Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of rosiglitazone versus metformin in treating polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS).
Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about rosiglitazone versus metformin in treating PCOS were retrieved on computer in MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, EBSCO, CBM, CNKI, Chinese Medical Association Journal Database and VIP from the date of their establishment to December 2010. The trials were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria by two reviewers independently, the data were extracted, the methodological quality was assessed, and finally meta-analysis was conducted with Stata 11.0 software.
Results A total of six RCTs involving 286 PCOS patients were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that there was no significant difference between rosiglitazone and metformin in improving PCOS patients’ insulin sensitivity (SMD= –0.14, 95%CI –0.46 to 0.19, P=0.412) and lowering androgen levels (SMD=0.05, 95%CI –0.26 to 0.36, P=0.747). However, the effect of rosiglitazone was inferior to metformin in lowing patients’ weight with a significant difference (SMD=0.34, 95%CI 0.11 to 0.58, P=0.004). The rosiglitazone showed a lower incidence rate of adverse reaction compared with metformin.
Conclusion Compared with metformin, the rosiglitazone is eqully effective in improving PCOS patients’ insulin sensitivity and lowering androgen levels, and has a lower incidence rate of adverse reaction although it is inferior to metformin in lowing patients’ weight. So rosiglitazone is more applicable for the patients who are of underweight or cannot tolerate the gastrointestinal side effects induced by metformin. There is no enough evidence for this conclusion due to the small sample size and limited number of RCTs. More high-quality, large-sample and multicentered RCTs are required to guide clinical treatment and benefit patients.
Citation: DU Qiang,YANG Sheng,WU Bo,HAN Ping. Rosiglitazone versus Metformin for Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Systematic Review. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2011, 11(9): 1021-1026. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20110171 Copy