The cardiovascular effect of incretin-based therapies among type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Comparative assessment of efficacy and safety of approved oral therapies for overactive bladder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

bladder based on a systematic review and network meta-analysis approach.

METHODS

Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials databases were systematically searched. The search time frame was from database creation to June 2, 2022. Randomized controlled double-blind trials of oral medication for overactive bladder were screened against the protocol's entry criteria. Trials were evaluated for quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, and data were statistically analyzed using Stata 16.0 software.

RESULT

A total of 60 randomized controlled double-blind clinical trials were included involving 50,333 subjects. Solifenacin 10mg was the most effective in mean daily micturitions and incontinence episodes, solifenacin 5/10mg in mean daily urinary urgency episodes and nocturia episodes, fesoterodine 8mg in urgency incontinence episodes/d and oxybutynin 5mg in voided volume/micturition. In terms of safety, solifenacin 5mg, ER-tolterodine 4mg, mirabegron, vibegron and ER-oxybutynin 10mg all showed a better incidence of dry mouth, fesoterodine 4mg, ER-oxybutynin 10mg, tolterodine 2mg, and vibegron in the incidence of constipation. Compared to placebo, imidafenacin 0.1mg showed a significantly increased incidence in hypertension, solifenacin 10mg in urinary tract infection, fesoterodine 4/8mg and darifenacin 15mg in headache.

CONCLUSION

Solifenacin showed better efficacy. For safety, most anticholinergic drugs were more likely to cause dry mouth and constipation, lower doses were better tolerated. The choice of drugs should be tailored to the patient's specific situation to find the best balance between efficacy and safety.

Research progress on the effects of novel hypoglycemic drugs in diabetes combined with myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) reperfusion is associated with ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury, which leads to enlarged myocardial infarction size, poor healing of the infarcted myocardium, and poor left ventricular remodeling, thus increasing the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). Diabetes increases myocardial susceptibility to I/R injury, decreases myocardial responsiveness to cardioprotective strategies, exacerbates myocardial I/R injury, and expands the infarct size of AMI, thereby increasing the incidence of malignant arrhythmias and heart failure. Currently, evidence regarding pharmacological interventions for diabetes combined with AMI and I/R injury is lacking. Traditional hypoglycemic drugs have a limited role in the prevention and treatment of diabetes combined with I/R injury. Current evidence suggests that novel hypoglycemic drugs may exert a preventive effect on diabetes combined with myocardial I/R injury, especially glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) and sodium-dependent glucose transporter protein 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), which may increase coronary blood flow, reduce acute thrombosis, attenuate I/R injury, decrease myocardial infarction size, inhibit structural and functional remodeling of the ischemic heart, improve cardiac function, and reduce the occurrence of MACEs of diabetes patients combined with AMI via mechanisms such as reduction of inflammatory response, inhibition of oxidative stress, and improvement of vascular endothelial function. This paper will systematically elaborate the protective role and molecular mechanisms of GLP-1 RA and SGLT2i in diabetes combined with myocardial I/R injury, aiming to provide clinical assistance.

Current gaps in management and timely referral of cardiorenal complications among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the Middle East and African countries: Expert recommendations

The upsurge of type 2 diabetes mellitus is a major public health concern in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and Africa (AFR) region, with cardiorenal complications (CRCs) being the predominant cause of premature morbidity and mortality. High prevalence of cardiometabolic risk factors, lack of awareness among patients and physicians, deficient infrastructure, and economic constraints lead to a cascade of CRCs at a significantly earlier age in MENA and AFR. In this review, we present consensus recommendations by experts in MENA and AFR, highlighting region-specific challenges and potential solutions for management of CRCs. Health professionals who understand sociocultural barriers can significantly increase patient awareness and encourage health-seeking behavior through simple educational tools. Increasing physician knowledge on early identification of CRCs and personalized treatment based on risk stratification, alongside optimum glycemic control, can mitigate therapeutic inertia. Early diagnosis of high-risk people with regular and systematic monitoring of cardiorenal parameters, development of region-specific care pathways for timely referral to specialists, followed by guideline-recommended care with novel antidiabetics are imperative. Adherence to guideline-recommended care can catalyze utilization of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists with demonstrated cardiorenal benefits-thus paving the way for overcoming care gaps in a cost-effective manner. Leveraging digital technology like electronic medical records can help generate real-world data and provide insights on voids in adoption of newer antidiabetic medications. A patient-centric approach, collaborative care among physicians from different specialties, alongside involvement of policy makers are key for improving patient outcomes and quality of care in MENA and AFR.

Comparative efficacy of empagliflozin versus placebo in the treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The objective of this meta-analysis study was to evaluate the comparative efficacy of empagliflozin (25 mg) with placebo in the treatment and management of type 1 diabetes mellitus. This study is a meta-analysis, so an ethical statement is not required. Different databases and individual journal websites like SCOPUS, Science direct, Cochrane review library etc. were used. The articles were evaluated based on the search and eligibility criteria. A total of five RCTs were incorporated in this meta-analysis. These studies contained a total of 1058 patients, including 526 patients with placebo (or control-treated patients), and 532 patients with empagliflozin (25 mg) treated combination. The mean follow-up time ranged from 7 days to 6 months. Overall, mean reduction in placebo was -0.50% and empa-treated was -0.85%, while the pooled WMD was 3.82 995% CI 1.20 – 5.88, p=0.0001). Regarding urinary glucose excretion, that the pooled WMD was 6.67 (95% CI 4.87-10.14, p=0.001) indicated a significant increase in empa-arm compared to placebo. No heterogeneity was found (I2 – 15.03%). This meta-analysis underlined the therapeutic benefit of empagliflozin as an adjunctive therapy for patients with type 1 diabetes.

Primary care management of type 2 diabetes: a comparison of the efficacy and safety of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is) exert their effects via the incretin system, which augments glucose-dependent insulin secretion in response to nutrient intake (the 'incretin effect'). Both classes are well-established pharmacologic options for the management of glycemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) after failure of first-line metformin; however, they have inherent differences in their mechanisms of action that are reflected in their clinical safety and efficacy profiles. GLP-1RAs have high glycemic efficacy and are associated with weight loss and, in some cases, cardioprotective effects, with a side-effect profile of predominantly transient gastrointestinal adverse events. Most GLP-1RAs are administered as subcutaneous injection, although an oral formulation of one GLP-1RA, semaglutide, has recently become available. DPP4is provide moderate glycemic control, are weight-neutral, and do not offer any cardiovascular benefits, but are generally well tolerated. DPP4is are all administered orally. This narrative review aims to provide guidance for a primary care audience on the similarities and differences between GLP-1RA and DPP4i therapies, with a focus on their mechanism of action, clinical safety, efficacy, and real-world effectiveness. The role of incretin-based therapies in the T2D treatment paradigm, including key considerations for guiding treatment decisions, will also be discussed.

Cardiovascular Safety and Benefits of Noninsulin Antihyperglycemic Drugs for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Part 2

Ideal drugs to improve outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are those with antiglycemic efficacy, as well as cardiovascular safety that has to be determined in appropriately designed cardiovascular outcome trials as mandated by regulatory agencies. The more recent antihyperglycemic medications have shown promise with regards to cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk reduction in T2DM patients at a high cardiovascular risk. Sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists are associated with better cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in T2DM patients than are dipeptidylpeptidase-4 inhibitors, leading to the Food and Drug Administration's approval of empagliflozin to reduce mortality, and of liraglutide to reduce CVD risk in high-risk T2DM patients. For heart failure outcomes, sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors are beneficial, while glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors are neutral. Ongoing and planned randomized controlled trials of these newer drugs should clarify the possibility of class effects and of CVD risk reduction benefits in low-moderate cardiovascular risk patients. While we eagerly await the results on ongoing studies, these medications should be appropriately prescribed in T2DM patients with baseline CVD or those at a high CVD risk after carefully evaluating the elevated risk for adverse events like gastrointestinal disturbances, bladder cancer, genital infections, and amputations. Studies to understand the pleotropic and novel pathophysiological mechanisms demonstrated by the sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors will shed light on the effects of the modulation of microvascular, inflammatory, and thrombotic milieu for improving the CVD risk in T2DM patients. This is part 2 of the series on noninsulin antihyperglycemic drugs for the treatment of T2DM.

Long-acting GLP-1 receptor agonists: Findings and implications of cardiovascular outcomes trials

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a common and serious comorbidity of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment has become an important aspect of evaluating new therapies for T2DM before approval by the FDA. Since 2008, in order to establish safety, new therapies for T2DM have been required to demonstrate that they will not result in an unacceptable increase in CV risk. Studies performed for this purpose are termed CV outcome trials, or CVOTs. This article reviews CVOTs completed to date for the class of long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs; liraglutide, exenatide extended-release, albiglutide, dulaglutide, semaglutide injectable, semaglutide oral) and implications for clinical management of T2DM. All CVOTs have confirmed long-acting GLP-1RAs to be noninferior to (not worse than) placebo with regard to first occurrence of a primary outcome of three-point major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; composite outcome of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke). Further, a number of the studies demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in primary outcomes of three-point MACE with GLP-1RA treatment compared with placebo. As a result, the product labeling for liraglutide, semaglutide injectable, and dulaglutide has been updated with an indication for reducing the risk of MACE in adults with T2DM and established CVD (all) or multiple CV risk factors (dulaglutide only). These findings have brought about an exciting paradigm shift from concern about not inflicting CV harm to the exciting prospect of reducing risks of CV outcomes. Major diabetes care guidelines now encourage early consideration of GLP-1RA use in patients with atherosclerotic CVD.

Cardiovascular Outcomes Comparison of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors versus Sulfonylurea as Add-on Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a Meta-Analysis

Objective

Recent studies have raised concern about the cardiovascular safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors. We performed a systematic review through meta-analysis to compare cardiovascular outcomes of sulfonylurea (SU) versus DPP4 inhibitors when used in combination with metformin.

Methods

After searching for trials using combination therapy of metformin with DPP4 inhibitor or SU in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase, one prospective observation study and 15 randomized controlled studies were selected.

Results

Regarding the primary analysis endpoint, there were no significant differences in the risk of all-cause mortality between SU and DPP4 inhibitors as an add-on therapy to metformin (random-effect relative risk [RR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98–1.33; p=0.811; I²=0%). Cardiovascular death was also similar between the two drug classes in the five studies which reported outcomes (random-effect RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.83–1.27; p=0.517; I²=0%). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac events (MACE), coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke and heart failure. However, there were less hypoglycemic events and weight gain in the DPP4 inhibitor group as compared with the SU group (random-effect RR, 3.79; 95% CI, 1.53–9.39; p<0.001; I²=98.2 and weighted mean difference, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.07–2.29; p<0.001; I²=94.7, respectively).

Conclusion

As add-on therapy to metformin, there were no significant differences in all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality between DPP4 inhibitors and SUs.

Novel Antidiabetic Agents: Cardiovascular and Safety Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Concerns of elevated cardiovascular risk with some anti-diabetic medications warranted trials on the cardiovascular outcome to demonstrate cardiovascular safety of newly marketed anti-diabetic drugs. Although these trials were initially designed to evaluate safety, some of these demonstrated significant cardiovascular benefits.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We reviewed the cardiovascular and safety outcomes of novel antidiabetic agents in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease or at high risk of it. We included the outcomes of safety trials, randomized controlled trials, meta-analysis, large cohort studies, and real-world data, which highlighted the cardiovascular profile of DPP-4is, GLP-1RAs and SGLT-2is.

CONCLUSION

Although DPP-4is demonstrated non-inferiority to placebo, gaining cardiovascular safety, as well market authorization, SGLT-2is and most of the GLP-1RAs have shown impressive cardiovascular benefits in patients with T2D and established CVD or at high risk of it. These favorable effects of novel antidiabetic agents on cardiovascular parameters provide novel therapeutic approaches in medical management, risk stratification and prevention.

Metabolic effects of antihyperglycemic agents and mortality: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The effects of antihyperglycemic medications on cardiovascular events and mortality are heterogeneous and their effects on intermediate factors might explain these differences. This systematic review explores the relationship between metabolic factors, mechanism of action, and mortality effects of antihyperglycemic medications in type 2 diabetes. Randomized trials assessing the effects of antihyperglycemic medications on all-cause or cardiovascular mortality in type 2 diabetes were included. Myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure were secondary outcomes. The effects of medications on HbA1c, severe hypoglycemia (SH), body weight, systolic blood pressure (SBP), and mechanism of action were evaluated. Meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed grouping studies according to the above-cited factors. All-cause mortality was lower for medications that reduced HbA1c, SH, body weight, and SBP. Decreased cardiovascular mortality was associated with lower HbA1c, SH, SBP. Myocardial infarction and stroke were also associated with favorable metabolic profile. These findings were not confirmed in meta-regression models. Medications associated with lower SH, body weight and SBP had a lower risk of heart failure. In conclusion, medications with better metabolic profile were associated with reduced all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. These findings are based on indirect comparisons and must be applied cautiously.

Indirect comparison of glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonists regarding cardiovascular safety and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: network meta-analysis

Background

The cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) have shown that glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RAs) have varying degrees of cardiovascular (CV) safety in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM.) The lack of any head-to-head comparative trials among GLP1RAs urged the need for an indirect comparison of these agents. Therefore, this study was conducted to indirectly compare the CV safety and mortality effects among different GLP1RAs in patients with T2DM using network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods

Medline was searched to identify GLP1RA CVOTs to date. The outcomes of interest were CV death, myocardial infarction (IM), stroke, and death from any cause. An NMA with binomial likelihood logit link model was used for the binary outcomes. We conducted both fixed effects and random effects models for each outcome, and selected the best model based on the deviance information and the average posterior residual deviance. This NMA was reported in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA-NMA).

Results

A total of seven GLP1RA CVOTs were included having 56,004 patients. The NMA results showed that oral semaglutide was statistically better than exenatide (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.21–0.99), dulaglutide (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.20–0.97), albiglutide (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.19–0.97), lixisenatide (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19–0.92) in reducing CV death events. No significant differences were detected between most of the treatments regarding reducing death from any cause, MI and stroke events. The ranking results showed that oral semaglutide had the highest probability to be ranked first (> 90%) in reducing CV death and death from any cause. Moreover, once weekly semaglutide had the highest probability to be ranked first in reducing MI and stroke events.

Conclusion

The GLP1RAs have shown significant benefits in terms of CV safety. The indirect comparison and ranking probability results have shown that one weekly semaglutide and oral semaglutide seems to be the preferred option in patients with T2DM and established or at high risk of CVD. This result can aid health care providers, pharmacy and therapeutics committees in hospitals, and insurance companies when deciding which GLP1RA to start or add to their formulary.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with and without prior cardiovascular events: An updated meta-analysis and subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

To conduct a meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcome trials on the effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane database and clinicaltrials.gov was performed to identify controlled trials (up to 15 June 2019) of GLP-1RAs with a cardiovascular endpoint. The principal endpoint of the present meta-analysis was MACE; secondary endpoints included myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, and hospitalization for heart failure. Mantel-Haenszel odds ratios (MH-ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for all outcomes.

RESULTS

In the seven trials included, all placebo-controlled, GLP-1RA treatment was associated with a reduction in MACE (MH-OR 0.87 [95% CI 0.81, 0.93]). Cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction and stroke were also reduced (MH-OR 0.88 [95% CI 0.80, 0.96], MH-OR 0.90 [95% CI 0.82, 0.98], MH-OR 0.91 [95% CI 0.84, 0.98] and MH-OR 0.86 [95% CI 0.77, 0.97], respectively). Results for hospitalization for heart failure were not statistically significant (MH-OR 0.93 [95% CI 0.83, 1.04]). The meta-analyses of patient subgroups showed a significant reduction in MACE with GLP-1RAs, irrespective of gender, advanced age and obesity.

CONCLUSIONS

GLP-1RAs are associated with a reduction in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in high-risk patients with diabetes. This effect does not appear to be moderated by gender or body mass index. The possibility of different effects of GLP-1RAs between patients in primary and secondary prevention merits further investigation.

Meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of SGLT2 inhibitors and incretin based agents combination therapy vs. SGLT2i alone or add-on to metformin in type 2 diabetes

We aimed to determine whether sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) and incretin-based agents combination therapy produces more benefits than SGLT2is alone in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SGLT2is plus Dipeptidyl-Peptidase 4 inhibitors (SGLT2is/DPP4is) or glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonists (SGLT2is/GLP-1RAs) against SGLT2is as monotherapy or add-on to metformin in T2DMs. A total of 13 studies with 7350 participants were included. Combination with GLP-1RAs exhibited more HbA1c reduction (WMD: -0.8; 95% CI, -1.14 to -0.45%), weight loss (-1.46; 95% CI, -2.38 to -0.54 kg), and systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction (-2.88; 95% CI, -4.52 to -1.25 mmHg) versus SGLT2is alone but increased the gastrointestinal disorder risk (RR: 1.68; 95% CI, 1.14-2.47). Combination with DPP4is exhibited an extra effect on HbA1c reduction (-0.47; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.37%), a neutral effect on weight (0.19; 95% CI, -0.11 to 0.48 kg) and SBP (-0.01; 95% CI, -0.85 to 0.63 mmHg), and ameliorated the genital infections risk (0.73; 95% CI, 0.54-0.97) versus SGLT2is. Meta-regression indicated the hypoglycemic efficacy of SGLT2is/DPP4is is higher in Asians than in other ethnics, and the differences in BMI across ethnic groups may mediate this effect. SGLT2is and incretin-based agents combination therapy is efficacious and safe versus SGLT2is alone in T2DMs. Particularly, combination with GLP-1RAs shows additional benefits to glycemic, weight, and SBP control to a larger extent than DPP4is, while combination with DPP4is ameliorates the risk for genital infection seen with SGLT2is. We highlight the need for individualized treatment related to the selection of this novel combination therapy.

Neurological Manifestation of Incretin-Based Therapies in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

As a new class of antidiabetic drug, incretin-based therapies, which include dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4Is) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), have raised concerns about symptoms of withdrawal in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), such as dizziness and headache. To systematically evaluate whether incretin-based therapies may lead to dizziness and headache in patients with T2DM compared to other traditional antidiabetic drugs or placebo. We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane library, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception through June 23, 2017, to identify randomized controlled trials of the safety of DPP-4Is or GLP-1 RAs versus placebo or other antidiabetic drugs in T2DM patients. We used the network meta-analysis under the frequentist framework to compare the association between multiple antidiabetic drugs and dizziness and headache. A total of 233 clinical trials with nine treatments and 147,710 patients were included: two incretin-based therapies, one placebo, and six traditional antidiabetic drugs (metformin, insulin, sulfonylurea, thiazolidinediones, alpha-glucosidase inhibitor, and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2). Compared to insulin, thiazolidinediones, or placebo, GLP-1 RAs statistically significantly increased the risk of dizziness (odds ratios [ORs]: 1.92, 1.57, and 1.40, respectively) and headache (ORs: 1.34, 1.41, and 1.18, respectively). DPP-4Is increased the risk of headache (OR: 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02 to 1.46; moderate quality) and dizziness (OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.05 to 2.03; moderate quality) compared to insulin. Of the incretin-based therapies, DPP-4Is had a lower risk of dizziness than GLP-1 RAs (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.87; high quality). Ranking probability analysis indicated that GLP-1 RAs may have the greatest risk of both dizziness and headache among the nine treatments (22.5% and 23.4%, respectively), whereas DPP-4Is were in the middle (46.2% and 45.0%, respectively). Incretin-based therapies increase the risk of dizziness and headache compared to insulin, thiazolidinediones, and placebo.

Comparative outcomes of heart failure among existent classes of anti-diabetic agents: a network meta-analysis of 171,253 participants from 91 randomized controlled trials

Background

The cardiovascular (CV) safety in terms of heart failure among different classes of treatment remains largely unknown. We sought to assess the comparative effect of these agents on heart failure outcomes.

Methods

This study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD 42016042063). MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. For the primary outcomes reported previously, studies between Jan 1, 1980 and June 30, 2016 were screened, and subsequently updated till Jan 24, 2019. We performed network meta-analysis to obtain estimates for the outcomes of heart failure, in particular by rankograms for ranking of heart failure risk as well as by pairwise comparisons among all classes of anti-diabetic medications.

Results

A total of 91 trials were included, among which were 171,253 participants and 4163 reported cases of heart failure events. As for rankograms, the surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) of sodium-glucose co-transporters 2 and thiazolidinediones were 93.4% and 4.3%, respectively, signifying the lowest and highest risk of heart failure, respectively. As for pairwise comparisons in the network, sodium-glucose co-transporters 2 were significantly superior to insulin (OR: 0.75, 95% CI 0.62–0.91), dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (OR: 0.68, 95% CI 0.59–0.78), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (OR: 0.65, 95% CI 0.54–0.78), and thiazolidinediones (OR: 0.46, 95% CI 0.27–0.77) in terms of heart failure risk. Furthermore, in an exploratory analysis among subjects with underlying heart failure or at risk of heart failure, the superiority of sodium-glucose co-transporters 2 was still significant.

Conclusions

In terms of heart failure risk, sodium-glucose co-transporters 2 were the most favorable option among all classes of anti-diabetic medications.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12933-019-0853-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Treatment with incretins does not increase the risk of pancreatic diseases compared to older anti-hyperglycaemic drugs, when added to metformin: real world evidence in people with Type 2 diabetes

AIMS

In people with metformin-treated diabetes, to evaluate the risk of acute pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer and other diseases of the pancreas post second-line anti-hyperglycaemic agent initiation.

METHODS

People with Type 2 diabetes diagnosed after 2004 who received metformin plus a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i, n = 50 095), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA, n = 12 654), sulfonylurea (n = 110 747), thiazolidinedione (n = 17 597) or insulin (n = 34 805) for at least 3 months were identified in the US Centricity Electronic Medical Records. Time to developing acute pancreatitis, other diseases of the pancreas and pancreatic cancer was estimated, balancing and adjusting anti-hyperglycaemic drug groups for appropriate confounders.

RESULTS

In the DPP-4i group, the adjusted mean time to acute pancreatitis was 2.63 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 2.38, 2.88] years; time to pancreatic cancer was 2.70 (2.19, 3.21) years; and time to other diseases of the pancreas was 2.73 (2.33, 3.12) years. Compared with DPP-4i, the insulin group developed acute pancreatitis 0.48 years (P < 0.01) earlier and the GLP-1RA group developed pancreatic cancer 3 years later (P < 0.01). However, with the constraint of no event within 6 months of insulin initiation, the risk of acute pancreatitis in the insulin group was insignificant. No other significant differences were observed between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in the risk of developing pancreatic diseases in those treated with various anti-hyperglycaemic drug classes were found.

Anti-atherosclerotic effect of incretin mimetics: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background: Diabetes is a very common cause of cardiovascular disease, and metformin remains the first-line treatment of diabetes. Many trials were conducted to prove the efficacy and safety of other antidiabetic medication as the best add-on medication. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the atherosclerotic effect of incretin mimetics in patients with diabetes.Methods: We searched in PubMed, clinicaltrials.gov and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing incretin mimetic with conventional treatment. The primary outcome was the change in carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) at the end of the trials.Results: Five RCTs (n = 1241), the mean age of patients included in the trials is 64.3 ± 11.4. The primary outcome was statistically significant for CIMT improvement in terms of long-term follow-up analysis between the incretin mimetic group and conventional group (mean difference [MD] -0.031; 95% Confidence interval [CI] -0.049 to 0.012; P = 0.001), whereas at short-term follow-up it wasn't (MD -0.004; 95% CI -0.024 to 0.016; P = 0.7) in the overall group of study participants. Additionally, the mean change in body mass index (BMI) (MD 0.064; 95% CI -0.54 to 0.67; P = 0.8), and mean change in systolic blood pressure (MD -0.42; 95% CI -3.2 to 2.3; P = 0.8) or diastolic blood pressure (MD 0.25; 95% CI -1.18 to 1.68; P = 0.7) were not significant.Conclusion: Long-term use of incretin mimetic medication results in significant improvement of atherosclerosis, which leads to fewer vascular events, with no apparent effect on blood pressure or BMI. Further dedicated trials are required to show the superiority of adding these medications to conventional treatment versus placebo.

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.