The risk of fragility fractures in new users of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors compared to sulfonylureas and other anti-diabetic drugs: A cohort study

Bone Fragility in Diabetes and its Management: A Narrative Review

Bone fragility is a serious yet under-recognised complication of diabetes mellitus (DM) that is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Multiple complex pathophysiological mechanisms mediating bone fragility amongst DM patients have been proposed and identified. Fracture risk in both type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) continues to be understated and underestimated by conventional risk assessment tools, posing an additional challenge to the identification of at-risk patients who may benefit from earlier intervention or preventive strategies. Over the years, an increasing body of evidence has demonstrated the efficacy of osteo-pharmacological agents in managing skeletal fragility in DM. This review seeks to elaborate on the risk of bone fragility in DM, the underlying pathogenesis and skeletal alterations, the approach to fracture risk assessment in DM, management strategies and therapeutic options.

The multiple actions of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) and its pharmacological inhibition on bone metabolism: a review

BACKGROUND

Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) plays a crucial role in breaking down various substrates. It also has effects on the insulin signaling pathway, contributing to insulin resistance, and involvement in inflammatory processes like obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Emerging effects of DPP-4 on bone metabolism include an inverse relationship between DPP-4 activity levels and bone mineral density, along with an increased risk of fractures.

MAIN BODY

The influence of DPP-4 on bone metabolism occurs through two axes. The entero-endocrine-osseous axis involves gastrointestinal substrates for DPP-4, including glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptides 1 (GLP-1) and 2 (GLP-2). Studies suggest that supraphysiological doses of exogenous GLP-2 has a significant inhibitory effect on bone resorption, however the specific mechanism by which GLP-2 influences bone metabolism remains unknown. Of these, GIP stands out for its role in bone formation. Other gastrointestinal DPP-4 substrates are pancreatic peptide YY and neuropeptide Y-both bind to the same receptors and appear to increase bone resorption and decrease bone formation. Adipokines (e.g., leptin and adiponectin) are regulated by DPP-4 and may influence bone remodeling and energy metabolism in a paracrine manner. The pancreatic-endocrine-osseous axis involves a potential link between DPP-4, bone, and energy metabolism through the receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa B ligand (RANKL), which induces DPP-4 expression in osteoclasts, leading to decreased GLP-1 levels and increased blood glucose levels. Inhibitors of DPP-4 participate in the pancreatic-endocrine-osseous axis by increasing endogenous GLP-1. In addition to their glycemic effects, DPP-4 inhibitors have the potential to decrease bone resorption, increase bone formation, and reduce the incidence of osteoporosis and fractures. Still, many questions on the interactions between DPP-4 and bone remain unanswered, particularly regarding the effects of DPP-4 inhibition on the skeleton of older individuals.

CONCLUSION

The elucidation of the intricate interactions and impact of DPP-4 on bone is paramount for a proper understanding of the body's mechanisms in regulating bone homeostasis and responses to internal stimuli. This understanding bears significant implications in the investigation of conditions like osteoporosis, in which disruptions to these signaling pathways occur. Further research is essential to uncover the full extent of DPP-4's effects on bone metabolism and energy regulation, paving the way for novel therapeutic interventions targeting these pathways, particularly in older individuals.

Meta-Analysis on the Association Between DPP-4 Inhibitors and Bone Mineral Density and Osteoporosis

Background Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) frequently coexists with osteoporosis and reduced bone mineral density (BMD). Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), a class of antihyperglycemic agents, are commonly employed in T2DM treatment. However, the influence of DPP-4i on bone health remains unclear and debated. This meta-analysis is conducted to explore the relationship between the use of DPP-4i and changes in BMD, as well as the prevalence of osteoporosis among T2DM patients. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases for relevant studies published up until June 2023. Studies included in the meta-analysis were those investigating T2DM patients under DPP-4i treatment, and examining the effects on BMD and osteoporosis. Random-effects models and fixed-effect models were utilized to compute the pooled effects. Heterogeneity among the included studies was evaluated using I² statistics. Results This meta-analysis incorporated a total of 10 studies, encompassing a combined population of 214,541 individuals. The results from this meta-analysis indicated an increase in BMD following DPP-4i usage (SMD 0.15, 95 % confidence interval 0.03-0.26). Additionally, the risk of osteoporosis was significantly reduced (OR 0.90, 95 % confidence interval 0.86-0.94) with very low heterogeneity, recorded at 0 % and 53.0 % respectively. No publication bias was detected in the funnel plot, and sensitivity analyses affirmed the stability of the study's conclusions. Conclusion Our results offer valuable insights into the positive impact of DPP-4i on bone health in T2DM patients, contributing to informed clinical decision-making. These findings may inform the development of more comprehensive T2DM management strategies that account for bone health.

Effects of Incretin Therapy on Skeletal Health in Type 2 Diabetes-A Systematic Review

Diabetes poses a significant risk to bone health, with Type 1 diabetes (T1D) having a more detrimental impact than Type 2 diabetes (T2D). The group of hormones known as incretins, which includes gastric inhibitory peptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), play a role in regulating bowel function and insulin secretion during feeding. GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are emerging as the primary treatment choice in T2D, particularly when atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is present. Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4is), although less potent than GLP-1 RAs, can also be used. Additionally, GLP-1 RAs, either alone or in combination with GIP, may be employed to address overweight and obesity. Since feeding influences bone turnover, a relationship has been established between incretins and bone health. To explore this relationship, we conducted a systematic literature review following the PRISMA guidelines. While some studies on cells and animals have suggested positive effects of incretins on bone cells, turnover, and bone density, human studies have yielded either no or limited and conflicting results regarding their impact on bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk. The effect on fracture risk may vary depending on the choice of comparison drug and the duration of follow-up, which was often limited in several studies. Nevertheless, GLP-1 RAs may hold promise for people with T2D who have multiple fracture risk factors and poor metabolic control. Furthermore, a potential new area of interest is the use of GLP-1 RAs in fracture prevention among overweight and obese people. Based on this systematic review, existing evidence remains insufficient to support a positive or a superior effect on bone health to reduce fracture risk in people with T2D. © 2023 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

To do one and to get more: Part I. Diabetes and bone

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), is a chronic metabolic disease, characterized by the presence of hyperglycemia and insulin resistance. The key treatment strategies for T2DM include modification of lifestyle, medications, and continuous glucose monitoring. DM patients often have DM-associated morbidities and comorbidities; however, disorders of musculoskeletal system are often neglected, compared to other major systems in DM patients. Based on sharing similar pathophysiology of DM and osteoporosis, it is supposed that the use of antidiabetic agents (ADAs) may not only provide the lowering glucose level effect and the maintenance of the sugar homeostasis to directly delay the tissue damage secondary to hyperglycemia but also offer the benefits, such as the prevention of developing osteoporosis and fractures. Based on the current review, evidence shows the positive correlation between DM and osteoporosis or fracture, but the effectiveness of using ADA in the prevention of osteoporosis and subsequent reduction of fracture seems to be inconclusive. Although the benefits of ADA on bone health are uncertain, the potential value of "To do one and to get more" therapeutic strategy should be always persuaded. At least, one of the key treatment strategies as an establishment of healthy lifestyle may work, because it improves the status of insulin resistance and subsequently helps DM control, prevents the DM-related micro- and macrovascular injury, and possibly strengthens the general performance of musculoskeletal system. With stronger musculoskeletal system support, the risk of "fall" may be decreased, because it is associated with fracture. Although the ADA available in the market does not satisfy the policy of "To do one and to get more" yet, we are looking forward to seeing the continuously advanced technology of drug development on diabetic control, and hope to see their extra-sugar-lowering effects.

Risk of Fracture With Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors, Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists, or Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis Combining 177 Randomized Controlled Trials With a Median Follow-Up of 26 weeks

Aim: This study aims to investigate the association between the use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and the risk of fracture among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Methods: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinical-Trials.gov databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Network meta-analysis was performed for total fracture and a series of secondary outcomes.

Results: A total of 177 RCTs (n = 165,081) involving the risk of fracture were identified (a median follow-up of 26 weeks). DPP-4i, GLP-1 RAs, and SGLT-2i did not increase total fracture risk compared with insulin (odds ratio: 0.86, 95% confidence interval: 0.39–1.90; 1.05, 0.54–2.04; 0.88, and 0.39–1.97, respectively), metformin (1.41, 0.48–4.19; 1.72, 0.55–5.38; 1.44, 0.48–4.30), sulfonylureas (0.77, 0.50–1.20; 0.94, 0.55–1.62; 0.79, 0.48–1.31), thiazolidinediones (0.82, 0.27–2.44; 1.00, 0.32–3.10; 0.83, 0.27–2.57), α-glucosidase inhibitor (4.92, 0.23–103.83; 5.99, 0.28–130.37; 5.01, 0.23–107.48), and placebo (1.04, 0.84–1.29; 1.27, 0.88–1.83; 1.06, 0.81–1.39).

Conclusions: The use of DPP-4i, GLP-1 RAs, or SGLT-2i is unlikely to increase the risk of fracture among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.

The risk of major osteoporotic fractures with GLP-1 receptor agonists when compared to DPP-4 inhibitors: A Danish nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) is associated with an increased fracture risk. There is little evidence for the effects of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) on fracture risk in T2D. We aimed to investigate the risk of major osteoporotic fractures (MOF) for treatment with GLP-1RA compared to dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) as add-on therapies to metformin.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study using Danish national health registries. Diagnoses were obtained from discharge diagnosis codes (ICD-10 and ICD-8-system) from the Danish National Patient Registry, and all redeemed drug prescriptions were obtained from the Danish National Prescription Registry (ATC classification system). Subjects treated with metformin in combination with either GLP-1RA or DPP-4i were enrolled from 2007 to 2018. Subjects were propensity-score matched 1:1 based on age, sex, and index date. MOF were defined as hip, vertebral, humerus, or forearm fractures. A Cox proportional hazards model was utilized to estimate hazard rate ratios (HR) for MOF, and survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. In addition, Aalen's Additive Hazards model was applied to examine additive rather than relative hazard effects while allowing time-varying effects.

RESULTS

In total, 42,816 individuals treated with either combination were identified and included. After matching, 32,266 individuals were included in the main analysis (16,133 in each group). Median follow-up times were 642 days and 529 days in the GLP-1RA and DPP-4i group, respectively. We found a crude HR of 0.89 [0.76-1.05] for MOF with GLP-1RA compared to DPP-4i. In the fully adjusted model, we obtained an unaltered HR of 0.86 [0.73-1.03]. For the case of hip fracture, we found a crude HR of 0.68 [0.49-0.96] and a similar adjusted HR. Fracture risk was lower in the GLP-1RA group when examining higher daily doses of the medications, when allowing follow-up to continue after medication change, and when examining hip fractures, specifically. Additional subgroup- and sensitivity analyses yielded results similar to the main analysis.

CONCLUSION

In our primary analysis, we did not observe a significantly different risk of MOF between treatment with GLP-1RA and DPP-4i. We conclude that GLP-1RA are safe in terms of fracture.

Effect of dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors, thiazolidinedione, and sulfonylurea on osteoporosis in patients with type 2 diabetes: population-based cohort study

The population-based cohort study used the Korean National Health Insurance claims database to evaluate the effect of anti-diabetic drugs on osteoporosis. The use of DPP-IV inhibitors does not increase the risk of osteoporosis compared with the use of sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, while a weak association was found between thiazolidinediones and increased risk of osteoporosis.

PURPOSE

The current study aimed to evaluate the effect of dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors (DPP-IVi), thiazolidinedione (TZD), and sulfonylurea (SU) on osteoporosis in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A population-based cohort study was conducted in the Republic of Korea using the Korean National Health Insurance claims database. Data from 2012 to 2017 for patients of 50-99 years of age who were prescribed DPP-IVi, TZD, or SU during 2013-2015 were extracted from the database. Based on pre-defined criteria, a total of 381,404 patients were analyzed after inverse probability of treatment weighting. The association between the study drugs and osteoporosis was estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. Data of 220,166 patients who were prescribed DPP-IVi, 18,630 who were prescribed TZD, and 142,608 patients who were prescribed SU were set.

RESULTS

In the multivariate-adjusted analysis, the hazard ratio (HR) of osteoporosis in the DPP-IVi group was not significantly different from that of the SU group (HR: 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-1.00), whereas the HR of osteoporosis in the TZD group was higher (HR: 1.13; 95% CI 1.06-1.20). In the subgroup analysis, the HRs of osteoporosis were higher with pioglitazone (HR: 1.14; 95% CI 1.06-1.23) in the TZD group and with glibenclamides (HR: 1.39; 95% CI 1.09-1.77) in the SU group, whereas drugs with lower HR in the DPP-IVi group were saxagliptin (HR: 0.93; 95% CI 0.87-0.99) and sitagliptin (HR: 0.93; 95% CI 0.89-0.97).

CONCLUSION

DPP-IV inhibitors do not increase the risk of osteoporosis compared with sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, while a weak association was found between thiazolidinediones and increased risk of osteoporosis.

Effects of Incretin-Related Diabetes Drugs on Bone Formation and Bone Resorption

Patients with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of fracture compared to the general population. Glucose absorption is accelerated by incretin hormones, which induce insulin secretion from the pancreas. The level of the incretin hormone, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), shows an immediate postprandial increase, and the circulating level of intact GLP-1 is reduced rapidly by dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4)-mediated inactivation. Therefore, GLP-1 receptor agonists and DPP-4 inhibitors are effective in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. However, these incretin-related diabetic agents have been reported to affect bone metabolism, including bone formation and resorption. These agents enhance the expression of bone markers, and have been applied to improve bone quality and bone density. In addition, they have been reported to suppress chronic inflammation and reduce the levels of inflammatory cytokine expression. Previously, we reported that these incretin-related agents inhibited both the expression of inflammatory cytokines and inflammation-induced bone resorption. This review presents an overview of current knowledge regarding the effects of incretin-related diabetes drugs on osteoblast differentiation and bone formation as well as osteoclast differentiation and bone resorption. The mechanisms by which incretin-related diabetes drugs regulate bone formation and bone resorption are also discussed.

Clinical and radiographic variables related to implants with simultaneous grafts among type 2 diabetic patients treated with different hypoglycemic medications: a retrospective study

Background

The influence of different hypoglycemic agents on peri-implant variables among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients is still unclear. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the radiographic marginal bone loss and clinical parameters around implants in patients using different hypoglycemic agents.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, the dental implant records of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients who met the inclusion criteria were collected. The patients using only single medication as follows: insulin, metformin, or glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) drugs, were grouped according to their medication. These patients received implant placement with the same initial status, and all the prosthesis restorations were cement-retained ceramic crowns. The peri-implant marginal bone levels were evaluated by periapical radiographs immediately after implant placement and at 1 and 2-year follow-up visits. The baseline characteristics were compared among groups. The peri-implant radiographic marginal bone loss and clinical parameters were preliminarily compared using the Kruskal–Wallis test, and then the covariates were controlled by covariance analysis. Bonferroni post hoc adjustment test was performed for the multiple comparisons.

Results

After a review of more than 7000 medical records, a total of 150 patients with 308 implants at 1-year follow-up were assessed. The peri-implant marginal bone loss in the GLP-1 drug group was significantly smaller than the insulin group and metformin group (P < 0.01). The radiographic bone loss in the metformin group was higher than the insulin group (P < 0.05). Some of these included patients were lost to follow-up. Only 74 patients with 129 implants completed the 2-year follow-up. The radiographic bone loss in the metformin group was still higher than the insulin group (P < 0.05) and GLP-1 group (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the BOP (+) and the mean PD among groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

The radiographic variables were not exactly the same among the patients with different hypoglycemic agents at both the 1 and 2-year follow-ups. After ensuring consistency in baseline characteristics, the positive effect of GLP-1 drugs on peri-implant bone remodeling may be no less than insulin or metformin. More studies are needed to verify the direct effect of these drugs on peri-implant bone.

Clinical trial registration number ChiCTR2000034211 (retrospectively registered).

Glucose-Lowering Drugs and Fracture Risk-a Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with increased fracture risk. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the effects of different classes of glucose-lowering drugs on fracture risk in patients with type 2 DM. The heterogeneity of the included studies did not allow formal statistical analyses.

RECENT FINDINGS

Sixty studies were included in the review. Metformin, dipeptidylpeptidase-IV inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2-inhibitors do not appear to increase fracture risk. Results for insulin and sulphonylureas were more disparate, although there may be an increased fracture risk related to hypoglycemia and falls with these treatments. Glitazones were consistently associated with increased fracture risk in women, although the evidence was sparser in men. New glucose-lowering drugs are continuously being developed and better understanding of these is leading to changes in prescription patterns. Our findings warrant continued research on the effects of glucose-lowering drugs on fracture risk, elucidating the class-specific effects of these drugs.

Update on: effects of anti-diabetic drugs on bone metabolism

INTRODUCTION

Preclinical, clinical, and population-based studies have provided evidence that anti-diabetic drugs affect bone metabolism and may affect the risk of fracture in diabetic patients.

AREAS COVERED

An overview of the skeletal effects of anti-diabetic drugs used in type 2 diabetes is provided. Searches on AdisInsight, PubMed, and Medline databases were conducted up to 1^st July 2020. The latest evidence from randomized clinical trials and population-based studies on the skeletal safety of the most recent drugs (DPP-4i, GLP-1RA, and SGLT-2i) is provided.

EXPERT OPINION

Diabetic patients present with a higher risk of fracture for a given bone mineral density suggesting a role of bone quality in the etiology of diabetic fracture. Bone quality is difficult to assess in human clinical practice and the use of preclinical models provides valuable information on diabetic bone alterations. As several links have been established between bone and energy homeostasis, it is interesting to study the safety of anti-diabetic drugs on the skeleton. So far, evidence for the newest molecules suggests a neutral fracture risk, but further studies, especially in different types of patient populations (patients at risk or with history of cardiovascular disease, renal impairment, neuropathy) are required to fully appreciate this matter.

Diabetes Mellitus and Osteoporosis Correlation: Challenges and Hopes

Diabetes and osteoporosis are two common diseases with different complications. Despite different therapeutic strategies, managing these diseases and reducing their burden have not been satisfactory, especially when they appear one after the other. In this review, we aimed to clarify the similarity, common etiology and possible common adjunctive therapies of these two major diseases and designate the known molecular pattern observed in them. Based on different experimental findings, we want to illuminate that interestingly similar pathways lead to diabetes and osteoporosis. Meanwhile, there are a few drugs involved in the treatment of both diseases, which most of the time act in the same line but sometimes with opposing results. Considering the correlation between diabetes and osteoporosis, more efficient management of both diseases, in conditions of concomitant incidence or cause and effect condition, is required.

The Effect of Type 2 Diabetes on Bone Biomechanics

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is ample evidence that patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) have increased risk of fracture even though they have normal or high bone mineral density. As a result, poor bone quality is suggested to contribute to skeletal fragility in this population. Thus, our goal was to conduct a comprehensive literature review to understand how bone quality components are altered in T2D and their effects on bone biomechanics and fracture risk.

RECENT FINDINGS

T2D does affect bone quality via alterations in bone microarchitecture, organic matrix, and cellular behavior. Further, studies indicate that bone biomechanical properties are generally deteriorated in T2D, but there are few reports in patients. Additional work is needed to better understand molecular and cellular mechanisms that contribute to skeletal fragility in T2D. This knowledge can contribute to the development of improved diagnostic tools and drug targets to for improved quality of life for those with T2D.

Risk of fracture with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in real-world use: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

In the present meta-analysis based on real-world data, the use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1ra), or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) was not associated with the risk of fracture.

INTRODUCTION

Cumulative evidence from randomized control trials (RCTs) with limited fracture events showed that the use of DPP-4i, GLP-1ra, or SGLT2i may not affect the risk of fracture. However, additional insights from large population-based studies with routinely collected data on fracture events and an adequate amount of fracture events are necessary to draw firm conclusions. To refine and complement the results from RCTs, a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies were performed to investigate the association between the use of DPP-4i, GLP-1ra, or SGLT2i and the risk of fracture in real-world settings.

METHODS

The PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched to identify relevant observational studies. A random-effect model was used to estimate the summary relative risks (RRs).

RESULTS

The use of DPP-4i (RR 0.83, 95% CI [confidence interval] 0.60, 1.14; n = 11), GLP-1ra (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.24, 1.74; n = 4), or SGLT2i (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.91, 1.16; n = 4) was not associated with the risk of fracture. In general, there was a consistent lack of association between the use of DPP-4i or GLP-1ra and the risk of fracture across nearly all subgroups, except for a significantly reduced risk of hip fracture with the use of GLP-1ra (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.04, 0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Cumulative real-world evidence does not support an association between the use of DPP-4i, GLP-1ra, or SGLT2i and the risk of fracture. Our findings, together with the cumulative evidence from RCTs, should reassure policy makers and medical practitioners that the use of these medications is unlikely to increase the risk of fracture among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in general. Further studies need to investigate the long-term impact of these drugs on the fracture risk, particularly in high-risk populations.

Effect of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors on the Risk of Bone Fractures in a Korean Population

BACKGROUND

There have been equivocal results in studies of the effects of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) on fractures. In this study, we analyzed the effect of DPP-4i on bone fracture risk in a Korean population.

METHODS

We extracted subjects (n = 11,164) aged 50 years or older from the National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort 2.0 from 2009 to 2014. Our control group included subjects without diabetes (n = 5,582), and our treatment groups with diabetes included DPP-4i users (n = 1,410) and DPP-4i non-users (n = 4,172). The primary endpoint was the incidence of a composite outcome consisting of osteoporosis diagnosis, osteoporotic fractures, vertebral fractures, non-vertebral fractures, and femoral fractures. The secondary endpoint was the incidence of each individual component of the composite outcome. Survival analysis was performed with adjustment for age, gender, diabetes complications severity index, Charlson comorbidity index, hypertension medication, and dyslipidemia treatment.

RESULTS

The incidence of the composite outcome per 1,000 person-years was 0.089 in DPP-4i users, 0.099 in DPP-4i non-users, and 0.095 in controls. There was no significant difference in fracture risk between DPP-4i users and DPP-4i non-users or controls after the adjustments (P > 0.05). The incidences of osteoporosis diagnosis, osteoporotic fractures, vertebral fractures, non-vertebral fractures, and femoral fractures were not significantly different between DPP-4i users and non-users. The results of subgroup analyses by gender and age were consistent.

CONCLUSION

DPP-4i had no significant effect on the risk of fractures in a Korean population.

Diabetes and bone

Bone disease is a serious complication to diabetes. Patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) suffer from an increased risk of fracture, most notably at the hip, compared with patients without diabetes. Confounders such as patient sex, age, body mass index, blood glucose status, fall risk, and diabetes medications may influence the fracture risk. Different underlying mechanisms contribute to bone disease in patients with diabetes. Bone quality is affected by low bone turnover in T1D and T2D, and furthermore, incorporation of advanced glycation end-products, changes in the incretin hormone response, and microvascular complications contribute to impaired bone quality and increased fracture risk. Diagnosis of bone disease in patients with diabetes is a challenge as current methods for fracture prediction such as bone mineral density T-score and fracture risk assessment tools underestimate fracture risk for patients with T1D and T2D. This review focuses on bone disease and fracture risk in patients with diabetes regarding epidemiology, underlying disease mechanisms, and diagnostic methods, and we also provide considerations regarding the management of diabetes patients with bone disease in terms of an intervention threshold and different treatments.

Term sets: A transparent and reproducible representation of clinical code sets

OBJECTIVE

Clinical code sets are vital to research using routinely-collected electronic healthcare data. Existing code set engineering methods pose significant limitations when considering reproducible research. To improve the transparency and reusability of research, these code sets must abide by FAIR principles; this is not currently happening. We propose 'term sets', an equivalent alternative to code sets that are findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We describe a new code set representation, consisting of natural language inclusion and exclusion terms (term sets), and explain its relationship to code sets. We formally prove that any code set has a corresponding term set. We demonstrate utility by searching for recently published code sets, representing them as term sets, and reporting on the number of inclusion and exclusion terms compared with the size of the code set.

RESULTS

Thirty-one code sets from 20 papers covering diverse disease domains were converted into term sets. The term sets were on average 74% the size of their equivalent original code set. Four term sets were larger due to deficiencies in the original code sets.

DISCUSSION

Term sets can concisely represent any code set. This may reduce barriers for examining and reusing code sets, which may accelerate research using healthcare databases. We have developed open-source software that supports researchers using term sets.

CONCLUSION

Term sets are independent of clinical code terminologies and therefore: enable reproducible research; are resistant to terminology changes; and are less error-prone as they are shorter than the equivalent code set.

Diabetes pharmacotherapy and effects on the musculoskeletal system

Persons with type 1 or type 2 diabetes have a significantly higher fracture risk than age-matched persons without diabetes, attributed to disease-specific deficits in the microarchitecture and material properties of bone tissue. Therefore, independent effects of diabetes drugs on skeletal integrity are vitally important. Studies of incretin-based therapies have shown divergent effects of different agents on fracture risk, including detrimental, beneficial, and neutral effects. The sulfonylurea class of drugs, owing to its hypoglycemic potential, is thought to amplify the risk of fall-related fractures, particularly in the elderly. Other agents such as the biguanides may, in fact, be osteo-anabolic. In contrast, despite similarly expected anabolic properties of insulin, data suggests that insulin pharmacotherapy itself, particularly in type 2 diabetes, may be a risk factor for fracture, negatively associated with determinants of bone quality and bone strength. Finally, sodium-dependent glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors have been associated with an increased risk of atypical fractures in select populations, and possibly with an increase in lower extremity amputation with specific SGLT2I drugs. The role of skeletal muscle, as a potential mediator and determinant of bone quality, is also a relevant area of exploration. Currently, data regarding the impact of glucose lowering medications on diabetes-related muscle atrophy is more limited, although preclinical studies suggest that various hypoglycemic agents may have either aggravating (sulfonylureas, glinides) or repairing (thiazolidinediones, biguanides, incretins) effects on skeletal muscle atrophy, thereby influencing bone quality. Hence, the therapeutic efficacy of each hypoglycemic agent must also be evaluated in light of its impact, alone or in combination, on musculoskeletal health, when determining an individualized treatment approach. Moreover, the effect of newer medications (potentially seeking expanded clinical indication into the pediatric age range) on the growing skeleton is largely unknown. Herein, we review the available literature regarding effects of diabetes pharmacotherapy, by drug class and/or by clinical indication, on the musculoskeletal health of persons with diabetes.

Comparative Safety of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors Versus Sulfonylureas and Other Glucose-lowering Therapies for Three Acute Outcomes

Although the glucose lowering effect of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors is well established, several potential serious acute safety concerns have been raised including acute kidney injury, respiratory tract infections, and acute pancreatitis. Using the UK-based Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), we identified initiators (365-day washout period) of DPP4 inhibitors and relevant comparators including initiators of sulfonylureas, metformin, thiazolidinediones, and insulin between January 2007 and January 2016 to quantify the association between DPP4 inhibitors and three acute health events – acute kidney injury, respiratory tract infections, and acute pancreatitis. The associations between drug and study outcomes were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for deciles of high-dimensional propensity scores and number of additional glucose lowering agents. After controlling for potential confounders, the risk was not significantly increased or decreased for initiators of DPP4 inhibitors compared to sulfonylureas (hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] for acute kidney injury: 0.81 [0.56–1.18]; HR for respiratory tract infections: 0.93 [0.84–1.04]; HR for acute pancreatitis 1.03 [0.42–2.52], metformin (HR for respiratory tract infection 0.91 [0.65–1.27]), thiazolidinediones (HR for acute kidney injury: 1.12 [0.60–2.10]; HR for respiratory tract infections: 1.02 [0.86–1.21]; HR for acute pancreatitis: 1.21 [0.25–5.72]), or insulin (HR for acute kidney injury: 1.40 [0.77–2.55]; HR for respiratory tract infections: 0.74 [0.60–0.92]; HR for acute pancreatitis: 1.01 [0.24–4.19]). Initiators of DPP4 inhibitors were associated with an increased risk of acute kidney injury when compared to metformin initiators (HR [95% CI] for acute kidney injury: 1.85 [1.10–3.12], although this association was attenuated when DPP4 inhibitor monotherapy was compared to metformin monotherapy exposure as a time-dependent variable (HR 1.39 [0.91–2.11]). Initiation of a DPP4 inhibitor was not associated with an increased risk of acute kidney injury, respiratory tract infections, or acute pancreatitis compared to sulfonylureas or other glucose-lowering therapies.

Skeletal Fragility in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is associated with an increased risk of fracture, which has been reported in several epidemiological studies. However, bone mineral density in T2D is increased and underestimates the fracture risk. Common risk factors for fracture do not fully explain the increased fracture risk observed in patients with T2D. We propose that the pathogenesis of increased fracture risk in T2D is due to low bone turnover caused by osteocyte dysfunction resulting in bone microcracks and fractures. Increased levels of sclerostin may mediate the low bone turnover and may be a novel marker of increased fracture risk, although further research is needed. An impaired incretin response in T2D may also affect bone turnover. Accumulation of advanced glycosylation endproducts may also impair bone strength. Concerning antidiabetic medication, the glitazones are detrimental to bone health and associated with increased fracture risk, and the sulphonylureas may increase fracture risk by causing hypoglycemia. So far, the results on the effect of other antidiabetics are ambiguous. No specific guideline for the management of bone disease in T2D is available and current evidence on the effects of antiosteoporotic medication in T2D is sparse. The aim of this review is to collate current evidence of the pathogenesis, detection and treatment of diabetic bone disease.