Do SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists modulate differently the risk of stroke ? Discordance between randomised controlled trials and observational studies

Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities

Diabetes mellitus is a significant risk factor for both ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, affecting up to a third of individuals with cerebrovascular diseases. Beyond being a risk factor for stroke, diabetes and hyperglycaemia have a negative impact on outcomes after ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke. Hyperglycaemia during the acute ischaemic stroke phase is associated with a higher risk of haemorrhagic transformation and poor functional outcome, with evidence in favour of early intervention to limit and manage severe hyperglycaemia. Similarly, intensive glucose control nested in a broader bundle of care, including blood pressure, coagulation and temperature control, can provide substantial benefit for clinical outcomes after haemorrhagic stroke. As micro- and macrovascular complications are frequent in people with diabetes, cardiovascular prevention strategies also need to consider tailored treatment. In this regard, the broader availability of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists can allow tailored treatments, particularly for those with heart failure and chronic kidney disease as comorbidities. Here, we review the main concepts of hyperacute stroke management and CVD prevention among people with diabetes, capitalising on results from large studies and RCTs to inform clinicians on preferred treatments.

Diabetes and Stroke: Impact of Novel Therapies for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a significant risk factor for stroke. Nevertheless, the evidence supporting stringent glycemic control to reduce macrovascular complications, particularly stroke, is not as clear as for microvascular complications. Presently, risk reduction strategies are based on controlling multiple risk factors, including hypertension, dyslipidemia, glycemia, smoking, and weight. Since 2008, new pharmacological therapies for treating T2DM have been required to undergo trials to ensure their cardiovascular safety. Remarkably, several novel therapies have exhibited protective effects against the combined endpoint of major cardiovascular events. Evidence from these trials, with stroke as a secondary endpoint, along with real-world data, suggests potential benefits in stroke prevention, particularly with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists. Conversely, the data on sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors remains more controversial. Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors appear neutral in stroke prevention. More recent pharmacological therapies still lack significant data on this particular outcome. This article provides a comprehensive review of the evidence on the most recent T2DM therapies for stroke prevention and their impact on clinical practice.

Underuse of GLP-1 receptor agonists in the management of type 2 diabetes despite a favorable benefit-safety profile

INTRODUCTION

Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are at high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and cardiovascular death. Cardiovascular protection is a key objective in T2DM.

AREAS COVERED

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have proven their efficacy in reducing major cardiovascular events in high-risk patients with T2DM in placebo-controlled trials, a finding confirmed in observational studies compared with other glucose-lowering agents. Overall, GLP-1RAs have a good safety profile associated with a favorable benefit/risk ratio for the management of T2DM, even if their cost-effectiveness might be questionable. International guidelines recommend GLP-1RAs as preferred glucose-lowering agents in patients with ASCVD and as a valuable alternative in overweight/obese patients with T2DM. However, real-life studies worldwide revealed that only a minority of patients receive a GLP-1RA, despite a positive trend for increased prescriptions in recent years. Surprisingly, however, fewer patients with established ASCVD are treated with these cardioprotective antihyperglycemic agents versus patients without ASCVD.

EXPERT OPINION

The reasons for GLP-1RA underuse in clinical practice are multiple. Multifaceted and coordinated interventions targeting all actors of the health-care system must be implemented to stimulate the adoption of GLP-1RAs as part of routine cardiovascular care among patients with T2DM, especially in those with ASCVD.

Cardiovascular protection significantly depends on HbA1c improvement with GLP-1RAs but not with SGLT2 is in type 2 diabetes: A narrative review

BACKGROUND

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), while developed as antihyperglycaemic medications for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, have proven to reduce major cardiovascular adverse events (MACEs) and hospitalization for heart failure (especially for SGLT2is) in dedicated cardiovascular outcome trials. The contribution of the glucose-lowering effect in the cardiovascular protection is uncertain and may differ between the two drug classes.

METHODS

This narrative review compares the relative effects of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction on the cardiovascular protection provided by GLP-1RAs and SGLT2is in placebo-controlled cardiovascular outcome trials by using the results of either post-hoc mediation analyses or meta-regression studies.

RESULTS

Both mediation and meta-regression analyses suggest that the lower cardiovascular risk with GLP-1RAs partially but substantially tracks with their glucose-lowering effect, especially when considering the reduction in nonfatal strokes. In contrast, similar analyses fail to demonstrate any significant contribution of the glucose-lowering effect with SGLT2is, not only on MACEs but also on heart failure issues.

CONCLUSION

The contribution of improved glucose control in cardiovascular protection is limited, but is much greater for GLP-1RAs than for SGLT2is. Of note, such mediation or meta-regression analyses are exploratory and can only be viewed as hypothesis generating.