Comparison of spironolactone and spironolactone plus metformin in the treatment of polycystic ovary syndrome

Effects of Low-Dose Spironolactone Combined with Metformin or Either Drug Alone on Insulin Resistance in Patients with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Pilot Study

Metformin and spironolactone alone can be used for the management of polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), and their combination could result in even better outcomes. To compare the effects and safety of low-dose spironolactone combined with metformin or either drug alone on insulin resistance (IR) and functional improvement in patients with PCOS, this was a single-center, randomized, open-label, pilot study of patients with PCOS at the Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University between 01/2014 and 01/2016. The participants were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to metformin, spironolactone, or metformin + spironolactone. The primary endpoint was the change in the homeostatic model assessment (HOMA)-IR after 12 weeks of treatment. A total of 189 participants were randomized (63 per group); 31 dropped out, and 54, 51, and 53 completed the 12-week treatment in the metformin, spironolactone, and combined groups, respectively. There were no differences in any parameters between the metformin and spironolactone groups (all P > 0.05). In the combined group, after 12 weeks of treatment, HOMA-IR (1.71 ± 0.91) was lower than in the metformin (1.92 ± 1.07, P < 0.05) and spironolactone (2.38 ± 1.14, P < 0.05) groups. In addition, total testosterone (TT), free androgen index (FAI), and area under the curve-insulin (AUCins) were lower in the combined group compared with the metformin group (all P < 0.05), while TT, FAI, HOMA-β, fasting plasma glucose, and AUCins were lower in the spironolactone group (all P < 0.05). Both metformin and spironolactone decreased HOMA-IR in patients with PCOS but without differences between the two monotherapies. The combined therapy decreased HOMA-IR to a greater extent than monotherapy.

Current Perspectives on Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is one of the most common reproductive, endocrine, and metabolic disorders in premenopausal women. Clinically, PCOS is mainly caused by androgen excess and ovarian dysfunction, manifested by anovulatory menstrual cycles, infertility, and hirsutism. In addition, PCOS increases the risk of insulin resistance, obesity, cardiovascular disease, anxiety and depression, dyslipidemia, and endometrial cancer. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is defined as ≥5% fat accumulation in the liver in the absence of remaining secondary causes and has become one of the most common chronic liver diseases worldwide. The prevalence of NAFLD is significantly higher and more severe in women with PCOS, and its pathogenesis can be associated with various risk factors such as hyperandrogenemia, insulin resistance, obesity, chronic low-grade inflammation, and genetic factors. Although there is no definitive solution for the management of NAFLD in PCOS, some progress has been made. Lifestyle modification should be the basis of management, and drugs to improve metabolism, such as insulin sensitizers and glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists, may show better efficacy. Bariatric surgery may also be a treatment of NAFLD in obese women with PCOS. This paper reviews three aspects of prevalence, risk factors, and management, in order to better understand the current state of research on NAFLD in PCOS, to explore the pathogenesis of NAFLD in PCOS, and to encourage further research on the application of drugs in this field.

An update on polycystic ovary syndrome: A review of the current state of knowledge in diagnosis, genetic etiology, and emerging treatment options

Polycystic ovary syndrome is the most common endocrine disorder in women of reproductive age, which is still incurable. However, the symptoms can be successfully managed with proper medication and lifestyle interventions. Despite its prevalence, little is known about its etiology. In this review article, the up-to-date diagnostic features and parameters recommended on the grounds of evidence-based data and different guidelines are explored. The ambiguity and insufficiency of data when diagnosing adolescent women have been put under special focus. We look at some of the most recent research done to establish relationships between different gene polymorphisms with polycystic ovary syndrome in various populations along with the underestimated impact of environmental factors like endocrine-disrupting chemicals on the reproductive health of these women. Furthermore, the article concludes with existing treatments options and the scopes for advancement in the near future. Various therapies have been considered as potential treatment through multiple randomized controlled studies, and clinical trials conducted over the years are described in this article. Standard therapies ranging from metformin to newly found alternatives based on vitamin D and gut microbiota could shine some light and guidance toward a permanent cure for this female reproductive health issue in the future.

Combined oral contraceptives and/or antiandrogens versus insulin sensitizers for polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Androgen excess is a key pathogenetic mechanism in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), although hyperinsulinism also contributes to androgen secretion. Therapeutic approaches for adult patients not seeking fertility include combined oral contraceptives (COC), antiandrogens (AA) and/or insulin sensitizers, although these practices are supported by limited high-quality evidence.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of these common treatments for PCOS by conducting a meta-analysis of RCTs with the following review questions: Which is the more appropriate therapeutic approach for hyperandrogenic symptoms, hyperandrogenemia, and ovulatory dysfunction in adult women with PCOS not seeking fertility; What is the impact on classic cardiometabolic risk factors of the more common treatments used in those women; Does the combination of the antiandrogenic therapy plus metformin have any impact on efficacy or cardiometabolic profile?

SEARCH METHODS

We searched PubMed and EMBASE for articles published up to 16 September 2017. After deleting duplicates, the abstracts of 1522 articles were analysed. We subsequently excluded 1446 articles leaving 76 studies for full-text assessment of eligibility. Of them, 43 articles were excluded. Hence, 33 studies and 1521 women were included in the quantitative synthesis and in the meta-analyses. Meta-analyses calculated mean differences (MD), standardized mean differences (SMD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% CIs. Heterogeneity and inconsistency across studies was assessed by χ2 test and Higgins's I2 statistics. Quality and risk of bias of individual studies were assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.1.0. We then used the approach recommended by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) group to indicate the global quality of evidence for a selection of primary outcomes.

OUTCOMES

Regarding efficacy, the MD in hirsutism score between COC and/or AA and metformin were not significant. The exclusion of one single study including most women with severe hirsutism yielded a significant effect in favour of COC and/or AA. When only those studies including an AA were compared with metformin, there were significant differences favouring antiandrogenic therapy. The combination of COC and/or AA with metformin was similar to COC and/or AA therapy alone in the whole group of patients. Post-intervention OR for the presence of regular menses favoured COC therapy. In terms of cardiometabolic impact, the MD in BMI were in favour of metformin. The negative effect of COC therapy on BMI was blunted by its combination with metformin. The MD in homoeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) were also in favour of metformin therapy compared to COC and/or AA. The combination of COC and/or AA and metformin decreased MD in HOMA with respect to antiandrogenic therapy alone. There were no significant post-intervention SMD in circulating glucose levels between COC and/or AA and metformin. However, adding metformin to COC and/or AA yielded a beneficial effect on fasting glucose levels. Post-intervention OR for abnormal glucose tolerance showed no significant differences between COC and/or AA and metformin, although after excluding studies including an AA as a comparator (without COC) a significant effect in favour of metformin therapy was observed. There were no significant differences among therapies in lipid profile, blood pressure or prevalence of hypertension. The global quality of evidence was very low when addressing the impact of the treatments explored on prevalence of hypertension and lipid profiles, low in the case of hirsutism, BMI and blood pressure values, and high for endometrial protection and glucose tolerance.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

These data provide further scientific evidence for the choice of treatment of women with PCOS. COC and AA are more effective than metformin for hyperandrogenic symptoms and endometrial protection. Their combination with metformin adds a positive effect on BMI and glucose tolerance.

PROSPERO CRD REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016053457.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists on glucose homeostasis

BACKGROUND

Spironolactone, a nonselective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), may have a deleterious effect on glycemia. The objective of this review was to assess current knowledge on MRAs' influence (spironolactone, eplerenone, and canrenone) on glucose homeostasis and the risk of diabetes.

METHOD

A systematic review was conducted using the Medline database on articles published from 1946 to January 2017 that studied the effects of MRAs on any glucose-related endpoints, without any restrictions regarding the participants' characteristics.Study design, patient population, dose and duration of intervention, and the quantitative results on glycemic markers were extracted, interpreted for result synthesis, and evaluated for sources of bias. From the articles included in the qualitative analysis, a select number were used in a meta-analysis on studies having measured glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) or risk of diabetes.

RESULTS

Seventy-two articles were selected from the Medline database and references of articles. Results on spironolactone were heterogeneous, but seemed to be disease-specific. A potential negative effect on glucose regulation was mainly observed in heart failure and diabetes trials, while a neutral or positive effect was detected in diseases characterized by hyperandrogenism, and inconclusive for hypertension. Interpretation of data from heart failure trials was limited by the small number of studies. From a meta-analysis of 12 randomized controlled studies evaluating spironolactone's impact on HbA1c in diabetic patients, spironolactone had a nonsignificant effect in parallel-group studies (mean difference 0.03 [-0.20;0.26]), but significantly increased HbA1c in crossover studies (mean difference 0.24 [0.18;0.31]). Finally, eplerenone did not seem to influence glycemia, while limited data indicated that canrenone may exert a neutral or beneficial effect.The studies had important limitations regarding study design, sample size, duration of follow-up, and choice of glycemic markers.

CONCLUSION

Spironolactone may induce disease-specific and modest alterations on glycemia. It is uncertain whether these effects are transient or not. Data from the most extensively studied population, individuals with diabetes, do not support a long-term glycemic impact in these patients. Further prospective studies are necessary to establish spironolactone's true biological effects and their clinical implications.