Diabetes drugs and stroke risk: Intensive versus conventional glucose-lowering strategies, and implications of recent cardiovascular outcome trials

Pharmacological interventions in human aging

Pharmacological interventions are emerging as potential avenues of alleviating age-related disease. However, the knowledge of ongoing clinical trials as they relate to aging and pharmacological interventions is dispersed across a variety of mediums. In this review we summarize 136 age-related clinical trials that have been completed or are ongoing. Furthermore, we establish a database that describe the trials (AgingDB, www.agingdb.com) keeping track of the previous and ongoing clinical trials, alongside their outcomes. The aim of this review and database is to give people the ability to easily query for their trial of interest and stay up to date on the latest results. In sum, herein we give an overview of the current pharmacological strategies that have been applied to target human aging.

Cardiovascular efficacy and safety of antidiabetic agents: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

An important characteristic of glucose-lowering therapies (GLTs) is their ability to prevent cardiovascular complications. We aimed to investigate the cardiorenal efficacy and general safety of GLTs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Multicentre, randomized, clinical trials that included over 100 participants comparing antidiabetic agents with a placebo or a different antidiabetic agent and reporting major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), or primarily reporting heart failure, were searched in the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases. Data were extracted independently for random-effects network meta-analyses to calculate the hazard ratio estimates.

RESULTS

Forty-three trials that compared nine types of GLTs were included in the present analysis. The risk of three-point MACE was reduced in the presence of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) and thiazolidinedione therapy compared with the placebo, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, or insulin therapy. GLP-1 RAs were favourable for cardiovascular and renal outcomes. SGLT-2is reduced renal outcomes by ~40%, which was superior to other GLTs. Thiazolidinedione therapy increased the risks of hospitalization for heart failure and had no benefits on mortality. Adverse events leading to drug discontinuation were higher with GLP-1 RAs and thiazolidinediones than placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

GLP-1 RAs, SGLT-2is and thiazolidinediones reduced three-point MACE compared with other GLTs. Each drug class had unique advantages and disadvantages.

Do SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists modulate differently the risk of stroke ? Discordance between randomised controlled trials and observational studies

Stroke represents a major burden in patients with type 2 diabetes, yet this cerebrovascular complication has been less carefully investigated than the risk of cardiovascular mortality, heart failure and renal disease. Some data suggested that glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) exert a better protection against stroke than sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is). However, this conclusion was derived from indirect comparisons in absence of any head-to-head randomised controlled trial (RCT). The present comprehensive review compares the effects of SGLT2is versus GLP-1RAs on nonfatal and fatal/nonfatal strokes in network meta-analyses of RCTs (mostly cardiovascular outcome trials) versus placebo, on the one hand, and in real-life observational cohort studies, on the other hand. Whereas network meta-analyses of placebo-controlled RCTs confirm a slight but significant (in 11 out of 13 meta-analyses) higher incidence of stroke in patients treated with SGLT2is compared with those treated with GLP-1RAs, a large majority of retrospective observational cohort studies (19 out of 21) failed to find any significant difference in the risk of stroke between the two pharmacological classes. Available, yet limited, findings suggest that SGLT2is may be more efficacious against haemorrhagic than ischaemic strokes, in patients at risk for atrial fibrillation and in patients with chronic kidney disease.

Comparison of therapeutic efficacy and safety of sitagliptin, dapagliflozin, or lobeglitazone adjunct therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on sulfonylurea and metformin: Third agent study

AIMS

Compare the efficacy and safety of sitagliptin, dapagliflozin, and lobeglitazone in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes, despite metformin and sulfonylurea therapy.

METHODS

The study randomized patients into three groups, receiving sitagliptin 100 mg, dapagliflozin 10 mg, or lobeglitazone 0.5 mg daily (n = 26 each) and monitored changes in biochemical parameters and body composition for 24 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was changes in HbA1c at 24 months.

RESULTS

The mean change in HbA1c in the sitagliptin, dapagliflozin, and lobeglitazone groups was -0.81 ± 0.21%, -1.05 ± 0.70%, and -1.08 ± 0.98%, after 24 months. Dapagliflozin treatment significantly lowered systolic blood pressure by 5.5 mmHg and alanine aminotransferase levels. Dapagliflozin and lobeglitazone treatment significantly reduced proteinuria and insulin resistance. Dapagliflozin decreased whole body fat percentage by 1.2%, whereas sitagliptin and lobeglitazone increased it by 1.1% and 1.8%, respectively. Whole body muscle percentage increased in the dapagliflozin group and decreased in the lobeglitazone group. The safety profiles of the three treatments were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

All three drugs displayed good glucose-lowering efficacy and comparable safety profiles. However, dapagliflozin therapy produced favorable changes in body composition. Dapagliflozin may be a suitable adjunct therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes seeking to improve their body composition.

Diabetes as one of the long-term COVID-19 complications: from the potential reason of more diabetic patients' susceptibility to COVID-19 to the possible caution of future global diabetes tsunami

According to recent researches, people with diabetes mellitus (type 1 and 2) have a higher incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is caused by a SARS-CoV-2 infection. In this regard, COVID-19 may make diabetic patients more sensitive to hyperglycemia by modifying the immunological and inflammatory responses and increasing reactive oxygen species (ROS) predisposing the patients to severe COVID-19 and potentially lethal results. Actually, in addition to COVID-19, diabetic patients have been demonstrated to have abnormally high levels of inflammatory cytokines, increased virus entrance, and decreased immune response. On the other hand, during the severe stage of COVID-19, the SARS-CoV-2-infected patients have lymphopenia and inflammatory cytokine storms that cause damage to several body organs such as β cells of the pancreas which may make them as future diabetic candidates. In this line, the nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) pathway, which is activated by a number of mediators, plays a substantial part in cytokine storms through various pathways. In this pathway, some polymorphisms also make the individuals more competent to diabetes via infection with SARS-CoV-2. On the other hand, during hospitalization of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, the use of some drugs may unintentionally lead to diabetes in the future via increasing inflammation and stress oxidative. Thus, in this review, we will first explain why diabetic patients are more susceptible to COVID-19. Second, we will warn about a future global diabetes tsunami via the SARS-CoV-2 as one of its long-term complications.

Current management of diabetes patients with COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes mellitus (DM) and the 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) appear to interact in both directions. There is mounting proof that patients with DM have a worse COVID-19 prognosis than those without it. Pharmacotherapy is also known to affect in view of the possible interplay between drugs and the pathophysiology of the above conditions in a given patient.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we discuss the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and its connections with diabetes mellitus. We also analyze the treatment modalities for COVID-19 and diabetes patients. The possible mechanisms of the different medications and their management limitations are also systematically reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

COVID-19 management as well as its knowledge base is changing constantly. The Pharmacotherapy and the choice of drugs also need to be specifically considered in view of the concomitant presence of these conditions in a patient. Anti-diabetic agents must be carefully evaluated in diabetic patients in view of the disease's severity, blood glucose level, appropriate treatment, and other components that could aggravate adverse events. A methodical technique is anticipated to enable the safe and rational use of drug therapy in COVID-19-positive diabetic patients to take.

Current management of diabetes patients with COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes mellitus (DM) and the 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) appear to interact in both directions. There is mounting proof that patients with DM have a worse COVID-19 prognosis than those without it. Pharmacotherapy is also known to affect in view of the possible interplay between drugs and the pathophysiology of the above conditions in a given patient.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we discuss the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and its connections with diabetes mellitus. We also analyze the treatment modalities for COVID-19 and diabetes patients. The possible mechanisms of the different medications and their management limitations are also systematically reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

COVID-19 management as well as its knowledge base is changing constantly. The Pharmacotherapy and the choice of drugs also need to be specifically considered in view of the concomitant presence of these conditions in a patient. Anti-diabetic agents must be carefully evaluated in diabetic patients in view of the disease's severity, blood glucose level, appropriate treatment, and other components that could aggravate adverse events. A methodical technique is anticipated to enable the safe and rational use of drug therapy in COVID-19-positive diabetic patients to take.

COVID-19: Diabetes Perspective-Pathophysiology and Management

Recent evidence relating to the impact of COVID-19 on people with diabetes is limited but continues to emerge. COVID-19 pneumonia is a newly identified illness spreading rapidly throughout the world and causes many disabilities and fatal deaths. Over the ensuing 2 years, the indirect effects of the pandemic on healthcare delivery have become prominent, along with the lingering effects of the virus on those directly infected. Diabetes is a commonly identified risk factor that contributes not only to the severity and mortality of COVID-19 patients, but also to the associated complications, including acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and multi-organ failure. Diabetic patients are highly affected due to increased viral entry into the cells and decreased immunity. Several hypotheses to explain the increased incidence and severity of COVID-19 infection in people with diabetes have been proposed and explained in detail recently. On the other hand, 20-50% of COVID-19 patients reported new-onset hyperglycemia without diabetes and new-onset diabetes, suggesting the two-way interactions between COVID-19 and diabetes. A systematic review is required to confirm diabetes as a complication in those patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Diabetes and diabetes-related complications in COVID-19 patients are primarily due to the acute illness caused during the SARS-CoV-2 infection followed by the release of glucocorticoids, catecholamines, and pro-inflammatory cytokines, which have been shown to drive hyperglycemia positively. This review provides brief insights into the potential mechanisms linking COVID-19 and diabetes, and presents clinical management recommendations for better handling of the disease.

The possible protective and therapeutic effects of ginger and cinnamon on the testis and coda epididymis of streptozotocin-induced-diabetic rats: Histological and biochemical studies

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a metabolic condition characterized by high blood sugar levels with serious system complications. Ginger (Zingiber officinale) and Cinnamon (Cinnamomum zeylanicum) have anti-diabetic activities. The goal of this study is to evaluate the possible protective and therapeutic effects of ginger and Cinnamon against histological, Ki67 Immunohistochemistry (IHC) and biochemical studies in testis and coda epididymis of Streptozotocin (STZ) induced diabetic rats. The experimental rats were divided into six groups: G1 was the control, G2 induced diabetic without treatment, G3 was treated with ginger before induction of DM (ginger protective), G4 were given ginger after DM induction (ginger therapeutic), G5 were given cinnamon before induction of DM (cinnamon protective) and G6 were given cinnamon after DM induction (cinnamon therapeutic). In diabetic rats' significant increases in fasting blood sugar and body weight were observed after three weeks. Ginger and cinnamon effectively decreased serum glucose levels. Histopathological evaluations of seminiferous tubules and coda epididymis sections from diabetic rats showed severe damage to them. Furthermore, the sections of seminiferous tubules and coda epididymis rats administered ginger and cinnamon extract showed normal structure, healthy lining epithelium and sperm contents compared to diabetic rats. The results of the study show that both Ginger and Cinnamon aqueous extracts are effective as both hypoglycemic natural supplements that can protect against diabetic-induced testicular damage as well as share in the reservation of the cauda epididymal structure and sperm contents.

Type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes accounts for nearly 90% of the approximately 537 million cases of diabetes worldwide. The number affected is increasing rapidly with alarming trends in children and young adults (up to age 40 years). Early detection and proactive management are crucial for prevention and mitigation of microvascular and macrovascular complications and mortality burden. Access to novel therapies improves person-centred outcomes beyond glycaemic control. Precision medicine, including multiomics and pharmacogenomics, hold promise to enhance understanding of disease heterogeneity, leading to targeted therapies. Technology might improve outcomes, but its potential is yet to be realised. Despite advances, substantial barriers to changing the course of the epidemic remain. This Seminar offers a clinically focused review of the recent developments in type 2 diabetes care including controversies and future directions.

Association of Time in Range with Endothelial Injury in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Exenatide

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to investigate whether treatment with exenatide could increase time in range (TIR) and decrease glycemic variability, and to evaluate the association between TIR and endothelial injury in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

Two-hundred patients with T2DM treated with exenatide for 16 weeks were included in this study. Seven-point fingerstick blood glucose was used to evaluate derived TIR and glycemic variability. The serum levels of soluble endothelial cell protein C receptor (sEPCR) and von Willebrand factor (vWF) were measured. Ninety-three patients having the data of endothelial injury markers were categorized as derived TIR > 70% or ≤ 70% after the treatment and the association between TIR and endothelial injury were evaluated.

RESULTS

Treatment with exenatide for 16 weeks resulted in a significant reduction in fasting blood glucose, postprandial 2 h blood glucose, and glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels in patients with T2DM. Compared with baseline, derived TIR value was significantly increased [85.7 (57.1, 100.0) % vs. 42.9 (14.9, 71.4) %, P < 0.001], and the parameters of glycemic variability were remarkably decreased after the treatment. After the treatment, serum sEPCR level was significantly decreased from baseline in patients with TIR > 70% [74.5 (32.8, 122.5) ng/mL vs. 96.9 (48.5, 150.9) ng/mL, P = 0.006] but not in those with TIR ≤ 70%; serum vWF level was remarkably decreased in patients with TIR > 70% [from 1166.2 (848.1, 1335.5) mIU/mL to 907.4 (674.3, 1335.1) mIU/mL, P = 0.001] while this effect was modest in those with TIR ≤ 70%.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with exenatide increases TIR and decreases glycemic variability in patients with T2DM. Moreover, the amelioration of endothelial injury is more pronounced in patients with TIR > 70% after the treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR-IPR-15006558 (registered, 27 May 2015).

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and COVID-19: A Narrative Review

Type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic metabolic disorder. The incidence and prevalence of patients with T2DM are increasing worldwide, even reaching epidemic values in most high- and middle-income countries. T2DM could be a risk factor of developing complications in other diseases. Indeed, some studies suggest a bidirectional interaction between T2DM and COVID-19. A growing body of evidence shows that COVID-19 prognosis in individuals with T2DM is worse compared with those without. Moreover, various studies have reported the emergence of newly diagnosed patients with T2DM after SARS-CoV-2 infection. The most common treatments for T2DM may influence SARS-CoV-2 and their implication in infection is briefly discussed in this review. A better understanding of the link between TD2M and COVID-19 could proactively identify risk factors and, as a result, develop strategies to improve the prognosis for these patients.

Effects of Semaglutide on Stroke Subtypes in Type 2 Diabetes: Post Hoc Analysis of the Randomized SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6

GLP-1 RA (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists), including semaglutide, may reduce stroke risk in people with type 2 diabetes. This post hoc analysis examined the subcutaneous and oral semaglutide effects, versus placebo, on stroke and its subtypes in people with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk.

Precision medicine in secondary prevention of ischemic stroke: how may blood-based biomarkers help in clinical routine? An expert opinion

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

One in eight patients unfortunately suffers a new stroke within 5 years of their first stroke, even today. Research in precision medicine could lead to a more individualized treatment allocation, possibly achieving lower recurrence rates of ischemic stroke. In this narrative review, we aim to discuss potential clinical implementation of several promising candidate blood biomarkers.

RECENT FINDINGS

We discuss specifically some promising blood-based biomarkers, which may improve the identification of underlying causes as well as risk stratification of patients according to their specific cerebrovascular risk factor pattern.

SUMMARY

Multimodal profiling of ischemic stroke patients by means of blood biomarkers, in addition to established clinical and neuroradiological data, may allow in the future a refinement of decision algorithms for treatment allocation in secondary ischemic stroke prevention.

The Clinical Features of In-Hospital Recurrence in Acute Ischaemic Stroke Patients over Time: A Real-World Observation at a Single Center

Acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) has a high risk of recurrence, particularly in the early stage. Our study aimed to assess the clinical characteristics and risk factors of in-hospital ischaemic recurrence in AIS patients in different periods. This study was a retrospective, single-center analysis. The patients were divided into two stages based on their admission time. The primary endpoint was recurrent stroke during hospitalization. In total, 978 patients in Stage 1 and 1047 patients in Stage 2 were included in this study. The in-hospital recurrence rate in Stage 1 was 5.9%, while that in Stage 2 was 4.0% (p = 0.046). A recurrence rate reduction mainly occurred in the minor stroke and large-artery atherosclerosis (LAA) stroke patients. Infection was an independent risk factor despite amelioration by antiplatelet therapy (p < 0.001). Diabetes patients also had a higher risk of in-hospital ischaemic recurrence among the minor stroke and large-artery atherosclerosis patients. A positive attitude towards antiplatelet therapy failed to completely halt recurrence of the disease. In conclusion, the rate of in-hospital ischaemic recurrence in AIS patients showed a decreasing trend over time, especially in the minor stroke and large-artery atherosclerosis stroke patients. Infection and diabetes were associated with a higher risk of stroke recurrence.

Diabetes and COVID-19; A Bidirectional Interplay

There seems to be a bidirectional interplay between Diabetes mellitus (DM) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). On the one hand, people with diabetes are at higher risk of fatal or critical care unit-treated COVID-19 as well as COVID-19 related health complications compared to individuals without diabetes. On the other hand, clinical data so far suggest that the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may result in metabolic dysregulation and in impaired glucose homeostasis. In addition, emerging data on new onset DM in previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 patients, reinforce the hypothesis of a direct effect of SARS-CoV-2 on glucose metabolism. Attempting to find the culprit, we currently know that the pancreas and the endothelium have been found to express Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors, the main binding site of the virus. To move from bench to bedside, understanding the effects of COVID-19 on metabolism and glucose homeostasis is crucial to prevent and manage complications related to COVID-19 and support recovering patients. In this article we review the potential underlying pathophysiological mechanisms between COVID-19 and glucose dysregulation as well as the effects of antidiabetic treatment in patients with diabetes and COVID-19.

Risk of stroke and retinopathy during GLP-1 receptor agonist cardiovascular outcome trials: An eight RCTs meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To explore the risk of stroke (including ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke) in type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) medication according to data from the Cardiovascular Outcome Trials(CVOT).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) on GLP-1RA therapy and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetics published in full-text journal databases such as Medline (via PubMed), Embase, Clinical Trials.gov, and the Cochrane Library from establishment to May 1, 2022 were searched. We assess the quality of individual studies by using the Cochrane risk of bias algorithm. RevMan 5.4.1 software was use for calculating meta- analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 60,081 randomized participants were included in the data of these 8 GLP-1RA cardiovascular outcomes trials. Pooled analysis reported statistically significant effect on total stroke risk[RR=0.83, 95%CI(0.73, 0.95), p=0.005], and its subtypes such as ischemic Stroke [RR=0.83, 95%CI(0.73, 0.95), p=0.008] from treatment with GLP-1RA versus placebo, and have no significant effect on the risk of hemorrhagic stroke[RR=0.83, 95%CI(0.57, 1.20), p=0.31] and retinopathy [RR=1.54, 95%CI(0.74, 3.23), p=0.25].

CONCLUSION

GLP-1RA significantly reduces the risk of ischemic stroke in type 2 diabetics with cardiovascular risk factors.

Diabetes, Drug Treatment, and Mortality in COVID-19: A Multinational Retrospective Cohort Study

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are at increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes possibly because of dysregulated inflammatory responses. Glucose-regulating medications, such as glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, and pioglitazone, are known to have anti-inflammatory effects that may improve outcomes in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. In a multinational retrospective cohort study, we used the TriNetX COVID-19 Research Network of 56 large health care organizations to examine these medications in relation to the incidence of hospital admissions, respiratory complications, and mortality within 28 days after a COVID-19 diagnosis. After matching for age, sex, race, ethnicity, BMI, and significant comorbidities, use of GLP-1R agonists and/or pioglitazone was associated with significant reductions in hospital admissions (GLP-1R: 15.7% vs. 23.5%, risk ratio [RR] 0.67 [95% CI 0.57-0.79; P < 0.001]; pioglitazone: 20.0% vs. 28.2%; RR 0.71 [95% CI 0.54-0.93; P = 0.01]). Use of GLP-1R agonists was also associated with reductions in respiratory complications (15.3% vs. 24.9%, RR 0.62 [95% CI 0.52-0.73]; P < 0.001) and incidence of mortality (1.9% vs. 3.3%, RR 0.58 [95% CI 0.35-0.97]; P = 0.04). Use of DPP-4 inhibitors was associated with a reduction in respiratory complications (24.0% vs. 29.2%, RR 0.82 [95% CI 0.74-0.90]; P < 0.001), and continued use of DPP-4 inhibitors after hospitalization was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with those who discontinued use (9% vs. 19%, RR 0.45 [95% CI 0.28-0.72]; P < 0.001). In conclusion, use of glucose-regulating medications, such as GLP-1R agonists, DPP-4 inhibitors, or pioglitazone, may improve COVID-19 outcomes for patients with T2DM; randomized clinical trials are needed to further investigate this possibility.

Incidence of stroke and its association with glycemic control and lifestyle in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: The Fukuoka diabetes registry

AIMS

We prospectively investigated the incidence of stroke and its subtypes, risk factors and prognosis in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A total of 4,875 participants with type 2 diabetes (mean age 65.4 years, male 57%, previous stroke 10%) were investigated for the development of stroke for 5 years. Risk factors were evaluated using multivariable adjusted Cox proportional models.

RESULTS

The incidence rates per 1,000 person-years were 6.7 for new-onset stroke (ischemic 5.5, hemorrhagic 1.2) and 22.7 for recurrent stroke (ischemic 18.8, hemorrhagic 3.8), respectively. Ischemic stroke was significantly associated with age, male, reduced regular physical activity, HbA_1c, diabetic kidney disease and previous stroke. Lacunar infarction was significantly associated with obesity, reduced regular physical activity, HbA_1c and diabetic kidney disease, whereas atherothrombotic stroke was significantly associated with age, reduced intake of dietary fiber, reduced regular physical activity, HbA_1c and previous stroke. Recurrent stroke was significantly associated with depressive symptom. Thirty-day and one-year survival was 76% and 64% for hemorrhagic stroke, and 96% and 91% for ischemic stroke, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study reemphasized the importance of glycemic control and lifestyle modification such as regular physical exercise for stroke prevention in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor use and mortality in COVID-19 patients with diabetes mellitus: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Few observational studies have shown a beneficial effect of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), although results are not consistent. The present systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to provide a precise summary of the effect of DPP4i use (preadmission or in-hospital) and mortality in COVID-19 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM).

METHODS

PubMed and Google Scholar databases were systematically searched using appropriate keywords to 4 January 2021, to identify observational studies reporting mortality in COVID-19 patients with DM using DPP4i versus those not using DPP4i. Preadmission and in-hospital use of DPP4i were considered. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Unadjusted and adjusted pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Subgroup analysis was performed for studies reporting preadmission and in-hospital use of DPP4i.

RESULTS

We identified nine observational studies of high quality pooling data retrieved from 7008 COVID-19 patients with DM. The pooled analysis of unadjusted and adjusted data did not show any significant association between DPP4i use and mortality in COVID-19 patients with DM. However, on subgroup analysis, we found that in-hospital (and not preadmission) DPP4i use was associated with reduced mortality (unadjusted OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23, 0.58, p < 0.0001, I ² = 0% and adjusted OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.13, 0.55, p = 0.0003, I ² = 12%).

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital use of DPP4i is associated with a significant reduction in COVID-19 mortality. Hence, it would be prudent to initiate or continue DPP4i in COVID-19 patients with DM if not contraindicated.

COVID-19 and diabetes mellitus: from pathophysiology to clinical management

Initial studies found increased severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), in patients with diabetes mellitus. Furthermore, COVID-19 might also predispose infected individuals to hyperglycaemia. Interacting with other risk factors, hyperglycaemia might modulate immune and inflammatory responses, thus predisposing patients to severe COVID-19 and possible lethal outcomes. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), which is part of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), is the main entry receptor for SARS-CoV-2; although dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) might also act as a binding target. Preliminary data, however, do not suggest a notable effect of glucose-lowering DPP4 inhibitors on SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility. Owing to their pharmacological characteristics, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors might cause adverse effects in patients with COVID-19 and so cannot be recommended. Currently, insulin should be the main approach to the control of acute glycaemia. Most available evidence does not distinguish between the major types of diabetes mellitus and is related to type 2 diabetes mellitus owing to its high prevalence. However, some limited evidence is now available on type 1 diabetes mellitus and COVID-19. Most of these conclusions are preliminary, and further investigation of the optimal management in patients with diabetes mellitus is warranted.

Hypothesized mechanisms explaining poor prognosis in type 2 diabetes patients with COVID-19: a review

PURPOSE

Epidemiological data suggest that comorbid patients, mostly those with type 2 diabetes (T2D), are predisposed to poor prognosis in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), leading to serious healthcare concerns. The aim of the present manuscript is to review the main relevant mechanisms possibly contributing to worsen the clinical course of COVID-19 in T2D.

RESULTS

Poor glucose control, high glycaemic variability and diabetes-related comorbidities at baseline, particularly cardiovascular diseases and obesity, contribute in worsening the prognosis in the above-mentioned cluster of patients. Moreover, both a lower efficient innate immune system response and cytokine dysregulation predispose patients with T2D to impaired viral clearance and more serious pulmonary and systemic inflammation once the SARS-CoV-2 infection occurred. Inconclusive data are currently available for specifically indicate or contraindicate concurrent medications for managing T2D and its comorbidities in infected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

T2D individuals should be considered as more vulnerable to COVID-19 than general population, and thus require adequate advices about hygienic tips to protect themselves during the pandemic. A careful management of glucose levels and diabetes-related comorbidities remains essential for avoiding further complications, and patient monitoring during the pandemic should be performed also at distance by means of telemedicine. Further studies are needed to clarify whether medications normally used for managing T2D and its associated comorbidities could have a protective or detrimental effect on COVID-19 clinical course.

Invited review. Series: Implications of the recent CVOTs in type 2 diabetes: Which patients for GLP-1RA or SGLT-2 inhibitor?

Large cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) have lent support to a cardiovascular protection with the use of SGLT2-inhibitors (SGLT2is) and GLP1-Receptor Agonists (GLP1-RAs) in subjects with type 2 diabetes. These two classes of novel glucose lowering agents have been shown to have a similar effect on the risk reduction of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE: nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, cardiovascular mortality). Nonetheless, they may not be simply interchangeable. Rather, careful evaluation of all the results of CVOTs leads identification of different effects that may allow profiling of the ideal individuals with T2DM who may benefit most from the use of one or the other class of agents. These differences include effect on heart failure, stroke and diabetic kidney disease that have prompt recent guidelines and recommendation for the treatment of type 2 diabetes to suggest the preferential use of SGLT2is in those with evidence of heart failure and impaired kidney function, while both SGLT2i and GLP1-RAs with proven effect could be use in those with prevalent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. This review discusses all these elements of differentiation along with others that in the future may help establishing the best cardiorenal benefit for individuals with T2DM.

The effect of dulaglutide on stroke: an exploratory analysis of the REWIND trial

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular outcome trials have suggested that glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists might reduce strokes. We analysed the effect of dulaglutide on stroke within the researching cardiovascular events with a weekly incretin in diabetes (REWIND) trial.

METHODS

REWIND was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial done at 371 sites in 24 countries. Men and women (aged ≥50 years) with established or newly detected type 2 diabetes whose HbA_1c was 9·5% or less (with no lower limit) on stable doses of up to two oral glucose-lowering drugs with or without basal insulin therapy were eligible if their body-mass index was at least 23 kg/m². Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to weekly subcutaneous injections of either masked dulaglutide 1·5 mg or the same volume of masked placebo (containing the same excipients but without dulaglutide). Randomisation was done by a computer-generated random code with an interactive web response system with stratification by site. Participants, investigators, the trial leadership, and all other personnel were masked to treatment allocation until the trial was completed and the database was locked. During the treatment period, participants in both groups were instructed to inject study drug on the same day at around the same time, each week. Strokes were categorised as fatal or non-fatal, and as either ischaemic, haemorrhagic, or undetermined. Stroke severity was assessed using the modified Rankin scale. Participants were seen at 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and then every 3 months for drug dispensing and every 6 months for detailed assessments, until 1200 confirmed primary outcomes accrued. The primary endpoint was the first occurrence of any component of the composite outcome, which comprised non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular or unknown causes. All analyses were done according to an intention-to-treat strategy that included all randomly assigned participants, irrespective of adherence. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01394952.

FINDINGS

Between Aug 18, 2011, and Aug 14, 2013, we screened 12 133 patients, of whom 9901 with type 2 diabetes and additional cardiovascular risk factors were randomly assigned to either dulaglutide (n=4949) or an equal volume of placebo (n=4952). During a median follow-up of 5·4 years, cerebrovascular and other cardiovascular outcomes were ascertained and adjudicated. 158 (3·2%) of 4949 participants assigned to dulaglutide and 205 (4·1%) of 4952 participants assigned to placebo had a stroke during follow-up (hazard ratio [HR] 0·76, 95% CI 0·62-0·94; p=0·010). Dulaglutide reduced ischaemic stroke (0·75, 0·59-0·94, p=0·012) but had no effect on haemorrhagic stroke (1·05, 0·55-1·99; p=0·89). Dulaglutide also reduced the composite of non-fatal stroke or all-cause death (0·88, 0·79-0·98; p=0·017) and disabling stroke (0·74, 0·56-0·99; p=0·042). The degree of disability after stroke did not differ by treatment group.

INTERPRETATION

Long-term dulaglutide use might reduce clinically relevant ischaemic stroke in people with type 2 diabetes but does not affect stroke severity.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company.

Risk of first stroke in people with type 2 diabetes and its relation to glycaemic control: A nationwide observational study

AIMS

To compare stroke incidence in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) with that in a matched control group, and to investigate whether glucose exposure in people with T2D can predict a first-time stroke event and mortality.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a nationwide observational cohort study, individuals with T2D were linked in the Swedish National Diabetes Register and matched with five individual population-based control subjects. We calculated crude incidence rates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and used Cox regression and multivariable hazard ratios (HRs), to estimate the risk of stroke and mortality in relation to glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels.

RESULTS

A total of 406 271 people with T2D (age 64.1 ± 12.4 years, 45.7% women) and 2086 440 control subjects (age 64.0 ± 12.4 years, 45.7% women) were included. During a median follow-up of 7.3 years, 26 380 people with T2D (6.5%) versus 92 375 control subjects (4.4%) were diagnosed with a stroke. The incidence rate was 10.12 events per 1000 person-years versus 7.26 events per 1000 person-years (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.52-1.56). In the T2D group after multivariable adjustments, the HRs for stroke stratified by HbA1c level were: 54-64 mmol/mol: 1.27 (95% CI 1.22-1.32); 65-75 mmol/mol: 1.68 (95% CI 1.60-1.76); 76-86 mmol/mol: 1.89 (95% CI, 1.75-2.05); and > 87 mmol/mol: 2.14 (95% CI 1.90-2.42), respectively, compared with the reference category of HbA1c ≤53 mmol/mol. There was a stepwise increased risk of death after stroke, for every 10-mmol/mol categorical increment of HbA1c (HR 1.71; 95% CI 1.47-2.00) for the highest HbA1c category.

CONCLUSIONS

An increased risk of stroke and death was associated with poor glycaemic control in people with T2D.