Network meta-analysis

Body weight change in kilograms (diabetes)

Type 2 diabetes (adults); background therapy: one or more non insulin glucose lowering drugs

weeks 64 to 130 (target week 104)Not stated by the trialsDoses of a drug pooledMean difference

Randomized trials

Treatments

1,012

Participants

Trial arms

In plain language

Across 2 trials with 1,012 participants, 0 of 2 treatments had a clearly better result than insulin glargine on body weight change in kilograms (diabetes), and for 2 the evidence could not tell them apart from insulin glargine. The most favorable estimate was for Exenatide injection: mean difference -2.28 kg (95% credible interval -7.40 to 3.45).

Lower values favor the treatment. "Clearly" means the 95% credible interval excludes no difference. These are averages across trials; they do not say how any one person will respond. Not medical advice.

Network of trials

Each circle is a treatment; each line joins treatments that were randomized against each other in at least one trial.

Node area shows participants; line width shows trials comparing two treatments directly. Blue: GLP-1 receptor agonist containing treatments; grey: comparators. Hover over or tab to a node or line for details.

Effects compared with Insulin glargine

Mean difference in kg. Lower values favor the treatment.

Versus Insulin glargine. Blue: Bayesian random effects posterior median with 95% credible interval (thick) and 95% prediction interval (dashed). Amber diamond: frequentist estimate with 95% confidence interval. Hover over or tab to a row for its values.

Effects of each treatment versus Insulin glargine
Treatment	Bayesian MD (95% CrI)	95% prediction interval	Frequentist MD (95% CI)	Verdict
Exenatide injection EXEN_SC	-2.28 (-7.40 to 3.45)	-9.69 to 5.59	-2.40 (-4.56 to -0.24)	Unclear
Insulin degludec with liraglutide injection IDEGLIRA_SC	-1.80 (-6.66 to 3.34)	-9.38 to 5.69	-1.80 (-2.40 to -1.20)	Unclear

Ranking

How likely each treatment is to be among the best. Rankings ignore the size of differences and their certainty, so read them with the effects above.

League table

Every treatment against every other: mean difference of the row treatment versus the column treatment, posterior median and 95% credible interval. Green: row clearly better; red: row clearly worse.

Every treatment in a row compared with every treatment in a column
Row versus column	INS_GLARGINE	EXEN_SC	IDEGLIRA_SC
INS_GLARGINE	INS_GLARGINE	2.28 -3.45 to 7.40	1.80 -3.34 to 6.66
EXEN_SC	-2.28 -7.40 to 3.45	EXEN_SC	-0.47 -7.75 to 7.39
IDEGLIRA_SC	-1.80 -6.66 to 3.34	0.47 -7.39 to 7.75	IDEGLIRA_SC

Heterogeneity, fit and convergence

Bayesian random effects (primary)

Heterogeneity (tau): 1.617 (95% CrI 0.075 to 5.474)
Residual deviance: 3.0 for 3 data points
DIC: 6.0 (pD 3.0)
Largest R-hat: 1.002
Smallest ESS: bulk 2,116, tail 2,207
Divergent transitions: 0
Convergence: All criteria met
Priors: PR01 N(0, 25^2); PR03 N(0, 12.5^2); PR07 half normal(0, 2.5^2) on tau

Frequentist check (netmeta)

Method: inverse variance, REML, MD
Tau: 0.000
Q (total): 0.00 on 0 df
Q (between designs): 0.00

Inconsistency

Do trials comparing two treatments directly agree with the indirect evidence through other treatments?

No comparison here has both direct and indirect evidence, so inconsistency cannot be checked by node splitting; the between designs Q above is the global check.

Small study effects

A comparison adjusted funnel plot: each point is one trial comparison, centered on its own network estimate. Asymmetry can signal that small trials with unfavorable results are missing.

Fewer than ten trial comparisons, too few to judge funnel plot asymmetry.

Baseline characteristics of the trials

The baseline value of each effect modifier or prognostic factor that applies here, per trial: mean or percent over arms, weighted by the number randomized. A note under a value names a stand in (a median for a mean, 100 minus the male share, Asian subgroup rows, an all Asian site list); "not reported" means no source of the trial prints it.

Baseline effect modifiers and prognostic factors per trial
Trial	Baseline BMI or body weight (kg/m2) effect modifier, prognostic factor; 1 of 2	Sex (percent female) effect modifier, prognostic factor; 2 of 2	Background glucose lowering therapy (stratum S0 to S4) effect modifier, prognostic factor; 2 of 2	Asian ancestry or region (percent Asian) effect modifier, prognostic factor; 1 of 2	Kidney function (eGFR) (mL/min/1.73 m2) prognostic factor, effect modifier; 0 of 2	Treatment duration (weeks) effect modifier; 2 of 2	Lifestyle co-intervention intensity (none standard intensive) effect modifier, prognostic factor; 2 of 2
NCT00097500 S001020	30.52	34.78	S1	not reported	not reported	52	not_reported
DUAL™ VIII S001131	not reported	45.16	S1	11.36	not reported	104	not_reported

Comparability of the trials

Checked across designs (the set of treatments each trial compares) for eligibility, outcome definition and assessment, and the baseline factors above. Flags point to possible intransitivity; notes describe variation that is not tied to design.

FlagBaseline, Baseline BMI or body weight: not reported by 1 of 2 trials
FlagBaseline, Asian ancestry or region: not reported by 1 of 2 trials
FlagBaseline, Kidney function (eGFR): not reported by 2 of 2 trials
FlagBaseline, Treatment duration: design means range from 52.0 (EXEN_SC vs INS_GLARGINE) to 104.0 (IDEGLIRA_SC vs INS_GLARGINE) weeks; threshold 26
FlagOutcome assessment, analysis set: confounded with design: full_analysis 1, other 1
NoteOutcome assessment, time point: selected time points span 64 to 104 weeks

Comparability items per trial
Trial	time weeks	analysis set	definition	instrument	adjudicated	proportion method	intercurrent events (discontinuation)	intercurrent events (rescue)	blinding	funding	start year	Eligibility
NCT00097500	64	other	not stated	not stated	not stated	not stated	not stated	not stated	open_label	industry	2004	age 30 to 75; HbA1c 6.5 to 9.5 percent; BMI 25 to 40; on metformin
DUAL™ VIII	104	full_analysis	not stated	not stated	not stated	not stated	not stated	not stated	open_label	industry	2016	adults with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on oral drugs, insulin naive

Trial data

What each trial contributes. Arm rows give the arm value with its standard error, or events over participants; contrast rows give the mean difference on the analysis scale against the trial's first row. Flags mark converted, combined or approximated inputs.

Trial data entering this analysis
Trial	Arm	Treatment	Week	Data	Value	SE	Events / N	Source
NCT00097500	A1	EXEN_SC	64	contrast, md	-2.400	1.100		R0027264:Results
NCT00097500	A2	INS_GLARGINE	64	contrast, md				R0027264:Results
DUAL™ VIII	A1	IDEGLIRA_SC	104	arm, change	1.200	0.218	506	registry:outcomes
DUAL™ VIII	A2	INS_GLARGINE	104	arm, change	3.000	0.218	506	registry:outcomes

Rerun this analysis yourself

Remove treatments or trials and refit the frequentist and Bayesian models in your browser, with the same methods as the published analysis.

Open in the NMA lab