Should Metformin Remain First-Line Medical Therapy for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease? An Alternative Approach

Comparing the effects of biguanides and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors on cardio-cerebrovascular outcomes, nephropathy, retinopathy, neuropathy, and treatment costs in diabetic patients

BACKGROUND

Western guidelines often recommend biguanides as the first-line treatment for diabetes. However, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, alongside biguanides, are increasingly used as the first-line therapy for type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in Japan. However, there have been few studies comparing the effectiveness of biguanides and DPP-4 inhibitors with respect to diabetes-related complications and cardio-cerebrovascular events over the long term, as well as the costs associated.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the outcomes of patients with T2DM who initiate treatment with a biguanide versus a DPP-4 inhibitor and the long-term costs associated.

METHODS

We performed a cohort study between 2012 and 2021 using a new-user design and the Shizuoka Kokuho database. Patients were included if they were diagnosed with T2DM. The primary outcome was the incidence of cardio-cerebrovascular events or mortality from the initial month of treatment; and the secondary outcomes were the incidences of related complications (nephropathy, renal failure, retinopathy, and peripheral neuropathy) and the daily cost of the drugs used. Individuals who had experienced prior events during the preceding year were excluded, and events within 6 months of the start of the study period were censored. Propensity score matching was performed to compare between two groups.

RESULTS

The matched 1:5 cohort comprised 529 and 2,116 patients who were initially treated with a biguanide or a DPP-4 inhibitor, respectively. Although there were no significant differences in the incidence of cardio-cerebrovascular events or mortality and T2DM-related complications between the two groups (p = 0.139 and p = 0.595), daily biguanide administration was significantly cheaper (mean daily cost for biguanides, 61.1 JPY; for DPP-4 inhibitors, 122.7 JPY; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

In patients with T2DM who initiate pharmacotherapy, there were no differences in the long-term incidences of cardio-cerebrovascular events or complications associated with biguanide or DPP-4 use, but the former was less costly.

Advances in the management of type 2 diabetes in adults

Type 2 diabetes is a chronic and progressive cardiometabolic disorder that affects more than 10% of adults worldwide and is a major cause of morbidity, mortality, disability, and high costs. Over the past decade, the pattern of management of diabetes has shifted from a predominantly glucose centric approach, focused on lowering levels of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), to a directed complications centric approach, aimed at preventing short term and long term complications of diabetes, and a pathogenesis centric approach, which looks at the underlying metabolic dysfunction of excess adiposity that both causes and complicates the management of diabetes. In this review, we discuss the latest advances in patient centred care for type 2 diabetes, focusing on drug and non-drug approaches to reducing the risks of complications of diabetes in adults. We also discuss the effects of social determinants of health on the management of diabetes, particularly as they affect the treatment of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes.

Antidiabetic Molecule Efficacy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus-A Real-Life Clinical Practice Study

In this paper, we aim to evaluate the efficacy of antidiabetic cardioprotective molecules such as Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and Glucagon-like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists (GLP-1 RAs) when used with other glucose-lowering drugs, lipid-lowering, and blood pressure (BP)-lowering drugs in a real-life setting. A retrospective, observational study on 477 patients admitted consecutively in 2019 to the outpatient clinic of a tertiary care unit for Diabetes Mellitus was conducted. Body mass index (BMI), blood pressure (BP) (both systolic and diastolic), and metabolic parameters, as well as A1c hemoglobin, fasting glycaemia and lipid profile, including total cholesterol (C), HDL-C, LDL-C and triglycerides), were evaluated at baseline and two follow-up visits were scheduled (6 months and 12 months) in order to assess the antidiabetic medication efficacy. Both SGLT-2i and GLP-1 RAs were efficient in terms of weight control reflected by BMI; metabolic control suggested by fasting glycaemia and A1c; and the diastolic component of BP control when comparing the data from the 6 and 12-month visits to the baseline, and when comparing the 12-month visit to the 6-month visit. Moreover, when comparing SGLT-2i and GLP-1 RAs with metformin, there are efficacy data for SGLT-2i at baseline in terms of BMI, fasting glycaemia, and HbA1c. In this retrospective study, both classes of cardioprotective molecules, when used in conjunction with other glucose-lowering, antihypertensive, and lipid-lowering medications, appeared to be efficient in a real-life setting for the management of T2DM.

Metformin Impedes Oxidation of LDL In Vitro

Metformin is the most commonly prescribed glucose-lowering drug for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The aim of this study was to investigate whether metformin is capable of impeding the oxidation of LDL, a crucial step in the development of endothelial dysfunction and atherosclerosis. LDL was oxidized by addition of CuCl2 in the presence of increasing concentrations of metformin. The extent of LDL oxidation was assessed by measuring lipid hydroperoxide and malondialdehyde concentrations, relative electrophoretic mobilities, and oxidation-specific immune epitopes. Cytotoxicity of oxLDL in the vascular endothelial cell line EA.hy926 was assessed using the alamarBlue viability test. Quantum chemical calculations were performed to determine free energies of reactions between metformin and radicals typical for lipid oxidation. Metformin concentration-dependently impeded the formation of lipid hydroperoxides, malondialdehyde, and oxidation-specific immune epitopes when oxidation of LDL was initiated by addition of Cu2+. The cytotoxicity of oxLDL was reduced when it was obtained under increasing concentrations of metformin. The quantum chemical calculations revealed that only the reaction of metformin with hydroxyl radicals is exergonic, whereas the reactions with hydroperoxyl radicals or superoxide radical anions are endergonic. Metformin, beside its glucose-lowering effect, might be a suitable agent to impede the development of atherosclerosis and associated CVD. This is due to its capability to impede LDL oxidation, most likely by scavenging hydroxyl radicals.

Metformin: A Narrative Review of Its Potential Benefits for Cardiovascular Disease, Cancer and Dementia

The biguanide metformin has been used as first-line therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treatment for several decades. In addition to its glucose-lowering properties and its prevention of weight gain, the landmark UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) demonstrated cardioprotective properties in obese T2DM patients. Coupled with a favorable side effect profile and low cost, metformin has become the cornerstone in the treatment of T2DM worldwide. In addition, metformin is increasingly being investigated for its potential anticancer and neuroprotective properties both in T2DM patients and non-diabetic individuals. In the meantime, new drugs with powerful cardioprotective properties have been introduced and compete with metformin for its place in the treatment of T2DM. In this review we will discuss actual insights in the various working mechanisms of metformin and the evidence for its beneficial effects on (the prevention of) cardiovascular disease, cancer and dementia. In addition to observational evidence, emphasis is placed on randomized trials and recent meta-analyses to obtain an up-to-date overview of the use of metformin in clinical practice.

First-line pharmacotherapy for incident type 2 diabetes: Prescription patterns, adherence and associated costs

AIMS

To use real-world prescription data from Alberta, Canada to: (a) describe the prescribing patterns for initial pharmacotherapy for those with newly diagnosed uncomplicated type 2 diabetes; (b) describe medication-taking behaviours (adherence and persistence) in the first year after initiating pharmacotherapy; and (c) explore healthcare system costs associated with prescribing patterns.

METHODS

We employed a retrospective cohort design using linked administrative datasets from 2012 to 2017 to define a cohort of those with uncomplicated incident diabetes. We summarized the initial prescription patterns, adherence and costs (healthcare and pharmaceutical) over the first year after initiation of pharmacotherapy. Using multivariable regression, we determined the association of these outcomes with various sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

The majority of individuals for whom metformin was indicated as first-line therapy received a prescription for metformin monotherapy (89%). Older individuals, those with higher baseline A1C and those with no comorbidities, were most likely to be started on non-metformin agents. Adherence with the initially prescribed regimen was suboptimal overall, with nearly half (48%) being non-adherent over the first year. One-third of those who started metformin discontinued it in the first 3 months. Those started on non-metformin agents had roughly twice the healthcare costs, and five to seven times higher medication costs, compared to those started on metformin, in the first year after starting therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

With the addition of new classes of medications, healthcare providers who look after those with type 2 diabetes have more pharmaceutical options than ever. Most individuals continue to be prescribed metformin monotherapy. However, adherence is suboptimal, and drops off considerably within the first 3 months.

SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP1 agonists administered without metformin compared to other glucose-lowering drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus to prevent cardiovascular events: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RAs) and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, administered without metformin on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes patients.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to Cochrane's methodological standards. We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on adult type 2 diabetes patients, assessing the efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP1-RAs compared to other glucose-lowering drugs and/or RCTs that presented data of a subgroup of type 2 diabetes patients without metformin use at baseline. The main outcome was the reduction of the risk of any major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) reported individually or as a composite outcome.

RESULTS

Five RCTs including 50,725 type 2 diabetes patients, of whom 10,013 had not received metformin, were included in this meta-analysis. Three of these studies assessed the efficacy of GLP1-RAs and two of SGLT2 inhibitors. In patients without metformin at baseline, GLP1-RAs in comparison with placebo reduced the risk of MACE significantly by 20% (HR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.71-0.89). SGLT2 inhibitors also significantly reduced the risk of MACE by 32% (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.57-0.81).

CONCLUSIONS

SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP1-RAs provided without metformin at baseline may reduce the risk of MACE in comparison with placebo in type 2 diabetes patients at increased risk of cardiovascular events.

Should metformin remain the first-line therapy for treatment of type 2 diabetes?

Metformin is a biguanide that is used as first-line treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus and is effective as monotherapy and in combination with other glucose-lowering medications. It is generally well-tolerated with minimal side effects and is affordable. Although the safety and efficacy of metformin have been well-established, there is discussion regarding whether metformin should continue to be the first choice for therapy as other anti-hyperglycemic medications exhibit additional advantages in certain populations. Despite a long-standing history of metformin use, there are limited cardiovascular outcomes data for metformin. Furthermore, the available studies fail to provide strong evidence due to either small sample size or short duration. Recent data from glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor cardiovascular and renal outcomes trials demonstrated additional protection from diabetes complications for some high-risk patients, which has impacted the guidelines for diabetes management. Post-hoc analyses comparing hazard ratios for participants taking metformin at baseline versus not taking metformin are inconclusive for these two groups. There are no data to suggest that metformin should not be initiated soon after the diagnosis of diabetes. Furthermore, the initiation of newer glycemic-lowering medications with cardiovascular benefits should be considered in high-risk patients regardless of glycemic control or target HbA1c. However, cost remains a major factor in determining appropriate treatment.

SGLT2 Inhibition for CKD and Cardiovascular Disease in Type 2 Diabetes: Report of a Scientific Workshop Sponsored by the National Kidney Foundation

Diabetes is the most frequent cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD), leading to nearly half of all cases of kidney failure requiring replacement therapy. The principal cause of death among patients with diabetes and CKD is cardiovascular disease (CVD). Sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors were developed to lower blood glucose levels by inhibiting glucose reabsorption in the proximal tubule. In clinical trials designed to demonstrate the CVD safety of SGLT2 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), consistent reductions in risks for secondary kidney disease end points (albuminuria and a composite of serum creatinine doubling or 40% estimated glomerular filtration rate decline, kidney failure, or death), along with reductions in CVD events, were observed. In patients with CKD, the kidney and CVD benefits of canagliflozin were established by the CREDENCE (Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes With Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation) trial in patients with T2DM, urinary albumin-creatinine ratio >300 mg/g, and estimated glomerular filtration rate of 30 to <90 mL/min/1.73 m2 To clarify and support the role of SGLT2 inhibitors for treatment of T2DM and CKD, the National Kidney Foundation convened a scientific workshop with an international panel of more than 80 experts. They discussed the current state of knowledge and unanswered questions in order to propose therapeutic approaches and delineate future research. SGLT2 inhibitors improve glomerular hemodynamic function and are thought to ameliorate other local and systemic mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of CKD and CVD. SGLT2 inhibitors should be used when possible by people with T2DM to reduce risks for CKD and CVD in alignment with the clinical trial entry criteria. Important risks of SGLT2 inhibitors include euglycemic ketoacidosis, genital mycotic infections, and volume depletion. Careful consideration should be given to the balance of benefits and harms of SGLT2 inhibitors and risk mitigation strategies. Effective implementation strategies are needed to achieve widespread use of these life-saving medications.

Where Does Metformin Stand in Modern Day Management of Type 2 Diabetes?

Metformin is the most commonly used glucose-lowering therapy (GLT) worldwide and remains the first-line therapy for newly diagnosed individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in management algorithms and guidelines after the UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) showed cardiovascular mortality benefits in the overweight population using metformin. However, the improved Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) realised in some of the recent large cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs) using sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) have challenged metformin's position as a first-line agent in the management of T2D. Many experts now advocate revising the existing treatment algorithms to target atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and improving glycaemic control as a secondary aim. In this review article, we will revisit the major cardiovascular outcome data for metformin and include a critique of the UKPDS data. We then review additional factors that might be pertinent to metformin's status as a first-line agent and finally answer key questions when considering metformin's role in the modern-day management of T2D.

Could metformin modulate cardiovascular outcomes differently with DPP-4 inhibitors compared with SGLT2 inhibitors?

AIMS

Preliminary data have suggested that metformin might potentiate cardiovascular (CV) protection by dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4is), but reduce CV protection by sodium-glucose cotransporter type-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) at high CV-related risk. For this reason, the present meta-analyses aimed to compare metformin moderation of the CV effects of the two pharmacological classes.

METHODS

Major adverse CV events (3-point MACEs) were counted in high-risk patients with T2DM treated with or without metformin as background therapy in five CV outcome trials with DPP-4is (SAVOR-TIMI 53, EXAMINE, TECOS, CARMELINA, CAROLINA) involving 24,821 patients (17,870 with and 6951 without metformin) and 2550 events (1696 with and 854 without metformin), and four trials with SGLT2is (EMPA-REG OUTCOME, CANVAS, DECLARE-TIMI 58, VERTIS CV) involving 24,563 patients (19,090 with and 5473 without metformin) and 1829 events (1300 with and 529 without metformin).

RESULTS

DPP-4is failed to reduce 3-point MACEs in both metformin users (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.89-1.03) and non-users (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.95-1.16), with no heterogeneity between trials and no significant between-subgroup differences (P = 0.4074), whereas SGLT2is significantly reduced 3-point MACEs in both patients with (OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.84-0.98) and without (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.71-0.91) metformin, but again with no heterogeneity between trials and no significant between-subgroup differences (P = 0.2977). Overall, metformin non-users had a poorer risk profile than metformin users.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analyses involving a larger number of trials than before have revealed that background metformin therapy has no significant influence on either the neutral impact of DPP-4is or the positive impact of SGLT2is on CV events (3-point MACEs) in T2DM patients at high CV risk.

Use of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease: A Review

Importance

Recent randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) reduce cardiovascular events in at-risk individuals with type 2 diabetes. Despite these findings, GLP-1RAs are underused in eligible patients, particularly by cardiologists.

Observations

To date, randomized clinical trials of albiglutide, dulaglutide, liraglutide, and injectable semaglutide have reported favorable cardiovascular outcomes. Most recently approved for clinical use, oral semaglutide has a favorable safety profile and is currently undergoing regulatory evaluation and further study for cardiovascular outcomes. Professional society guidelines now recommend GLP-1RA therapy for cardiovascular risk mitigation in patients with type 2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or multiple ASCVD risk factors, independent of glucose control or background antihyperglycemic therapy (other diabetes medications being used). Additional conditions suitable for GLP-1RA therapy include obesity and advanced chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m2), for which cardiovascular risk-reducing options are limited. Out-of-pocket costs and secondary advantages (eg, weight loss) may inform shared decision-making discussions regarding potential therapies. GLP-1RA therapy has a favorable safety profile. Its most common adverse effect is gastrointestinal upset, which typically wanes during the early weeks of therapy and may be mitigated by starting at the lowest dose and escalating as tolerated. Depending on baseline glycemic control, sulfonylureas and insulin may need to be decreased before GLP-1RA initiation; without concurrent use of insulin or sulfonylureas, GLP-1RAs are not associated with hypoglycemia. Multidisciplinary follow-up and collaborative care with primary care physicians and/or endocrinologists are important.

Conclusions and Relevance

Findings from this review suggest that GLP-1RAs are safe, are well tolerated, and improve cardiovascular outcomes, largely independent of their antihyperglycemic properties, but they remain underused by cardiologists. This review provides a practical resource for cardiologists for initiating GLP-1RAs and managing the therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and established ASCVD or high risk for ASCVD.

Repurposing Antidiabetic Drugs for Cardiovascular Disease

Metabolic diseases and diabetes represent an increasing global challenge for human health care. As associated with a strongly elevated risk of developing atherosclerosis, kidney failure and death from myocardial infarction or stroke, the treatment of diabetes requires a more effective approach than lowering blood glucose levels. This review summarizes the evidence for the cardioprotective benefits induced by antidiabetic agents, including sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1-RA), along with sometimes conversely discussed effects of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4i) and metformin in patients with high cardiovascular risk with or without type 2 diabetes. Moreover, the proposed mechanisms of the different drugs are described based on the results of preclinical studies. Recent cardiovascular outcome trials unexpectedly confirmed a beneficial effect of GLP-1RA and SGLT2i in type 2 diabetes patients with high cardiovascular risk and with standard care, which was independent of glycaemic control. These results triggered a plethora of studies to clarify the underlying mechanisms and the relevance of these effects. Taken together, the available data strongly highlight the potential of repurposing the original antidiabetics GLP1-RA and SGLT2i to improve cardiovascular outcome even in non-diabetic patients with cardiovascular diseases.

Cardiovascular Effects of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors and Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists: a Review for the General Cardiologist

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Results from cardiovascular (CV) outcome trials have revealed important insights into the CV safety and efficacy of glucose-lowering agents, including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA).

RECENT FINDINGS

Among patients with T2DM, DPP-4i have no significant effect on risk of major adverse CV events (MACE: CV death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) with mixed results regarding risk for heart failure (HF). While sitagliptin and linagliptin have neutral effects on HF risk, saxagliptin significantly increases the risk of HF. The CV safety of the GLP-1RA class of medications has been clearly demonstrated, and select agents, such as liraglutide, semaglutide, albiglutide, and dulaglutide, reduce the risk of MACE in patients with T2DM and established CV disease. CV outcome trials have demonstrated CV safety but not incremental efficacy for DPP-4i in most cases. Select GLP-1RA have proven efficacy for MACE and should be considered by cardiologists for CV risk mitigation in the care of patients with T2DM and established CV disease.

2020 Consensus of Taiwan Society of Cardiology on the pharmacological management of patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases

The global incidence and prevalence of type 2 diabetes have been escalating in recent decades. The total diabetic population is expected to increase from 415 million in 2015 to 642 million by 2040. Patients with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). About two-thirds of patients with type 2 diabetes died of ASCVD. The association between hyperglycemia and elevated cardiovascular (CV) risk has been demonstrated in multiple cohort studies. However, clinical trials of intensive glucose reduction by conventional antidiabetic agents did not significantly reduce macrovascular outcomes.In December 2008, U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a mandate that every new antidiabetic agent requires rigorous assessments of its CV safety. Thereafter, more than 200,000 patients have been enrolled in a number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). These trials were initially designed to prove noninferiority. It turned out that some of these trials demonstrated superiority of some new antidiabetic agents versus placebo in reducing CV endpoints, including macrovascular events, renal events, and heart failure. These results are important in clinical practice and also provide an opportunity for academic society to formulate treatment guidelines or consensus to provide specific recommendations for glucose control in various CV diseases.In 2018, the Taiwan Society of Cardiology (TSOC) and the Diabetes Association of Republic of China (DAROC) published the first joint consensus on the "Pharmacological Management of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiovascular Diseases." In 2020, TSOC appointed a new consensus group to revise the previous version. The updated 2020 consensus was comprised of 5 major parts: (1) treatment of diabetes in patients with multiple risk factors, (2) treatment of diabetes in patients with coronary heart disease, (3) treatment of diabetes in patients with stage 3 chronic kidney disease, (4) treatment of diabetes in patients with a history of stroke, and (5) treatment of diabetes in patients with heart failure. The members of the consensus group thoroughly reviewed all the evidence, mainly RCTs, and also included meta-analyses and real-world evidence. The treatment targets of HbA1c were finalized. The antidiabetic agents were ranked according to their clinical evidence. The consensus is not mandatory. The final decision may need to be individualized and based on clinicians' discretion.

Impact of Regulatory Guidance on Evaluating Cardiovascular Risk of New Glucose-Lowering Therapies to Treat Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Lessons Learned and Future Directions

Responding to concerns about the potential for increased risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, specifically myocardial infarction, associated with certain glucose-lowering therapies, the US Food and Drug Administration and the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use of the European Medicines Agency issued guidance to the pharmaceutical industry in 2008. Glucose-lowering therapies were granted regulatory approval primarily from smaller studies that have demonstrated reductions in glycated hemoglobin concentration. Such studies were overall underpowered and of insufficient duration to show any effect on cardiovascular outcomes. The 2008 guidance aimed to ensure the cardiovascular safety of new glucose-lowering therapies to treat patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This resulted in a plethora of new cardiovascular outcome trials, most designed primarily as placebo-controlled noninferiority trials, but with many also powered for superiority. Several of these outcome trials demonstrated cardiovascular benefits of the newer agents, resulting in the first-ever cardiovascular protection indications for glucose-lowering therapies. Determining whether the guidance continues to have value in its current form is critically important as we move forward after the first decade of implementation. In February 2018, a think tank comprising representatives from academia, industry, and regulatory agencies convened to consider the guidance in light of the findings of the completed cardiovascular outcome trials. The group made several recommendations for future regulatory guidance and for cardiovascular outcome trials of glucose-lowering therapies. These recommendations include requiring only the 1.3 noninferiority margin for regulatory approval, conducting trials for longer durations, considering studying glucose-lowering therapies as first-line management of type 2 diabetes mellitus, considering heart failure or kidney outcomes within the primary outcome, considering head-to-head active comparator trials, increasing the diversity of patients enrolled, evaluating strategies to streamline registries and the study of unselected populations, and identifying ways to improve translation of trial results to general practice.

Antihyperglycemic therapies and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: State of the art and future directions

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a progressive chronic disease and is an established risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Until recently, the cardiovascular safety and efficacy of antihyperglycemic drugs remained uncertain. However, after the changes in regulatory guidance in 2008, a wealth of data has been generated, expanding the focus of the treatment of diabetes from blood glucose control to the prevention of macro-and microvascular complications and improvement in mortality. This article will review cardiovascular outcome trials of antihyperglycemic agents and provide overview of ongoing trials.

Series: Implications of the recent CVOTs in type 2 diabetes: Impact on guidelines: The endocrinologist point of view

The management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) essentially consists in controlling hyperglycaemia, together with other vascular risk factors, in order to reduce the incidence and severity of diabetic complications. Whereas glucose control using classical glucose-lowering agents (except perhaps metformin) largely fails to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD), two new pharmacological classes, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), have proven their ability to reduce major cardiovascular events in patients with established CVD. Furthermore, SGLT2is reduced the risk of hospitalisation for heart failure and the progression of renal disease. According to the 2018 ADA-EASD consensus report, the choice of a second agent to be added to metformin should now be driven by the presence or not of atherosclerotic CVD, heart failure or renal disease, all conditions that should promote the use of a SGLT2i or a GLP-1 RA with proven efficacy. Thus endocrinologists have to face a new paradigm in the management of T2DM, with a shift from a primary objective of glucose control without inducing hypoglycaemia and weight gain to a goal of cardiovascular and renal protection, largely independent of glucose control. Of note, however, the latter remains crucial to reduce the risk of microangiopathy.

[Primary prevention of coronary heart disease : Evidence-based drug treatment]

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the most frequent cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Lifestyle modifications and drug treatment of cardiovascular risk factors are able to effectively prevent CAD. The basis of prevention is the assessment of the individual cardiovascular risk, e.g. by using a validated risk score. Documented evidence for prevention of CAD is available for the control of hypertension using angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) and calcium antagonists, for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia using statins, ezetimibe and proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK-9) inhibitors and for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus with metformin, sodium-glucose transporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists. There is no positive benefit-risk ratio for people with a low risk in the use of acetylsalicylic acid in primary prevention, in contrast to the positive recommendations for secondary prevention. There is no evidence for the efficacy of primary prevention with beta blockers, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glitazones, sulfonylureas or insulin. Similarly, there is no evidence for drug treatment of obesity, any supplementation with vitamins or hormone preparations or omega‑3 fatty acids.

Consensus recommendations for management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular diseases

The recent American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes guideline mentioned glycaemia management in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs); however, it did not cover the treatment approaches for patients with T2DM having a high risk of CVD, and treatment and screening approaches for CVDs in patients with concomitant T2DM. This consensus guideline undertakes the data obtained from all the cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) to propose approaches for the T2DM management in presence of CV comorbidities. For patients at high risk of CVD, metformin is the drug of choice to manage the T2DM to achieve a patient specific HbA1c target. In case of established CVD, a combination of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist with proven CV benefits is recommended along with metformin, while for chronic kidney disease or heart failure, a sodium-glucose transporter proteins-2 inhibitor with proven benefit is advised. This document also summarises various screening and investigational approaches for the major CV events with their accuracy and specificity along with the treatment guidance to assist the healthcare professionals in selecting the best management strategies for every individual. Since lifestyle modification and management plays an important role in maintaining the effectiveness of the pharmacological therapies, authors of this consensus recommendation have also briefed on the patient-centric non-pharmacological management of T2DM and CVD.