonylureas increase the risk of hypoglycemia (OR: 3.7) in comparison with metformin27 |
Metformin: gastrointestinal side effects; rare cases of lactic acidosis Alpha-glucosidase inhibitors: gastrointestinal side effects Sulfonylureas: weight gain; hypoglycemia Pioglitazone: fluid retention; weight gain; heart failure; bone fracture DPP-4 inhibitors: suspected pancreatitis; rare cases of pemphigoid GLP-1RA: gastrointestinal side effects; cholelithiasis; pancreatitis SGLT-2 inhibitors: genito-urinary infections; rare keto-acidosis Insulin: hypoglycemia and weight gain |
Certainty of evidence What is the overall certainty of the evidence of effects? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
Low |
Moderate for MACE (pioglitazone and sulfonylureas); Low for all the other clinical outcomes |
|
Values Is there important uncertainty about or variability in how much people value the main outcomes? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
No important uncertainty or variability |
No evidence of variability or uncertainty HbA1c, body weight, severe hypoglycemia, macrovascular complications, and mortality are already considered among critical outcomes of the treatment of type 2 diabetes by scientific societies23−26 |
|
Balance of effects Does the balance between desirable and undesirable effects favor the intervention or the comparison? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
Varies | The balance of effects favor metformin, GLP-1 RA, and SGLT-2i over other classes of drugs, whereas it is unfavorable for sulfonylureas | |
Resources required How large are the resource requirements (costs)? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
Varies |
Low for metformin, pioglitazone, sulfonylureas, acarbose Moderate for other classes, higher for GLP-1RA and insulin |
Some bioequivalent molecules could reduce direct costs for the most expensive approaches (i.e., insulin and GLP-1RA) |
Certainty of evidence of required resources What is the certainty of the evidence of resource requirements (costs)? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
High | Several good-quality studies explored this issue | |
Cost-effectiveness Does the cost-effectiveness of the intervention favor the intervention or the comparison? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
Varies | The cost-effective evaluation depends on the form of the drug used | |
Equity What would be the impact on health equity? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
Probably no impact | Drugs recommended in the present guideline are already considered as first- and second-line treatments for patients without previous cardiovascular events in the principal guidelines23−26 | |
Acceptability Is the intervention acceptable to key stakeholders? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
Probably yes | No specific evidence is available on this issue | |
Feasibility Is the intervention feasible to implement? | ||
Judgment | Research evidence | Additional considerations |
Probably yes | A large part of patients with type 2 diabetes in Italy is already treated with metformin, whereas GLP-1 RA and SGLT-2i are still relatively underutilized and sulfonylureas still prescribed |