Systematic Reviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Diabetes. Dec 15, 2022; 13(12): 1168-1183
Published online Dec 15, 2022. doi: 10.4239/wjd.v13.i12.1168
Table 3 Gliclazide ± metformin and linagliptin ± metformin (no comparator)
Ref./treatment
Primary study objective
Study design
Study population
CVD excluded
Number of participants
Study duration
Endpoint (hypoglycemia)
Hypoglycemia definition
Hypoglycemia results
Endpoint (MACE)
MACE definition
MACE results
Barnett et al[33], 2008/DINAMIC 1/GliclazideCompare the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of gliclazide in SMBG vs non-SMBG groupMulticenter randomized parallel-groupT2D patients managed on diet aloneNot mentioned6106 moSafety endpoint (AE)Grade 1: Suspected mild hypoglycemiaSMBG group: 8.7% patients had 51 HE: symptomatic (27), asymptomatic (11), SMBG-confirmed (11) and non-graded (2)---
Grade 2: Suspected moderate hypoglycemiaNon-SMBG group: 7.0% patients had 66 HE: Symptomatic (66) and non-graded (2). Two HE-related withdrawals
Grade 3: Suspected severe hypoglycemia with need of third party assistanceNo grade 3 or 4 symptoms
Grade 4: Suspected severe hypoglycemia with need of medical assistanceSymptoms suggestive of nocturnal hypoglycemia: SMBG group: 3 and non-SMBG group: 7
Ross et al[42], 2015/Linagliptin/metformin vs linagliptin monotherapyChange from baseline in HbA1cRandomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel group, multinationalNewly diagnosed (≤ 12 mo) T2D and marked hyperglycemia (≥ 8.5 and ≤ 12.0%)ACS, stroke or TIA < 3 mo31624 wkSafety endpoint (AE)Severe hypoglycemia: Requiring assistance from another person to administer carbohydrate or other resuscitative actionLinagliptin/metformin: 1.9% of patients and linagliptin: 3.2% of patients no severe hypoglycemia--No deaths