Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Oct;55(4):565-574.
doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2018.04.038. Epub 2018 Aug 17.

Review of Metformin Use for Type 2 Diabetes Prevention

Affiliations
Free PMC article
Review

Review of Metformin Use for Type 2 Diabetes Prevention

Tannaz Moin et al. Am J Prev Med. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Context: Prediabetes is prevalent and significantly increases lifetime risk of progression to type 2 diabetes. This review summarizes the evidence surrounding metformin use for type 2 diabetes prevention.

Evidence acquisition: Articles published between 1998 and 2017 examining metformin use for the primary indication of diabetes prevention available on MEDLINE.

Evidence synthesis: Forty articles met inclusion criteria and were summarized into four general categories: (1) RCTs of metformin use for diabetes prevention (n=7 and n=2 follow-up analyses); (2) observational analyses examining metformin use in heterogeneous subgroups of patients with prediabetes (n=9 from the Diabetes Prevention Program, n=1 from the biguanides and the prevention of the risk of obesity [BIGPRO] trial); (3) observational analyses examining cost effectiveness of metformin use for diabetes prevention (n=11 from the Diabetes Prevention Program, n=1 from the Indian Diabetes Prevention Program); and (4) real-world assessments of metformin eligibility or use for diabetes prevention (n=9). Metformin was associated with reduced relative risk of incident diabetes, with the strongest evidence for use in those at highest risk (i.e., aged <60 years, BMI ≥35, and women with histories of gestational diabetes). Metformin was also deemed cost effective in 11 economic analyses. Recent studies highlighted low rates of metformin use for diabetes prevention in real-world settings.

Conclusions: Two decades of evidence support metformin use for diabetes prevention among higher-risk patients. However, metformin is not widely used in real-world practice, and enhancing the translation of this evidence to real-world practice has important implications for patients, providers, and payers.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. PRISMA 2009 flow diagram from Moher et al.
PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 4 articles

Publication types

Feedback