The Association between Sulfonylurea Use and All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality: A Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Assessing use of patient-focused pharmacotherapy in glycemic management through the Diabetes Collaborative Registry (DCR)

BACKGROUND

Although practice guidelines stress individualization of glucose management in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), the extent to which providers take patient factors into account when selecting medications is not well known.

METHODS

Diabetes Collaborative Registry (DCR) is an outpatient diabetes registry including primary care, cardiology, and endocrinology practices. T2D medications were grouped as those which may be suboptimal for key patient subgroups, and we examined patient factors associated with use of these agents using hierarchical, multivariable Poisson models.

RESULTS

In DCR, 157,551 patients from 374 US practices were prescribed a glucose-lowering medication. Patients with morbid obesity were more likely treated with medications prone to cause weight gain (relative rate [RR] 1.09, 95% CI 1.07-1.11). Older patients were more likely to be treated with medications with increased risk of hypoglycemia (RR 1.04 per 5 years, 95% CI 1.04-1.05). Patients with CKD 4/5 were less likely to be treated with agents with known risk in patients with advanced CKD (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.71-0.77). Patients with coronary artery disease were no more or less likely to be treated with medications with potential cardiovascular safety issues (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.96-1.01).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed some targeted use of glucose-lowering therapies in certain subgroups but also identified potential opportunities for better personalization of treatment. Data sources such as the DCR can highlight potential areas for improving targeted approaches to pharmacologic therapy in order to optimize selection of patients most likely to benefit (and least likely to be harmed) from treatments.

Do sulphonylureas still have a place in clinical practice?

Sulphonylureas have been commercially available since the 1950s, but their use continues to be associated with controversy. Although adverse cardiovascular outcomes in some observational studies have raised concerns about sulphonylureas, findings from relatively recent, robust, and high-quality systematic reviews have indicated no increased risk of all-cause mortality associated with sulphonylureas compared with other active treatments. Results from large, multicentre, randomised controlled trials such as the UK Prospective Diabetes Study and ADVANCE have confirmed the microvascular benefits of sulphonylureas, a reduction in the incidence or worsening of nephropathy and retinopathy, and no increase in all-cause mortality, although whether these benefits were due to sulphonylurea therapy and not an overall glucose-lowering effect could not be confirmed. A comparison of sulphonylureas and pioglitazone in the TOSCA.IT trial also confirmed the efficacy and cardiovascular safety of sulphonylureas. Investigators of randomised controlled trials have reported an increased risk of hypoglycaemia and weight gain with sulphonylureas, but data from observational studies suggest that the incidence of severe hypoglycaemia is lower in people taking sulphonylurea than in people taking insulin, and weight gain with sulphonylureas has been relatively modest in large cohort studies. 80% of people with diabetes live in low-to-middle income countries, so the effectiveness, affordability, and safety of sulphonylureas are particularly important considerations when prescribing glucose-lowering therapy. Results of ongoing head-to-head studies with new drugs, such as the comparison of glimepiride with linagliptin in the CAROLINA study and the comparison of various therapies (including sulphonylureas) for glycaemic control in the GRADE study, will determine the place of sulphonylureas in glucose-lowering therapy algorithms for patients with type 2 diabetes.

Sulfonylurea and neuroprotection: The bright side of the moon

Sulfonylurea (SUR) agents are the second and most used oral hypoglycemic drugs after metformin and they still as an imperative tool for most favorable of glucose control. SURs are used mainly in the management of Type 2 diabetes mellitus since; they are effective in the glycemic control and reduction of microvascular complications. First-generation SUR represents 3% of used oral hypoglycemic agents while second and third generations are used in about 25% in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Upregulation of SUR1 receptor has been observed after stroke and traumatic brain injury, therefore, SUR such as glibenclamide inhibits brain edema and astrocyte swelling following brain insults. SUR drugs mainly glibenclamide is effective at a low dose in the management of cerebral stroke and could be a contestant with corticosteroid in controlling brain edema.

Cardiovascular safety of DPP-4 inhibitors compared with sulphonylureas: Results of randomized controlled trials and observational studies

After failure of metformin monotherapy, another glucose-lowering agent should be added to improve glucose control. The clinician has several pharmacological choices, including the addition of a sulphonylurea (SU) or a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i). While the cardiovascular safety of SUs remains a matter of controversy, DPP-4is have proven their non-inferiority vs placebo in recent cardiovascular (CV) outcome trials. In the absence of a head-to-head CV outcome trial-the CAROLINA, comparing linagliptin with glimepiride, is still ongoing-only indirect information can be found in the literature to compare CV outcomes (major CV events, myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, CV death and all-cause mortality) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with SUs or DPP-4is. Thus, this comprehensive review summarizes the CV outcomes (excluding heart failure) reported in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SUs vs placebo or other glucose-lowering agents, DPP-4is vs placebo or other glucose-lowering agents and SUs vs DPP-4is in phase-II/III studies. Also, the results of observational studies reporting CV events in patients treated with either SUs or DPP-4is have been carefully examined. Overall, the CV safety of SUs appears to be poorer than that of DPP-4is in both RCTs and cohort studies. However, the results are somewhat disparate, and such heterogeneity may be explained by different patient characteristics across studies, but also perhaps by differences between various molecules in each pharmacological class. In particular, some doubt about a class effect affecting SU CV safety has been raised. The results of CAROLINA are expected to shed more light on SU CV concerns, especially compared with DPP-4is.

The role of KATP channels in cerebral ischemic stroke and diabetes

ATP-sensitive potassium (KATP) channels are ubiquitously expressed on the plasma membrane of cells in multiple organs, including the heart, pancreas and brain. KATP channels play important roles in controlling and regulating cellular functions in response to metabolic state, which are inhibited by ATP and activated by Mg-ADP, allowing the cell to couple cellular metabolic state (ATP/ADP ratio) to electrical activity of the cell membrane. KATP channels mediate insulin secretion in pancreatic islet beta cells, and controlling vascular tone. Under pathophysiological conditions, KATP channels play cytoprotective role in cardiac myocytes and neurons during ischemia and/or hypoxia. KATP channel is a hetero-octameric complex, consisting of four pore-forming Kir6.x and four regulatory sulfonylurea receptor SURx subunits. These subunits are differentially expressed in various cell types, thus determining the sensitivity of the cells to specific channel modifiers. Sulfonylurea class of antidiabetic drugs blocks KATP channels, which are neuroprotective in stroke, can be one of the high stoke risk factors for diabetic patients. In this review, we discussed the potential effects of KATP channel blockers when used under pathological conditions related to diabetics and cerebral ischemic stroke.

Association between the ERCC2 Asp312Asn polymorphism and risk of cancer

Cancer is the leading cause of death in economically developed countries and the second leading cause of death in developing countries. The relationship between genetic polymorphisms and the risk of cancers has been widely researched. Excision repair cross-complementing group 2 (ERCC2) gene plays important roles in the nucleotide excision repair pathway. There is contrasting evidence on the association between the ERCC2 Asp312Asn polymorphism and the risk of cancer. We conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis in order to assess the correlation between these factors. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Science Direct, Web of Science, and CNKI databases for studies published from January 1, 2005 to January 1, 2016. Finally, 86 articles with 38,848 cases and 48,928 controls were included in the analysis. The overall analysis suggested a significant association between the ERCC2 Asp312Asn polymorphism and cancer risk. Furthermore, control source, ethnicity, genotyping method, and cancer type were used for subgroup analysis. The result of a trial sequential analysis indicated that the cumulative evidence is adequate; hence, further trials were unnecessary in the overall analysis for homozygote comparison. In summary, our results suggested that ERCC2 Asp312Asn polymorphism is associated with increased cancer risk. A significantly increased cancer risk was observed in Asian populations, but not in Caucasian populations. Furthermore, the ERCC2 Asp312Asn polymorphism is associated with bladder, esophageal, and gastric cancers, but not with breast, head and neck, lung, prostate, and skin cancers, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Further multi-center, well-designed studies are required to validate our results.

Utility of posaconazole therapeutic drug monitoring and assessment of plasma concentration threshold for effective prophylaxis of invasive fungal infections: a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

Background

Posaconazole therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is increasingly used in clinical practice. However, the utility of posaconazole TDM and the target of posaconazole plasma concentration for clinical successful prophylaxis remain uncertain and controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate posaconazole exposure-response relationship and determine an optimum posaconazole concentration for prophylaxis against invasive fungal infections (IFIs).

Methods

Bibliographic databases were searched (from inception to September 2017) to select studies including the clinical outcomes below and above concentration cut-off value of 0.5 mg/L and 0.7 mg/L. The reliability of the results were evaluated with trial sequential analysis (TSA).

Results

Twenty-eight studies with 1930 patients included were analyzed. The results of our pooled analysis demonstrated that patients with posaconazole plasma concentrations over 0.5 mg/L were twice more likely to achieve successful responses compared with those with lower concentrations (odds ratio, OR = 1.98, 95% confidence interval, CI 1.09–3.58, P = 0.02) while the threshold, 0.7 mg/L showed no significant difference (OR = 1.84, 95% CI 0.94–3.63, P = 0.08). The TSA results showed that there was sufficient information to support these findings.

Conclusions

An optimal posaconazole concentration target of 0.5 mg/L is suggested to ensure the clinical prophylactic efficacy and may help reduce the dosage and dose-dependent toxicity comparing with the target of 0.7 mg/L.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12879-018-3055-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Diabetes medications and cardiovascular disease: at long last progress

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although intensive control of hyperglycemia has been proven to decrease the risk of microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes, it has had little apparent effect on reducing cardiovascular complications - the leading cause of mortality in this disease. We review the cardiovascular effects of various glucose-lowering medications, with a particular focus on the recent studies demonstrating clear benefits from members of several drug categories.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recently, several randomized controlled studies have revealed significant improvements in cardiovascular outcomes from a thiazolidinedione, two sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and two glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists.

SUMMARY

These data suggest that certain glucose lowering agents after metformin should be favored in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients when there is underlying cardiovascular disease.

Comparative Safety of Sulfonylureas and the Risk of Sudden Cardiac Arrest and Ventricular Arrhythmia

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between individual antidiabetic sulfonylureas and outpatient-originating sudden cardiac arrest and ventricular arrhythmia (SCA/VA).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using 1999-2010 U.S. Medicaid claims from five large states. Exposures were determined by incident use of glyburide, glimepiride, or glipizide. Glipizide served as the reference exposure, as its effects are believed to be highly pancreas specific. Outcomes were ascertained by a validated ICD-9-based algorithm indicative of SCA/VA (positive predictive value ∼85%). Potential confounding was addressed by adjustment for multinomial high-dimensional propensity scores included as continuous variables in a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Of sulfonylurea users under study (N = 519,272), 60.3% were female and 34.9% non-Hispanic Caucasian, and the median age was 58.0 years. In 176,889 person-years of sulfonylurea exposure, we identified 632 SCA/VA events (50.5% were immediately fatal) for a crude incidence rate of 3.6 per 1,000 person-years. Compared with glipizide, propensity score-adjusted hazard ratios for SCA/VA were 0.82 (95% CI 0.69-0.98) for glyburide and 1.10 (0.89-1.36) for glimepiride. Numerous secondary analyses showed a very similar effect estimate for glyburide; yet, not all CIs excluded the null.

CONCLUSIONS

Glyburide may be associated with a lower risk of SCA/VA than glipizide, consistent with a very small clinical trial suggesting that glyburide may reduce ventricular tachycardia and isolated ventricular premature complexes. This potential benefit must be contextualized by considering putative effects of different sulfonylureas on other cardiovascular end points, cerebrovascular end points, all-cause death, and hypoglycemia.

The effect of antidiabetic medications on the cardiovascular system: a critical appraisal of current data

Both type 1 and type 2 diabetes are associated with increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. This risk seems to be reduced by achievement of euglycemia. However, after the withdrawal of rosiglitazone from the market, the question arose as to whether this risk concerns simply a matter of euglycemia or the distinct role played by each antidiabetic drug with respect to its effect on CVD risk. To address this issue, many studies have been published during the last decade involving old and new antidiabetic agents, which however yielded contradictory results. Briefly, metformin is still considered safe and confers a beneficial effect on CVD risk. Conflicting data exist as concerns sulfonylureas, although the second and third generation representatives are regarded as relatively safe. Pioglitazone use seems to be associated with a reduction in CVD risk, whereas the dipeptidyl-dipeptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), lixisenatide and exenatide-LAR [from the category of glucagon-like-peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists], confer a neutral effect. Two other GLP-1R agonists, liraglutide and semaglutide, as well as the sodium-glucose transporter-2 (SGLT2)-inhibitors, empagliflozin and cangliflozin, have shown an additional effect on CVD risk reduction, although their safety is in doubt. Insulin analogues and newer long-acting compounds are also safe for the cadiovascular system. The aim of this narrative review is to present and critically analyse the current data for each antidiabetic drug category with regard to their effect on CVD risk.

The impact of glucose-lowering medications on cardiovascular disease

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus die most frequently from cardiovascular disease. Metabolic control is mandatory both for preventing long-term complications and for reducing the negative effects of the exposure of the other risk factors. In this article, we will describe the most commonly used glucose-lowering agents, the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying their cardiovascular protection, the available evidence-based data for this protection, and the contraindications and potential adverse effects.

Oral diabetes medication monotherapy and short-term mortality in individuals with type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether sulfonylurea use, compared with non-sulfonylurea oral diabetes medication use, was associated with 2-year mortality in individuals with well-controlled diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We studied 5352 US veterans with type 2 diabetes, obstructive CAD on coronary angiography, hemoglobin A1c ≤7.5% at the time of catheterization, and taking zero or one oral diabetes medication (categorized as no medications, non-sulfonylurea medication, or sulfonylurea). We estimated the association between medication category and 2-year mortality using inverse probability of treatment-weighted (IPW) standardized mortality differences and IPW multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

49%, 35%, and 16% of the participants were on no diabetes medications, non-sulfonylurea medications, and sulfonylureas, respectively. In individuals on no medications, non-sulfonylurea medications, and sulfonylureas, the unadjusted mortality rates were 6.6%, 5.2%, and 11.9%, respectively, and the IPW-standardized mortality rates were 5.9%, 6.5%, and 9.7%, respectively. The standardized absolute 2-year mortality difference between non-sulfonylurea and sulfonylurea groups was 3.2% (95% CI 0.7 to 5.7) (p=0.01). In Cox proportional hazards models, the point estimate suggested that sulfonylurea use might be associated with greater hazard of mortality than non-sulfonylurea medication use, but this finding was not statistically significant (HR 1.38 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.93), p=0.05). We did not observe significant mortality differences between individuals on no diabetes medications and non-sulfonylurea users.

CONCLUSIONS

Sulfonylurea use was common (nearly one-third of those taking medications) and was associated with increased 2-year mortality in individuals with obstructive CAD. The significance of the association between sulfonylurea use and mortality was attenuated in fully adjusted survival models. Caution with sulfonylurea use may be warranted for patients with well-controlled diabetes and CAD, and metformin or newer diabetes medications with cardiovascular safety data could be considered as alternatives when individualizing therapy.

Antihyperglycemic agent therapy for adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus 2017: a position statement of the Korean Diabetes Association

In 2017, the Korean Diabetes Association (KDA) published a position statement on the use of antihyperglycemic agents for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The KDA regularly updates its Clinical Practice Guidelines, but since the last update in 2015, many results from clinical trials have been introduced, and domestic data from studies performed in Korean patients with T2DM have been published. Recently, evidence from large clinical studies assessing cardiovascular outcomes following the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists in patients with T2DM were incorporated into the recommendations. Additionally, new data from clinical trials using dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors and thiazolidinediones in Korean patients with T2DM were added. Following a systematic review and assessment of recent evidence, the KDA updated and modified its clinical practice recommendations regarding the use of antihyperglycemic agents and revised the treatment algorithm for Korean adult patients with T2DM.

Monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

In order to improve the quality of life and to prevent chronic complications related to diabetes mellitus, intensive lifestyle modification and proper medication are needed from the early stage of diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). When using the first medication for diabetic patients, the appropriate treatment should be selected considering the clinical characteristics of the patient, efficacy of the drug, side effects, and cost. In general, the use of metformin as the first treatment for oral hypoglycemic monotherapy is recommended because of its excellent blood glucose-lowering effect, relatively low side effects, long-term proven safety, low risk of hypoglycemia, and low weight gain. If metformin is difficult to use as a first-line treatment, other appropriate medications should be selected in view of the clinical situation. If the goal of achieving glycemic control is not achieved by monotherapy, a combination therapy with different mechanisms of action should be initiated promptly.

The Infamous, Famous Sulfonylureas and Cardiovascular Safety: Much Ado About Nothing?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sulfonylureas (SUs) are one of the most commonly used glucose-lowering agents worldwide. While their efficacy is undisputed, their cardiovascular safety has been debated since the 1970's.

RECENT FINDINGS

With no dedicated cardiovascular studies to definitively answer this question, observational studies and meta-analyses abound and have reported divergent results, fueling the controversy. Studies that compared SUs to metformin or newer agents, like GLP-1 agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors, suggest a difference in cardiovascular events, yet this is likely the result of beneficial effects of the latter. Studies comparing SUs to other agents have been reassuring. SUs remain a common choice of treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes due to their exceptional value. They are effective at lowering glucose and thus contributing to the prevention of microvascular complications. Weight gain and hypoglycemia are their main side effects, although less severe when compared to insulin treatment. Their cardiovascular safety will remain a controversial topic due to lack of conclusive data, but there is no definitive evidence of harm with the second-generation agents.

Monotherapy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

In order to improve the quality of life and to prevent chronic complications related to diabetes mellitus, intensive lifestyle modification and proper medication are needed from the early stage of diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). When using the first medication for diabetic patients, the appropriate treatment should be selected considering the clinical characteristics of the patient, efficacy of the drug, side effects, and cost. In general, the use of metformin as the first treatment for oral hypoglycemic monotherapy is recommended because of its excellent blood glucose-lowering effect, relatively low side effects, long-term proven safety, low risk of hypoglycemia, and low weight gain. If metformin is difficult to use as a first-line treatment, other appropriate medications should be selected in view of the clinical situation. If the goal of achieving glycemic control is not achieved by monotherapy, a combination therapy with different mechanisms of action should be initiated promptly.

Antihyperglycemic Agent Therapy for Adult Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus 2017: A Position Statement of the Korean Diabetes Association

In 2017, the Korean Diabetes Association (KDA) published a position statement on the use of antihyperglycemic agents for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The KDA regularly updates its Clinical Practice Guidelines, but since the last update in 2015, many results from clinical trials have been introduced, and domestic data from studies performed in Korean patients with T2DM have been published. Recently, evidence from large clinical studies assessing cardiovascular outcomes following the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists in patients with T2DM were incorporated into the recommendations. Additionally, new data from clinical trials using dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors and thiazolidinediones in Korean patients with T2DM were added. Following a systematic review and assessment of recent evidence, the KDA updated and modified its clinical practice recommendations regarding the use of antihyperglycemic agents and revised the treatment algorithm for Korean adult patients with T2DM.

Comparative Effectiveness for Glycemic Control in Older Adults with Diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review and summarize the current data for comparative effectiveness of glycemic control in older adults.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last several years, professional societies have released guidelines for glycemic control in older adults, generally recommending individualized HbA1c goals. However, recent observational studies demonstrate that many older adults remain aggressively managed and are at increased risk of hypoglycemia. Large randomized trials of older adults with diabetes have failed to show cardiovascular benefit from intensive glycemic control and show only minimal microvascular benefit. Additionally, a few studies suggest that suboptimal glycemic control can increase the risk for geriatric syndromes. Emerging research suggests similar safety and efficacy of glucose-lowering therapies in older versus younger adults.

SUMMARY

Overall, there is a paucity of data supporting the benefit of intensive glycemic control in older adults. More research is needed in this vulnerable population.

Comparative Evaluation of Safety and Efficacy of Glimepiride and Sitagliptin in Combination with Metformin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Indian Multicentric Randomized Trial - START Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Modern sulfonylureas like glimepiride offer effective glycemic control with extrapancreatic benefits and good tolerability. The objective of the present study was to evaluate and compare safety and efficacy of glimepiride and sitagliptin in combination with metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

In this open-label, randomized, comparative, multicenter study, a total of 305 T2DM patients who were either drug naïve or uncontrolled on metformin were randomized to glimepiride 1 or 2 mg/sustained-release metformin 1000 mg once daily (glimepiride group, n = 202) or sitagliptin 50 mg/metformin 500 mg twice daily (sitagliptin group, n = 103) for 12 weeks. Primary endpoint was change in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Secondary endpoints were change in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), body mass index (BMI) and to assess overall safety profile.

RESULTS

At 12 weeks, there was a statistically significant difference in the mean HbA1c reduction in glimepiride group (0.42%) as compared to sitagliptin group (0.30%) (P = 0.001). Mean reduction in FPG and PPG was also statistically significant in the glimepiride group as compared to the sitagliptin group (P = 0.008). There was no significant difference in terms of change in BMI (0.07 ± 0.39 kg/m² vs. 0.08 ± 0.31 kg/m²) in glimepiride and sitagliptin groups, respectively, (P = 0.644) between both the groups. The incidences of hypoglycemic events were also comparable among both the groups.

CONCLUSION

In T2DM patients, glimepiride/metformin combination exhibited significant reduction in glycemic parameters as compared to sitagliptin/metformin combination. Moreover, there was no significant difference between both the groups in terms of change in BMI and incidence of hypoglycemia.

Pro- and Antiarrhythmic Actions of Sulfonylureas: Mechanistic and Clinical Evidence

Sulfonylureas are the most commonly used second-line drug class for treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). While the cardiovascular safety of sulfonylureas has been examined in several trials and nonrandomized studies, little is known of their specific effects on sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) and related serious arrhythmic outcomes. This knowledge gap is striking, because persons with DM are at increased risk of SCA. In this review, we explore the influence of sulfonylureas on the risk of serious arrhythmias, with specific foci on ischemic preconditioning, cardiac excitability, and serious hypoglycemia as putative mechanisms. Elucidating the relationship between individual sulfonylureas and serious arrhythmias is critical, especially as the diabetes epidemic intensifies and SCA incidence increases in persons with diabetes.

Cardiovascular benefits and safety of non-insulin medications used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Diabetes mellitus is a growing in exponential proportions. If the current growth trend continues, it may result in every third adult in the United States having diabetes mellitus by 2050, and every 10^th adult worldwide. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) confers a 2- to 3-fold increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) events compared with non-diabetic patients, and CV mortality is responsible for around 80% mortality in this population. Patients with T2DM can have other features of insulin resistance-metabolic syndrome like hypertension, lipid abnormalities, and obesity which are all associated with increased CV disease and stroke risk even in the absence of T2DM. The management of a T2DM calls for employing a holistic risk factor control approach. Metformin is the first line therapy for T2DM and has been shown to have cardiovascular beneficial effects. Intense debate regarding the risk of myocardial infarction with rosiglitazone led to regulatory agencies necessitating cardiovascular outcome trials with upcoming anti-diabetic medications. Glucagon like peptide-1 agonists and sodium glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors have shown promising CV safety and additional CV benefit in recent clinical trials. These drugs have favorable effects on traditional CV risk factors. The findings from these studies further support that fact that CV risk factor control plays an important role in reducing morbidity and mortality in T2DM patients. This review article will discuss briefly the cardiovascular safety and benefits of the oral medications which are currently being used for T2DM and will then discuss in detail about the newer medications being investigated for the treatment of T2DM.

Sulfonylureas and the Risks of Cardiovascular Events and Death: A Methodological Meta-Regression Analysis of the Observational Studies

Recent randomized trials have compared the newer antidiabetic agents to treatments involving sulfonylureas, drugs associated with increased cardiovascular risks and mortality in some observational studies with conflicting results. We reviewed the methodology of these observational studies by searching MEDLINE from inception to December 2015 for all studies of the association between sulfonylureas and cardiovascular events or mortality. Each study was appraised with respect to the comparator, the outcome, and study design-related sources of bias. A meta-regression analysis was used to evaluate heterogeneity. A total of 19 studies were identified, of which six had no major design-related biases. Sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and mortality in five of these studies (relative risks 1.16-1.55). Overall, the 19 studies resulted in 36 relative risks as some studies assessed multiple outcomes or comparators. Of the 36 analyses, metformin was the comparator in 27 (75%) and death was the outcome in 24 (67%). The relative risk was higher by 13% when the comparator was metformin, by 20% when death was the outcome, and by 7% when the studies had design-related biases. The lowest predicted relative risk was for studies with no major bias, comparator other than metformin, and cardiovascular outcome (1.06 [95% CI 0.92-1.23]), whereas the highest was for studies with bias, metformin comparator, and mortality outcome (1.53 [95% CI 1.43-1.65]). In summary, sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and mortality in the majority of studies with no major design-related biases. Among studies with important biases, the association varied significantly with respect to the comparator, the outcome, and the type of bias. With the introduction of new antidiabetic drugs, the use of appropriate design and analytical tools will provide their more accurate cardiovascular safety assessment in the real-world setting.

Pioglitazone and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with insulin resistance, pre-diabetes and type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of pioglitazone in people with insulin resistance, pre-diabetes and type 2 diabetes.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

Literature searches were performed across PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1966 to May 2016 to identify randomised, controlled trials with more than 1 year follow-up.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Relative risk (RR) with 95% CI was used to evaluate the association between pioglitazone and the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: composite of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke and cardiovascular death) and safety outcomes, after pooling data across trials in a fixed-effects model.

RESULTS

Nine trials with 12 026 participants were enrolled in the current meta-analysis. Pioglitazone therapy was associated with a lower risk of MACE in patients with pre-diabetes or insulin resistance (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.93), and diabetes (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97). Risks of heart failure (RR 1.32; CI 1.14 to 1.54), bone fracture (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.99), oedema (RR, 1.63; CI 1.52 to 1.75) and weight gain (RR 1.60; CI 1.50 to 1.72) increased in pioglitazone group.

CONCLUSIONS

Pioglitazone was associated with reduced risk of MACE in people with insulin resistance, pre-diabetes and diabetes mellitus. However, the risks of heart failure, bone fracture, oedema and weight gain were increased.

The Landscape of Glucose-Lowering Therapy and Cardiovascular Outcomes: From Barren Land to Metropolis

The choice of glucose-lowering therapy (GLT) has expanded to include 11 different classes in addition to insulin. Since the 2008 Food and Drug Administration guidance for industry and mandate of demonstrating cardiovascular (CV) safety prior to any new drug approval, there were several trials primarily conducted to establish that goal. Some had neutral effects, while there were positively beneficial outcomes with more recent studies. Hospitalization for congestive heart failure has also been a heterogeneous finding among the different classes of GLT, with drug outcomes ranging from risky to beneficial. The current review selectively focuses on the evidence for CV outcomes for each class of GLT and summarizes the existing guidelines with regard to these drugs in heart disease. Moreover, it illustrates the dynamic status in the development of evidence. Finally, the review enables healthcare providers to formulate a plan for hypoglycemic therapy which will optimize CV health, in a patient-centered manner.

Correction: The Association between Sulfonylurea Use and All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality: A Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001992.].