4.3 Article

Comparison of myo-inositol and metformin on glycemic control, lipid profiles, and gene expression related to insulin and lipid metabolism in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a randomized controlled clinical trial

Journal

GYNECOLOGICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY
Volume 35, Issue 5, Pages 406-411

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09513590.2018.1540570

Keywords

Myo-inositol; metformin; glycemic control; lipid profiles; polycystic ovary syndrome

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This investigation was conducted to evaluate comparison of myo-inositol and metformin on glycemic control, lipid profiles, and gene expression related to insulin and lipid metabolism in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). This randomized controlled trial was conducted on 53 women with PCOS, aged 18-40 years old. Subjects were randomly allocated into two groups to take either myo-inositol (n = 26) or metformin (n = 27) for 12 weeks. Myo-inositol supplementation, compared with metformin, significantly reduced fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (beta -5.12 mg/dL; 95% CI, -8.09, -2.16; p=.001), serum insulin levels (beta -1.49 mu IU/mL; 95% CI, -2.28, -0.70; p<.001), homeostasis model of assessment-insulin resistance (beta -0.36; 95% CI, -0.55, -0.17; p<.001), serum triglycerides (beta 12.42 mg/dL; 95% CI, -20.47, -4.37; p=.003) and VLDL-cholesterol levels (beta -2.48 mg/dL; 95% CI, -4.09, -0.87; p=.003), and significantly increased the quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (beta 0.006; 95% CI, 0.002, 0.01; p=.006) compared with metformin. Moreover, myo-inositol supplementation upregulated gene expression of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-gamma) (p=.002) compared with metformin. Overall, taking myo-inositol, compared with metformin, for 12 weeks by women with PCOS had beneficial effects on glycemic control, triglycerides and VLDL-cholesterol levels, and gene expression of PPAR-gamma.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available