Assessment of cardiovascular risk of new drugs for the treatment of diabetes mellitus: risk assessment vs. risk aversion

Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients With and Without Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized-Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have shown encouraging results regarding cardiovascular outcomes mainly in patients with diabetes. In the present study, we compared the efficacy of GLP-1 RAs in cardiovascular events between patients with and without diabetes.

METHODS

After finding eligible studies assessing the impact of GLP-1 RAs on cardiovascular events in patients with and without diabetes using a systematic search, we performed a meta-analysis on randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing cardiovascular outcomes between patients taking GLP-1 RAs and placebo stratified by the presence or absence of diabetes. Relative risk (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were set as the reporting effect size using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 24 RCTs (50 033 with GLP-1 RAs and 44 514 with placebo) were included. Patients on GLP-1 RAs had lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.82-0.93), cardiovascular death (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82-0.94), myocardial infarction (MI) (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.97), stroke (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.80-0.92), and hospitalization for heart failure (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83-0.98). Both subgroups were shown to be effective in terms of MACE and mortality. Nondiabetic patients had decreased risk of hospitalization for heart failure and MI, whereas the diabetic subgroup had marginally nonsignificant efficacy.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this meta-analysis indicated that patients who are overweight/obese but do not have diabetes have a comparable reduction in the risk of adverse cardiovascular events as those with diabetes. These results need to be confirmed further by large-scale randomized trials in the future.

A systematic review of astragaloside IV effects on animal models of diabetes mellitus and its complications

Context

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the fastest-growing diseases worldwide; however, its pathogenesis remains unclear. Complications seriously affect the quality of life of patients in the later stages of diabetes, ultimately leading to suffering. Natural small molecules are an important source of antidiabetic agents.

Objective

Astragaloside IV (AS-IV) is an active ingredient of Astragalus mongholicus (Fisch.) Bunge. We reviewed the efficacy and mechanism of action of AS-IV in animal and cellular models of diabetes and the mechanism of action of AS-IV on diabetic complications in animal and cellular models. We also summarized the safety of AS-IV and provided ideas and rationales for its future clinical application.

Methods

Articles on the intervention in DM and its complications using AS-IV, such as those published in SCIENCE, PubMed, Springer, ACS, SCOPUS, and CNKI from the establishment of the database to February 2022, were reviewed. The following points were systematically summarized: dose/concentration, route of administration, potential mechanisms, and efficacy of AS-IV in animal models of DM and its complications.

Results

AS-IV has shown therapeutic effects in animal models of DM, such as alleviating gestational diabetes, delaying diabetic nephropathy, preventing myocardial cell apoptosis, and inhibiting vascular endothelial dysfunction; however, the potential effects of AS-IV on DM should be investigated.

Conclusion

AS-IV is a potential drug for the treatment of diabetes and its complications, including diabetic vascular disease, cardiomyopathy, retinopathy, peripheral neuropathy, and nephropathy. In addition, preclinical toxicity studies indicate that it appears to be safe, but the safe human dose limit is yet to be determined, and formal assessments of adverse drug reactions among humans need to be further investigated. However, additional formulations or structural modifications are required to improve the pharmacokinetic parameters and facilitate the clinical use of AS-IV.

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors reduce the incidence of first cardiovascular events in Japanese diabetic patients

BACKGROUND

Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors do not suppress cardiovascular events in diabetic patients with a history of cardiovascular disease. However, the effect of DPP-4 inhibitors on cardiovascular events in Japanese diabetic patients is unclear. Therefore, we investigated whether DPP-4 inhibitors alter the incidence of cardiovascular events in Japanese diabetic patients without a history of cardiovascular events.

METHODS

The Japanese Primary Prevention of Atherosclerosis with Aspirin for Diabetes (JPAD) trial was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open label, blinded, end-point study conducted from 2002 to 2008. After completion of the JPAD trial, we followed up the patients until 2019. Patients who had had a cardiovascular event by the 2013 follow-up were excluded from the study. JPAD patients were divided into a DPP-4 group and a non-DPP-4 group based on whether they were taking DPP-4 inhibitors at the 2013 follow-up because few patients took DPP-4 inhibitors before 2013. We investigated the incidence of cardiovascular events consisting of coronary events, cerebrovascular events, heart failure requiring hospitalization, and aortic and peripheral vascular disease in 1099 JPAD patients until 2019.

RESULTS

During the observation period from 2013 to 2019, 37 (7%) first cardiovascular events occurred in the DPP-4 group (n = 518) and 66 (11%) in the non-DPP-4 group (n = 581). The incidence of cardiovascular events was significantly lower in the DPP-4 group than in the non-DPP-4 group (Log-Rank P = 0.0065). Cox proportional hazards model analysis revealed that the use of DPP-4 inhibitors (hazard ratio 0.65; 95% confidence interval 0.43-0.98; P = 0.038) was an independent factor after adjustment for age ≥ 65 years, hypertension, statin usage, and insulin usage.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings have demonstrated that the use of DPP-4 inhibitors may be associated with a reduced incidence of first cardiovascular events in Japanese diabetic patients. The results require confirmation in randomized controlled trials.

Characteristics predicting the efficacy of SGLT-2 inhibitors versus GLP-1 receptor agonists on major adverse cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis study

BACKGROUND

Recent large clinical trials have demonstrated cardiovascular benefits of similar overall magnitude for sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT-2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) therapy in subjects with type 2 diabetes. We sought to identify subgroups based on baseline characteristics with a differential response to either SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched from 2008 to 2022 for SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA randomized trials that reported 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events (3P-MACE). Baseline clinical and biochemical characteristics included age, sex, body mass index (BMI), HbA1c, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), albuminuria, preexisting cardiovascular disease (CVD), and heart failure (HF). Absolute and relative risk reductions (ARR and RRR) regarding incidence rates for 3P-MACE with a 95% confidence interval were calculated. The association of average baseline characteristics in each study with the ARR and RRR for 3P-MACE was investigated by meta-regression analyses (random-effects model, assuming inter-study heterogeneity). Meta-analysis was also conducted to investigate whether the efficacy of SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA on 3P-MACE reduction could differ according to the patient's characteristics (e.g., HbA1c above/below cutoff).

RESULTS

After a critical assessment of 1,172 articles, 13 cardiovascular outcome trials with a total of 111,565 participants were selected. In meta-regression analysis, the more patients with reduced eGFR in the studies, the greater ARR by SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA therapy. Similarly, in the meta-analysis, SGLT-2i therapy tended to be more effective in reducing 3P-MACE in people with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m² than in those with normal renal function (ARR - 0.90 [-1.44 to - 0.37] vs. - 0.17 [-0.34 to - 0.01] events/100 person-years). Furthermore, people with albuminuria tended to respond better to SGLT-2i therapy than those with normoalbuminuria. However, this was not the case for the GLP-1RA treatment. Other factors including age, sex, BMI, HbA1c, and preexisting CVD or HF did not affect the efficacy of either SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA treatment on the ARR or RRR of 3P-MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

Because decreased eGFR [significant] and albuminuria [trend] were found to predict a better efficacy for SGLT-2i in 3P-MACE reduction, this class of drug should be preferred in such patients. However, GLP-1RA may be considered for patients with normal eGFR because it showed better efficacy than SGLT-2i in this subgroup [trend].

Semaglutide, a glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonist with cardiovascular benefits for management of type 2 diabetes

Semaglutide, a glucagon like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, is available as monotherapy in both subcutaneous as well as oral dosage form (first approved oral GLP-1 receptor agonist). It has been approved as a second line treatment option for better glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes and currently under scrutiny for anti-obesity purpose. Semaglutide has been proved to be safe in adults and elderly patients with renal or hepatic disorders demanding no dose modification. Cardiovascular (CV) outcome trials established that it can reduce various CV risk factors in patients with established CV disorders. Semaglutide is well tolerated with no risk of hypoglycaemia in monotherapy but suffers from gastrointestinal adverse effects. A large population affected with COVID-19 infection were diabetic; therefore use of semaglutide in diabetes as well as CV patients would be very much supportive in maintaining health care system during this pandemic situation. Hence, this peptidic drug can be truly considered as a quintessential of GLP-1 agonists for management of type 2 diabetes.

Cardiovascular outcome trials of glucose-lowering therapies

INTRODUCTION

Early initiated and long-term sustained intensive glucose control is associated with a significantly decreased risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality, over and above the well-established decline in the risk of microvascular disease. Based on the recent cardiovascular outcome trial (CVOT) data, this review focuses on the various benefits of the newer medications with their positioning in the treatment algorithm and explores the place of the older medications in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

AREAS COVERED

We searched the literature for glucose-lowering therapies for patients with T2DM. We included CVOTs conducted for newer sulphonylureas, thiazolidinediones, insulin degludec, DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT2 inhibitors, and GLP-1 receptor agonists.

EXPERT OPINION

Selection of glucose-lowering therapy in the management of T2DM should be individualized and based on patient characteristics, associated comorbidities, patient preference, affordability and adherence to treatment. In view of the benefits seen in the CVOTs with SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists, these newer classes should be the preferred choice in patients with/without established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and chronic kidney disease.

The Effects of SGLT2 Inhibitors on Cardiovascular and Renal Outcomes in Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous meta-analyses demonstrated the benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) primarily on patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), but with questionable efficacy on patients at risk of ASCVD. Additionally, evidence of beneficial cardiorenal outcomes in patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 with the CV outcomes trials remains unclear. Canagliflozin, one of the SGLT2i, has recently been studied in a large randomized controlled trial in diabetic patients with chronic kidney disease. Thus, there is a need to understand the combined outcomes on the population targeted for treatment with SGLT2i as a whole, regardless of ASCVD status. This meta-analysis will therefore assess the efficacy of SGLT2i in cardiovascular and renal outcomes in general, and in patients with eGFR under 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 in particular.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Cochrane databases for randomized, placebo-controlled studies involving SGLT2i. We examined composite cardiovascular outcomes of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarctions, nonfatal stroke, and heart failure hospitalizations. Renal composite outcomes and progression of albuminuria were also analyzed. Pooled relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a fixed-effects model.

RESULTS

The search yielded a total of 252 articles. Four studies were ultimately included in the meta-analysis after exclusion of other irrelevant studies. The pooled RR (95% CI) for the composite cardiovascular outcome was 0.93 (0.87-0.99) with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 167 in the general study population and 0.89 (0.77-1.02) in patients with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2. The pooled RR for all-cause mortality was 0.9 (0.84-0.97) with NNT = 143. The pooled RR for death from cardiovascular causes alone was 0.89 (0.81-0.99) in the general population and 0.82 (0.62-1.07) in patients with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2. The pooled RR for heart failure hospitalizations was 0.71 (0.63-0.79) with NNT = 91. With respect to renal outcomes, the pooled RR for the composite renal outcome was 0.63 (0.56-0.71) with NNT = 67; this was true even in patients with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 0.67 (0.59-0.76). Lastly, the pooled RR for progression of albuminuria was 0.80 (0.76-0.84).

CONCLUSION

SGLT2i are associated with significantly lower major adverse cardiovascular events, heart failure hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality. The evidence is strongest in reducing heart failure hospitalizations. However, the evidence is weaker when it comes to the population subset with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2. SGLT2i are also associated with significantly lower adverse renal events, with these effects apparent even in the population with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2.

Class effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on cardiorenal outcomes

BACKGROUND

To summarize the four recent sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) trials: Dapagliflozin Effect on CardiovascuLAR Events (DECLARE-TIMI 58), CANagliflozin CardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program, Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients-Removing Excess Glucose (EMPA-REG OUTCOME), Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes with Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation (CREDENCE), and explore the potential determinants for their cardiovascular, renal, and safety outcomes.

RESULTS

The composite renal outcome event rates per 1000 patient-years for drug and placebo, as well as the corresponding relative risk reductions, were 3.7, 7.0, 47%; 5.5, 9.0, 40%; 6.3, 11.5, 46%; 43.2, 61.2, 30% for DECLARE-TIMI 58, CANVAS, EMPA-REG OUTCOME, and CREDENCE, respectively (event definitions varied across trials). The major adverse cardiovascular (CV) event rates per 1000 patient-years for drug and placebo, as well as the corresponding relative risk reductions, were 22.6, 24.2, 7%; 26.9, 31.5, 14%; 37.4, 43.9, 14%; 38.7, 48.7, 20% for DECLARE-TIMI 58, CANVAS, EMPA-REG OUTCOME, and CREDENCE, respectively. DECLARE-TIMI 58 had the fewest cardiorenal events and CREDENCE the most. These differences were presumably due to varying inclusion criteria resulting in DECLARE-TIMI 58 having the best baseline renal filtration function and CREDENCE the worst (mean estimated glomerular filtration rate 85.2, 76.5, 74, 56.2 mL/min/1.73 m² for DECLARE-TIMI 58, CANVAS, EMPA-REG OUTCOME, and CREDENCE, respectively). Additionally, CREDENCE had considerably higher rates of albuminuria (median urinary albumin-creatinine ratios (UACR) were 927, 12.3, and 13.1 mg/g for CREDENCE, CANVAS, and DECLARE-TIMI 58, respectively; EMPA-REG OUTCOME had 59.4% UACR < 30, 28.6% UACR > 30-300, 11.0% UACR > 300 mg/g).

CONCLUSIONS

Dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, and canagliflozin have internally and externally consistent and biologically plausible class effects on cardiorenal outcomes. Baseline renal filtration function and degree of albuminuria are the most significant indicators of risk for both CV and renal events. Thus, these two factors also anticipate the greatest clinical benefit for SGLT2i.

Risk of heart failure hospitalization among users of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors compared to glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists

Background

Incretin-based therapies including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and glucagon like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists are novel medications for type 2 diabetes management. Several studies have found cardioprotective effects of incretin-based therapies; however, it remains unclear whether there is any difference in heart failure (HF) risk between the two incretin-based therapies (DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists). We aimed to assess the risk of hospitalization due to HF with the use of DPP-4 inhibitors compared to GLP-1 receptor agonists.

Methods

Using Truven Health Marketscan data, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with type 2 diabetes, who were newly initiated on DPP-4 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists. Follow-up continued from drug initiation until the first occurrence of: HF hospitalization (primary outcome), discontinuation of therapy (i.e. no fill for 7 days), switch to the comparator, end of enrollment, or end of study (December 2013). Cox proportional hazards models with propensity-score-matching were used to compare the risk of HF hospitalization between DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists.

Results

A total of 321,606 propensity score-matched patients were included in the analysis (n = 160,803 for DPP-4 inhibitors; n = 160,803 for GLP-1 agonists). After adjusting for baseline characteristics and disease risk factors, the use of DPP-4 inhibitors was associated with a 14% decreased risk of HF hospitalization compared to GLP-1 agonists use [hazard ratio (HR), 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83, 0.90]. The results were consistent in patients without baseline HF (HR, 0.85; 95% CI 0.82, 0.89), but the association was not statistically significant for patients with baseline HF (HR, 0.90; 95% CI 0.74, 1.07).

Conclusion

In this retrospective matched cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes, the use of DPP-4 inhibitors was associated with a reduced risk of HF hospitalization compared to GLP-1 agonists. However, the association was not statistically significant in patients who had HF prior to the use of DPP-4 inhibitors.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12933-018-0746-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cardiovascular Effects of New Oral Glucose-Lowering Agents: DPP-4 and SGLT-2 Inhibitors

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major challenge in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Glucose-lowering agents that reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events would be considered a major advance, as recently reported with liraglutide and semaglutide, 2 glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and with empagliflozin and canagliflozin, 2 SGLT-2 (sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2) inhibitors, but not with DPP-4 (dipeptidyl peptidase-4) inhibitors. The present review is devoted to CV effects of new oral glucose-lowering agents. DPP-4 inhibitors (gliptins) showed some positive cardiac and vascular effects in preliminary studies, and initial data from phase 2 to 3 clinical trials suggested a reduction in major cardiovascular events. However, subsequent CV outcome trials with alogliptin, saxagliptin, and sitagliptin showed noninferiority but failed to demonstrate any superiority compared with placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and high CV risk. An unexpected higher risk of hospitalization for heart failure was reported with saxagliptin. SGLT-2 inhibitors (gliflozins) promote glucosuria, thus reducing glucose toxicity and body weight, and enhance natriuresis, thus lowering blood pressure. Two CV outcome trials in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients mainly in secondary prevention showed remarkable positive results. Empagliflozin in EMPA-REG-OUTCOME (EMPAgliflozin Cardiovascular OUTCOME Events in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients) reduced major cardiovascular events, CV mortality, all-cause mortality, and hospitalization for heart failure. In CANVAS (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study), the reduction in CV mortality with canagliflozin failed to reach statistical significance despite a similar reduction in major cardiovascular events. The underlying protective mechanisms of SGLT-2 inhibitors remain unknown and both hemodynamic and metabolic explanations have been proposed. CVD-REAL studies (Comparative Effectiveness of Cardiovascular Outcomes in New Users of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors; with the limitation of an observational approach) suggested that these favorable results may be considered as a class effect shared by all SGLT-2 inhibitors (including dapagliflozin) and be extrapolated to a larger population of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in primary prevention. Ongoing CV outcome trials with other DPP-4 (linagliptin) and SGLT-2 (dapagliflozin, ertugliflozin) inhibitors should provide additional information about CV effects of both pharmacological classes.

Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor Development and Post-authorisation Programme for Vildagliptin - Clinical Evidence for Optimised Management of Chronic Diseases Beyond Type 2 Diabetes

The last decade has witnessed the role of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors in producing a conceptual change in early management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) by shifting emphasis from a gluco-centric approach to holistically treating underlying pathophysiological processes. DPP-4 inhibitors highlighted the importance of acknowledging hypoglycaemia and weight gain as barriers to optimised care in T2DM. These complications were an integral part of diabetes management before the introduction of DPP-4 inhibitors. During the development of DPP-4 inhibitors, regulatory requirements for introducing new agents underwent substantial changes, with increased emphasis on safety. This led to the systematic collection of adjudicated cardiovascular (CV) safety data, and, where 95% confidence of a lack of harm could not be demonstrated, the standardised CV safety studies. Furthermore, the growing awareness of the worldwide extent of T2DM demanded a more diverse approach to recruitment and participation in clinical trials. Finally, the global financial crisis placed a new awareness on the health economics of diabetes, which rapidly became the most expensive disease in the world. This review encompasses unique developments in the global landscape, and the role DPP-4 inhibitors, specifically vildagliptin, have played in research advancement and optimisation of diabetes care in a diverse population with T2DM worldwide.

Cardiovascular outcome studies with incretin-based therapies: Comparison between DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4is) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) represent two distinct classes of incretin-based therapies used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Non-inferiority versus placebo was shown in large prospective cardiovascular outcome trials in patients with high cardiovascular risk: SAVOR-TIMI 53 (saxagliptin), EXAMINE (alogliptin), and TECOS (sitagliptin); ELIXA (lixisenatide), LEADER (liraglutide) and SUSTAIN 6 (semaglutide). The promises raised by meta-analyses of phase 2-3 trials with DPP-4is were non confirmed as no cardiovascular protection could be evidenced. However, LEADER showed a significant reduction in major cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in patients treated by liraglutide compared to placebo. These positive results contrasted with the non-inferiority results with lixisenatide in ELIXA. They were partially confirmed with semaglutide in SUSTAIN 6 despite the absence of reduction in cardiovascular mortality. Hospitalisation for heart failure was not increased except with saxagliptin in SAVOR-TIMI 53. The reasons for different outcomes between trials remain largely unknown as well as the precise underlying mechanisms explaining the cardiovascular protection by liraglutide. The clinical relevance of results with DPP-4is and GLP-1RAs is discussed. Ongoing trials with linagliptin and several once-weekly GLP-1RAs should provide new insights into remaining fundamental questions.

Current perspectives on cardiovascular outcome trials in diabetes

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is one of the most common diabetes-associated complications, as well as a leading cause for death in type 2 diabetes patients (T2D). Despite the well-known correlation between the two, up until the 2008 FDA industry guidance for licensing of new anti-hyperglycemic drugs, which required an investigation of cardiovascular outcomes (CVO) of glucose-lowering agents, only a few studies had looked into the relationship between glucose lowering drugs and cardiovascular (CV) risk. Thereafter, CVOT design has focused on non-inferiority short-term studies on high-risk patient populations aiming at capturing CV safety issues. Despite the wealth of information and useful data provided by CVOTs, this approach still suffers from certain limitations. The present review will condense the main results of the most recently completed CVOTs, reflect on the lessons learned, discuss on the issues presented by current CVOT design and offer some suggestions for improvement.