IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0254412.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The comparative effectiveness of 55 interventions in obese patients with polycystic ovary syndrome: A network meta-analysis of 101 randomized trials

Author

Listed:
  • Mohamed Abdel-Maboud
  • Amr Menshawy
  • Elfatih A Hasabo
  • Mohamed Ibrahim Abdelraoof
  • Mohamed Alshandidy
  • Muhammad Eid
  • Esraa Menshawy
  • Oumaima Outani
  • Ahmed Menshawy

Abstract

Background: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) affects up to 18% of reproductive-age females. The prevalence of obesity in PCOS patients reaches up to 80%, which is 2-fold higher than the general population. Objective: The present study aimed to compare the effectiveness of 55 pharmacological interventions across 17 different outcomes in overweight/obese PCOS patients with hyperandrogenism manifestations for both short- and long-term follow-ups. A comprehensive literature search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Science Direct, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials comparing any conventional pharmacological intervention as a monotherapy or a combination in overweight/obese patients with polycystic ovary syndrome and hyperandrogenism manifestations. Extracted data included three main parameters; I. Anthropometric parameters (BMI, Waist and Hip circumferences, and Waist/HIP ratio), II. Hormonal parameters (FSH, LH, FSG, SHBG, Estradiol, Total Testosterone, Free testosterone, DHEAS, Androstenedione), and III. Metabolic parameters (Total Cholesterol, LDL-C, HDL-C, Triglycerides, Fasting glucose, Fasting glucose, HOMA-IR). Critical appraisal and risk of bias assessments were performed using the modified Jadad scale, and the overall quality of this network meta-analysis was evaluated according to the CINeMA framework. We performed both a pairwise meta-analysis and a network meta-analysis to evaluate the effect sizes with 95% CI, and we calculated the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for each intervention. Results: Our final search on May 15th 2021 retrieved 23,305 unique citations from searching six electronic databases. Eventually, 101 RCTs of 108 reports with a total of 8,765 patients were included in our systematic review and multi-treatments meta-analysis. 55 different interventions were included: 22 monotherapies, and 33 combinations. The two-dimensional cluster ranking of the average SUCRA values for metabolic and hormonal parameters with significant estimates revealed flutamide (77.5%, 70%; respectively) as the highest and rosiglitazone (38.2%, 26.3%; respectively) as the lowest, in terms of the overall efficacy in reducing weight and hyperandrogenism. However, cyproterone-acetate+ethinylestradiol exhibited a higher ranking in improving hormonal parameters (71.1%), but even a lower-ranking regarding metabolic parameters (34.5%). Conclusions and relevance: Current evidence demonstrated the superiority of flutamide in improving both metabolic and hormonal parameters, and the higher efficacy of cyproterone-acetate+ethinylestradiol only in improving hormonal parameters. Nearly all interventions were comparable in female hormones, FGS, HDL, glucose, and insulin levels improvements.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohamed Abdel-Maboud & Amr Menshawy & Elfatih A Hasabo & Mohamed Ibrahim Abdelraoof & Mohamed Alshandidy & Muhammad Eid & Esraa Menshawy & Oumaima Outani & Ahmed Menshawy, 2021. "The comparative effectiveness of 55 interventions in obese patients with polycystic ovary syndrome: A network meta-analysis of 101 randomized trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-31, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0254412
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254412
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0254412
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0254412&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0254412?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0254412. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.