SynthesisEndocrine2026
Comparison of somatostatin analogues on glucose metabolism: A systematic review and network Meta-Analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Endocrine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSomatostatin analogues (SSAs) are cornerstone treatments for hormone-secreting tumors but can disrupt glucose metabolism. Comparative effects on glycemic parameters between different SSAs and doses remain quantitatively unclear.
methodsWe searched major databases for RCTs reporting fasting blood glucose (FBG) or glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) changes with SSA treatment vs. control/active comparator. Frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA) using Stata 17.0 compared effects across SSA types/doses (octreotide, lanreotide, pasireotide 20 mg, 40 mg, 60 mg), expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Treatments were ranked via surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Risk of bias and evidence certainty Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) were assessed.
results10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 973 patients with different diseases were analyzed. Pasireotide 60 mg significantly increased FBG (MD = 1.44 mmol/L, 95% CI: 0.58 to 2.30) and HbA1c (MD = 0.60%, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.92) versus control. Compared to octreotide and lower doses of pasireotide (20 mg and 40 mg), pasireotide 60 mg also resulted in significantly worse FBG and HbA1c outcomes. Octreotide and lanreotide showed neutral glycemic effects. SUCRA ranked pasireotide 60 mg worst for both FBG (SUCRA 10.70%) and HbA1c (SUCRA 5.50%). Results remained robust in sensitivity analyses excluding high-bias studies. GRADE certainty was high or moderate for key pasireotide 60 mg comparisons.
conclusionPasireotide 60 mg consistently demonstrates significant adverse effects on FBG and HbA1c compared to first-generation SSAs. However, this ranking should be interpreted with caution due to asymmetric dose stratification and clinical heterogeneity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41697434What 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.