Controversy about the relationship between sulfonylurea use and cardiovascular events and mortality

Prescription patterns and therapeutic effects of second-line drugs in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Analysis of claims data for metformin and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors as the first-line hypoglycemic agents

BACKGROUND

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is) and metformin are the most frequently prescribed first-line drugs for Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We investigated the risk of cardiovascular events by second-line treatment type in these patients.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Patients with T2D, prescribed either metformin or DPP4i as a first-line drug, were identified in claims data from Japanese acute care hospitals. The primary and secondary outcomes were cumulative risks of MI or stroke and of death, respectively, from second-line treatment initiation.

RESULTS

Patients prescribed first-line metformin or DPP4i was 16,736 and 74,464, respectively. In patients receiving first-line DPP4i, the death incidence was lower in those receiving second-line metformin than in those receiving second-line sulfonylurea (p < 0.001), whereas the primary outcome was not significantly different. No significant differences were observed for either outcome when DPP4is and metformin were used as first- and second-line drugs or vice versa.

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin was suggested to have larger effect to reduce death than sulfonylurea in patients receiving first-line DPP4i. The order of first- and second-line for the DPP4i and metformin combination did not affect the outcomes. Given the nature of the study design, certain limitations, including potential under-adjustment for confounders, should be considered.

Role and mechanism(s) of incretin-dependent therapies for treating diabetes mellitus

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a worldwide ailment which leads to chronic complications like cardiac disorders, renal perturbations, limb amputation and blindness. Type one diabetes (T1DM), Type two diabetes (T2DM), Another types of diabetes, such as genetic errors in function of β-cell and action of insulin, cystic fibrosis, chemical-instigated diabetes or following tissue transplantation), and pregnancy DM (GDM). In response to nutritional ingestion, the gut may release a pancreatic stimulant that affects carbohydrate metabolism. The duodenum produces a 'chemical excitant' that stimulates pancreatic output, and researchers have sought to cure diabetes using gut extract injections, coining the word 'incretin' to describe the phenomena. Incretins include GIP and GLP-1. The 'enteroinsular axis' is the link between pancreas and intestine. Nutrient, neuronal and hormonal impulses from intestine to cells secreting insulin were thought to be part of this axis. In addition, the hormonal component, incretin, must meet two requirements: (1) it secreted by foods, mainly carbohydrates, and (2) it must induce an insulinotropic effect which is glucose-dependent. In this review, we clarify the ability of using incretin-dependent treatments for treating DM.

Trends in First-Line Glucose-Lowering Drug Use in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes in Light of Emerging Evidence for SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated recent use trends and predictors of first-line antidiabetes treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Using two large U.S. health insurance databases (Clinformatics and Medicare), we identified adult patients with type 2 diabetes who initiated antidiabetes treatment from 2013 through 2019. Quarterly trends in use of first-line antidiabetes treatment were plotted overall and stratified by cardiovascular disease (CVD). Multinomial logistic regressions were fit to estimate predictors of first-line antidiabetes treatment, using metformin, the recommended first-line treatment for type 2 diabetes, as the common referent.

RESULTS

Metformin was the most frequently initiated medication, used by 80.6% of Medicare beneficiaries and 83.1% of commercially insured patients. Sulfonylureas were used by 8.7% (Medicare) and 4.7% (commercial). Both populations had low use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i, 0.8% [Medicare] and 1.7% [commercial]) and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1Ra; 1.0% [Medicare] and 3.5% [commercial]), with increasing trends over time (P < 0.01). Initiators of antidiabetes drugs with established cardiovascular benefits (SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA) were more likely to be younger and had prevalent CVD or higher socioeconomic status compared with initiators of metformin.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adult patients with type 2 diabetes, metformin was by far the most frequent first-line treatment. While the use of SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA was low from 2013 through 2019, it increased among patients with CVD.

Prescription of Sulphonylureas among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Italy: Results from the Retrospective, Observational Multicentre Cross-Sectional SUSCIPE (Sulphonyl_UreaS_Correct_Internal_Prescription_Evaluation) Study

INTRODUCTION

Recent guidelines for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) provide evidence supporting limited use of sulphonylureas (SUs), especially in specific risk patient categories, yet data from national registries still suggest their widespread use. The aim of this study was to investigate characteristics of patients with diabetes treated with SUs and quantify the proportion of patients that met the recommendations for use of SUs by recent guidelines and of those presenting characteristics representing an inappropriate prescription risk (IPR).

METHODS

A multicenter, retrospective, cross-sectional, observational study in patients with T2DM receiving treatment with SUs (as monotherapy or in combination with another diabetes therapy) was conducted between 2017 and 2018 in 22 outpatient diabetes clinics across Italy. Exclusion criteria were type 1 diabetes, diabetes mellitus secondary to other conditions, and presence of severe/life-threatening diseases.

RESULTS

A total of 510 patients with T2DM (306 men, 204 women; mean age ± standard deviation 69.8 ± 9.3 years) who were receiving treatment with a SU (as monotherapy or in combination therapy) were assessed in the study. Overall, 70.6% [n = 360; 95% confidence interval (CI) 66.4%, 74.5%] were assessed to have an IPR. Of these, approximately half presented one factor for risk of inappropriate prescription, and 27 and 10.6% presented two and three factors, respectively. In terms of factors contributing to the total burden of risk of inappropriate treatment with SUs, 37.5% (95% CI 33.2%, 41.8%) of all patients were obese; 33.3% (95% CI 29.3%, 37.6%)] were aged ≥ 75 years; 18.6% (95% CI 15.3%, 22.3%) had a history of cardiovascular disease; 14.1% (95% CI 11.2%, 17.4%) had chronic renal insufficiency; 1.8% (95% CI 0.8%, 3.3%) had a history of severe hypoglycemia; 1.8% (95% CI 0.8%; 3.3%) had cognitive impairment; and 2.4% (95% CI 1.2%, 4.1%) had a risky occupation.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study provide evidence of a high rate of inappropriate SU prescription risk among patients with T2DM, especially among those with overweight/obesity, older age, history of cardiovascular disease, and hypoglycemia.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Comparative Safety of Sulfonylureas and the Risk of Sudden Cardiac Arrest and Ventricular Arrhythmia

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between individual antidiabetic sulfonylureas and outpatient-originating sudden cardiac arrest and ventricular arrhythmia (SCA/VA).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using 1999-2010 U.S. Medicaid claims from five large states. Exposures were determined by incident use of glyburide, glimepiride, or glipizide. Glipizide served as the reference exposure, as its effects are believed to be highly pancreas specific. Outcomes were ascertained by a validated ICD-9-based algorithm indicative of SCA/VA (positive predictive value ∼85%). Potential confounding was addressed by adjustment for multinomial high-dimensional propensity scores included as continuous variables in a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Of sulfonylurea users under study (N = 519,272), 60.3% were female and 34.9% non-Hispanic Caucasian, and the median age was 58.0 years. In 176,889 person-years of sulfonylurea exposure, we identified 632 SCA/VA events (50.5% were immediately fatal) for a crude incidence rate of 3.6 per 1,000 person-years. Compared with glipizide, propensity score-adjusted hazard ratios for SCA/VA were 0.82 (95% CI 0.69-0.98) for glyburide and 1.10 (0.89-1.36) for glimepiride. Numerous secondary analyses showed a very similar effect estimate for glyburide; yet, not all CIs excluded the null.

CONCLUSIONS

Glyburide may be associated with a lower risk of SCA/VA than glipizide, consistent with a very small clinical trial suggesting that glyburide may reduce ventricular tachycardia and isolated ventricular premature complexes. This potential benefit must be contextualized by considering putative effects of different sulfonylureas on other cardiovascular end points, cerebrovascular end points, all-cause death, and hypoglycemia.

Pro- and Antiarrhythmic Actions of Sulfonylureas: Mechanistic and Clinical Evidence

Sulfonylureas are the most commonly used second-line drug class for treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). While the cardiovascular safety of sulfonylureas has been examined in several trials and nonrandomized studies, little is known of their specific effects on sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) and related serious arrhythmic outcomes. This knowledge gap is striking, because persons with DM are at increased risk of SCA. In this review, we explore the influence of sulfonylureas on the risk of serious arrhythmias, with specific foci on ischemic preconditioning, cardiac excitability, and serious hypoglycemia as putative mechanisms. Elucidating the relationship between individual sulfonylureas and serious arrhythmias is critical, especially as the diabetes epidemic intensifies and SCA incidence increases in persons with diabetes.