Multimodal Therapy With Metformin, Inositol and Dietary Restriction Improves Insulin Resistance and Endocrine Outcomes in Women With Polyendocrine Metabolic Ovarian Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Noor-Ul-Ain Irfan; Shemaila Saleem; Asma Irfan

doi:10.1111/cen.70188

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 42517336

Multimodal Therapy With Metformin, Inositol and Dietary Restriction Improves Insulin Resistance and Endocrine Outcomes in Women With Polyendocrine Metabolic Ovarian Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Noor-Ul-Ain Irfan·Shemaila Saleem·Asma Irfan

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome (PMOS), formerly known as polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), is a common endocrine-metabolic disorder characterized by insulin resistance, hyperandrogenism and ovulatory dysfunction. Metformin, inositol supplementation and lifestyle modification are widely used treatments, but direct comparative evidence remains limited. Multimodal therapy combining metformin, inositol and dietary restriction produces greater metabolic and reproductive improvement than single-modality interventions. METHODS: We conducted a 12-week randomized controlled trial in 192 women aged 18-35 years diagnosed with PMOS according to Rotterdam criteria. Participants were allocated to metformin (1500-2000 mg/day), inositol (myo-inositol 2 g plus d-chiro-inositol 50 mg twice daily), calorie-restricted diet (1200-1500 kcal/day), or combination therapy. Primary outcomes included changes in body mass index (BMI) and insulin resistance assessed by HOMA-IR. Secondary outcomes included testosterone, LH/FSH ratio and menstrual regularity. Analysis was performed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), with post-intervention values as dependent variables and corresponding baseline values as covariates. Categorical outcomes were compared using the Chi-square test. RESULTS: All interventions improved metabolic and endocrine parameters. Combination therapy resulted in the greatest reduction in HOMA-IR (- 2.64, 95% CI - 2.82 to -2.46, p < 0.001) and BMI (- 2.8 kg/m2, 95% CI - 3.05 to -2.55, p < 0.001). Menstrual cyclicity improved across all groups, with the highest proportion of participants reporting cycle regularisation in the combination therapy group (85.4%), compared with dietary restriction (72.9%), inositol (64.6%), and metformin (39.6%) (p < 0.001). Given the short follow-up duration, these findings reflect early improvements rather than sustained normalisation. CONCLUSION: Multimodal therapy was associated with superior metabolic and reproductive outcomes compared with single-modality interventions in women with PMOS. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials. gov (NCT07380841).

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Noor-Ul-Ain Irfan, Shemaila Saleem, Asma Irfan. 2026-07-28. Multimodal Therapy With Metformin, Inositol and Dietary Restriction Improves Insulin Resistance and Endocrine Outcomes in Women With Polyendocrine Metabolic Ovarian Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial.. https://doi.org/10.1111/cen.70188

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial resource Adolescent subject Adult subject Body Mass Index subject Caloric Restriction subject Combined Modality Therapy subject Female subject Humans subject Inositol subject Insulin Resistance subject Journal Article subject Randomized controlled trials study

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Efficacy and safety of add-on topiramate vs. metformin on cardiometabolic profile in patients of schizophrenia on atypical antipsychotics with metabolic syndrome: an active-controlled, rater-blinded, parallel-design randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome is common among patients with schizophrenia, but current treatment options are limited, with metformin being the most studied. While placebo-controlled studies suggest potential benefits of topiramate, comparative efficacy and safety data are lacking. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of topiramate versus metformin for treating metabolic syndrome and reducing cardiovascular risks among patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: A randomised, open-label, parallel-group clinical trial was conducted on 60 patients of schizophrenia with metabolic syndrome, randomised equally to receive either topiramate (50 mg/day) or metformin (1000 mg/day) for eight weeks. Primary outcome was cardiovascular risk score (QRISK3), and secondary outcomes were LDL∶HDL ratio, insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and clinical global impression-Schizophrenia scale (CGI-SCH) scores. RESULTS: Over the study period, QRISK3 scores improved significantly in both groups [topiramate: MD = 0.61 (0.02 to 1.21), p = 0.04; metformin: MD = 0.45 (0.07 to 0.83), p = 0.02], with no significant between-group difference in unadjusted analysis (p = 0.648). However, ANCOVA adjusting for baseline QRISK3 revealed a significantly greater improvement in the topiramate group (β = -0.324, p = 0.043). Metformin showed significant within-group improvements in LDL: HDL ratio and HOMA-IR; however, ANCOVA adjusting for baseline HOMA-IR showed the between-group difference remained non-significant (β = -1.209, p = 0.078). Both groups showed significant improvements in PANSS and CGI-SCH scores, with no significant between-group differences in MoCA scores. A moderate correlation between the QRISK3 change, the PANSS change, and the CGI-SCH-I scores was observed in the topiramate group and the total population. Regression analysis identified PANSS change as a predictor of QRISK3 improvement. CONCLUSION: Topiramate demonstrated comparable, and on adjusted analysis superior, cardiovascular risk reduction compared to metformin, supporting its use as a viable alternative in the management of metabolic syndrome in patients with schizophrenia on atypical antipsychotics, particularly where metformin is contraindicated.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Lung function after randomization to metformin, lifestyle intervention or placebo in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study (DPPOS).

INTRODUCTION: Metformin and physical activity have been suggested as beneficial for chronic lung disease; however, there are no prior randomized trials. METHODS: The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) was a 3-year trial that randomized 3234 individuals at risk for diabetes to metformin, lifestyle intervention or placebo. After the DPP, 88% of participants enrolled in the DPP Outcomes Study that offered lifestyle intervention to all and open-label continuation of metformin. Spirometry was performed at approximately 19 and 22 years post-randomization. Lung function measures were compared in an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis by original randomization group. Models were unadjusted and adjusted for demographics, body size, smoking and sitting/standing at spirometry. Additional analyses tested prevalence of obstruction (FEV1/FVC <70%), restrictive pattern (FVC < LLN and FEV1/FVC ≥70%), preserved ratio impaired spirometry (PRISm: FEV1 <80% predicted, FEV1/FVC ≥70%) and symptoms (COPD Assessment Test [CAT] score ≥10). RESULTS: The 1888 participants with spirometry were a mean (±SD) age of 68.2 ± 9.3 years, 70% female and 6% currently smoked and 33% had previously smoked cigarettes. Mean follow-up time was 19.0 ± 0.8 years. The mean FEV1 was 2.14 ± 0.60 L, FVC 2.74 ± 0.74 L, FEV1/FVC 78.4 ± 6.4%, mean BMI was 32.4 ± 6.7 kg/m2 and 58% had diabetes. In both unadjusted and adjusted ITT analyses, randomization group was not associated with FEV1, FVC or FEV1/FVC. Likewise, rates of obstruction, restrictive pattern, PRISm or symptoms did not differ by randomization group. CONCLUSIONS: In this long-term follow-up after a randomized trial, we found no significant associations between randomization to metformin or lifestyle intervention and lung function or respiratory symptoms.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Long-term safety of oral orforglipron in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes (ACHIEVE-J): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Orforglipron, an oral GLP-1 receptor agonist, requires further evaluation in east Asian populations with type 2 diabetes, given this group's distinct pathophysiological characteristics. This study aimed to assess orforglipron as add-on treatment to diet and exercise alone or to oral antihyperglycaemic medications in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, open-label phase 3 study was conducted in 40 medical research centres and hospitals in Japan. Adults with type 2 diabetes and elevated glucose levels managing their condition with diet and exercise alone or with one or two oral antihyperglycaemic medications were assigned (1:1:1) via computer-generated random sequence to receive once-daily oral orforglipron (3 mg, 12 mg, or 36 mg). Randomisation was stratified by background therapy, baseline HbA1c (≤8·5% or >8·5%), and metformin use (yes vs no; applied only to α-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinedione, and glinides). Investigators, participants, and site staff were not masked to treatment. The primary endpoint was safety for 52 weeks, assessed in all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of orforglipron. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06010004 (ACHIEVE-J). FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2023, and June 5, 2025, 450 participants were screened and 401 were randomly assigned to three groups (3 mg, n=132; 12 mg, n=135; and 36 mg, n=134). 352 (88%) completed study treatment. 339 participants (85%, 95% CI 80·7-87·8) had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), more frequently in the 36-mg group (118 [88%, 95% CI 81·5-92·5]) than in the 3-mg (107 [81%, 73·5-86·8]) and 12-mg (114 [84%, 77·4-89·6]) groups. Most TEAEs were of mild (267 [67%, 61·8-71·0]) or moderate (63 [16%, 12·5-19·6]) severity. Discontinuations due to an adverse event occurred in 19 of 134 participants (14%, 95% CI 9·3-21·1) in the 36-mg group compared with seven of 132 (5%, 2·6-10·5) in the 3-mg group and 11 of 135 (8%, 4·6-14·0) in the 12-mg group. Across treatment groups, gastrointestinal symptoms were the most common TEAEs leading to study treatment discontinuation (3 mg: 5 [3·8%, 1·6-8·6]; 12 mg: 8 [5·9%, 3·0-11·3]; and 36 mg: 11 [8·2%, 4·7-14·1]). Level 2 (blood glucose <54 mg/dL) hypoglycaemia events occurred in three of 135 participants in the 12-mg group (2%, 0·8-6·3) and in three of 134 in the 36-mg group (2%, 0·8-6·4) groups. No level 3 (severe) hypoglycaemia events occurred. Outcomes were generally similar across background therapies. INTERPRETATION: Treatment with orforglipron in combination with diet and exercise alone or one or two oral antihyperglycaemic medications for 52 weeks demonstrated an acceptable safety profile in Japanese adults with type 2 diabetes. FUNDING: Eli Lilly. TRANSLATION: For the Japanese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Aged↗

Abstract

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Discover connections

Related citations

Efficacy and safety of add-on topiramate vs. metformin on cardiometabolic profile in patients of schizophrenia on atypical antipsychotics with metabolic syndrome: an active-controlled, rater-blinded, parallel-design randomized controlled trial.

Lung function after randomization to metformin, lifestyle intervention or placebo in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study (DPPOS).

Long-term safety of oral orforglipron in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes (ACHIEVE-J): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group phase 3 trial.