ReviewCureus2025
Insulin Versus Established GLP-1 Receptor Agonists, DPP-4 Inhibitors, and SGLT-2 Inhibitors for Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-Term Association Between GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Use and Incident Pancreatic Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Cohort Study Using the TriNetX Network.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Article
- Antidiabetic Properties ofLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Limited head-to-head studies compare established glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4is), and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) to insulin in the management of uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of traditional GLP-1 RAs, DPP-4is, and SGLT-2is compared with insulin. Comprehensive searches were conducted in the Cochrane Database, PubMed, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and EMBASE for publications from January 2010 to June 2022, with an additional search extended through June 2025 to capture newly published studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing insulin with established GLP-1 RAs, DPP-4is, or SGLT-2is were included. Thirteen trials involving 5,807 participants were identified. Nine trials compared GLP-1 RAs to insulin, four compared DPP-4is to insulin, and one examined SGLT-2i combined with DPP-4i versus insulin. Compared with insulin, traditional non-insulin agents were associated with greater reductions in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (mean difference (MD) = -0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.5 to -0.03), body weight (MD = -3.27, 95% CI -4.16 to -2.38), and systolic blood pressure (MD = -3.55, 95% CI -4.92 to -2.17). Insulin use carried a higher relative risk of hypoglycemia (risk ratio (RR) = 2.24, 95% CI 1.88-2.67). Subgroup analyses showed that GLP-1 RAs were superior to insulin in reducing HbA1c and hypoglycemic events, whereas DPP-4is achieved similar glycemic control with improved safety profiles. These findings suggest that established GLP-1 RAs, DPP-4is, and SGLT-2is offer superior or comparable efficacy with better safety than insulin in insulin-naïve patients with uncontrolled T2DM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.