Cardiovascular safety of sulfonylureas: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Uncovering the antidiabetic potential of heart-friendly and diuretic bioactive compounds through computer-based drug design

Avicenna, a pioneer of modern medicine, recommended diuretic therapy to treat diabetes. Like Avicenna's approach, current medicine frequently prescribes oral antidiabetic pills with diuretic and hypoglycemic effects by blocking the absorption of sodium and glucose. To this end, the paper sought natural compounds with potential antidiabetic, cardioprotective, and diuretic properties through computer-based drug design (CADD) techniques, targeting the inhibition of SGLT2 proteins. We identified several bioactive compounds from various sources exhibiting potential multifunctionality through high-throughput virtual screening (HTVS) of vast compound libraries. Subsequent molecular docking and dynamics simulations were employed to assess these compounds' binding efficacy and stability with their respective targets, alongside ADMET prediction, to evaluate their pharmacokinetic and safety profiles. The top hits, phenylalanyltryptophan, tyrosyl-tryptophan, tyrosyl-tyrosine, celecoxib, and DIBOA trihexose, had superior docking scores ranging from -11,4 to -9,8 kcal/mol. The molecular dynamics simulations displayed steady interactions between target proteins and biocompounds throughout 100 ns without significant conformational shifts. These findings lay the groundwork for lead optimization and preclinical testing. This meticulous process ensures the safety and efficacy of potential treatments, marking a meaningful step toward developing innovative treatments for managing diabetes and its associated health complications.

Profiles of sulfonylurea use in Diabetes Mellitus type 2: an analysis of clinical practice over the last 10 years

AIMS

Describing the evolution over time in the use of sulfonylureas (SUs) and the characteristics of patients at first prescription and at interruption of treatment with SUs.

METHODS

Retrospective evaluation of data from the Italian Association of Diabetologists (AMD) Annals registry (2010-2020), about T2D patients who started treatment with SUs. The longitudinal probability of remaining on SUs was estimated by Kaplan Meier survival curves.

RESULTS

SU prescription decreased from 30.7 % (2010) to 12.9 % (2020). Patients started on SU were 68.2 ± 11.2 years old, mostly males (55.5 %), with diabetes duration = 10.1 ± 8.3 years, BMI = 29.7 ± 5.5 kg/m2, and HbA1c = 8.3 ± 1.7 % [67 mmol/mol]. After one year, the probability of staying on SU was 85.4 %, 75.9 % after two years, 68.2 % after 3 years, 56.6 % after 5 years. Patients who discontinued SUs had higher BMI and HbA1c, were younger, more often males and treated with insulin. Over time, the percentage of subjects switched to metformin, DPP4i, SGLT2i, and GLP1RA increased, whereas use of glinides, glitazones, acarbose and insulin declined.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest a consensus, slowly, but increasingly aligning with the current National indications of dismissing SUs for the treatment of T2D. The new drugs for diabetes should represent a preferable choice in all patients who do not have specific contraindications.

Management of traumatic spinal cord injury: A current concepts review of contemporary and future treatment

Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) is a condition leading to inflammation, edema, and dysfunction of the spinal cord, most commonly due to trauma, tumor, infection, or vascular disturbance. Symptoms include sensory and motor loss starting at the level of injury; the extent of damage depends on injury severity as detailed in the ASIA score. In the acute setting, maintaining mean arterial pressure (MAP) higher than 85 mmHg for up to 7 days following injury is preferred; although caution must be exercised when using vasopressors such as phenylephrine due to serious side effects such as pulmonary edema and death. Decompression surgery (DS) may theoretically relieve edema and reduce intraspinal pressure, although timing of surgery remains a matter of debate. Methylprednisolone (MP) is currently used due to its ability to reduce inflammation but more recent studies question its clinical benefits, especially with inconsistency in recommending it nationally and internationally. The choice of MP is further complicated by conflicting evidence for optimal timing to initiate treatment, and by the reported observation that higher doses are correlated with increased risk of complications. Thyrotropin-releasing hormone may be beneficial in less severe injuries. Finally, this review discusses many options currently being researched and have shown promising pre-clinical results.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and the risk of atrial fibrillation in adults with diabetes: a real-world study

BACKGROUND

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) have cardiovascular benefits in type 2 diabetes, but none of the cardiovascular trials studied atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF) as a primary endpoint. Data from post-marketing surveillance studies remains sparse.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the real-world risk of AF comparing GLP-1RA with other non-insulin glucose-lowering agents.

DESIGN

Cohort study using de-identified electronic health record data from the Optum Labs Data Warehouse.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients with diabetes who were newly prescribed add-on non-insulin glucose-lowering agents and were on metformin between 2005-2020.

EXPOSURES

New users of GLP-1RA were separately compared with new users of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), using 1:1 propensity score matching to adjust for differences in patient characteristics.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome was incident AF, defined and captured by diagnosis code for AF. Incidence rate difference (IRD) and hazard ratio (HR) were estimated in the matched cohorts.

KEY RESULTS

In the matched cohort of 14,566 pairs of GLP-1RA and DPP4i followed for a median of 3.8 years, GLP-1RA use was associated with a lower risk of AF (IRD, -1.0; 95% CI, -1.8 to -0.2 per 1000 person-years; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.96). In the matched cohort of 9,424 pairs of patients on GLP-1RA and SGLT2i with a median follow-up of 2.9 years, there was no difference in the risk for AF (IRD, 0.4; 95% CI -0.7 to 1.5 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.42).

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-word study, GLP-1RA was associated with a lower risk of AF compared with DPP4i, but no difference compared with SGLT2i, suggesting that cardiovascular benefits of GLP-1RA use may extend to prevention for AF in patients with diabetes. Our findings call for future randomized controlled trials to focus on the effects of GLP-1RA on AF prevention.

Comparative safety of sulfonylureas among U.S. nursing home residents

BACKGROUND

The comparative safety of sulfonylureas (SUs) in nursing home (NH) residents remains understudied despite widespread use. We compared the effects of three SU medications and initial SU doses on adverse glycemic and cardiovascular events among NH residents.

METHODS

This national retrospective cohort study linked Medicare claims with Minimum Data Set 2.0 assessments for long-stay NH residents aged ≥65 years between January 2008 and September 2010. Exposures were the SU medication initiated (glimepiride, glipizide, or glyburide) and doses (standard or reduced). One-year outcomes were hospitalizations or emergency department visits for severe hypoglycemia, heart failure (HF), stroke, and acute myocardial infarction (AMI). After the inverse probability of treatment and inverse probability of censoring by death weighting, we estimated hazard ratios (HR) using Cox regression models with robust 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

The cohort (N = 6821) included 3698 new glipizide, 1754 glimepiride, and 1369 glyburide users. Overall, the mean (standard deviation) age was 81.4 (8.2) years, 4816 (70.6%) were female, and 5164 (75.7%) were White non-Hispanic residents. The rates of severe hypoglycemia were 30.3 (95% CI 22.3-40.1), 49.0 (95% CI 34.5-67.5), and 35.9 (95% CI 22.2-54.9) events per 1000 person-years among new glipizide, glimepiride, and glyburide users, respectively (glimepiride versus glipizide HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.4, p = 0.04; glyburide versus glipizide HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.7-1.9, p = 0.59). The rates of severe hypoglycemia were 27.1 (95% CI 18.6-38.0) and 42.8 (95% CI 33.6-53.8) events per 1000 person-years among new users of reduced and standard SU doses, respectively (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4-3.5, p < 0.01). Rates of HF, stroke, and AMI were similar between medications and doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Among long-stay NH residents, new use of glimepiride and standard SU doses resulted in higher rates of severe hypoglycemic events. Cardiovascular outcomes may not be affected by the choice of SU medication or dose.

Effects of glucose-lowering agents on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in subjects with type 2 diabetes: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with external adjudication of events

AIMS

To investigate the effects of glucose-lowering agents on all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular and renal outcomes in adults with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A MEDLINE and EMBASE search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials, published up to 28 February 2022, with a follow-up ≥52 weeks, in which glucose-lowering drugs were compared with either placebo or active comparators. We included only trials reporting formal external adjudication of events. All-cause mortality, 3-point MACE (major cardiovascular events), and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) were considered as principal outcomes. Doubling of serum creatinine, worsening albuminuria, and renal death were considered as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

We included randomized controlled trials performed on metformin (n = 17), pioglitazone (n = 20), alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (n = 9), insulin secretagogues (n = 42), dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors (n = 67), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (n = 45) or sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i; n = 42) and insulin (n = 18). Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist and SGLT-2i were associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality [Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (MH-OR), 95% confidence interval: 0.88 (0.83; 0.95) and 0.85 (0.79; 0.91), respectively] and MACE [MH-OR, 95% confidence interval: 0.89 (0.84; 0.94) and 0.90 (0.84; 0.96), respectively]. SGLT-2i was associated with a reduced risk of HHF [MH-OR 0.68 (0.62; 0.75)], worsening albuminuria [MH-OR 0.67 (0.55; 0.80)] and doubling of serum creatinine [MH-OR 0.58 (0.44; 0.79)]. Metformin and pioglitazone were associated with a significantly lower risk of MACE [MH-OR 0.60 (0.47; 0.80) and 0.85 (0.74; 0.97), respectively] and pioglitazone with a higher risk of HHF [MH-OR 1.30 (1.04; 1.62)]. Insulin secretagogues were associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality [MH-OR 1.12 (1.01; 1.24)] and MACE [MH-OR 1.19 (1.02; 1.39)].

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this updated meta-analysis need to be considered in the choice of drug treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus, which cannot be merely based on the effect of glucose-lowering drugs on long-term glycaemic control.

Revisiting 'intensive' blood glucose control: A causal directed acyclic graph-guided systematic review of randomized controlled trials

AIM

To clarify the importance of HbA1c reduction and antidiabetic drug use in preventing major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted an updated systematic review of contemporary large randomized controlled trials assessing the relative efficacy and safety of antidiabetic drugs with less hypoglycaemia risk in adult T2D patients. Mixed-effects meta-regression was performed to examine the associations of HbA1c reduction with subsequent risk of macrovascular and microvascular events. We evaluated the potential mediating role of HbA1c reduction in the relationship between antidiabetic drugs and MACE.

RESULTS

Eighteen placebo-controlled trials comprising 155 610 participants were included. The effects of treatment differed among antidiabetic drug classes for most adverse outcomes with high heterogeneity (I2 : 63.7%-95.8%). Mean HbA1c reduction was lowest with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (0.30%), followed by sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (0.46%), and was highest with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (0.58%) and thiazolidinediones (0.60%). Lower relative risks of MACE were significantly associated with larger reductions in achieved HbA1c (β -0.3182; 95% CI: -0.5366 to -0.0998; P = .0043), even after adjusting for drug classes. When considering HbA1c lowering as a mediator to be controlled, beneficial effects owing to specific antidiabetic treatment for MACE were not observed (χ2  = 1.4494; P = .6940). The proportion mediated by HbA1c reduction was 50.0%-63.5% for these antidiabetic agents.

CONCLUSIONS

The main benefits of antidiabetic agents might result from the reduction in blood sugar levels and are generally independent of drugs used. Risk reduction in MACE was proportional to the magnitude of HbA1c decrease conferred by antidiabetic agents with less hypoglycaemic hazard.

Interventions Against Posttransplantation Diabetes: A Scientific Rationale for Treatment Hierarchy Based on Literature Review

Posttransplant diabetes (PTD) is a common medical complication after solid organ transplantation. Because of adverse outcomes associated with its development and detrimental impact on long-term survival, strategies to prevent or manage PTD are critically important but remain underresearched. Treatment hierarchies of antidiabetic therapies in the general population are currently being revolutionized based on cardiovascular outcome trials, providing evidence-based rationale for optimization of medical management. However, opportunities for improving medical management of PTD are challenged by 2 important considerations: (1) translating clinical evidence data from the general population to underresearched solid organ transplant cohorts and (2) targeting treatment based on primary underlying PTD pathophysiology. In this article, the aim is to provide an overview of PTD treatment options from a new angle. Rationalized by a consideration of underlying PTD pathophysiological defects, which are heterogeneous among diverse transplant patient cohorts, a critical appraisal of the published literature and summary of current research in progress will be reviewed. The aim is to update transplant professionals regarding medical management of PTD from a new perspective tailored therapeutic intervention based on individualized characteristics. As the gap in clinical evidence between management of PTD versus type 2 diabetes widens, it is imperative for the transplant community to bridge this gap with targeted clinical trials to ensure we optimize outcomes for solid organ transplant recipients who are at risk or develop PTD. This necessary clinical research should help efforts to improve long-term outcomes for solid transplant patients from both a patient and graft survival perspective.

Association of glucose-lowering drugs with incident stroke and transient ischaemic attacks in primary care patients with type 2 diabetes: disease analyzer database

AIMS

Previous observational studies on glucose-lowering drugs and risk of stroke in type 2 diabetes yielded conflicting results. The aim was to examine the association of glucose-lowering drugs with incident stroke and transient ischaemic attacks (TIA) in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of the disease analyzer, which comprises a representative panel of 1248 general and internal medicine practices throughout Germany (01/2000-12/2019: 9.8 million patients). Incident non-fatal stroke/TIA was defined based on ICD-10 codes (I63, I64; G45) in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Cox regression models were fitted to obtain hazard ratios (HR; 95%CI) for stroke/TIA adjusting for potential confounders (age, sex, health insurance, coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, heart failure, polyneuropathy, blood pressure, eGFR) and anthropometric and metabolic intermediators (BMI, HbA1c, HDL- and LDL-cholesterol, triglycerides, lipid-lowering drugs).

RESULT

312,368 persons with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes without previous stroke/TIA (mean age: 64 years; 52% males) were included. There were 16,701 events of non-fatal stroke/TIA corresponding to an incidence rate of 9.3 (95%CI 9.1-9.4) per 1000 person-years. Using Cox regression, adjusted HR for stroke/TIA (per 1 year of treatment) of 0.59 (0.54-0.64) for SGLT2 inhibitors and of 0.79 (0.74-0.85) for GLP-1 receptor agonists were estimated. DPP-4 inhibitors (0.84; 0.82-0.86), metformin (0.90; 0.89-0.91), insulin (0.92; 0.91-0.93) and sulfonylureas (0.98; 0.96-0.99) also showed moderately reduced HR for stroke/TIA. Sex-specific regression analyses yielded similar results (HR).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with SGLT2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists might reduce non-fatal stroke/TIA in persons with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of head-to-head trials comparing sulfonylureas and low hypoglycaemic risk antidiabetic drugs

BACKGROUND

Safety of sulfonylurea drugs in the treatment of Type 2 Diabetes is still under debate. The aim of this study was to compare the all-cause mortality and cardiovascular adverse events of sulfonylureas and drugs with a low risk for hypoglycaemia in adults with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE (PubMed, OVID), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, WOS and Lilacs.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled head-to-head trials that compared sulfonylureas with active control with low hypoglycaemic potential in adults (≥ 18 years old) with type 2 diabetes published up to August 2015. The drug classes involved in the analysis were metformin, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists.

OUTCOMES

The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. The secondary endpoints were MACE, cardiovascular events and severe hypoglycaemia.

SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS

Two reviewers checked study eligibility, independently extracted data and assessed quality with disagreements resolved through discussion. We assessed the risk of bias of the included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials v2. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were estimated by using fixed effects model. The study is registered on PROSPERO (26/05/2016 CRD42016038780).

RESULTS

Our final analysis comprised 31 studies (26,204 patients, 11,711 patients given sulfonylureas and 14,493 given comparator drugs). In comparison to drugs with low hypoglycaemic potential, sulfonylureas had higher odds for all-cause mortality (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.00-1.75), MACE (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.07-1.61), myocardial infarction (fatal and non-fatal) (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.17-2.38) and hypoglycaemia (OR 5.24, 95% CI 4.20-6.55). Subsequent sensitivity analysis revealed differences in the effect of sulfonylureas, with an increased risk of all-cause mortality with glipizide but not the other molecules.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis raises concern about the safety of SUs compared to alternative drugs involved in current analysis. Important differences may exist within the drug class, and glimepiride seems to have best safety profile.

Certain sulfonylurea drugs increase serum free fatty acid in diabetic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sulfonylurea (SU) is a commonly used antidiabetic drugs effective for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Previous studies have reported that the SU treatment could alter the serum free fatty acid (FFA) concentration in diabetic patients; however, their exact effects remain unknown.

AIM

To assess the impact of SU on the FFA level in diabetic patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted by consulting the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Reference Citation Analysis (https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/), and Web of Science databases from January 1, 1991 to July 30, 2021. Either a fixed-effects model or random-effects model was applied to study the association between SU treatment and FFA concentration according to the heterogeneity test. Two investigators independently performed data extraction. The mean difference (MD) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to measure effect size. R3.5.1 software was utilized for conducting statistical analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies with 2273 individuals were selected. Results indicated that FFA concentration increased slightly after treatment with SU (MD = 0.08, 95%CI: 0.03-0.12, P < 0.01). In addition, we found that SU treatment combined with other antidiabetics could also increase the concentration of serum FFA (MD = 0.14, 95%CI: 0.01-0.28, P < 0.01). Regarding the type of SU, there was no significant difference in FFA concentration with glimepiride or glibenclamide. FFA concentration was higher at ≥ 12 wk (MD = 0.09, 95%CI: 0.04-0.13) but not at < 12 wk (MD = 0.01, 95%CI: -0.07-0.09).

CONCLUSION

SU treatment could increase the serum FFA concentration in diabetic patients. The fundamental underlying mechanism still needs further investigation.

Treatment of diabetes mellitus has borne much fruit in the prevention of cardiovascular disease

Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the most alarming complication of diabetes mellitus (DM), and a strategy aiming at cardiovascular event prevention in diabetes mellitus has long been debated. Large landmark clinical trials have shown cardiovascular benefits of intensive glycemic control as a 'legacy effect' in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus. In contrast, we have learned that excessive intervention aimed at strong glycemic control could cause unexpected cardiovascular death in patients who are resistant to treatments against hyperglycemia. It has also been shown that the comprehensive multifactorial intervention for cardiovascular risk factors that was advocated in the current guideline provided substantial cardiovascular event reduction. The impact of classical antidiabetic agents launched before 1990s on cardiovascular events is controversial. Although there are many clinical or observational studies assessing the impact of those agents on cardiovascular events, the conclusions are inconsistent owing to variable patient backgrounds and concomitant antidiabetic agents among the studies. Moreover, most of them were not large-scale, randomized, cardiovascular outcome trials. In contrast, GLP-1RA (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist) and SGLT2 (sodium-glucose cotransporter 2) inhibitors have demonstrated undeniable cardiovascular benefits in large-scale, randomized, controlled trials. Whereas GLP-1RAs decrease atherosclerotic disease, especially stroke, SGLT2 inhibitors mainly prevent heart failure. SGLT2 inhibitors are superior to GLP-1RAs with respect to hard renal outcomes. Therefore, it can be said that drugs such as GLP-1RAs and SGLT2 inhibitors that prevent cardiovascular events, in addition to their glucose-lowering effect, are incredible novel tools that we have gained for use in diabetic treatment.

Safety and Efficacy of Inpatient Diabetes Management with Non-insulin Agents: an Overview of International Practices

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The field of inpatient diabetes has advanced significantly over the last 20 years, leading to the development of personalized treatment approaches. However, outdated guidelines still recommend the use of basal-bolus insulin therapy as the preferred treatment approach, and against the use of non-insulin anti-hyperglycemic agents.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several observational and prospective randomized controlled studies have demonstrated that oral anti-hyperglycemic agents are widely used in the hospital, including studies of DPP-4 agents and GLP-1 agonists. With advances in the field of inpatient diabetes management, a paradigm shift has occurred, from an approach of recommending "basal-bolus regimens" for all patients to a more precision medicine option for hospitalized non-critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes.

Association Between Specificity of Sulfonylureas to Cardiac Mitochondrial KATP Channels and the Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies have revealed an intraclass difference in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) among sulfonylureas. In vitro and ex vivo studies reported several sulfonylureas to exhibit high-affinity blockage of cardiac mitochondrial ATP-sensitive potassium (mitoKATP) channels and could interfere with ischemic preconditioning, the most important mechanism of self-cardiac protection. However, no studies have examined whether these varying binding affinities of sulfonylureas could account for their intraclass difference in MACE. We compared mitoKATP channel high-affinity versus low-affinity sulfonylureas regarding the MACE risk in real-world settings.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Using the Taiwan nationwide health care claims database, patients with type 2 diabetes initiating sulfonylurea monotherapy between 2007 and 2016 were included in the cohort study. A total of 33,727 new mitoKATP channel high-affinity (glyburide and glipizide) and low-affinity (gliclazide and glimepiride) sulfonylurea users, respectively, were identified after 1:1 propensity score matching. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CI.

RESULTS

MitoKATP channel high-affinity sulfonylureas were associated with a significantly increased risk of three-point MACE (aHR 1.21 [95% CI 1.03-1.44]), ischemic stroke (aHR 1.23 [95% CI 1.02-1.50]), and cardiovascular death (aHR 2.61 [95% CI 1.31-5.20]), but not with that of myocardial infarction (aHR 1.04 [95% CI 0.75-1.46]). The duration-response analyses revealed the highest MACE risk to be within 90 days of therapy (aHR 4.67 [95% CI 3.61-6.06]).

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac mitoKATP channel high-affinity sulfonylureas were associated with an increased MACE risk compared with low-affinity sulfonylureas in a nationwide population with diabetes.

Oral GLP-1 analogue: perspectives and impact on atherosclerosis in type 2 diabetic patients

Cardiovascular events related to atherosclerosis are responsible for high morbidity and mortality among patients with type 2 diabetes. Improvement in care, especially in early stages, is crucial. Oral semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, controls blood glucose and results in significant body weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes. Beyond these well-known effects, an interesting aspect of this drug is its antiatherogenic activity, which should be further explored in clinical practice. This paper reviews the evidence related to oral semaglutide decreasing cardiovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes, focusing on the drug's antiatherosclerotic properties. The glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue restores endothelial dysfunction, induces vasodilatation, and reduces plasma lipids. Oral semaglutide showed cardiovascular safety profile, with significant reduced risk of death from cardiovascular events. Based on current data, clinicians should consider oral semaglutide for type 2 diabetes management.

The role of sulfonylureas in the treatment of type 2 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is increasingly prevalent and associated with increased risk for cardiovascular and renal disease. After lifestyle modification, metformin is usually the first-line pharmacotherapy and sulfonylureas are traditionally added after metformin failure. However, with newer glucose lowering drugs that may have less risk of hypoglycemia or that may reduce cardiovascular and renal events, the position of sulfonylureas is being reevaluated.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, the authors review relevant publications related to the use of sulfonylureas.

EXPERT OPINION

Sulfonylureas are potent glucose lowering drugs. The risk of hypoglycemia varies with different drugs within the class and can be minimized by using the safer drugs, possibly in lower doses. Cardiovascular events do not appear to be increased with some of the newer generation drugs. The durability of glycemic control also appears comparable to other newer agents. Sulfonylureas are the preferred treatment for some types of monogenic diabetes and selection of T2D patients who may have greater benefit from sulfonylureas based on certain phenotypes and genotypes is likely to be refined further by precision medicine. Sulfonylureas are inexpensive and readily available everywhere and they are still the most frequently used second-line treatment for T2D in many parts of the world.

Changing the approach to type 2 diabetes treatment: A comparison of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sulphonylureas across the continuum of care

Despite the importance of individualised strategies for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and the availability of alternative treatments, including glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), sulphonylureas are still widely used in practice. Clinical evidence shows that GLP-1 RAs may provide better and more durable glycaemic control than sulphonylureas, with lower risk of hypoglycaemia. Other reported benefits of GLP-1 RAs include weight loss rather than weight gain (as observed with sulphonylureas), blood pressure reduction and improvement in lipid profiles. In general, the main adverse events with GLP-1 RAs are gastrointestinal in nature. The respective modes of action of GLP-1 RAs and sulphonylureas contribute to differences in the durability of glycaemic control (related to effects on beta-cells) and effects on body weight. Moreover, the glucose-dependent mode of action of GLP-1 RAs, which favours a low incidence of hypoglycaemia, contrasts with the glucose-independent mode of action of sulphonylureas. Evidence from cardiovascular outcomes trials indicates a consistent finding of cardiovascular safety across the GLP-1 RAs and suggests a class benefit for the long-acting GLP-1 RAs in reducing three-point major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality. In contrast, potential concerns relating to an increased incidence of adverse cardiovascular events with sulphonylureas have yet to be fully resolved. Recent updates to management guidelines recommend that treatment selection for patients with T2DM should consider clinical trial evidence of cardiovascular safety. Available evidence suggests that this selection should give preference to GLP-1 RAs over sulphonylureas, especially for patients at high cardiovascular risk.

Cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: An extensive meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

Meta-analyses of randomized trials on Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) reported discordant results on major cardiovascular events (MACE), mortality, and heart failure. Aim of this meta-analysis of randomized trials is the assessment of the cardiovascular safety of DPP4i.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A Medline, Embase, Cochrane database search for sitagliptin, vildagliptin, omarigliptin, saxagliptin, alogliptin, trelagliptin, anagliptin, linagliptin, gemigliptin, evogliptin, and teneligliptin was performed up to up January 1st, 2020. All trials with a duration ≥24 weeks and comparing the effects of DPP4i with placebo or active drugs were collected. Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (MH-OR) with 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) was calculated for all outcomes defined above. A total of 182 eligible trials were identified. DPP-4i were not associated with an increased risk of MACE (MH-OR 0.99 [0.93, 1.04]), all-cause mortality (MH-OR 0.99 [0.93, 1.06]), and heart failure (MH-OR 1.05 [0.96, 1.15]) with no significant differences across individual molecules, except for saxagliptin, which was associated with an increased risk of heart failure.

CONCLUSIONS

As a class, DPP4i are not associated with any increase or reduction of MACE, all-cause mortality, and heart failure. Saxagliptin seems to be associated with an increased risk of hospitalization for heart failure.

Improvement of glycemic control in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

Different guidelines provide similar, but not identical, therapeutic targets for HbA1c in type 2 diabetes. These targets can also depend from the different pharmacological strategies adopted for intensifying glycemic control.

DATA SYNTHESIS

This meta-analysis includes randomized trials adopting any pharmacological regimen for intensifying glycemic control in T2DM (versus standard of care/placebo), with a trial duration ≥2 years and a between-group HbA1c difference≥0.5%. The primary outcome was to assess the effects of the improvement of glycemic control on major cardiovascular events (MACE), ocular and renal complications, and severe hypoglycemia. Mantel-Haenszel odds ratios (MH-OR) with 95% Confidence Intervals were calculated for all the outcomes considered. We included 13 trials fulfilling the inclusion criteria. The improvement of glycemic control was associated with a lower risk of MACE (MH-OR:0.89 [95%CI 0.85-0.94]) and renal adverse events (MH-OR 0.73 [0.65-0.82]), but not all-cause mortality (MH-OR 0.95 [0.88-1.01]) and ocular adverse complications (MH-OR 0.94 [0.72-1.22]). For glucose-lowering drugs inducing hypoglycemia, a protective effect on the risk of microvascular complications, but not of MACE and all-cause mortality, was observed only for HbA1c ≤ 48 mmol/mol, but with higher risk of severe hypoglycaemia (MH-OR 2.72 [1.79-4.13]). Drugs not inducing hypoglycaemia were associated with a reduction of MACE, renal adverse events, and all-cause mortality, for HbA1c< 7% (no data for lower targets).

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis show that the improvement of glycemic control with drugs not inducing hypoglycemia is associated with a reduction in the risk of long-term chronic vascular and renal complications, and all-cause mortality.

Lower risk of death and cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes initiating glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors: A real-world study in two Italian cohorts

AIM

To examine the efficacy and safety of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors compared with other antihyperglycaemic agents (AHAs) in large and unselected populations of the Lombardy and Apulia regions in Italy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An observational cohort study of first-time users of GLP-1RAs, SGLT2 inhibitors or other AHAs was conducted from 2010 to 2018. Death and cardiovascular (CV) events were evaluated using conditional Cox models in propensity-score-matched populations. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each region and in a meta-analysis for pooled risks.

RESULTS

After propensity-score matching, the Lombardy cohort included 18 716 and 11 683 patients and the Apulia cohort 9772 and 6046 patients for the GLP-1RA and SGLT2 inhibitor groups, respectively. Use of GLP-1RAs was associated with lower rates of death (HR 0.61, CI 0.56-0.65, Lombardy; HR 0.63, CI 0.55-0.71, Apulia), cerebrovascular disease and ischaemic stroke (HR 0.70, CI 0.63-0.79; HR 0.72, CI 0.60-0.87, Lombardy), peripheral vascular disease (HR 0.72, CI 0.64-0.82, Lombardy; HR 0.80, CI 0.67-0.98, Apulia), and lower limb complications (HR 0.67, CI 0.56-0.81, Lombardy; HR 0.69, CI 0.51-0.93, Apulia). Compared with other AHAs, SGLT2 inhibitor use decreased the risk of death (HR 0.47, CI 0.40-0.54, Lombardy; HR 0.43, CI 0.32-0.57, Apulia), cerebrovascular disease (HR 0.75, CI 0.61-0.91, Lombardy; HR 0.72, CI 0.54-0.96, Apulia), and heart failure (HR 0.56, CI 0.46-0.70, Lombardy; HR 0.57, CI 0.42-0.77, Apulia). In the pooled cohorts, a reduction in heart failure was also observed with GLP-1RAs (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.97). Serious adverse events were quite low in frequency.

CONCLUSION

Our findings from real-world practice confirm the favourable effect of GLP-1RAs and SGLT2 inhibitors on death and CV outcomes across both regions consistently. Thus, these drug classes should be preferentially considered in a broad type 2 diabetes population beyond those with CV disease.

Cardiovascular safety of evogliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes: A nationwide cohort study

AIM

To assess whether the use of evogliptin, a novel dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i), was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events compared with glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study using South Korea's nationwide healthcare database from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2018. We identified a base cohort of patients with T2D who newly initiated metformin monotherapy, from which we identified a study cohort of patients who either added or switched to glimepiride or DPP-4is (including evogliptin). Patients were followed up from initiation of DPP-4is or glimepiride until the earliest of either outcome occurrence or 31 December 2018. Our primary outcome was hospitalization or an emergency visit for cardiovascular events, a composite endpoint comprised of cerebrovascular events, heart failure, myocardial infarction, transient ischaemic attack, angina pectoris and revascularization procedures; secondary outcomes were the individual components of the primary outcome. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the risk of study outcomes associated with evogliptin compared with glimepiride.

RESULTS

Our base and study cohorts had 317,307 and 128,788 patients, respectively, of which 100,038 were DPP-4i users (2946 were evogliptin users) and 28,750 were glimepiride users within the study cohort. The median follow-up was 195 days for evogliptin and 113 days for glimepiride users. Compared with glimepiride, evogliptin was associated with a reduced risk of the primary outcome (aHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48-0.95) and cerebrovascular events (aHR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22-0.78) but showed non-significant associations for myocardial infarction (aHR 0.63, 95% CI 0.27-1.46), heart failure (aHR 0.35, 95% CI 0.09-1.47), transient ischaemic attack (aHR 0.23, 95% CI 0.03-1.72) and angina pectoris (aHR 1.35, 95% CI 0.82-2.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this population-based cohort study provide novel real-world evidence that the use of evogliptin, compared with glimepiride, did not increase the risk of cardiovascular events, including cerebrovascular events, myocardial infarction, heart failure, transient ischaemic attack and angina pectoris.

Platelet Effects of Anti-diabetic Therapies: New Perspectives in the Management of Patients with Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease

In type 2 diabetes, anti-thrombotic management is challenging, and current anti-platelet agents have demonstrated reduced efficacy. Old and new anti-diabetic drugs exhibited—besides lowering blood glucose levels—direct and indirect effects on platelet function and on thrombotic milieu, eventually conditioning cardiovascular outcomes. The present review summarizes existing evidence on the effects of glucose-lowering agents on platelet properties, addressing pre-clinical and clinical research, as well as drug–drug interactions with anti-platelet agents. We aimed at expanding clinicians’ understanding by highlighting new opportunities for an optimal management of patients with diabetes and cardiovascular disease. We suggest how an improvement of the thrombotic risk in this large population of patients may be achieved by a careful and tailored combination of anti-diabetic and anti-platelet therapies.

Concurrent diabetes and heart failure: interplay and novel therapeutic approaches

Diabetes mellitus increases the risk of developing heart failure, and the co-existence of both diseases worsens cardiovascular outcomes, hospitalization and the progression of heart failure. Despite current advancements on therapeutic strategies to manage hyperglycemia, the likelihood of developing diabetes-induced heart failure is still significant, especially with the accelerating global prevalence of diabetes and an ageing population. This raises the likelihood of other contributing mechanisms beyond hyperglycemia in predisposing diabetic patients to cardiovascular disease risk. There has been considerable interest in understanding the alterations in cardiac structure and function in the diabetic patients, collectively termed as "diabetic cardiomyopathy". However, the factors that contribute to the development of diabetic cardiomyopathies is not fully understood. This review summarizes the main characteristics of diabetic cardiomyopathies, and the basic mechanisms that contribute to its occurrence. This includes perturbations in insulin resistance, fuel preference, reactive oxygen species generation, inflammation, cell death pathways, neurohormonal mechanisms, advanced glycated end-products accumulation, lipotoxicity, glucotoxicity, and posttranslational modifications in the heart of the diabetic. This review also discusses the impact of antihyperglycemic therapies on the development of heart failure, as well as how current heart failure therapies influence glycemic control in diabetic patients. We also highlight the current knowledge gaps in understanding how diabetes induces heart failure.

Impacts of early insulin treatment vs glimepiride in diabetic patients with background metformin therapy: A nationwide retrospective cohort study

ABSTRACT

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a progressive disease. After metformin failure, the addition of insulin or sulfonylureas might increase the risk of hypoglycemia and cardiovascular (CV) morbidity. Here, the risk of all-cause mortality was compared between early insulin treatment and glimepiride use in T2DM patients with background metformin therapy.We conducted a 9-year retrospective cohort study from the population-based National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan. A total of 2054 patients with T2DM under insulin or glimepiride treatment were enrolled during 2004 to 2012. Overall event rates of all-cause mortality were compared between 1027 insulin users and 1027 matched glimepiride users.After the propensity score matching, the mortality rates were 72.5 and 4.42 per 1000 person-years for insulin users and glimepiride users. The adjusted hazard ratio of mortality was 14.47 (95% CI: 8.64-24.24; P value <.001) as insulin compared with glimepiride users. The insulin users had significantly higher risk of CV death (adjusted hazard ratio 7.95, 95% CI 1.65-38.3, P = .01) and noncardiovascular death (adjusted hazard ratio 14.9, 95% CI 8.4-26.3, P < .001).The nationwide study demonstrated that metformin plus insulin therapy was associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality.

Cardiovascular Safety and Benefits of Noninsulin Antihyperglycemic Drugs for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus-Part 1

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major contributor to the morbidity and mortality associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). With T2DM growing in pandemic proportions, there will be profound healthcare implications of CVD in person with diabetes. The ideal drugs to improve outcomes in T2DM are those having antiglycemic efficacy in addition to cardiovascular (CV) safety, which has to be determined in appropriately designed CV outcome trials as mandated by regulatory agencies. Available evidence is largely supportive of metformin's CV safety and potential CVD risk reduction effects, whereas sulfonylureas are either CV risk neutral or are associated with variable CVD risk. Pioglitazone was also associated with improved CVD risk in patients with diabetes. The more recent antihyperglycemic medications have shown promise with regards to CVD risk reduction in T2DM patients at a high CV risk. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, a type of incretin-based therapy, were associated with better CV outcomes and mortality in T2DM patients, leading to the Food and Drug Administration approval of liraglutide to reduce CVD risk in high-risk T2DM patients. Ongoing and planned randomized controlled trials of the newer drugs should clarify the possibility of class effects, and of CVD risk reduction benefits in low-moderate CV risk patients. While metformin remains the first-line antiglycemic therapy in T2DM, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists should be appropriately prescribed in T2DM patients with baseline CVD or in those at a high CVD risk to improve CV outcomes. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors are discussed in the second part of this review.

[Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Diseases and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus - new Developments in the Treatment]

Despite obvious success in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, incidence of myocardial infarction, stroke, critical ischemia, and lower extremity amputation remains high. Results of clinical studies of new hypoglycemic drugs have demonstrated their high efficacy in decreasing mortality, incidence of cardiovascular complications, and progression of chronic heart failure. At the same time, prevention of atherothrombotic complications is essential for this patient category. Traditionally, the antiaggregant therapy with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is administered to patients with stable atherosclerotic diseases to reduce the risk. Attempts of reducing additionally the risk with ASA combinations with other antiplatelet drugs did not produce an expected result. Theoretical prerequisites suggested that anticoagulant supplements would increase the treatment efficacy in prevention of atherothrombotic complications in patients with cardiovascular diseases. Recently emerged oral anticoagulants can be administered at a considerably lower dose. In the COMPASS study, a combination of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice a day and ASA 100 mg/day compared to ASA 100 mg/day significantly reduced the total risk of stroke and cardiovascular death by 24 % and incidence of stroke and cardiovascular death by 42% and 22 %, respectively. Patients with peripheral artery disease showed for the first time improvement of prognosis, decreased number of amputations, major complications of lower extremity disease. Results of the COMPASS study confirmed the validity of influencing simultaneously the platelet and the coagulation components of hemostasis in patients with stable atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases.

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.

Efficacy and Cardiovascular Safety of Antidiabetic Medications

Diabetes mellitus (DM) has already affected one in every eleven person in the global population, and the dis-ease prevalence continues to increase because of the obesity pandemic. Even with the availability of a multitude of antidi-abetic medications for optimal glycaemic control, cardiovascular morbidity and mortality were not largely altered until re-cently when newer antidiabetic drugs such as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor analogues (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors were introduced. Cardiovascular safety of antidiabetic drugs has also been a hot topic for global scientific debate after the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) enforced restrictions on Rosiglita-zone in 2010 with the suspicion of increased mortality and myocardial events (with subsequent uplift of the ban on the drug in 2013 following the emergence of additional evidence on safety). After this debate, all antidiabetic should go through rigorous safety checks with cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs). Recent CVOTs with GLP-1RAs and SGLT2 inhibitors have revealed markedly positive outcomes that have changed the landscape of diabetes management across the world. Thus, the therapeutic algorithm for optimal management of DM should consider not only the glycaemic control ef-ficacy of the individual antidiabetic agent but also the cardiovascular safety and modifications in other anticipated long-term DM complication profiles. Therefore, it is imperative to critically appraise the efficacy and cardiovascular safety of all antidiabetic drugs to improve the scientific practice of our diabetes care globally. This issue, "Efficacy and cardiovas-cular safety of antidiabetic medications," provides readers the back-up of up to date evidence.

[Diagnosis, Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease in People with Diabetes and Prediabetes]

Diagnosis, Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease in People with Diabetes and Prediabetes Abstract. Diabetes is associated with an increased cardiovascular risk. In addition to optimizing glycemia, timely diagnosis and stringent control of cardiovascular risk factors is essential for individuals with diabetes. Therapeutic options include lifestyle-optimization, individualized drug therapy and targeted treatment of concomitant or secondary cardiovascular disease. Cardiovascular disease occurs more often in individuals with diabetes and includes heart failure, atrial fibrillation, coronary heart disease and sudden cardiac death. The correct choice of antidiabetic drugs and interventions can control cardiovascular risk factors, reduce cardiovascular risk and treat concomitant or secondary diseases in a targeted manner. This review is intended to provide guidance on diagnosis, treatment and choice of therapy for individuals with type 2 diabetes without and with concomitant or secondary cardiovascular disease.

Sulfonylureas may be useful for glycemic management in patients with diabetes and liver cirrhosis

This study aimed to investigate the long-term outcomes of sulfonylurea (SU) use in patients with T2DM and compensated liver cirrhosis. From January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2012, we selected the data of 3781 propensity-score-matched SU users and nonusers from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database. The mean follow-up time for this study was 5.74 years. Cox proportional hazards models with robust sandwich standard error estimates were used to compare the risks of main outcomes between SU users and nonusers. The incidence of mortality during follow-up was 3.24 and 4.09 per 100 person-years for SU users and nonusers, respectively. The adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, and decompensated cirrhosis in SU users relative to SU nonusers were 0.79 (0.71–0.88), 0.69 (0.61–0.80), and 0.82 (0.66–1.03), respectively. The SU-associated lower risks of death and cardiovascular events seemed to have a dose–response trend. This population-based cohort study demonstrated that SU use was associated with lower risks of death and major cardiovascular events compared with SU non-use in patients with T2DM and compensated liver cirrhosis. SUs may be useful for glycemic management for patients with liver cirrhosis.

Effect of insulin secretagogues on major cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIM

In 2019, the Italian Society of Diabetology and the Italian Association of Clinical Diabetologists nominated an expert panel to develop guidelines for drug treatment of type 2 diabetes. This expert panel, after identifying the effects of glucose-lowering agents on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and all-cause mortality as critical outcomes, decided to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of insulin secretagogues (sulfonylureas and glinides) with this respect.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A MEDLINE database search was performed to identify all RCTs, up to January 1st, 2020, with duration≥52 weeks, in which insulin secretagogues (glibenclamide, gliclazide, glimepiride, glipizide, chlorpropamide, repaglinide, nateglinide) were compared with either placebo or active comparators. The principal endpoints were MACE (restricted for RCT reporting MACEs within their outcomes) and all-cause mortality (irrespective of the inclusion of MACEs among the pre-specified outcomes). Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (MH-OR) with 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) was calculated for all the endpoints considered. Fourteen RCTs were included in the analysis for MACEs (919 in insulin secretagogues and 1,087 in control group). Insulin secretagogues were not significantly associated with an increased risk of MACEs in comparison with controls (MH-OR 1.08 [95% CI 0.96, 1.22], p = 0.20). When considering the 48 RCTs fulfilling criteria for inclusion in the analysis on all-cause mortality, insulin secretagogues were associated with a significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality (MH-OR 1.11 [1.00, 1.23], p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that insulin secretagogues are associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality when compared with placebo or other anti-hyperglycaemic drugs.

Add-on therapy in metformin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes at moderate cardiovascular risk: a nationwide study

BACKGROUND

In randomised clinical trials, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors reduced cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) at high cardiovascular risk, as compared to standard care. However, data comparing these agents in patients with T2D who are at moderate risk is sparse.

METHODS

From Danish national registries, we included patients with T2D previously on metformin monotherapy, who started an additional glucose-lowering agent [GLP-1 RA, SGLT-2 inhibitor, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor, sulfonylurea (SU), or insulin] in the period 2010-2016. Patients with a history of cardiovascular events [heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke] were excluded. Patients were followed for up to 2 years. Cause-specific adjusted Cox regression models were used to compare the risk of hospitalisation for HF, a composite endpoint of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (MI, stroke or cardiovascular death), and all-cause mortality for each add-on therapy. Patients who initiated DPP-4 inhibitors were used as reference.

RESULTS

The study included 46,986 T2D patients with a median age of 61 years and of which 59% were male. The median duration of metformin monotherapy prior to study inclusion was 5.3 years. Add-on therapy was distributed as follows: 13,148 (28%) GLP-1 RAs, 2343 (5%) SGLT-2 inhibitors, 15,426 (33%) DPP-4 inhibitors, 8917 (19%) SUs, and 7152 (15%) insulin. During follow-up, 623 (1.3%, range 0.8-2.1%) patients were hospitalised for HF-hazard ratios (HR) were 1.11 (95% CI 0.89-1.39) for GLP-1 RA, 0.84 (0.52-1.36) for SGLT-2 inhibitors, 0.98 (0.77-1.26) for SU and 1.54 (1.25-1.91) for insulin. The composite MACE endpoint occurred in 1196 (2.5%, range 1.5-3.6%) patients, yielding HRs of 0.82 (0.69-0.97) for GLP-1 RAs, 0.79 (0.56-1.12) for SGLT-2 inhibitors, 1.22 (1.03-1.49) for SU and 1.23 (1.07-1.47) for insulin. 1865 (3.9%, range 1.9-9.0%) died from any cause during follow-up. HRs for all-cause mortality were 0.91 (0.78-1.05) for GLP-1 RAs, 0.79 (0.58-1.07) for SGLT-2 inhibitors, 1.13 (0.99-1.31) for SU and 2.33 (2.08-2.61) for insulin.

CONCLUSION

In a nationwide cohort of metformin-treated T2D patients and no history of cardiovascular events, the addition of either GLP-1 RA or SGLT-2 inhibitor to metformin treatment was associated with a similar risk of hospitalisation for HF and death, and a lower risk of MACE for GLP-1 RA when compared with add-on DPP-4 inhibitors. By contrast, initiation of treatment with SU and insulin were associated with a higher risk of MACE. Additionally, insulin was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality and hospitalisation for HF.

Risk of sudden cardiac arrest and ventricular arrhythmia with sulfonylureas: An experience with conceptual replication in two independent populations

Sulfonylureas are commonly used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus. Despite awareness of their effects on cardiac physiology, a knowledge gap exists regarding their effects on cardiovascular events in real-world populations. Prior studies reported sulfonylurea-associated cardiovascular death but not serious arrhythmogenic endpoints like sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) or ventricular arrhythmia (VA). We assessed the comparative real-world risk of SCA/VA among users of second-generation sulfonylureas: glimepiride, glyburide, and glipizide. We conducted two incident user cohort studies using five-state Medicaid claims (1999–2012) and Optum Clinformatics commercial claims (2000–2016). Outcomes were SCA/VA events precipitating hospital presentation. We used Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for high-dimensional propensity scores, to generate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR). We identified 624,406 and 491,940 sulfonylurea users, and 714 and 385 SCA/VA events, in Medicaid and Optum, respectively. Dataset-specific associations with SCA/VA for both glimepiride and glyburide (vs. glipizide) were on opposite sides of and could not exclude the null (glimepiride: aHR_Medicaid 1.17, 95% CI 0.96–1.42; aHR_Optum 0.84, 0.65–1.08; glyburide: aHR_Medicaid 0.87, 0.74–1.03; aHR_Optum 1.11, 0.86–1.42). Database differences in data availability, populations, and documentation completeness may have contributed to the incongruous results. Emphasis should be placed on assessing potential causes of discrepancies between conflicting studies evaluating the same research question.

Latest Evidence on Sulfonylureas: What's New?

This review addresses the question of the cardiovascular (CV) safety of sulfonylureas (SUs) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) when directly tested against comparator agents in CV outcome trials. Presented at a recent symposium entitled "SUs in the treatment of T2DM: a fresh look and new insights" held on Wednesday September 18, 2019 during the 55th Annual Meeting of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) in Barcelona Spain, this review discusses the initial evidence that sparked concerns over the CV safety of SUs as well as more recent findings from large studies of SUs (i.e. ADVANCE, TOSCA.IT and CAROLINA trials), highlighting the differences in CV and hypoglycaemia risks among the various SUs. Finally, the impact of glycaemic control on CV outcomes is also discussed, where the data suggest that the recent positive CV outcomes with some antihyperglycaemic agents may have been driven in part by improved glycaemic control.

Sulphonylureas monotherapy and risk of hospitalization for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A population-based cohort study in China

PURPOSE

The risk of heart failure associated with sulphonylureas is unclear. We evaluated the association between sulphonylureas and hospitalization of heart failure (HHF) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in China.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was implemented using the Yinzhou Regional Health Care Database (YRHCD). We identified 15 752 adult patients with T2DM who were newly exposed to sulphonylurea monotherapy (N = 12 487) or acarbose monotherapy (N = 3265) from January 2010 to September 2016. Cox proportional hazards models weighted by inverse probability of treatment weights were used to compare the risk of HHF between initiators of sulphonylurea and acarbose.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 0.55 (0.49, 1.11) and 0.49 (0.35, 0.70) years for sulphonylureas and acarbose initiators separately, 320 patients developed HHF, with 279 events in sulphonylureas group, and 41 events in acarbose group. The incidence rates of HHF among sulphonylureas initiators and acarbose initiators were 22.2 (95% CI 19.6-24.9) and 18.3 (95% CI 13.2-24.9) per 1000 person-years, respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of HHF for sulphonylureas vs acarbose was 1.61 (95% CI 1.14-2.27). When stratified by history of heart failure, aHR was 1.55 (95% CI 0.79-3.06) in patients with a history of heart failure, and 1.64 (95% CI 1.10-2.45) in patients with no history of heart failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggested that use of sulphonylureas monotherapy compared with acarbose monotherapy for initial treatment of T2DM for approximately 0.5 years are significantly associated with a higher risk of HHF.

Exploring the Possible Impact of Unbalanced Open-Label Drop-In of Glucose-Lowering Medications on EXSCEL Outcomes

BACKGROUND

EXSCEL (Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering) assessed the impact of once-weekly exenatide 2 mg versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, while aiming for glycemic equipoise. Consequently, greater drop-in of open-label glucose-lowering medications occurred in the placebo group. Accordingly, we explored the potential effects of their unbalanced use on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or nonfatal stroke, and all-cause mortality (ACM), given that some of these agents are cardioprotective.

METHODS

Cox hazard models were performed by randomized treatment for drug classes where >5% open-label drop-in glucose-lowering medication occurred, and for glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs; 3.0%) using three methodologies: drop-in visit right censoring, inverse probability for treatment weighting (IPTW), and applying drug class risk reductions.

RESULTS

Baseline glucose-lowering medications for the 14 752 EXSCEL participants (73.1% with previous cardiovascular disease) did not differ between treatment groups. During median 3.2 years follow-up, open-label drop-in occurred in 33.4% of participants, more frequently with placebo than exenatide (38.1% versus 28.8%), with metformin (6.1% versus 4.9%), sulfonylurea (8.7% versus 6.9%), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (10.6% versus 7.5%), SGLT-2i (10.3% versus 8.1%), GLP-1 RA (3.4% versus 2.4%), and insulin (13.8% versus 9.4%). The MACE effect size was not altered meaningfully by right censoring, but the favorable HR for exenatide became nominally significant in the sulfonylurea and any glucose-lowering medication groups, while the ACM HR and p-values were essentially unchanged. IPTW decreased the MACE HR from 0.91 (P=0.061) to 0.85 (P=0.008) and the ACM HR from 0.86 (P=0.016) to 0.81 (P=0.012). Application of literature-derived risk reductions showed no meaningful changes in MACE or ACM HRs or P values, although simulations of substantially greater use of drop-in cardioprotective glucose-lowering agents demonstrated blunting of signal detection.

CONCLUSIONS

EXSCEL-observed HRs for MACE and ACM remained robust after right censoring or application of literature-derived risk reductions, but the exenatide versus placebo MACE effect size and statistical significance were increased by IPTW. Effects of open-label drop-in cardioprotective medications need to be considered carefully when designing, conducting, and analyzing cardiovascular outcome trials of glucose-lowering agents under the premise of glycemic equipoise. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01144338.

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.

Toxicity of Metformin and Hypoglycemic Therapies

Metformin along with other antidiabetic medications provide benefit to patients in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, but caution is advised in certain scenarios to avoid toxicity in kidney disease. Renal dosing, monitoring of kidney function, and evaluating the risk of developing serious side effects are warranted with some agents. The available literature with regard to incidence of adverse events and toxicity of hypoglycemic therapies is reviewed.

Use of Spontaneous Reporting Systems to Detect Host-Medication Interactions: Sex Differences in Oral Anti-Diabetic Drug-Associated Myocardial Infarction

Background Medical treatment should be tailored to an individual's characteristics to optimize treatment benefits. We examined whether case-only analyses from spontaneous reporting systems can detect host-medication interactions in oral antidiabetic drug-associated myocardial infarction. Methods and Results Interaction between sex and use of oral antidiabetic drugs was mined among patients with myocardial infarction in the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System from 2004 to 2014, including 55 718 males and 42 428 females. The odds ratio ( OR ) of multiplicative interactions was used to estimate sex-drug interaction. Detected signs of these interactions were then validated by a nested case-control study utilizing a healthcare record database, Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, from 2001 to 2014, including 31 585 cases and 126 340 controls. In the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System, a higher proportion of male than female patients used metformin (10.32% in males versus 7.82% in females) and sulfonylureas (4.75% in males versus 3.43% in females); after adjusting for patients' pharmacy-based chronic disease score, males had a higher risk of metformin-associated ( OR =1.07; 99% confidence interval, 1.00-1.14) and sulfonylureas-associated ( OR =1.21; 99% confidence interval, 1.10-1.33) myocardial infarction than females. Detected signs of sex-drug interactions were validated in the National Health Insurance Research Database ( OR for metformin=1.14; 99% confidence interval, 1.03-1.26; OR for sulfonylureas=1.13; 99% confidence interval, 1.02-1.25). Conclusions Males have a higher risk of metformin- and sulfonylureas-associated myocardial infarction than females, which suggests that sex-drug interactions are a key issue in diabetes mellitus treatment plan development. This case-only approach using information from spontaneous reporting systems may be a potential tool for screening host-medication interactions that cause adverse events.

Personalized Management of Type 2 Diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Our goal is to discuss how to personalize the management of patients with type 2 diabetes by adjusting glycemic targets and tailoring medical therapy to account for unique patient characteristics.

RECENT FINDINGS

We review the pharmacotherapeutic options for the management of type 2 diabetes, focusing on potential advantages and disadvantages of each class of agents. We also discuss how to approach specific patient subpopulations and propose a conceptual framework for incorporating these factors into clinical practice. As the diabetes treatment landscape rapidly expands, physicians have the exciting opportunity to offer patients increasingly individualized care.

The right place for Sulphonylureas today

The place of Sulphonylurea based insulin secretagogues in the management of Type 2 diabetes appears as controversial today as it was fifty years ago. Newer therapies are associated with less hypoglycaemia and weight gain than Sulphonylureas but currently cost more and lack assurances which come with long-term exposure. Emergence of recent CVOT data for SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists is likely to influence therapeutic choices and guidance is now supportive of their earlier use in cases at high risk of cardiovascular disease. Meta-analyses of Sulphonylurea trials have failed to indicate a consistent effect (positive or negative) on cardiovascular disease or mortality, although are limited by the relative scarcity of studies directly reporting these outcomes. The CAROLINA trial is reassuring in demonstrating cardiovascular safety for the Sulphonylurea Glimepiride when compared directly with the DPP-4 inhibitor Linagliptin, suggesting either of these agents would be relatively safe second line options after Metformin in the majority of patients. This review provides a balanced assessment of available Sulphonylurea treatments in the context of current cardiovascular outcome trial data (CVOT) data and hopefully assists informed decision making about the place of these drugs in contemporary glucose lowering practice.

Outcomes Associated With the Adjunctive Use of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors With Insulin Versus Other Antihyperglycemic Medications in Patients With Prediabetes or Diabetes After Cardiac Surgery

BACKGROUND

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) plus basal insulin is noninferior to insulin monotherapy for glycemic control in medical-surgical patients, but data in postoperative cardiac surgery patients are sparse.

OBJECTIVE

To compare glucose control in postoperative cardiac surgery patients with prediabetes or diabetes receiving a DPP-4i plus insulin versus other antihyperglycemic regimens.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients with prediabetes or diabetes who underwent cardiac surgery at our hospital between May 2016 and June 2017. Included patients were stratified into cohorts: (1) DPP-4i plus insulin and (2) other antihyperglycemic regimens. Blood glucose levels were collected on postoperative days 2 to 7. Uncontrolled glucose (≥2 measurements <80 or >180 mg/dL in 1 day), hyperglycemia (>2 measurements ≥180 mg/dL in 1 day), and hypoglycemia (any measurement <70 mg/dL) were compared between cohorts using logistic regression adjusted for home antihyperglycemics.

RESULTS

We included 135 cardiac surgery patients, of which 65 received DPP-4i plus insulin. Eighty-two patients received antihyperglycemics at home. Uncontrolled glucose occurred in 61 (45.2%) patients; while hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia occurred in 50 (37.0%) and 24 (17.8%) patients, respectively. There was no difference in the adjusted odds of uncontrolled glucose (odds ratio [OR] = 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65-3.11), hyperglycemia (OR = 1.20; 95% CI = 0.52-2.78), or hypoglycemia (OR = 0.69; 95% CI = 0.27-1.75) for those receiving DPP-4i plus insulin versus other regimens.

CONCLUSION

Glucose control was no different among postoperative cardiac surgery patients receiving a DPP-4i plus insulin versus other regimens. DPP-4i use was not associated with hypoglycemia.

Update on Management of Type 2 Diabetes for Cardiologists

The management of type 2 diabetes mellitus has evolved over the last several years as new antidiabetic agents continue to arrive and change the goals of diabetes care. In 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration mandated that all new antidiabetic agents must demonstrate cardiovascular (CV) safety, which has led to a series of CV outcome trials. In this article, we review the key findings from these CV outcome trials and their impact on diabetes care guidelines.

Reflections on the sulphonylurea story: A drug class at risk of extinction or a drug class worth reviving?

The role of sulphonylureas (SUs) in modern clinical practice poses ongoing clinical debate. With the advent of newer agents in diabetes management, there is an increasing shift away from the prescribing of SUs, but not necessarily to more effective agents. This review provides a different perspective on the debate, reflecting in depth upon the physiology of SUs, drawing on insights gained from monogenic diabetes to highlight the potential benefit of lower doses of SUs, and the probable benefit of gliclazide over most other, if not all SUs, in terms of sulphonylurea failure and cardiovascular outcomes.

Review of the cardiovascular safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and the clinical relevance of the CAROLINA trial

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD) is a well-recognized complication of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and there is a clinical need for glucose-lowering therapies that do not further increase CV risk in this population. Although sulfonylureas (SUs) may be used as second-line therapy for patients requiring additional therapy after first-line metformin to improve glycemic control, their long-term effects on CV outcomes remain uncertain, and a wide range of alternative agents exist including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors.

METHODS

Literature searches in PubMed (2013-2018) were conducted with terms for DPP-4 inhibitors combined with CV terms, with preference given to cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs). Reference lists from retrieved articles and diabetes guidelines were also considered.

RESULTS

This narrative review discusses current evidence for the CV safety of these agents, describes the long-term CV effects of DPP-4 inhibitors, including effects on CV events, mortality, the risk for heart failure hospitalization, and highlights the need for further research into the CV effects of SU therapy. Although SUs remain a treatment option for T2DM, the long-term effects of these agents on CV outcomes are unclear, and further long-term studies are required. For DPP-4 inhibitors, uncertainties have been raised about their long-term effect on hospitalization for heart failure in light of the results of SAVOR-TIMI 53, although the findings of other DPP-4 inhibitor CVOTs in T2DM and data analyses have suggested these agents do not increase the occurrence of adverse CV outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on recent CVOTs and guideline updates, the choice of add-on to metformin therapy for patients with T2DM and established CV disease should be a sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor or a glucagon-like peptide-1 agonist with proven CV benefit. Additional treatment options for those individuals who require therapy intensification, as well as in patients with T2DM and without established CVD include DPP-4 inhibitors and SUs. Since few head-to-head trials have compared the effects of different oral glucose-lowering agents on CV outcomes in T2DM, with most CVOTs using placebo as a comparator, the CAROLINA trial will provide important information on the comparative CV safety of a commonly prescribed SU and a DPP-4 inhibitor.