Effect of pharmacological interventions on lipid profiles and C-reactive protein in polycystic ovary syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

A Cross-Sectional Study of Glomerular Hyperfiltration in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

Glomerular hyperfiltration (GH) has been reported to be higher in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and is an independent risk factor for renal function deterioration, metabolic, and cardiovascular disease. The aim of this study was to determine GH in type A PCOS subjects and to identify whether inflammatory markers, markers of CKD, renal tubule injury markers, and complement system proteins were associated. In addition, a secondary cohort study was performed to determine if the eGFR had altered over time. In this comparative cross-sectional analysis, demographic, metabolic, and proteomic data from Caucasian women aged 18-40 years from a PCOS Biobank (137 with PCOS, 97 controls) was analyzed. Slow Off-rate Modified Aptamer (SOMA)-scan plasma protein measurement was undertaken for inflammatory proteins, serum markers of chronic kidney disease (CKD), tubular renal injury markers, and complement system proteins. A total of 44.5% of the PCOS cohort had GH (eGFR ≥ 126 mL/min/1.73 m2 (n = 55)), and 12% (n = 17) eGFR ≥ 142 mL/min/1.73 m2 (super-GH(SGH)). PCOS-GH women were younger and had lower creatinine and urea versus PCOS-nonGH. C-reactive protein (CRP), white cell count (WCC), and systolic blood pressure (SBP) were higher in PCOS versus controls, but CRP correlated only with PCOS-SGH alone. Complement protein changes were seen between controls and PCOS-nonGH, and decay-accelerator factor (DAF) was decreased between PCOS-nonGH and PCOS-GSGH (p < 0.05). CRP correlated with eGFR in the PCOS-SGH group, but not with other inflammatory or complement parameters. Cystatin-c (a marker of CKD) was reduced between PCOS-nonGH and PCOS-GSGH (p < 0.05). No differences in tubular renal injury markers were found. A secondary cohort notes review of the biobank subjects 8.2-9.6 years later showed a reduction in eGFR: controls -6.4 ± 12.6 mL/min/1.73 m2 (-5.3 ± 11.5%; decrease 0.65%/year); PCOS-nonGH -11.3 ± 13.7 mL/min/1.73 m2 (-9.7 ± 12.2%; p < 0.05, decrease 1%/year); PCOS-GH (eGFR 126-140 mL/min/17.3 m2) -27.1 ± 12.8 mL/min/1.73 m2 (-19.1 ± 8.7%; p < 0.0001, decrease 2%/year); PCOS-SGH (eGFR ≥ 142 mL/min/17.3 m2) -33.7 ± 8.9 mL/min/17.3 m2 (-22.8 ± 6.0%; p < 0.0001, decrease 3.5%/year); PCOS-nonGH eGFR versus PCOS-GH and PCOS-SGH, p < 0.001; no difference PCOS-GH versus PCOS-SGH. GH was associated with PCOS and did not appear mediated through tubular renal injury; however, cystatin-c and DAF were decreased, and CRP correlated positively with PCOS-SGH, suggesting inflammation may be involved at higher GH. There were progressive eGFR decrements for PCOS-nonGH, PCOS-GH, and PCOS-SGH in the follow-up period which, in the presence of additional factors affecting renal function, may be clinically important in the development of CKD in PCOS.

PPAR agonists as add-on treatment with metformin in management of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The combination of metformin and the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR) agonists offers a promising avenue for managing type 2 diabetes (T2D) through their potential complementary mechanisms of action. The results from randomized controlled trials (RCT) assessing the efficacy of PPAR agonists plus metformin versus metformin alone in T2D are inconsistent, which prompted the conduct of the systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception (1966) to March 2023 to identify all RCTs comparing any PPAR agonists plus metformin versus metformin alone in T2D. Categorical variables were summarized as relative risk along with 95% confidence interval (CI). Twenty RCTs enrolling a total of 6058 patients met the inclusion criteria. The certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low. Pooled results show that using PPAR agonist plus metformin, as compared to metformin alone, results in lower concentrations of fasting glucose [MD = - 22.07 mg/dl (95% CI - 27.17, - 16.97), HbA1c [MD = - 0.53% (95% CI - 0.67, - 0.38)], HOMA-IR [MD = - 1.26 (95% CI - 2.16, - 0.37)], and fasting insulin [MD = - 19.83 pmol/L (95% CI - 29.54, - 10.13)] without significant increase in any adverse events. Thus, synthesized evidence from RCTs demonstrates the beneficial effects of PPAR agonist add-on treatment versus metformin alone in T2D patients. In particular, novel dual PPARα/γ agonist (tesaglitazar) demonstrate efficacy in improving glycaemic and lipid concentrations, so further RCTs should be performed to elucidate the long-term outcomes and safety profile of these novel combined and personalized therapeutic strategies in the management of T2D.PROSPERO registration no. CRD42023412603.

Oxidative Stress Markers and Heat Shock Proteins in Non-Obese Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Are Not Elevated and Show No Correlation with Vitamin D

INTRODUCTION

Oxidative stress (OS) is recognized in the pathophysiology of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). OS results in intracellular reactive oxygen species generation, causing oxidative protein damage that is protected by heat shock proteins (HSPs). Vitamin D is thought to reduce and protect against OS; therefore, OS, HSP, and vitamin D levels may be associated with PCOS. However, their expression in PCOS without underlying inflammation is unknown.

METHODS

In this exploratory study, the plasma levels of 7 OS proteins and 10 HSPs that are affected by the OS process were measured using Slow Off-rate Modified Aptamer (SOMA)-scan plasma protein measurements in non-obese, non-insulin resistant women with PCOS (n = 24) without systemic inflammation and control (n = 24) women; the cohorts were matched for weight and age. The OS proteins and HSPs were correlated with 25-hydroxy vitamin D₃ (25(OH)D₃) and the active form, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D₃ (1,25(OH)₂D₃), as measured by isotope-dilution liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

The PCOS women versus the controls had comparable insulin resistance and systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein 2.0 mg/L vs. 2.3 mg/L, p > 0.05), but higher free androgen index and anti-mullerian hormone levels. Among the OS proteins, only esterase D (ESD; p < 0.01) was elevated in PCOS and the HSPs did not differ between the PCOS and control women. There was no correlation of 25(OH)D₃ or 1,25(OH)₂D₃ with any of the proteins.

CONCLUSIONS

In a PCOS population that was non-obese and without insulin resistance and systemic inflammation, only ESD was elevated in PCOS, whilst the other OS proteins and HSPs were not elevated. Further, none of the OS proteins or HSPs were correlated with either 25(OH)D₃ or 1,25(OH)₂D₃ in either cohort of women or when both cohorts were combined, indicating that the OS and HSP responses were largely absent and not affected by vitamin D in a non-obese PCOS population.

Statins for women with polycystic ovary syndrome not actively trying to conceive

BACKGROUND

Statins are lipid-lowering agents with pleiotropic actions. Experts have proposed that in addition to improving the dyslipidaemia associated with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), statins may also exert other beneficial metabolic and endocrine effects, such as reducing testosterone levels. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of statin therapy in women with PCOS who are not actively trying to conceive.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHLs, and four ongoing trials registers on 7 November 2022. We also handsearched relevant conference proceedings and the reference lists of relevant trials for any additional studies, and we contacted experts in the field for any further ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of statin therapy in women with PCOS not actively trying to conceive. Eligible comparisons were statin versus placebo or no treatment, statin plus another agent versus the other agent alone, and statin versus another agent. We performed statistical analysis using Review Manager 5, and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE methods.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology. Our primary outcomes were resumption of menstrual regularity and resumption of spontaneous ovulation. Our secondary outcomes were clinical and physiological measures including hirsutism, acne severity, testosterone levels, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Six RCTs fulfilled the criteria for inclusion. They included 396 women with PCOS who received six weeks, three months, or six months of treatment; 374 women completed the studies. Three studies evaluated the effects of simvastatin and three studies evaluated the effects of atorvastatin. We summarised the results of the studies under the following comparisons. Statins versus placebo (3 RCTs) One trial measured resumption of menstrual regularity as menstrual cycle length in days. We are uncertain if statins compared with placebo shorten the mean length of the menstrual cycle (mean difference (MD) -2.00 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -24.86 to 20.86; 37 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported resumption of spontaneous ovulation, improvement in hirsutism, or improvement in acne. We are uncertain if statins compared with placebo reduce testosterone levels after six weeks (MD 0.06, 95% CI -0.72 to 0.84; 1 RCT, 20 participants; very low-certainty evidence), after 3 months (MD -0.53, 95% CI -1.61 to 0.54; 2 RCTs, 64 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or after 6 months (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.63; 1 RCT, 28 participants; very low-certainty evidence) Two studies recorded adverse events, and neither reported significant differences between the groups. Statins plus metformin versus metformin alone (1 RCT) The single RCT included in this comparison measured resumption of menstrual regularity as the number of spontaneous menses per six months. We are uncertain if statins plus metformin compared with metformin improves resumption of menstrual regularity (MD 0.60 menses, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.12; 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report resumption of spontaneous ovulation. We are uncertain if statins plus metformin compared with metformin alone improves hirsutism measured using the Ferriman-Gallwey score (MD -0.16, 95% CI -0.91 to 0.59; 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence), acne severity measured on a scale of 0 to 3 (MD -0.31, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.05; 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or testosterone levels (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.31; 69 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study reported that no significant adverse events occurred. Statins plus oral contraceptive pill versus oral contraceptive pill alone (1 RCT) The single RCT included in this comparison did not report resumption of menstrual regularity or spontaneous ovulation. We are uncertain if statins plus the oral contraceptive pill (OCP) improves hirsutism compared with OCP alone (MD -0.12, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.17; 48 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report improvement in acne severity. We are also uncertain if statins plus OCP compared with OCP alone reduces testosterone levels, because the certainty of the evidence was very low (MD -0.82, 95% CI -1.38 to -0.26; 48 participants). The study reported that no participants experienced significant side effects. Statins versus metformin (2 RCTs) We are uncertain if statins improve menstrual regularity compared with metformin (number of spontaneous menses per six months) compared to metformin (MD 0.50 menses, 95% CI -0.05 to 1.05; 1 RCT, 61 participants, very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported resumption of spontaneous ovulation. We are uncertain if statins compared with metformin reduce hirsutism measured using the Ferriman-Gallwey score (MD -0.26, 95% CI -0.97 to 0.45; 1 RCT, 61 participants; very low-certainty evidence), acne severity measured on a scale of 0 to 3 (MD -0.18, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.17; 1 RCT, 61 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or testosterone levels (MD -0.24, 95% CI -0.58 to 0.10; 1 RCT, 61 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Both trials reported that no significant adverse events had occurred. Statins versus oral contraceptive pill plus flutamide (1 RCT) According to the study report, no participants experienced any significant side effects. There were no available data for any other main outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for all main outcomes of this review was of very low certainty. Due to the limited evidence, we are uncertain if statins compared with placebo, or statins plus metformin compared with metformin alone, improve resumption of menstrual regularity. The trial evaluating statin plus OCP versus OCP alone reported neither of our primary outcomes. No other studies reported resumption of spontaneous ovulation. We are uncertain if statins improve hirsutism, acne severity, or testosterone. All trials that measured adverse events reported no significant differences between the groups.