Cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality associated with sulphonylureas compared with other antihyperglycaemic drugs: A Bayesian meta-analysis of survival data

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

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

Effectiveness of glucose-lowering medications on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes at moderate cardiovascular risk

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death among people with type 2 diabetes1-5, most of whom are at moderate CVD risk6, yet there is limited evidence on the preferred choice of glucose-lowering medication for CVD risk reduction in this population. Here, we report the results of a retrospective cohort study where data for US adults with type 2 diabetes and moderate risk for CVD are used to compare the risks of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event with initiation of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA; n = 44,188), sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i; n = 47,094), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i; n = 84,315) and sulfonylureas (n = 210,679). Compared to DPP4i, GLP-1RA (hazard ratio (HR) 0.87; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-0.93) and SGLT2i (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.81-0.90) were associated with a lower risk of a major adverse cardiovascular event, whereas sulfonylureas were associated with a higher risk (HR 1.19; 95% CI 1.16-1.22). Thus, GLP-1RA and SGLT2i may be the preferred glucose-lowering agents for cardiovascular risk reduction in patients at moderate baseline risk for CVD. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05214573.

New-onset syncope in diabetic patients treated with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: a Chinese population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Syncope is a symptom that poses an important diagnostic and therapeutic challenge, and generates significant cost for the healthcare system. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have demonstrated beneficial cardiovascular effects, but their possible effects on incident syncope have not been fully investigated. This study compared the effects of SGLT2i and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) on new-onset syncope.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a retrospective, territory-wide cohort study enrolling type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients treated with SGLT2i or DPP4i between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2020, in Hong Kong, China. The outcomes were hospitalization of new-onset syncope, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality. Multivariable Cox regression and different approaches using the propensity score were applied to evaluate the association between SGLT2i and DPP4i with incident syncope and mortality. After matching, a total of 37 502 patients with T2DM were included (18 751 SGLT2i users vs. 18 751 DPP4i users). During a median follow-up of 5.56 years, 907 patients were hospitalized for new-onset syncope (2.41%), and 2346 patients died from any cause (6.26%), among which 471 deaths (1.26%) were associated with cardiovascular causes. Compared with DPP4i users, SGLT2i therapy was associated with a 51% lower risk of new-onset syncope [HR 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.57; P < 0.001], 65% lower risk of cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.26-0.46; P < 0.001), and a 70% lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.30; 95% CI 0.26-0.34; P < 0.001) in the fully adjusted model. Similar associations with syncope were observed for dapagliflozin (HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.58-0.85; P < 0.001), canagliflozin (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.36-0.63; P < 0.001), and ertugliflozin (HR 0.45; 95% CI 0.30-0.68; P < 0.001), but were attenuated for empagliflozin (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.59-1.05; P = 0.100) after adjusting for potential confounders. The subgroup analyses suggested that, compared with DPP4i, SGLT2i was associated with a significantly decreased risk of incident syncope among T2DM patients, regardless of gender, age, glucose control status, Charlson comorbidity index, and the association remained constant amongst those with common cardiovascular drugs and most antidiabetic drugs at baseline.

CONCLUSION

Compared with DPP4i, SGLT2i was associated with a significantly lower risk of new-onset syncope in patients with T2DM, regardless of gender, age, degree of glycaemic control, and comorbidity burden.

Comparison of the effects of gemigliptin versus glimepiride on cardiac function in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with metformin: The gemi-heart study

AIM

To investigate the effects of gemigliptin on cardiac function and compare the effects of gemigliptin and glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty T2D patients being treated with metformin were assigned to a gemigliptin group (50 mg daily) or a glimepiride group (2 mg daily) for 24 weeks. The preadjudicated extension period was up to 52 weeks. Glucose metabolism variables and cardiac biomarkers were measured. Echocardiography was used to evaluate cardiac functions.

RESULTS

The HbA1c levels decreased significantly from 8.1% ± 0.6% to 6.8% ± 0.6% in the gemigliptin group and from 8.1% ± 0.6% to 7.0% ± 0.7% in the glimepiride group, without a between-group difference. Gemigliptin reduced insulin resistance, high sensitivity C-reactive protein and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and blood pressure, and increased adiponectin level compared with glimepiride therapy. Gemigliptin induced favourable changes in body composition. Left ventricular end-diastolic volume decreased in the gemigliptin group but increased in the glimepiride group, with a borderline between-group difference. Cardiac biomarkers did not change significantly in either group. At 52 weeks, the HbA1c levels in both groups increased slightly; 7.3% ± 0.8% in the gemigliptin group versus 7.7% ± 1.3% in the glimepiride group, without a between-group difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Gemigliptin had a comparable glucose-lowering efficacy without deleterious effects on cardiac functions or on biomarkers reflective of myocardial injury or heart failure during the 24-week observation period. However, larger, longer-term studies are needed to confirm these findings.

SGLT1: A Potential Drug Target for Cardiovascular Disease

SGLT1 and SGLT2 are the two main members of the sodium-glucose cotransporters (SGLTs), which are mainly responsible for glucose reabsorption in the body. In recent years, many large clinical trials have shown that SGLT2 inhibitors have cardiovascular protection for diabetic and non-diabetic patients independent of lowering blood glucose. However, SGLT2 was barely detected in the hearts of humans and animals, while SGLT1 was highly expressed in myocardium. As SGLT2 inhibitors also have a moderate inhibitory effect on SGLT1, the cardiovascular protection of SGLT2 inhibitors may be due to SGLT1 inhibition. SGLT1 expression is associated with pathological processes such as cardiac oxidative stress, inflammation, fibrosis, and cell apoptosis, as well as mitochondrial dysfunction. The purpose of this review is to summarize the protective effects of SGLT1 inhibition on hearts in various cell types, including cardiomyocytes, endothelial cells, and fibroblasts in preclinical studies, and to highlight the underlying molecular mechanisms of protection against cardiovascular diseases. Selective SGLT1 inhibitors could be considered a class of drugs for cardiac-specific therapy in the future.

Can metformin use reduce the risk of stroke in diabetic patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Stroke and cardiovascular diseases are major causes of death and disability, especially among diabetic patients. Some studies have shown that metformin has been effective in preventing cardiovascular diseases. In this study, we aim to evaluate the effect of metformin on stroke in type 2 diabetic patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted in Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from their inception till 1st July 2022. Randomized clinical trials (RCT) and cohort studies were included. Two independent researchers screened the records, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Findings were reported as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). All statistical analyses were performed using the STATA 17.0 software package.

RESULTS

Analysis of 21 included studies with 1,392,809 patients demonstrated that metformin monotherapy was effective in reducing stroke risk in both RCTs (RR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.50, 0.87 p = 0.004) and cohort studies (RR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.55, 0.81, p < 0.0001). However, combined administration of metformin with other antihyperglycemic agents had no significant effect on stroke risk reduction in either the RCTs (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.69, 1.22 p = 0.558) or the cohort studies (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.59, 1.06, p = 0.122).

CONCLUSION

Low to moderate level of evidence in RCTs showed that metformin monotherapy could reduce stroke risk in type 2 diabetic patients. However, the preventive effect of metformin in stroke was not observed in patients who received a combination of metformin plus other hypoglycemic agents.

Reassessing the evidence of a survival advantage in Type 2 diabetes treated with metformin compared with controls without diabetes: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Previous research has suggested that individuals with Type 2 diabetes and initiated on metformin monotherapy present with a survival advantage compared with the general population without diabetes. This finding has generated considerable interest in the prophylactic use of metformin against age-related morbidity.

METHODS

Utilizing Danish National Health Registers, we assessed differences in survival associated with metformin monotherapy for Type 2 diabetes compared with no diagnosis of diabetes in both singleton and discordant twin populations between 1996 and 2012. Data were analysed in both nested case-control and matched cohort study designs, with incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and hazard ratios estimated using conditional logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression, respectively.

RESULTS

In case-control pairs matched on birth year and sex or co-twin (sex, birth year and familial factors), incident Type 2 diabetes with treatment by metformin monotherapy initiation compared with no diagnosis of diabetes was associated with increased mortality in both singletons (IRR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.37, 1.68) and discordant twin pairs (IRR = 1.90, 95% CI: 1.35, 2.67). After adjusting for co-morbidities and social indicators, these associations were attenuated to 1.32 (95% CI: 1.16, 1.50) and 1.64 (95% CI: 1.10, 2.46), respectively. Increased mortality was observed across all levels of cumulative use and invariant to a range of study designs and sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment initiation by metformin monotherapy in Type 2 diabetes was not associated with survival equal or superior to that of the general population without diabetes. Our contrasting findings compared with previous research are unlikely to be the result of differences in epidemiological or methodological parameters.

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.

[Cardiovascular preventive recommendations. PAPPS 2022 thematic updates. Working groups of the PAPPS]

The recommendations of the semFYC's Program for Preventive Activities and Health Promotion (PAPPS) for the prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are presented. The following sections are included: epidemiological review, where the current morbidity and mortality of CVD in Spain and its evolution as well as the main risk factors are described; cardiovascular (CV) risk and recommendations for the calculation of CV risk; main risk factors such as arterial hypertension, dyslipidemia and diabetes mellitus, describing the method for their diagnosis, therapeutic objectives and recommendations for lifestyle measures and pharmacological treatment; indications for antiplatelet therapy, and recommendations for screening of atrial fibrillation, and recommendations for management of chronic conditions. The quality of testing and the strength of the recommendation are included in the main recommendations.

Defining the Role of SGLT2 Inhibitors in Primary Care: Time to Think Differently

Disease burden in people with diabetes is mainly driven by long-term complications such as cardiovascular disease, heart failure and chronic kidney disease. This is a consequence of the interconnection between the cardiovascular, renal and metabolic systems, through a continuous chain of events referred to as 'the cardiorenal metabolic continuum'. Increasing evidence suggests that sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) have beneficial effects across all stages of the cardiorenal metabolic continuum, reducing morbidity and mortality in a wide range of individuals, from those with diabetes and multiple risk factors to those with established heart failure and chronic kidney disease, regardless of the presence of diabetes. Despite this robust evidence base, the complexity of label indications and misconceptions concerning potential side effects have resulted in a lack of clear understanding in primary care regarding the implementation of SGLT2is in clinical practice. With this in mind, we provide an overview of the clinical and economic benefits of SGLT2is across the cardiorenal metabolic continuum together with practical considerations in order to help address some of these concerns and clearly define the role of SGLT2is in primary care as a holistic outcomes-driven treatment with the potential to reduce disease burden across the cardiorenal metabolic spectrum.

Metformin and the heart: Update on mechanisms of cardiovascular protection with special reference to comorbid type 2 diabetes and heart failure

Metformin has been in clinical use for the management of type 2 diabetes for more than 60 years and is supported by a vast database of clinical experience: this includes evidence for cardioprotection from randomised trials and real-world studies. Recently, the position of metformin as first choice glucose-lowering agent has been supplanted to some extent by the emergence of newer classes of antidiabetic therapy, namely the sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists. These agents have benefitted through support from large cardiovascular outcomes trials with more modern trial designs than earlier studies conducted to assess metformin. Nevertheless, clinical research on metformin continues to further assess its many potentially advantageous effects. Here, we review the evidence for improved cardiovascular outcomes with metformin in the context of the current era of diabetes outcomes trials. Focus is directed towards the potentially cardioprotective actions of metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes and heart failure (HF), now recognised as the most common complication of diabetes.

Contemporary Medical Therapies for Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease and Concomitant Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a Review of Current Evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to highlight the evidence behind landmark trials involving these two novel drug classes in conjunction with a review of long-standing therapies used to improve cardiovascular (CV) outcomes among patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) patients and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

RECENT FINDINGS

Recently, societal guideline recommendations have expanded the management of T2DM to incorporate therapies with CV risk factor modification. This is due to CV outcome trials (CVOT) uncovering advantageous cardioprotective effects of several novel therapies, including glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). Providers who manage high-risk patients with T2DM, such as those with concomitant PAD, are expected to incorporate these novel medical therapies into routine patient care. The body of evidence surrounding GLP-1 RA demonstrates a strong benefit in mitigating the innate heightened CV risk among patients with T2DM. Furthermore, SGLT2i not only have a favorable CV profile but also reduce the risk of HF hospitalizations and progression of renal disease. Patients with T2DM and PAD are known to be at a heightened risk for major adverse cardiac and lower extremity events, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease. As such, the use of novel therapies such as GLP-RA and SGLT2i should be strongly considered to minimize morbidity and mortality in this vulnerable population.

Three-step matching algorithm to enhance between-group comparability and minimize confounding in comparative effectiveness studies

We developed a three-step matching algorithm to enhance the between-group comparability for comparative drug effect studies involving prevalent new-users of the newer study drug versus older comparator drug(s). The three-step matching scheme is to match on: (1) index date of initiating the newer study drug to align the cohort entry time between study groups, (2) medication possession ratio measures that consider prior exposure to all older comparator drugs, and (3) propensity scores estimated from potential confounders. Our approach is illustrated with a comparative cardiovascular safety study of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1ra) versus sulfonylurea (SU) in type 2 diabetes patients using Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database 2003–2015. 66% of 3195 GLP-1ra users had previously exposed to SU. The between-group comparability was well-achieved after implementing the matching algorithm (i.e., standardized mean difference < 0.2 for all baseline patient characteristics). Compared to SU, the use of GLP-1ra yielded a significantly reduced risk of the primary composite cardiovascular events (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.71 [0.54–0.95], p = 0.022). Our matching scheme can enhance the between-group comparability in prevalent new-user cohort designs to minimize time-related bias, improve confounder adjustment, and ensure the reliability and validity of study findings.

Personalized Type 2 Diabetes Management: An Update on Recent Advances and Recommendations

Previous guidelines for the treatment of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) have relied heavily upon rigid algorithms for the sequential addition of pharmacotherapies to achieve target glycemic control. More recent guidelines advocate a personalized approach for diabetes treatment, to improve patient satisfaction, quality of life, medication adherence and overall health outcomes. Clinicians should work with patients to develop personalized goals for their treatment, including targeted glycemic control, weight management, prevention and treatment of associated comorbidities and avoidance of complications such as hypoglycemia. Factors that affect the intensity of treatment and choice of pharmacotherapy should include medical and patient influences. Medical considerations include the diabetes phenotype, biomarkers including genetic tests, and the presence of comorbidities such as cardiovascular, renal, or hepatic disease. Patient factors include their treatment preference, age and life expectancy, diabetes duration, hypoglycemia fear and unawareness, psychological and social circumstances. The use of a personalized approach in the management of people with T2D can reduce the cost and failure associated with the algorithmic "one-size-fits-all" approach, to anticipate disease progression, improve the response to diabetes pharmacotherapy and reduce the incidence of diabetes-associated complications. Ultimately, the use of personalized medicine in people with T2D should improve medication adherence, patient satisfaction and quality of life to reduce diabetes distress and improve physical health outcomes.

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.

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.

CARDIOVASCULAR EFFECTS OF NON-INSULIN GLUCOSE-LOWERING AGENTS: A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF TRIAL EVIDENCE AND POTENTIAL CARDIOPROTECTIVE MECHANISMS

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is highly prevalent and associated with a 2-fold increased mortality, mostly explained by cardiovascular diseases. Trial evidence on older glucose-lowering agents such as metformin and sulfonylureas is limited in terms of cardiovascular efficacy. Since 2008, after rosiglitazone was observed to increase the risk of myocardial infarction and heart failure (HF), cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOT) have been required by regulators for licensing new glucose-lowering agents. In the following CVOTs, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4i) have been shown to be safe but not to improve morbidity/mortality, except for saxagliptin which increased the risk of HF. Several glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-Ra) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have been demonstrated to reduce the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. SGLT2i have shown a class effect for the reduction in risk of HF events in patients with T2DM, leading to trials testing their efficacy/safety in HF regardless of T2DM. In the DAPA-HF and the EMPEROR-Reduced trials dapagliflozin and empagliflozin, respectively, improved cardiovascular mortality/morbidity in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), with and without T2DM. Therefore, these drugs are now key part of HFrEF pharmacotherapy. In the SOLOIST-WHF, sotagliflozin reduced cardiovascular mortality/morbidity in patients with T2DM and a recent acute episode of HF regardless of EF. The DELIVER and the EMPEROR-Preserved are testing dapagliflozin and empagliflozin, respectively, in patients with HF with mildly reduced and preserved EF. A strong renal protective role of SGLT2i has also emerged in trials enrolling patients with and without T2DM.

Ultrasound-assisted C3F8-filled PLGA nanobubbles for enhanced FGF21 delivery and improved prophylactic treatment of diabetic cardiomyopathy

Diabetic cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a serious cardiac complication of diabetes that currently lacks specific treatment. Fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) has been proved to have cardioprotective effect in DCM. However, the insufficient cardiac delivery effect of FGF21 limits its application in DCM. Therefore, to improve the therapeutic efficacy of FGF21 in DCM, an effective drug delivery system is urgently required. In this study, perfluoropropane (C₃F₈) and polyethylenimine (PEI)-doped poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) nanobubbles (CPPNBs) were synthesized via double-emulsion evaporation and FGF21 was efficiently absorbed (CPPNBs@FGF21) via the electrostatic incorporation effect. CPPNBs@FGF21 could effectively deliver FGF21 to the myocardial tissue through the cavitation effect under low-frequency ultrasound (LFUS). The as-prepared CPPNBs@FGF21 could efficiently load FGF21 after doping with the cationic polymer PEI, and displayed uniform dispersion and favorable biosafety. After filling with C₃F₈, CPPNBs@FGF21 could be used for distribution monitoring through ultrasound imaging. Moreover, CPPNBs@FGF21 significantly downregulated the expression of ANP, CTGF, and caspase-3 mRNA via the action of LFUS owing to increased FGF21 release, therefore exhibiting enhanced inhibition of myocardial hypertrophy, apoptosis, and interstitial fibrosis in DCM mice. In conclusion, we established an effective protein delivery nanocarrier for the diagnosis and prophylactic treatment of DCM. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Diabetic cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a serious cardiac complication of diabetes that currently lacks effective clinical treatments. Fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) can protect cardiomyocytes from diabetic damage, but insufficient cardiac drug delivery limits the application of FGF21 in DCM. In this study, perfluoropropane (C3F8) and polyethylenimine (PEI)-doped poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) nanobubbles loaded with FGF21 (CPPNBs@FGF21) were developed for the prophylactic treatment of DCM. CPPNBs@FGF21 could effectively deliver the FGF21 to the myocardial tissue through the cavitation effect of low-frequency ultrasound (LFUS). Our results indicated that CPPNBs@FGF21 combined with LFUS could significantly down-regulate the expressions of ANP, CTGF, and caspase-3 mRNA, and as a result, it prevented the myocardial hypertrophy, apoptosis, and interstitial fibrosis of DCM mice. Overall, we established an effective protein delivery nanocarrier for the diagnosis and prophylactic treatment of DCM.

Cellular mechanisms and recommended drug-based therapeutic options in diabetic cardiomyopathy

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with a specific cardiac phenotype characterized by structural and functional alterations. This so-called diabetic cardiomyopathy (DM CM) is clinically relevant as patients with DM show high incidence of heart failure. Mechanistically, several parameters interact on the cardiomyocyte level leading to increased inflammation, apoptosis, reactive oxygen species and altered calcium signaling. This in turn provokes functional myocardial changes that might inter alia play into the worsened clinical outcome in DM patients. Therefore, efficient therapeutic options are urgently needed. This review focuses on mechanistic effects of currently recommended antidiabetic treatment and heart failure therapy for DM CM.

Cardiovascular risk management in type 2 diabetes mellitus: A joint position paper of the Italian Cardiology (SIC) and Italian Diabetes (SID) Societies

AIM

This review represents a joint effort of the Italian Societies of Cardiology (SIC) and Diabetes (SID) to define the state of the art in a field of great clinical and scientific interest which is experiencing a moment of major cultural advancements, the cardiovascular risk management in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Consists of six chapters that examine various aspects of pathophysiology, diagnosis and therapy which in recent months have seen numerous scientific innovations and several clinical studies that require extensive sharing.

CONCLUSIONS

The continuous evolution of our knowledge in this field confirms the great cultural vitality of these two cultural spheres, which requires, under the leadership of the scientific Societies, an ever greater and effective collaboration.

Cardiovascular events and mortality among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients newly prescribed first-line blood glucose-lowering drugs monotherapies: A population-based cohort study in the Catalan electronic medical record database, SIDIAP, 2010-2015

AIM

To assess cardiovascular (CV) events and all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients treated with first-line monotherapies of non-insulin antidiabetic drugs (NIADs).

METHODS

Longitudinal retrospective cohort study in the Catalan database SIDIAP (Information System for the Development of Research in Primary Care). T2DM patients ≥18 years newly prescribed first-line monotherapies during 2010-2015 were followed since their first prescription until the composite of major adverse CV events, MACE (myocardium infarction [MI], stroke and all-cause death), its components, heart failure (HF) and peripheral artery disease (PAD) or censoring. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios 95% confidence interval (HR [95%CI]).

RESULTS

Compared with metformin, the use of sulfonylureas, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4 i) and meglitinides were significantly associated with higher risk for MACE (1.55 [1.42-1.68]); 1.49 [1.22-1.84] and 2.01 [1.29-3.12]) and all-cause mortality (1.67 [1.52-1.84], 1.65 [1.30-2.] and 2.08 [1.26-3.42]). Sulfonylureas users had increased risk of MI (1.38 [1.03-1.85]) stroke (1.31 [1.11-1.54]), HF (1.49 [1.28-1.72]) and PAD (1.24 [1.02-1.51]). Meglitinides users were at increased risks of MI, HR 2.03 (1.10-3.74).

CONCLUSION

In first-line monotherapies, compared with metformin, sulfonylureas were associated with increased risks in all the outcomes; DPP-4 i and repaglinide showed increased risks of MACE and mortality. Residual confounding cannot be ruled out.

Efficacy and Safety of Ertugliflozin in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Inadequately Controlled by Sulfonylurea Monotherapy: a Substudy of VERTIS CV

INTRODUCTION

Sulfonylureas (SU) are commonly used antihyperglycemic agents. VERTIS CV was the cardiovascular outcome study for the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor ertugliflozin. Enrollment of patients in VERTIS CV occurred in two sequential cohorts (Cohort 1 and Cohort 2).

METHODS

This substudy assessed the efficacy and safety of adding ertugliflozin to SU monotherapy. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline at 18 weeks.

RESULTS

Among the 8246 patients who were randomized in VERTIS CV, 157 patients in Cohort 1 and 135 patients in Cohort 2 were on SU monotherapy at baseline. In the prespecified analysis (Cohort 1 only), the least squares (LS) mean HbA1c change from baseline for placebo, ertugliflozin 5 mg, and ertugliflozin 15 mg was -  0.56%, -  0.91%, and -  0.78%, respectively (placebo-adjusted LS mean [95% CI] change: - 0.35% [-  0.72%, 0.02%]; -  0.22% [-  0.60%, 0.16%] for ertugliflozin 5 and 15 mg, respectively; p > 0.05 for both). In a post-hoc analysis that included Cohorts 1 and 2 (N = 292), the LS mean HbA1c change from baseline at week 18 for placebo, ertugliflozin 5 mg, and ertugliflozin 15 mg was -  0.31%, - 0.77%, and -  0.68%, respectively (placebo-adjusted change: -  0.46% [-  0.73%, -  0.18%]; -  0.37% [-  0.66%, -  0.09%]; p = 0.001 and 0.01 for ertugliflozin 5 and 15 mg, respectively). In Cohort 1, adverse events were reported in 45.8%, 47.3%, and 25.9% of patients with placebo, ertugliflozin 5 mg, and ertugliflozin 15 mg. The incidence rates of symptomatic hypoglycemia were 0.0%, 5.5%, and 3.7%, respectively, with no cases of severe hypoglycemia. The safety profile was similar for Cohorts 1 and 2 combined.

CONCLUSION

The addition of ertugliflozin to SU monotherapy reduced HbA1c but did not result in significant placebo-adjusted reductions from baseline according to the prespecified primary analysis (n = 157); however, in a post-hoc analysis with a larger patient population (n = 292), significant and clinically relevant HbA1c reductions were observed. Ertugliflozin was generally well tolerated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01986881.

Medical treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: Recommendations of the Diabetes, Obesity and Nutrition Group of the Spanish Society of Internal Medicine

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a major health problem with high prevalence, morbidity and mortality, and its medical treatment is growing in complexity due to patients' diverse clinical conditions. This article presents a consensus document by the Diabetes, Obesity and Nutrition Group of the Spanish Society of Internal Medicine, with recommendations for the medical treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The main objective of this article is to facilitate the therapeutic decision-making process to improve the care of patients with diabetes. The document prioritises treatments with cardiovascular benefits, especially those that benefit patients with heart and renal failure.

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.

Medical treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: Recommendations of the Diabetes, Obesity and Nutrition Group of the Spanish Society of Internal Medicine

Type 2 diabetes is a big health concern due to its high prevalence and morbi-mortality. Medical treatment has a growing complexity which is focus on patients' clinical situations. This article contains a consensus statement about recommendations on medical treatment of type-2 diabetes from the Working Group of Diabetes, Obesity and Nutrition of Spanish Society of Internal Medicine. The aim of this consensus is to facilitate therapeutic decision-making to improve the diabetes patients care. The document prioritizes treatments with cardiovascular, especially heart failure, and real benefits.

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.

Comparative effectiveness of gliclazide modified release versus sitagliptin as second-line treatment after metformin monotherapy in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To compare the effectiveness and safety of gliclazide modified release (MR) to sitagliptin as type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) treatments in a real-world patient population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used records from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. The cohort consisted of adult patients with T2D newly treated with either gliclazide MR or sitagliptin as second-line treatment added to metformin and with a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level of ≥7.0% (53 mmol/mol). Patients were 1:1 matched using high-dimensional propensity score matching and followed to determine the time taken to reach an HbA1c <7.0%. Secondary outcomes included time to HbA1c ≤6.5% (48 mmol/mol), time to ≥1% (11 mmol/mol) HbA1c reduction from baseline, treatment persistence and durability, and hypoglycaemic events.

RESULTS

Among the 1986 patients included, those on gliclazide MR more likely achieved an HbA1c <7.0% [hazard ratio (HR): 1.35; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15-1.57], HbA1c ≤6.5% (HR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.19-1.92) or had an HbA1c reduction ≥1% from baseline (HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.00-1.24) compared with patients on sitagliptin. Durability (log-rank P = .135) and persistence (P = .119) were similar between the two groups. Hypoglycaemic events were uncommon (23 total severe and non-severe events; incidence rate, 3.7 per 1000 patient years), with 4.7 and 2.6 events per 1000 patient years with gliclazide MR and sitagliptin treatment, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world study, second-line gliclazide MR was more effective than sitagliptin in reducing HbA1c, with similar durability and persistence and low rates of hypoglycaemic events, in individuals with T2D on metformin treatment and HbA1c above the target of 7.0%.

Heart Failure in Diabetes Mellitus: An Updated Review

Diabetes mellitus (DM) and heart failure (HF) are comorbid conditions associated with significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Despite the availability of novel and effective therapeutic options and intensive glycaemic control strategies, mortality and hospitalisation rates continue to remain high and the incidence of HF persists. In this review, we described the impact of currently available glucose-lowering therapies in DM with a focus on HF clinical outcomes. Non-conventional modes of management and alternative pathophysiological mechanisms with the potential for therapeutic targeting are also discussed.

Cardiovascular safety of Glimepiride: An indirect comparison from CAROLINA and CARMELINA

BACKGROUND

Despite having unquestionable glucose lowering efficacy, current guidelines no more favour the uses of sulphonylureas for CV safety concern, except when cost is an issue. However, formal cardiovascular outcome trial (CVOT) is not available.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed an indirect treatment comparison to find the hazard ratio for 3-point MACE, all-cause death, CV death and non-CV death between glimepiride and placebo based on two large CVOTs which established the CV safety of linagliptin (CARMELINA and CAROLINA).

RESULTS

Glimepiride was shown to have a non-inferior risk compared to placebo for 3-point MACE (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.850, 1.274), all-cause mortality (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.880, 1.317), CV death (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.732, 1.259), and non-CV death (HR 1.24, 95% CI 0.893, 1.733).

CONCLUSION

Cardiovascular safety of glimepiride is re-assuring and may help patients with type 2 diabetes world-over to avail the benefit of this affordable efficacious medication.

[Cardiovascular preventive recommendations. PAPPS 2020 update]

The recommendations of the semFYC's Program for Preventive Activities and Health Promotion (PAPPS) for the prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are presented. The following sections are included: Epidemiological review, where the current morbidity and mortality of CVD in Spain and its evolution as well as the main risk factors are described; Cardiovascular (CV) risk tables and recommendations for the calculation of CV risk; Main risk factors such as arterial hypertension, dyslipidemia and diabetes mellitus, describing the method for their diagnosis, therapeutic objectives and recommendations for lifestyle measures and pharmacological treatment; Indications for antiplatelet therapy, and recommendations for screening of atrial fibrillation. The quality of testing and the strength of the recommendation are included in the main recommendations.

Pharmacological Management of Cardiac Disease in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Insights into Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) has emerged as a growing pandemic. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) constitutes another major health problem, with coronary heart disease being the leading cause of cardiovascular death. Patients with T2DM require a multilevel therapeutic approach, both for primary and secondary prevention of CVD.

OBJECTIVE

To present and summarize the most recent, highest level evidence retrieved from literature, relevant to the pharmaceutical management of CVD in T2DM.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of the literature on MEDLINE from its inception till today, primarily for relevant systematic reviews, meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials.

RESULTS

There is a trend towards more intensified therapeutic interventions in T2DM, concerning glycemic, lipid and blood pressure control. New drugs, such as sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and proprotein convertase subtilisin/ kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors might evolve as key players in the management of diabetes and its complications within the next years. Classic drugs, such as those targeting the renin-angiotensinaldosterone system, statins and aspirin remain first-line treatment options, both for primary and secondary prevention of CVD. Lifestyle interventions should always be integrated into a complete therapeutic strategy in diabetic patients. Novel drugs, such as finerenone and LCZ696 have provided significant results in cardiovascular outcome studies; however, their role in T2DM has to be further elucidated.

CONCLUSION

Pharmaceutical approach of CVD in T2DM is multilevel and complex. Drug classes featuring pleiotropic effects may boost our armamentarium in the fight against CVD.

Cardiovascular Effects of Hypoglycemic Agents in Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Despite substantial improvements over the years, diabetes mellitus is still associated with cardiovascular disease, heart failure, and excess mortality.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article is to examine existing data on the reduction of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in diabetes. Control of glycemia, lipid levels, and blood pressure are described in brief. The main scope of this article is, however, to review the glucose-independent cardiovascular effect of antidiabetic pharmacological agents (mainly other than insulin).

METHODS

The article is a narrative review based on recently published reviews and meta-analyses complemented with data from individual trials, when relevant.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Older data suggest a cardioprotective role of metformin (an inexpensive and safe drug); a role to date not convincingly challenged. The cardiovascular effects of thiazolidinediones, sulphonylurea, and glinides are debatable. Recent large-scale cardiovascular outcome trials suggest a neutral profile of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, yet provide compelling evidence of cardioprotective effects of glucagon-like 1 receptor antagonists and sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitors.

CONCLUSION

Metformin may have a role in primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease; glucagon-like 1 receptor antagonists and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors play a role in secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitors have a role to play in both primary and secondary prevention of heart failure; yet, they carry a small risk of the potentially dangerous adverse effect, euglycemic diabetic ketoacidosis.

2020 Consensus of Taiwan Society of Cardiology on the pharmacological management of patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases

The global incidence and prevalence of type 2 diabetes have been escalating in recent decades. The total diabetic population is expected to increase from 415 million in 2015 to 642 million by 2040. Patients with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). About two-thirds of patients with type 2 diabetes died of ASCVD. The association between hyperglycemia and elevated cardiovascular (CV) risk has been demonstrated in multiple cohort studies. However, clinical trials of intensive glucose reduction by conventional antidiabetic agents did not significantly reduce macrovascular outcomes.In December 2008, U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a mandate that every new antidiabetic agent requires rigorous assessments of its CV safety. Thereafter, more than 200,000 patients have been enrolled in a number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). These trials were initially designed to prove noninferiority. It turned out that some of these trials demonstrated superiority of some new antidiabetic agents versus placebo in reducing CV endpoints, including macrovascular events, renal events, and heart failure. These results are important in clinical practice and also provide an opportunity for academic society to formulate treatment guidelines or consensus to provide specific recommendations for glucose control in various CV diseases.In 2018, the Taiwan Society of Cardiology (TSOC) and the Diabetes Association of Republic of China (DAROC) published the first joint consensus on the "Pharmacological Management of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiovascular Diseases." In 2020, TSOC appointed a new consensus group to revise the previous version. The updated 2020 consensus was comprised of 5 major parts: (1) treatment of diabetes in patients with multiple risk factors, (2) treatment of diabetes in patients with coronary heart disease, (3) treatment of diabetes in patients with stage 3 chronic kidney disease, (4) treatment of diabetes in patients with a history of stroke, and (5) treatment of diabetes in patients with heart failure. The members of the consensus group thoroughly reviewed all the evidence, mainly RCTs, and also included meta-analyses and real-world evidence. The treatment targets of HbA1c were finalized. The antidiabetic agents were ranked according to their clinical evidence. The consensus is not mandatory. The final decision may need to be individualized and based on clinicians' discretion.

Scientific independence and objectivity: many questions linger about treatment of type 2 diabetes, such as scientific study design, optimal glucose control and the safety of injecting exogenous insulin

Whilst clinical guidelines exist for the treatment of people with type 2 diabetes, many underlying assumptions are still not qualified by convincing evidence. In this commentary, it is argued that fundamental issues still cloud clinical practice, such as biases in the design of clinical studies, the association between glucose control & clinical outcomes, and the safety of exposure to exogenous insulin and other glucose-lowering drugs. Relevant scientific evidence and alternative opinions about important issues continue to be largely ignored, and no effort has been made to resolve these questions. This may have had serious consequences, such as stifling innovation because there are no further benefits to be achieved in relation to glucose control.

Stroke in the patient with diabetes (Part 2) - Prevention and the effects of glucose lowering therapies

There is a higher incidence of stroke in both the type 2 diabetic and the non-diabetic insulin resistant patient which is accompanied by higher morbidity and mortality. Stroke primary prevention can be achieved by controlling atrial fibrillation and hypertension, and the utilization of statins and anticoagulant therapies. Utilizing pioglitazone and GLP-1 receptor agonists reduce the risk of stroke while the utilization of metformin, α-glucosidase inhibitors, DPP-4 and SGLT-2 inhibitors have no effect. Insulin use may be a marker of increased risk of stroke, but not necessarily causative. Utilizing intravenous insulin to normalize plasma glucose levels in the acute phase of a stroke does not improve the outcome. Antiplatelet agents are not proven to be of benefit in primary prevention whereas the use of direct-acting oral anticoagulants to avoid stroke and the early use of tpA in the acute phase have been shown to be beneficial.

The present and future scope of real-world evidence research in diabetes: What questions can and cannot be answered and what might be possible in the future?

The last decade has witnessed an exponential growth in the opportunities to collect and link health-related data from multiple resources, including primary care, administrative, and device data. The availability of these "real-world," "big data" has fuelled also an intense methodological research into methods to handle them and extract actionable information. In medicine, the evidence generated from "real-world data" (RWD), which are not purposely collected to answer biomedical questions, is commonly termed "real-world evidence" (RWE). In this review, we focus on RWD and RWE in the area of diabetes research, highlighting their contributions in the last decade; and give some suggestions for future RWE diabetes research, by applying well-established and less-known tools to direct RWE diabetes research towards better personalized approaches to diabetes care. We underline the essential aspects to consider when using RWD and the key features limiting the translational potential of RWD in generating high-quality and applicable RWE. Only if viewed in the context of other study designs and statistical methods, with its pros and cons carefully considered, RWE will exploit its full potential as a complementary or even, in some cases, substitutive source of evidence compared to the expensive evidence obtained from randomized controlled trials.

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.

CVOTs: What did the endocrinologist learn?

The recent CVOTs which tested the new glucose-lowering drugs (GLD) show that in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) it is now possible to reduce cardiovascular complications including ischemic events and hospitalization for heart failure, and mortality, and, to some extent, microvascular complications of diabetes, in particular renal outcomes. Additionally CVOTs provide major informations on safety and metabolic effects for long-term use of these drugs. The benefits with GLP-1 RAs are most likely derived through the reduction of atherosclerosis-related events while SGLT-2is seem mostly to reduce heart failure-related events. Specific mechanisms independent from glucose control are involved. Based on CVOTs results it is time, as stated in the new EASD-ADA and ESC/EASD guidelines, to take into consideration such opportunities in the decision-making process when treating T2DM patients, favoring the use of drugs that have shown clear cardiovascular and renal benefits. The treatment decisions require more expertise in the evaluation of cardiovascular and renal risk which becomes a major determinant for the choice of GLD treatment, the target for lipids, the adjustment of anti-hypertensive treatments and the prescription of aspirin. In this context it is essential that endocrinologists-diabetologists communicate more with cardiologists and nephrologists and with the primary care practitioners.

The Changing Landscape of Pharmacotherapy for Diabetes Mellitus: A Review of Cardiovascular Outcomes

The prevention of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality has always been a primary concern in patients with type 2 diabetes. Modern trials of glucose-lowering therapies now assess major adverse cardiac events as an endpoint in addition to the effects on glycaemic control. Whilst the data on the efficacy of intensive glucose lowering on reducing cardiovascular risk are limited, there are now increasing numbers of glucose-lowering therapies that have proven cardiovascular benefit independent of glucose lowering. This review will summarise the available literature on cardiovascular outcomes in relation to metformin, sulphonylureas, di-peptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide receptor agonists, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, acarbose and insulin. In addition, new paradigms in diabetes management and the importance of treatment selection based on considerations including but not limited to glycaemic control will be discussed.