Evidence map›Insulin × glycemic control›PMID 21756323›Full record

Trial reportCardiovascular diabetology2011

Double-blind, randomized, multicentre, and active comparator controlled investigation of the effect of pioglitazone, metformin, and the combination of both on cardiovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving stable basal insulin therapy: the PIOCOMB study.

Markolf Hanefeld, Andreas Pfützner, Thomas Forst, Iris Kleine, Winfried Fuchs

Open access · goldFull text readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cardiovascular diabetology, 2011. The graph read 1 number from its abstract, feeding 1 cell of the map, but none could be read as for or against, so it casts no vote. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

1number the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

Read, but not usablea number the graph found but could not read as for or against

Glycemic controlcomparator not stated · ascvd, t2dfeeds one cell of the map
increase 2.50p = 0.1539
C (p = 0.0289).Insulin dosage was reduced by 7.3 units in group B (p < 0.0001), by 6.0 units in C (p = 0.0004), but was increased by 2.5 units (p = 0.1539) in A at follow up.
FeedsInsulin×glycemic control

clause the extractor read what became the number

2 · Its place on the map

Where it lands on the map

Rows are treatments, columns are outcomes. The coloured squares are the cells this paper feeds, coloured by the vote it casts there. Click one to jump to what this paper adds to it.

supports the treatmentfavours the comparatorno clear differenceread, but no usable result
3 · What it changes

What it adds to each cell

For every cell the paper feeds: the belief in the claim with and without this paper, and this paper's estimate drawn against every other readable study in the cell. The ringed dot is this paper.

Insulin×glycemic control

No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →

40 readable studies in this cell: 14 favour the treatment, 14 find no difference, 13 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.50contested · 9 families support, 6 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the comparatorfavours the treatment →
0 · no effect
NCT036893742,274 enrolled · 2018
Δ -0.29-0.38 to -0.20
NCT037306622,002 enrolled · 2018
Δ -0.99-1.13 to -0.86
NCT013360231,663 enrolled · 2011
Treatment contrast -0.64-0.75 to -0.53
NCT038829701,444 enrolled · 2019
Δ -0.86-1.00 to -0.72
NCT045379231,428 enrolled · 2020
Δ -1.10-1.24 to -0.97
NCT032680051,264 enrolled · 2017
Δ -0.04-0.11 to 0.03
NCT020581471,170 enrolled · 2014
Δ -0.78-0.90 to -0.67
NCT021289321,089 enrolled · 2014
Δ -0.81-0.96 to -0.67
NCT009606611,036 enrolled · 2009
Δ -0.04-0.18 to 0.11
NCT00856986987 enrolled · 2009
Δ -0.52-0.68 to -0.36
NCT01117350978 enrolled · 2010
Δ 2.54-3.88 to 8.93
NCT03214380933 enrolled · 2017
Δ 0.06-0.05 to 0.16

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

4 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

5 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Metformin for preventing the progression of chronic kidney disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024 · on this map
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Metformin Directly Binds to MMP-9 to Improve Plaque Stability.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
6 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

7 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Markolf HanefeldGWT-TUD mbH, Fiedlerstr. 34, 01307 Dresden, Germany. hanefeld@gwtonline-zks.de
Andreas Pfützner
Thomas Forst
Iris Kleine
Winfried Fuchs
Institut für Klinische Forschung und Entwicklung · DETakeda (Germany) · DEGWT-TUD (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

8 · The paper itself

Abstract

The marked sentences are the ones the graph read a number from.

backgroundWe analyzed specific effects of an add-on therapy with pioglitazone compared to metformin and their combination in patients with basal insulin treatment on biomarkers of CV risk.

methodsIn this double-blind, randomized, multicentre, active comparator controlled trial, 121 patients with type 2 diabetes were enrolled. Inclusions: treatment with basal insulin, HbA(1C) 6.5%-8.5%, age 30-75 years. After glargine therapy over 2 weeks for titration towards FBG ≤ 7.8 mmol/L, patients received either (A) bid 850 mg metformin (n = 42), (B) bid 15 mg pioglitazone (n = 40), or (C) 30 mg pioglitazone plus 1.7 g metformin (n = 39) over 6 months. Matrix Metal Proteinase 9 (MMP-9) was primary objective, together with biomarkers of CV risk.

resultsPioglitazone (B) reduced MMP-9 versus baseline by 54.1 ± 187.1 ng/mL, with metformin (A) it was increased by 49.6 ± 336.2 ng/mL (p = 0.0345; B vs. A), and with the combination of both (C) it was decreased by 67.8 ± 231.4 ng/mL (A vs. C: p = 0.0416; B vs. C: p = 0.8695). After logarithmic transformation due to high variances the exploratory results showed significance for A vs. B (p = 0.0043) and for A vs. C (p = 0.0289).Insulin dosage was reduced by 7.3 units in group B (p < 0.0001), by 6.0 units in C (p = 0.0004), but was increased by 2.5 units (p = 0.1539) in A at follow up. Reduction in hs-CRP was significant within treatment groups for B (p = 0.0098) and C (p < 0.0001), and between the groups for A vs. C (p = 0.0124). All three single regimens reduced PAI-1. Adiponectin was significantly elevated in B and C (p < 0.0001) and between-groups. HbA(1C) was only significantly decreased in the combination group. No significant effects were observed for NFkB and PGFα. peripheral edema were seen in 11.9% vs. 40.0% vs. 20.5%, and weight change was -0.7 kg vs. +4.3 kg vs. +2.7 kg (A vs. B vs. C).

conclusionsAddition of pioglitazone but not of metformin reduces MMP-9, hs-CRP and increased insulin sensitivity and adiponectin in this study. The combination of both had no additional effect on inflammation. Pioglitazone is suggested to be a rational add-on therapy to basal insulin in patients with high CV risk.

Indexed as

AdiponectinAdultAgedCardiovascular DiseasesC-Reactive ProteinDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Dose-Response Relationship, DrugDouble-Blind MethodDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinMaleMatrix Metalloproteinase 9AdiponectinC-Reactive ProteinGlycated HemoglobinHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinMatrix Metalloproteinase 9MetforminPioglitazoneThiazolidinediones

Identifiers

PMID21756323
PMCPMC3160877
OpenAlexW2151222320

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.