Comparative cardiovascular effectiveness of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists versus sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes: A population-based cohort study

Comparative safety and cardiovascular effectiveness of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in nursing homes

AIM

Studies examining the safety and effectiveness of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) versus glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) among community-dwelling adults may not generalize to nursing home (NH) residents, who are typically older and more multimorbid. We compared the safety and cardiovascular effectiveness of SGLT2is and GLP-1RAs among US NH residents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eligible individuals were aged ≥66 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus and initiated an SGLT2i or GLP-1RA in an NH between 2013 and 2018. Safety outcomes included fall-related injuries, hypoglycaemia, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), urinary tract infection or genital infection, and acute kidney injury in the year following treatment initiation. Cardiovascular effectiveness outcomes included death, major adverse cardiovascular events and hospitalization for heart failure. Per-protocol adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using stabilized inverse probability of treatment and censoring weighted cause-specific hazard regression models accounting for 127 covariates.

RESULTS

The study population included 7710 residents (31.08% SGLT2i, 68.92% GLP-1RA). Compared with GLP-1RA initiators, SGLT2i initiators had higher rates of DKA (HR 1.95, 95% confidence limits 1.27, 2.99) and death (HR 1.18, 95% confidence limits 1.02, 1.36). Rates of urinary tract infection or genital infection, acute kidney injury, major adverse cardiovascular events, and heart failure were also elevated, while rates of fall-related injuries and hypoglycaemia were reduced, but all estimates were imprecise and highly compatible with no difference.

CONCLUSIONS

SGLT2is do not have superior, and may have inferior, effectiveness compared with GLP-1RAs for cardiovascular and mortality outcomes in NH residents. Residents initiating SGLT2is should be monitored closely for DKA.

Comparison of cardiovascular outcomes of new antihyperglycemic agents in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a meta-analysis

AIMS

The study aims to provide comprehensive evidence for the selection of agents in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients with cardiovascular risk and summarize the lasted evidence for the cardiovascular effects of sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) in patients with heart failure (HF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Several online databases were searched. All studies that explored the cardiovascular effects of SGLT2i or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP1-RA) were screened and reviewed. A total of 38 studies were included. Compared with GLP1-RA, the use of SGLT2i significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular death [risk ratio (RR) = 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.44-0.58], hospitalization of heart failure (HHF) (RR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.74-0.80), death from any cause (RR = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.60-0.68), and myocardial infarction (MI) (RR = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.76-0.87). However, SGLT2i significantly increased the risk of stroke (RR = 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.17). Compared with the control group, SGLT2i treatment reduced the risk of cardiovascular death by 14% (RR = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.94), HHF by 25%, and death from any cause by 9% in patients with HF, regardless of diabetes status.

CONCLUSIONS

SGLT2i is associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular death, HHF, death from any cause, and MI in patients with T2DM compared with GLP1-RA. In addition, SGLT2i brought more benefits with respect to the effects of cardiovascular death, HHF, and death from any cause in patients with HF, regardless of diabetes status.

Cardiorenal effectiveness of empagliflozin vs. glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: final-year results from the EMPRISE study

BACKGROUND

No randomized clinical trials have directly compared the cardiorenal effectiveness of empagliflozin and GLP-1RA agents with demonstrated cardioprotective effects in patients with a broad spectrum of cardiovascular risk. We reported the final-year results of the EMPRISE study, a monitoring program designed to evaluate the cardiorenal effectiveness of empagliflozin across broad patient subgroups.

METHODS

We identified patients ≥ 18 years old with type 2 diabetes who initiated empagliflozin or GLP-1RA from 2014 to 2019 using US Medicare and commercial claims databases. After 1:1 propensity score matching using 143 baseline characteristics, we evaluated risks of outcomes including myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke, hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE - MI, stroke, or cardiovascular mortality), a composite of HHF or cardiovascular mortality, and progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) (in patients with chronic kidney disease stages 3-4). We estimated hazard ratios (HR) and rate differences (RD) per 1,000 person-years, overall and within subgroups of age, sex, baseline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), and heart failure (HF).

RESULTS

We identified 141,541 matched pairs. Compared with GLP-1RA, empagliflozin was associated with similar risks of MI or stroke [HR: 0.99 (0.92, 1.07); RD: -0.23 (-1.25, 0.79)], and lower risks of HHF [HR: 0.50 (0.44, 0.56); RD: -2.28 (-2.98, -1.59)], MACE [HR: 0.90 (0.82, 0.99); RD: -2.54 (-4.76, -0.32)], cardiovascular mortality or HHF [HR: 0.77 (0.69, 0.86); RD: -4.11 (-5.95, -2.29)], and ESKD [0.75 (0.60, 0.94); RD: -6.77 (-11.97, -1.61)]. Absolute risk reductions were larger in older patients and in those with baseline ASCVD/HF. They did not differ by sex.

CONCLUSIONS

The cardiovascular benefits of empagliflozin vs. cardioprotective GLP-1RA agents were larger in older patients and in patients with history of ASCVD or HF, while they did not differ by sex. In patients with advanced CKD, empagliflozin was associated with risk reductions of progression to ESKD.

Comparative cardiovascular safety of LABA/LAMA FDC versus LABA/ICS FDC in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a population-based cohort study with a target trial emulation framework

BACKGROUND

Use of combinations of long-acting β2 agonists/long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LABA/LAMA) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is increasing. Nevertheless, existing evidence on cardiovascular risk associated with LABA/LAMA versus another dual combination, LABA/inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), was limited and discrepant.

AIM

The present cohort study aimed to examine comparative cardiovascular safety of LABA/LAMA and LABA/ICS with a target trial emulation framework, focusing on dual fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapies.

METHODS

We identified patients with COPD who initiated LABA/LAMA FDC or LABA/ICS FDC from a nationwide Taiwanese database during 2017-2020. The outcome of interest was a hospitalized composite cardiovascular events of acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, heart failure, cardiac dysrhythmia, and ischemic stroke. Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for composite and individual cardiovascular events after matching up to five LABA/LAMA FDC initiators to one LABA/ICS FDC initiator using propensity scores (PS).

RESULTS

Among 75,926 PS-matched patients, use of LABA/LAMA FDC did not show a higher cardiovascular risk compared to use of LABA/ICS FDC, with a HR of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78-1.01) for the composite events, 0.80 (95% CI, 0.61-1.05) for acute myocardial infarction, 1.48 (95% CI, 0.68-3.25) for unstable angina, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.80-1.24) for congestive heart failure, 0.62 (95% CI, 0.37-1.05) for cardiac dysrhythmia, and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.66-1.02) for ischemic stroke. The results did not vary substantially in several pre-specified sensitivity and subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSION

Our findings provide important reassurance about comparative cardiovascular safety of LABA/LAMA FDC treatment among patients with COPD.

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.

Risk of major adverse limb events in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus receiving sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: A population-based retrospective cohort study

Background: Both sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) have cardiovascular protective effects in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, the comparative risk of GLP-1RA versus SGLT-2i for major adverse limb events remains unknown.

Materials and methods: We studied a nationwide cohort involving 123,048 diabetes patients 20–100 years of age who initiated a SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA during 2012 and 2017. The patients in the two groups were matched by propensity score (PS), and incidence rates for hospitalization for major adverse limb events, critical limb ischemia (CLI) and lower extremity amputation (LEA), were assessed. Cox proportional hazards regression was applied to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) between patients receiving SGLT-2i as compared with GLP-1RA. The modification effects of age, a history of established cardiovascular disease, and chronic kidney disease were examined. In addition, use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) was chosen as a second active comparator.

Results: After PS-matching, a total of 13,378 SGLT-2i and 13,378 GLP-1RA initiators were identified. Use of SGLT-2i was not associated with an increased risk for hospitalization for CLI and LEA, either compared with GLP-1RA (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.77–1.65 and 1.27; 95% CI, 0.63–2.55, respectively) or compared with DPP-4i use (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.75–1.50 and HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.42–1.53, respectively). Although the study was underpowered to explore potential effect modification, a trend of higher risks for LEA was noted among SGLT-2i users with cardiovascular disease as compared with either GLP-1RA or DPP-4i.

Conclusion: Use of SGLT-2i was not associated with higher risks for hospitalization for CLI and LEA as compared with reference drugs. Further large-scale studies are needed for a precise risk estimation.