Antihyperglycemic treatment in diabetics with coronary disease: increased metformin-associated mortality over a 5-year follow-up

Association of Metformin with the Mortality and Incidence of Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Pre-existing Cardiovascular Diseases

INTRODUCTION

Whether metformin reduces all-cause cardiovascular mortality and the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular diseases (CVD) remains inconclusive. Some randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies have shown that metformin is associated with an increased risk of mortality and cardiovascular events.

METHODS

We conducted a pooling synthesis to assess the effects of metformin in all-cause cardiovascular mortality and incidence of cardiovascular events in patients with CVD. Studies published up to October 2021 in PubMed or Embase with a registration in PROSPERO (CRD42020189905) were collected. Both RCT and cohort studies were included. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% CI were pooled across various trials using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

This study enrolled 35 published studies (in 14 publications) for qualitative synthesis and identified 33 studies (published in 26 publications) for quantitative analysis. We analysed a total of 61,704 patients, among them 58,271 patients were used to calculate all-cause mortality while 12,814 patients were used to calculate cardiovascular mortality. Compared with non-metformin control, metformin usage is associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (HR: 0.90; 95% CI 0.83, 0.98; p = 0.01), cardiovascular mortality (HR: 0.89; 95% CI 0.85, 0.94; p < 0.0001), incidence of coronary revascularisation (HR: 0.79; 95% CI 0.64, 0.98; p = 0.03), and heart failure (HR: 0.90; 95% CI 0.87, 0.94; p < 0.0001) in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular diseases.

CONCLUSION

Metformin use is associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, incidence of coronary revascularisation, and heart failure in patients with CVD; however, metformin usage was not associated with reduction in the incidence of myocardial infarction, angina, or stroke.

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.

Gastrointestinal Mechanisms Underlying the Cardiovascular Effect of Metformin

Metformin, the most widely prescribed drug therapy for type 2 diabetes, has pleiotropic benefits, in addition to its capacity to lower elevated blood glucose levels, including mitigation of cardiovascular risk. The mechanisms underlying the latter remain unclear. Mechanistic studies have, hitherto, focused on the direct effects of metformin on the heart and vasculature. It is now appreciated that effects in the gastrointestinal tract are important to glucose-lowering by metformin. Gastrointestinal actions of metformin also have major implications for cardiovascular function. This review summarizes the gastrointestinal mechanisms underlying the action of metformin and their potential relevance to cardiovascular benefits.

Sodium-glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors: Moving Beyond the Glycemic Treatment Goal

Revelations of the multifactorial pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) that extend beyond the role of insulin and glucose utilization have been crucial in redefining the treatment paradigm. The focus of treatment is currently directed towards achieving wide-ranging targets encompassing the management of cardiovascular comorbidities that have been evidenced as indispensable aspects of T2DM. While most currently prescribed antihyperglycemic agents have little or no effect on reducing cardiovascular risks, some have been associated with undesirable effects on common risk factors such as weight gain and cardiovascular sequelae. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are newer additions to the array of therapeutic agents for T2DM that have demonstrated robust glycemic control as mono and add-on therapies. Their unique renal mode of action, independent of insulin modulation, confers complementary metabolic benefits. By virtue of these effects, SGLT2i may have a distinct role in the revised treatment recommendations by established working groups such as the American Diabetes Association and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists that advocate a more comprehensive management of T2DM, not restricting to glycemic targets. The current review gives an overview of the changing treatment needs for T2DM and discusses the nonglycemic effects of SGLT2i. It provides an updated summary on the efficacy of canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, and empagliflozin in promoting weight loss, stabilizing blood pressure, and other favorable metabolic effects.

Antidiabetic treatment with gliptins: focus on cardiovascular effects and outcomes

The traditional oral pharmacological therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been based on the prescription of metformin, a biguanide, as first line antihyperglycemic agent world over. It has been demonstrated that after 3 years of treatment, approximately 50 % of diabetic patients could achieve acceptable glucose levels with monotherapy; but by 9 years this had declined to only 25 %. Therefore, the implementation of a combined pharmacological therapy acting via different pathways becomes necessary, and its combination with a compound of the sulfonylurea group was along decades the most frequently employed prescription in routine clinical practice. Meglitinides, glitazones and alpha-glucosidase inhibitors were subsequently developed, but the five mentioned groups of oral antihyperglycemic agents are associated with variable degrees of undesirable or even severe cardiovascular events. The gliptins—also called dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors—are an additional group of antidiabetic compounds with increasing clinical use. We review the status of the gliptins with emphasis on their capabilities to positively or negatively affect the cardiovascular system, and their potential involvement in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Alogliptin, anagliptin, linagliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, teneligliptin and vildagliptin are the compounds currently in clinical use. Regardless differences in chemical structure and metabolic pathways, gliptins as a group exert favorable changes in experimental models. These changes, as an almost general rule, include improved endothelial function, reduction of inflammatory markers, oxidative stress ischemia/reperfusion injury and atherogenesis. In addition, increased adiponectin levels and modest decreases in lipidemia and blood pressure were reported. In clinical settings, several trials—notably the longer one, employing sitagliptin, with a mean follow-up period of 3 years—did not show an increased risk for ischemic events. Anyway, it should be emphasized that the encouraging results from basic science were not yet translated into clinical evidence, probably due the multiple and pleiotropic enzymatic effects of DPP4 inhibition. Moreover, when employing saxagliptin, while the drug was not associated with an augmented risk for ischemic events, it should be pinpointed that the rate of hospitalization for heart failure was significantly increased. Gliptins as a group constitute a widely accepted therapy for the management of T2DM, usually as a second-line medication. Nonetheless, for the time being, a definite relationship between gliptins treatment and improved cardiovascular outcomes remains uncertain and needs yet to be proven.

Association of sulphonylurea treatment with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

We conducted a meta-analysis of cohort and case-control studies to evaluate all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who received sulphonylurea (SU) treatment, when compared to any other diabetes treatment. Only studies reporting raw data on mortality during SU treatment were included. Data were combined using random-effects (RE) models. Unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) are presented. Of 4991 publication titles and abstracts reviewed, 20 studies (n = 551,912 patients) were included. For cohort studies (n = 276,050), patients receiving SU monotherapy or combination treatment had significantly higher all-cause and CV mortality risks compared to any non-SU treatment [all-cause, 13 studies: OR = 1.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.48-2.49; CV, 5 studies: OR = 2.72, 95% CI = 1.95-3.79]. Validity was limited by the high treatment group heterogeneity (I (2) > 90%) and study-inherent biases/design differences. In conclusion, patients receiving SU treatment had increased all-cause and CV mortality risks. However, the meta-analysis was limited by the high heterogeneity of non-randomized studies.

The role of co-morbidity in the selection of antidiabetic pharmacotherapy in type-2 diabetes

Metformin is, if not contraindicated and if tolerated, usually preferred over other antidiabetic drugs for the first line treatment of type-2 diabetes. The particular decision on which antidiabetic agent to use is based on variables such as efficacy, cost, potential side effects, effects on weight, comorbidities, hypoglycemia, risk, and patient preferences. However, there is no guidance how to consider these in the selection of antidiabetic drug treatment. In this work, we aimed to summarize available evidence and tried to give pragmatic treatment recommendations from a clinical practice perspective.

There are clear contraindications for some drugs in those with impaired renal and liver function and precautions in those with heart failure for the use of metformin (NYHA III-IV) and glitazones. On the other hand, GLP-1 analogs, DPP-4 inhibitors and acarbose are generally less critical and can be used in the majority of patients. We identified the following gaps with respect to the selection of antidiabetic drug treatment in patients with co-morbid disease conditions: 1) Guidelines fail to give advice on the use of specific antidiabetic drugs in patients with co-morbidity. 2) The literature is deficient in studies documenting antidiabetic drug use in patients with severely impaired renal function, diabetic retinopathy, cerebrovascular disease and systolic heart failure. 3) Further there are no specific data on patients with multiple of these co-morbid disease conditions. We postulate that differential use of antidiabetic drugs in patients with co-morbid disease constellations will help to reduce treatment related complications and might improve prognosis.

Metformin revisited: a critical review of the benefit-risk balance in at-risk patients with type 2 diabetes

Metformin is unanimously considered a first-line glucose-lowering agent. Theoretically, however, it cannot be prescribed in a large proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes because of numerous contraindications that could lead to an increased risk of lactic acidosis. Various observational data from real-life have shown that many diabetic patients considered to be at risk still receive metformin and often without appropriate dose adjustment, yet apparently with no harm done and particularly no increased risk of lactic acidosis. More interestingly, recent data have suggested that type 2 diabetes patients considered at risk because of the presence of traditional contraindications may still derive benefit from metformin therapy with reductions in morbidity and mortality compared with other glucose-lowering agents, especially sulphonylureas. The present review analyzes the benefit-risk balance of metformin therapy in special populations, namely, patients with stable coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndrome or myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, renal impairment or chronic kidney disease, hepatic dysfunction and chronic respiratory insufficiency, all conditions that could in theory increase the risk of lactic acidosis. Special attention is also paid to elderly patients with type 2 diabetes, a population that is growing rapidly, as older patients can accumulate several comorbidities classically considered contraindications to the use of metformin. A review of the recent scientific literature suggests that reassessment of the contraindications of metformin is now urgently needed to prevent physicians from prescribing the most popular glucose-lowering therapy in everyday clinical practice outside of the official recommendations.

Cardiovascular risk factor management of myocardial infarction patients with and without diabetes in the Netherlands between 2002 and 2006: a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data

OBJECTIVE

We examined levels and trends in cardiovascular risk factors and drug treatment in myocardial infarction (MI) patients with and without diabetes.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis of baseline Alpha Omega Trial data, a randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

32 hospitals in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, we had 1014 MI patients with diabetes (74% men) and 3823 without diabetes (79% men) aged 60-80 years, analysed over the period 2002-2006.

RESULTS

Between 2002 and 2006, a significantly decreasing trend in the prevalence of obesity (-5%, p(trend)=0.02) and in systolic blood pressure (BP) levels (-5 mm Hg, p(trend)<0.0001) was demonstrated in non-diabetic patients, but not in diabetic patients. In 2006, obesity, mean systolic BP and serum triglyceride levels were significantly higher, whereas high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were lower in diabetic patients compared to those without. Prescription of antihypertensive drug (diabetic vs non-diabetic patients respectively, 95% vs 93%, p=0.08) and statin treatment were high (86% and 90%, p=0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

A high proportion of MI patients with and without diabetes was similarly treated with cardiovascular drugs. In spite of high drug treatment levels, more adverse risk factors were found in patients with diabetes.

[Advances in the prevention, diagnosis and therapy of vascular diseases]

Atherosclerosis is a systemic disease affecting the coronary, carotid, intracerebral, renal and peripherial arteries. The early morphological and functional impairments could be detected in the second or third decades of life and their progression depend on the number and severity of risk factors and individual susceptility. Although the vascular risk factors (smoking, overweight, age, unhealthy diet, lack of physical exercise, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease and dyslipidemia) are the same and common in the different vascular diseases, the present clinical routine artificially classifies the diagnosis and therapy of different vascular diseases into different subfields of medicine with the negative impact of possible polypragmasia. Recently, worldwide health surveys (e.g. REACH registry) have proven the usefulness of a holistic approach in the diagnosis and therapy of multiorgan-affected vascular patients. This review summarizes the multidisciplinary advances and future perspective of vascular diseases.

Overcoming barriers to diabetes control in geriatrics

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes mellitus is approaching epidemic proportions in most countries and has captured the attention of physicians at local, national and global levels. The elderly population remains at a higher risk for diabetes mellitus (1), and the disease poses unique concerns for geriatricians, primary care physicians, nurses and specialised pharmacists who provide care to the elderly. Glycaemic control, geriatric-related syndromes and cardiovascular risk factors considerably affect the elderly patient's functional status and life expectancy (2). Geriatric syndromes may include polypharmacy, chronic pain, injurious falls, cognitive impairment, urinary incontinence and depression. Higher rates of premature death; functional disability; and chronic illnesses, such as hypertension, cerebrovascular accidents, dementia and coronary artery disease, often affect elderly diabetic patients.

DISCUSSION

Collaborative efforts are continually needed to allocate and maximise utilisation of resources to help empower older adults with diabetes to overcome barriers to disease management. Healthcare providers are increasingly challenged by the complexity of problems that face old patients, and must therefore be prepared to assess and treat diabetes mellitus within the milieu of many geriatric-related chronic illnesses. Healthcare providers must tailor individualised treatment methods, with the ultimate goal of not only achieving laboratory norms but also improving the quality of life for this vulnerable population.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for extra care and overcoming barriers to diabetes control in old patients as a dynamic and a continuous task that needs coordination of healthcare systems and professionals at all levels of care.

Management of hyperglycemia in geriatric patients with diabetes mellitus: South Asian consensus guidelines

Asia is home to four of the world's five largest diabetic populations, two of them being South Asian nations, namely, India and Pakistan. This problem is compounded by a substantial rise in the elderly population in Asian countries. On the other hand, the heterogeneous health condition and multiple co-morbidities make the care of chronic disease in the elderly a challenging task. The aim of the South Asian Consensus Guidelines is to provide evidence-based recommendations to assist healthcare providers in the rational management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the elderly population. Current Guidelines used systematic reviews of available evidence to form its key recommendations. No evidence grading was done for the purpose of this manuscript. The clinical questions of the guidelines, the methodology of literature search, and medical writing strategy were finalized by consultations in person and through mail. The South Asian Consensus guideline emphasizes tailoring of glycemic goals for patients based on age, co-morbid conditions especially that of cardiovascular system, risk of hypoglycemia, and life expectancy. It also recommends cautious use of available pharmacotherapy in geriatric patients with diabetes. The primary principle of diabetes therapy should be to achieve euglycemia, without causing hypoglycemia. Appropriate use of modern insulins and oral drugs, including incretin mimetics will help physicians achieve this aim.

Multiple outcomes associated with the use of metformin and sulphonylureas in type 2 diabetes: a population-based cohort study in Italy

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of metformin and sulphonylureas on the risks of switching to insulin therapy, hospitalisation for macrovascular disease and all-cause mortality.

METHODS

The 70,437 residents of the Italian Region of Lombardy aged 40 to 90 years who started diabetes treatment with metformin or sulphonylureas during 2001-2003 entered the study and were followed until July 2007. We estimated the effects of the first-line agent, early compliance, and persistence with first-line therapy on the risks of switching to insulin, hospitalisation for macrovascular disease and all-cause mortality, by fitting a multistate model and adjusting for age, gender and selected clinical factors.

RESULTS

Compared with patients who started on metformin, those who started on sulphonylureas were at a higher risk of switching to insulin (adjusted hazard ratio and 95% CI, 1.55; 1.43, 1.68), hospitalisation (1.15; 1.08, 1.21), and death (1.37; 1.26, 1.49). Compared with patients who stayed on sulphonylureas for 3 months or less, those on sulphonylureas for more than 9 months had an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.24 (1.13, 1.35) for switching to insulin and 1.14 (1.05, 1.23) for hospitalisation. The risks of switching to insulin and hospitalisation were both increased among patients who switched from metformin to another oral hypoglycaemic agent or combined initial monotherapy with another agent.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides evidence that the risks of switching to insulin, hospitalisation because of macrovascular events and death changes according to the first prescribed oral hypoglycaemic agent, as well as to the early compliance and persistence with such agent.

Risk of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis with metformin use in type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Metformin is an oral anti-hyperglycemic agent that has been shown to reduce total mortality compared to other anti-hyperglycemic agents, in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Metformin, however, is thought to increase the risk of lactic acidosis, and has been considered to be contraindicated in many chronic hypoxemic conditions that may be associated with lactic acidosis, such as cardiovascular, renal, hepatic and pulmonary disease, and advancing age.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis, and to evaluate blood lactate levels, for those on metformin treatment compared to placebo or non-metformin therapies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A comprehensive search was performed of electronic databases to identify studies of metformin treatment. The search was augmented by scanning references of identified articles, and by contacting principal investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Prospective trials and observational cohort studies in patients with type 2 diabetes of least one month duration were included if they evaluated metformin, alone or in combination with other treatments, compared to placebo or any other glucose-lowering therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis was recorded as cases per patient-years, for metformin treatment and for non-metformin treatments. The upper limit for the true incidence of cases was calculated using Poisson statistics. In a second analysis lactate levels were measured as a net change from baseline or as mean treatment values (basal and stimulated by food or exercise) for treatment and comparison groups. The pooled results were recorded as a weighted mean difference (WMD) in mmol/L, using the fixed-effect model for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Pooled data from 347 comparative trials and cohort studies revealed no cases of fatal or nonfatal lactic acidosis in 70,490 patient-years of metformin use or in 55,451 patients-years in the non-metformin group. Using Poisson statistics the upper limit for the true incidence of lactic acidosis per 100,000 patient-years was 4.3 cases in the metformin group and 5.4 cases in the non-metformin group. There was no difference in lactate levels, either as mean treatment levels or as a net change from baseline, for metformin compared to non-metformin therapies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from prospective comparative trials or from observational cohort studies that metformin is associated with an increased risk of lactic acidosis, or with increased levels of lactate, compared to other anti-hyperglycemic treatments.

Risk of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis with metformin use in type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Metformin is an oral anti-hyperglycemic agent that has been shown to reduce total mortality compared to other anti-hyperglycemic agents, in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Metformin, however, is thought to increase the risk of lactic acidosis, and has been considered to be contraindicated in many chronic hypoxemic conditions that may be associated with lactic acidosis, such as cardiovascular, renal, hepatic and pulmonary disease, and advancing age.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis, and to evaluate blood lactate levels, for those on metformin treatment compared to placebo or non-metformin therapies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A comprehensive search was performed of electronic databases to identify studies of metformin treatment. The search was augmented by scanning references of identified articles, and by contacting principal investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Prospective trials and observational cohort studies in patients with type 2 diabetes of least one month duration were included if they evaluated metformin, alone or in combination with other treatments, compared to placebo or any other glucose-lowering therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis was recorded as cases per patient-years, for metformin treatment and for non-metformin treatments. The upper limit for the true incidence of cases was calculated using Poisson statistics. In a second analysis lactate levels were measured as a net change from baseline or as mean treatment values (basal and stimulated by food or exercise) for treatment and comparison groups. The pooled results were recorded as a weighted mean difference (WMD) in mmol/L, using the fixed-effect model for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Pooled data from 347 comparative trials and cohort studies revealed no cases of fatal or nonfatal lactic acidosis in 70,490 patient-years of metformin use or in 55,451 patients-years in the non-metformin group. Using Poisson statistics the upper limit for the true incidence of lactic acidosis per 100,000 patient-years was 4.3 cases in the metformin group and 5.4 cases in the non-metformin group. There was no difference in lactate levels, either as mean treatment levels or as a net change from baseline, for metformin compared to non-metformin therapies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from prospective comparative trials or from observational cohort studies that metformin is associated with an increased risk of lactic acidosis, or with increased levels of lactate, compared to other anti-hyperglycemic treatments.

Sulfonylureas and prognosis after myocardial infarction in patients with diabetes: a population-based follow-up study

BACKGROUND

The cardiovascular safety, including risk of myocardial infarction (MI), of individual sulfonylureas (SUs) may differ. It remains uncertain whether treatment with individual SUs influences prognosis following MI.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide population-based follow-up study among all Danish patients hospitalized with first-time MI from 1996 to 2004. From the national health databases, we identified 3930 MI patients who used SUs at the time of admission. We computed mortality rates and rates of MI and heart failure readmission according to type of SU and used Cox's proportional hazards regression analysis to compute hazard ratios (HRs) as estimates of relative risk controlling for differences in prognostic covariates.

RESULTS

The 30-day and 1-year mortality after MI among SU users was 22.0% and 35.3%, respectively. We found no substantial differences in 30-day and 1-year mortality among users of different SUs. Use of gliclazide in monotherapy showed a trend towards lower mortality; adjusted HR of 1-year mortality 0.70 (95% CI: 0.48-1.00). Users of the different SUs appeared to have similar risks of new MI and heart failure following MI.

CONCLUSIONS

The prognosis after MI was not substantially influenced by the choice of SU.

A cardiologic approach to non-insulin antidiabetic pharmacotherapy in patients with heart disease

Classical non-insulin antihyperglycemic drugs currently approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) comprise five groups: biguanides, sulfonylureas, meglitinides, glitazones and alpha-glucosidase inhibitors. Novel compounds are represented by the incretin mimetic drugs like glucagon like peptide-1 (GLP-1), the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, dual peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR) agonists (glitazars) and amylin mimetic drugs. We review the cardiovascular effects of these drugs in an attempt to improve knowledge regarding their potential risks when treating T2DM in cardiac patients. Metformin may lead to lethal lactic acidosis, especially in patients with clinical conditions that predispose to this complication, such as recent myocardial infarction, heart or renal failure. Sulfonylureas exert their effect by closing the ATP-dependent potassium channels. This prevents the opening of these channels during myocardial ischemia, impeding the necessary hyperpolarization that protects the cell. The combined sulfonylurea/metformin therapy reveals additive effects on mortality in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Meglitinides effects are similar to those of sulfonylureas, due to their almost analogous mechanism of action. Glitazones lower leptin levels, leading to weight gain and are unsafe in NYHA class III or IV. The long-term effects of alpha-glucosidase inhibitors on morbidity and mortality rates is yet unknown. The incretin GLP-1 is associated with reductions in body weight and appears to present positive inotropic effects. DPP-4 inhibitors influences on the cardiovascular system seem to be neutral and patients do not gain weight. The future of glitazars is presently uncertain following concerns about their safety. The amylin mimetic drug paramlintide, while a satisfactory adjuvant medication in insulin-dependent diabetes, is unlikely to play a major role in the management of T2DM. Summarizing the present information it can be stated that 1. Four out the five classical oral antidiabetic drug groups present proven or potential cardiac hazards; 2. These hazards are not mere 'side effects', but biochemical phenomena which are deeply rooted in the drugs' mechanism of action; 3. Current data indicate that the combined glibenclamide/metformin therapy seems to present special risk and should be avoided in the long-term management of T2DM with proven CAD; 4. Glitazones should be avoided in patients with overt heart failure; 5, The novel incretin mimetic drugs and DPP-4 inhibitors--while usually inadequate as monotherapy--appear to be satisfactory adjuvant drugs due to the lack of known undesirable cardiovascular effects; 6. Customized antihyperglycemic pharmacological approaches should be implemented for the achievement of optimal treatment of T2DM patients with heart disease. In this context, it should be carefully taken into consideration whether the leading clinical status is CAD or heart failure.

Relation of severe coronary artery narrowing to insulin or thiazolidinedione use in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes Study)

Patients with diabetes continue to die of coronary artery disease (CAD) at rates 2 to 4 times higher than patients without diabetes, despite advances in treatment of cardiovascular disease. The role of glycemic control therapies, independent of their glucose-lowering effects, on cardiovascular disease is a recurring question. We examined the association of glycemic control therapies with extent of CAD as measured by coronary angiogram obtained at baseline in 1,803 subjects in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial who had type 2 diabetes mellitus, documented moderate to severe CAD, and no previous cardiac revascularization procedures. The association between glycemic control therapy use recorded at baseline and percent coronary artery stenosis and myocardial jeopardy index was analyzed by multiple regression models. Insulin use at study entry was associated with 23% fewer highly stenotic lesions (> or =70%) (p <0.001) and a significantly lower myocardial jeopardy index compared with subjects not on insulin, despite a worse cardiac risk factor profile, more unstable angina, and increased inflammatory markers in insulin users. Subjects taking thiazolidinediones (TZDs) for > or =6 months had 17% fewer highly stenotic lesions (p = 0.02) and significantly lower C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 levels compared with those not taking TZDs. In conclusion, this cross-sectional study of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and CAD showed that treatment with insulin or TZDs was associated with fewer highly stenotic lesions, independent of disease duration, glycemic control, and other risk factors.

Risk of coronary artery disease associated with initial sulphonylurea treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes: a matched case-control study

AIMS

This study sought to assess the risk of developing coronary artery disease (CAD) associated with initial treatment of type 2 diabetes with different sulphonylureas.

METHODS

In type 2 diabetic patients, cases who developed CAD were compared retrospectively with controls that did not. The 20-year risk of CAD at diagnosis of diabetes, using the UKPDS risk engine, was used to match cases with controls.

RESULTS

The 76 cases of CAD were compared with 152 controls. The hazard of developing CAD (95% CI) associated with initial treatment increased by 2.4-fold (1.3-4.3, P=0.004) with glibenclamide; 2-fold (0.9-4.6, P=0.099) with glipizide; 2.9-fold (1.6-5.1, P=0.000) with either, and was unchanged with metformin. The hazard decreased 0.3-fold (0.7-1.7, P=0.385) with glimepiride, 0.4-fold (0.7-1.3, P=0.192) with gliclazide, and 0.4-fold (0.7-1.1, P=0.09) with either.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiating treatment of type 2 diabetes with glibenclamide or glipizide is associated with increased risk of CAD in comparison to gliclazide or glimepiride. If confirmed, this may be important because most Indian patients receive the cheaper older sulphonylureas, and present guidelines do not distinguish between individual agents.

Effect of metformin-containing antidiabetic regimens on all-cause mortality in veterans with type 2 diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE

There are conflicting reports concerning metformin use and mortality rates in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between metformin use and all-cause mortality in veterans with T2DM.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

An observational cohort study involving 2206 patients with T2DM was performed using computerized database from the Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Memphis, TN. All-cause mortality was compared among cohorts of metformin and nonmetformin users. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for all-cause mortality after adjusting for age, race, baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, glycosylated hemoglobin, use of insulin, use of ACE inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers or statins.

RESULTS

The average length of follow-up in metformin and nonmetformin users was 62 +/- 17 and 61 +/- 18 months, respectively. The mean age was 63 +/- 11 years. Crude mortality rates were similar in both groups: 266 (22%) metformin users and 253 (25.3%) nonmetformin users died. There was a trend for improved survival with metformin use (unadjusted HR 0.85, P = 0.07). After multivariate adjustment, metformin users had significantly decreased HR for time to all-cause mortality compared with nonmetformin users (adjusted HR 0.77, P < 0.01). Insulin use was an independent predictor of worsened survival in both univariate and multivariate analyses. In subgroup analysis of patients exposed to insulin, all-cause mortality remained decreased in metformin users (adjusted HR 0.62, P < 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Treatment of T2DM with regimens containing metformin alone or in combination with other hypoglycemic agents was associated with reduced all-cause mortality compared with regimens without metformin.

Type of preadmission glucose-lowering treatment and prognosis among patients hospitalised with myocardial infarction: a nationwide follow-up study

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

We examined whether the type of preadmission glucose-lowering treatments explained differences in mortality rate and risk of readmission with myocardial infarction (MI) and heart failure following first-time hospitalisation for MI in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide population-based follow-up study among all Danish patients hospitalised with first-time MI from 1996 to 2004. Data on use of glucose-lowering drugs and other medications, comorbidities, socioeconomic status, laboratory findings, readmission with MI and heart failure, and death were obtained from medical databases. We computed mortality rates and rates of MI and heart failure readmission, according to type of glucose-lowering treatment and used Cox's proportional hazards regression analysis to compute hazard ratios (HRs) as estimates of relative risks.

RESULTS

We identified 8,494 MI patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The overall cumulative 30 day and 1 year mortality rates were 22.2 and 36.6%, respectively. Patients not receiving any glucose-lowering drugs (adjusted 30 day HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.57-1.10) and users of any combination (adjusted 30 day HR: 1.43, 95% CI: 0.98-2.09) had the lowest and highest mortality rates, respectively, when compared with users of sulfonylureas. We found that glycaemic control had no impact on the risk estimates in a subanalysis including biochemical laboratory data. We found no differences in the risk of new MI and heart failure between the different glucose-lowering agents.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Type of preadmission glucose-lowering treatment in monotherapy is not associated with substantial differences in prognosis following hospitalisation with MI. However, patients treated with any combination had increased mortality rates.

Rationale, design, and methods for glycemic control in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) Trial

A major therapeutic question in considering accelerated atherogenesis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is whether reducing insulin resistance, as a proximal defect of a host of proatherogenic abnormalities including hyperglycemia, will be superior for decreasing mortality and coronary artery disease (CAD) risk compared with treating hyperglycemia to overcome insulin resistance with insulin-providing agents. This question is highly relevant, since earlier targeted glycemic control trials utilizing conventional glucose-lowering strategies that increase insulin levels have generally failed to reduce CAD risk despite markedly reducing microvascular risk. The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial seeks to determine whether primarily using an insulin-sensitizing strategy for treatment of type 2 diabetes is superior when compared with primarily using an insulin-providing strategy with regard to cardiovascular outcomes. This article presents the rationale, design, and methods being used to test the glycemic control hypothesis in BARI 2D.

Sulfonylureas and the risk of myocardial infarction

Patients with diabetes mellitus have an increased risk of coronary artery diseases such as myocardial infarction. Sulfonylureas are used in the treatment of diabetes mellitus and have been linked with adverse cardiovascular effects due to an apparent effect on myocardial ischemic preconditioning. Individual sulfonylureas differ pharmacologically and may have different effects. Although the hypotheses were stimulated by animal studies and experimental studies using intermediate end points, data on the possible clinical implications in humans remain sparse. However, recent data seem reassuring.

Risk of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis with metformin use in type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Metformin is an oral anti-hyperglycemic agent used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The results of the UK Prospective Diabetes Study indicate that metformin treatment is associated with a reduction in total mortality compared to other anti-hyperglycemic treatments. Metformin, however, is thought to increase the risk of lactic acidosis, and is considered to be contraindicated in many chronic hypoxemic conditions that may be associated with lactic acidosis, such as cardiovascular, renal, hepatic and pulmonary disease, and advancing age.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis with metformin use compared to placebo and other glucose-lowering treatments in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. A secondary objective was to evaluate the blood lactate levels for those on metformin treatment compared to placebo or non-metformin therapies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A search was performed of The Cochrane Library (up to 8/2005), MEDLINE (up to 8/2005), EMBASE (up to 11/2000), OLD MEDLINE, and REACTIONS (up to 8/2005), in order to identify all studies of metformin treatment from 1966 to August 2005. The Cumulated Index Medicus was used to search relevant articles from 1959 to 1965. The search was augmented by scanning references of identified articles, and by contacting principal investigators. Date of latest search: August 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Prospective trials in patients with type 2 diabetes that lasted longer than one month were included if they evaluated metformin, alone or in combination with other treatments, compared to placebo or any other glucose-lowering therapy. Observational cohort studies of metformin treatment lasting greater than one month were also included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected trials to be included, assessed study quality and extracted data. The incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis was recorded as cases per patient-years, for metformin treatment and for placebo or other treatments. The upper limit for the true incidence of cases in the metformin and non-metformin groups were calculated using Poisson statistics. In a second analysis lactate levels were measured as a net change from baseline or as mean treatment values (basal and stimulated by food or exercise) for treatment and comparison groups. The pooled results were recorded as a weighted mean difference (WMD) in mmol/L, using the fixed effect model for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Pooled data from 206 comparative trials and cohort studies revealed no cases of fatal or nonfatal lactic acidosis in 47,846 patient-years of metformin use or in 38,221 patients-years in the non-metformin group. Using Poisson statistics with 95% confidence intervals the upper limit for the true incidence of metformin-associated lactic acidosis was 6.3 cases per 100,000 patient-years, and the upper limit for the true incidence of lactic acidosis in the non-metformin group was 7.8 cases per 100,000 patient-years. There was no difference in lactate levels, either as mean treatment levels or as a net change from baseline, for metformin compared to placebo or other non-biguanide therapies. The mean lactate levels were slightly lower for metformin treatment compared to phenformin (WMD -0.75 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.15).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from prospective comparative trials or from observational cohort studies that metformin is associated with an increased risk of lactic acidosis, or with increased levels of lactate, compared to other anti-hyperglycemic treatments if prescribed under the study conditions.

Reduced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality associated with metformin use in subjects with Type 2 diabetes

AIM

Metformin therapy reduces microvascular complications in Type 2 diabetes; questions remain, however, regarding its impact on macrovascular events. This study examined metformin use in relation to risk of cardiovascular-related hospitalization and mortality.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis, using Saskatchewan Health administrative databases to identify new users of oral antidiabetic drugs. Subject groups were defined by medication use during 1991-1999: sulphonylurea monotherapy, metformin monotherapy, or combination therapy. Deaths and non-fatal hospitalizations recorded during the study period were identified as cardiovascular-related from ICD-9 codes. The main outcome was a composite of first non-fatal hospitalization or death. Standard multivariate techniques, including propensity scores, were used to adjust for potential confounding. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the relationship between metformin use and the composite endpoint.

RESULTS

Metformin monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of the composite endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio 0.81; 95% confidence interval 0.68, 0.97) compared with sulphonylurea monotherapy. Combination therapy with meformin and a sulphonylurea was associated with lower mortality, but had similar hospitalization rates, to sulphonylurea monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular-related morbidity and mortality, and combination metformin and sulphonylurea therapy was associated with a reduced risk of fatal cardiovascular events, when compared with sulphonylurea monotherapy.

The role of sulphonylureas in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus

The sulphonylureas act by triggering insulin release from the pancreatic beta cell. A specific site on the adenosine triphosphate (ATP)-sensitive potassium channels is occupied by sulphonylureas leading to closure of the potassium channels and subsequent opening of calcium channels. This results in exocytosis of insulin. The meglitinides are not sulphonylureas but also occupy the sulphonylurea receptor unit coupled to the ATP-sensitive potassium channel. Glibenclamide (glyburide), gliclazide, glipizide and glimepiride are the primary sulphonylureas in current clinical use for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Glibenclamide has a higher frequency of hypoglycaemia than the other agents. With long-term use, there is a progressive decrease in the effectiveness of sulphonylureas. This loss of effect is the result of a reduction in insulin-producing capacity by the pancreatic beta cell and is also seen with other antihyperglycaemic agents. The major adverse effect of sulphonylureas is hypoglycaemia. There is a theoretical concern that sulphonylureas may affect cardiac potassium channels resulting in a diminished response to ischaemia. There are now many choices for initial therapy of type 2 diabetes in addition to sulphonylureas. Metformin and thiazolidinediones affect insulin sensitivity by independent mechanisms. Disaccharidase inhibitors reduce rapid carbohydrate absorption. No single agent appears capable of achieving target glucose levels in the majority of patients with type 2 diabetes. Combinations of agents are successful in lowering glycosylated haemoglobin levels more than with a single agent. Sulphonylureas are particularly beneficial when combined with agents such as metformin that decrease insulin resistance. Sulphonylureas can also be given with a basal insulin injection to provide enhanced endogenous insulin secretion after meals. Sulphonylureas will continue to be used both primarily and as part of combined therapy for most patients with type 2 diabetes.

Treatment modalities of diabetes mellitus and outcomes of acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND

Oral treatments for diabetes mellitus (DM) may have a deleterious effect on acute coronary syndromes (ACS) outcomes.

AIM

We aimed to examine in-hospital mortality among patients with ACS and DM and the impact of anti-DM treatment modalities.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The Euro Heart Survey ACS prospectively enrolled 10484 patients across Europe and the Mediterranean basin. Of the 10214 patients with recorded DM status, 2352 (23.0%) had DM, of whom 562 were on diet alone, 1112 received oral hypoglycaemics, 561 received insulin, and 117 received both. The in-hospital mortality for ST-elevation-ACS was 9.8 and 5.7% for patients with and without DM, respectively, with an adjusted risk (95% confidence interval) of in-hospital mortality of 1.6 (1.2, 2.1). The in-hospital mortality for non-ST-elevation-ACS was 2.8 and 2.0%, accordingly, with an adjusted risk (95% confidence interval) of in-hospital mortality of 1.2 (0.8, 1.9). The in-hospital mortality for undetermined-electrocardiographic-pattern-ACS was 11.5 and 10.9%, accordingly, with an adjusted risk of in-hospital mortality of 1.1 (0.6, 2.0). Among DM patients with ST-elevation-ACS, the adjusted risks of in-hospital mortality were 1.0 for diet therapy, 0.8 (0.4, 1.5) for oral hypoglycaemics, and 1.9 (1.0, 3.8) for insulin; for DM patients and non-ST-elevation-ACS, 1.0 for diet therapy, 2.2 (0.6, 7.8) for oral hypoglycaemics, and 3.5 (1.0, 12.5) for insulin; for DM patients and undetermined-electrocardiographic-pattern-ACS, the adjusted risks of in-hospital mortality were 1.0 for diet therapy, 0.9 (0.2, 4.6) for oral hypoglycaemics, and 2.1 (0.5, 9.5) for insulin.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute coronary syndrome patients with DM, especially those with ST-elevation, had increased in-hospital mortality. Among ACS patients with DM, those receiving insulin had worse outcomes. Outcomes were similar for those on hypoglycaemics or on diet alone.

Association of diabetes mellitus and glycemic control strategies with clinical outcomes after acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is associated with an increased risk for coronary artery disease (CAD) and its complications. The relative effect of glucose-lowering strategies of "insulin provision" versus "insulin sensitization" among patients with CAD remains unclear.

METHODS

To evaluate the associations of diabetes and hypoglycemic strategies with clinical outcomes after acute coronary syndromes, we analyzed data from 15,800 patients enrolled in the SYMPHONY and 2nd SYMPHONY trials.

RESULTS

Compared with nondiabetic patients, patients with diabetes (n = 3101; 19.6%) were older, more often female, more often had prior CAD, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia, and less often were current smokers. The diabetic cohort had higher 90-day unadjusted risk of the composite of death/myocardial infarction (MI)/severe recurrent ischemia (SRI), death/MI, and death alone, as well as a near doubling of 1-year mortality rates. At 1 year, diabetes was associated with significantly higher adjusted risks of death/MI/SRI (OR, 1.3 [95% confidence interval, 1.1, 1.5]) and death/MI (OR, 1.2 [1.0, 1.4]). Hypoglycemic therapy including only insulin and/or sulfonylurea (insulin-providing; n = 1473) was associated with higher 90-day death/MI/SRI compared with therapy that included only biguanide and/or thiazolidinedione therapy (insulin-sensitizing; n = 100) (12.0% vs 5.0%); (adjusted OR, 2.1 [1.2, 3.7]).

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetic patients with acute coronary syndromes had worse clinical outcomes. Although the findings regarding the influence of glycemic-control strategies should be interpreted with caution because of the exploratory nature of the analyses and the relatively small sample size of the insulin-sensitizing group, the improved risk-adjusted outcomes associated with insulin-sensitizing therapy underscore the need to further evaluate treatment strategies for patients with diabetes and CAD.

Lipoprotein risk factors for cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with oral antihyperglycaemic agents

AIMS

To compare lipoprotein risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) treated with a sulphonylurea (SU) compound only, metformin (MET) only, or combined SU + MET.

METHODS

The study population consisted of 62 patients with type 2 DM, whose antihyperglycaemic treatment program had been stable for at least 3 months, divided into three groups: 26 patients in the SU group, 17 patients in the MET group and 19 patients in the SU + MET group. None of the patients were taking lipid-lowering drugs. Fasting venous blood samples were taken to measure concentrations of glucose, total cholesterol, triglycerides (TG), high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) and remnant lipoprotein-cholesterol (RLP-C) as well as for determination of LDL particle diameter.

RESULTS

The three groups were similar in terms of age, gender, body mass index and fasting plasma glucose concentrations. Total cholesterol concentrations were significantly lower (p < 0.05 for trend) in those treated with SU + MET as compared with the other two groups. However, there were no significant differences between the three groups in their plasma concentrations of TG, LDL-C, HDL-C or RLP-C; furthermore, the proportion of individuals within each treatment group with small LDL particle diameter was also not different.

CONCLUSIONS

The lipoprotein profile of patients with type 2 DM, matched for level of fasting hyperglycaemia, was similar irrespective of treatment with SU alone, MET alone or SU + MET. Thus, we could not identify any changes in lipoprotein metabolism that could account for differences in risk of CVD as a function of treatment.

Combination treatment with metformin and glibenclamide versus single-drug therapies in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized, double-blind, comparative study

To compare efficacy and tolerability of combination treatment with metformin and sulfonylurea with each of these drugs alone in the treatment of type 2 diabetes, 88 type 2 diabetic subjects (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] levels, 8.0%+/-1.0%; age, 57.3+/-7.1 years; body mass index [BMI]. 27.0+/-2.6 kg/m2; diabetes duration, 9.8+/-8.2 years; means +/- SD) were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with metformin (500 to 3,000 mg/d), glibenclamide (5 to 15 mg/d), or their combination (metformin 400 to 2,400 mg/d + glibenclamide 2.5 to 15 mg/d) for 6 months. Thereafter, groups were crossed over for the following 6 months. Thus, each patient received metformin or glibenclamide alone, and the combination treatment. Doses were titrated to obtain HbA1c levels < or = 6.0% and fasting plasma glucose levels less than 140 mg/dL. Eighty patients concluded both treatment periods and were included in the analysis of treatment efficacy. In patients receiving metformin or glibenclamide alone, the maximal dose was reached in 21 and 25 patients, respectively; 8 and 15 of these subjects, respectively, required the maximal dose when they were on the combination treatment. During the study, 4 (10.0%) subjects receiving metformin, 7 (17.1%) receiving glibenclamide, and 31 (39.2%) receiving the combination treatment reached HbA1c levels < or = 6.0%. Moreover, when efficacy of the combination treatment on glycemic control was compared with that of single-drug therapies in each individual patient, the combination was significantly more effective than either metformin or glibenclamide (HbA1c after treatment, 6.1%+/-1.1% v 7.3%+/-1.4%, and 6.5%+/-0.7% v 7.6%+/-1.5%, respectively, both P<.0001). In conclusion, combination treatment with metformin and sulfonylurea is more effective than these drugs alone in improving glycemic control in type 2 diabetes, while also allowing a reduction of the dosage of each drug.

Risk of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis with metformin use in type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Metformin is an oral anti-hyperglycemic agent used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The results of the UK Prospective Diabetes Study indicate that metformin treatment is associated with a reduction in total mortality compared to other anti-hyperglycemic treatments. Metformin, however, is thought to increase the risk of lactic acidosis, and is considered to be contraindicated in many chronic hypoxemic conditions that may be associated with lactic acidosis, such as cardiovascular, renal, hepatic and pulmonary disease, and advancing age.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis with metformin use compared to placebo and other glucose-lowering treatments in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. A secondary objective was to evaluate the blood lactate levels for those on metformin treatment compared to placebo or non-metformin therapies.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A search was performed of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (up to 4/2000), Medline (up to 11/2000), Embase (up to 11/2000), Oldmedline, and Reactions (up to 5/2000), in order to identify all studies of metformin treatment from 1966 to November 2000. The Cumulated Index Medicus was used to search relevant articles from 1959 to 1965. The search was augmented by scanning references of identified articles, and by contacting principal investigators. Date of latest search: November 2000.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Prospective trials in patients with type 2 diabetes that lasted longer than one month were included if they evaluated metformin, alone or in combination with other treatments, compared to placebo or any other glucose-lowering therapy. Observational cohort studies of metformin treatment lasting greater than one month were also included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected trials to be included, assessed study quality and extracted data. The incidence of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis was recorded as cases per patient-years, for metformin treatment and for placebo or other treatments. The upper limit for the true incidence of cases in the metformin and non-metformin groups were calculated using Poisson statistics. In a second analysis lactate levels were measured as a net change from baseline or as mean treatment values (basal and stimulated by food or exercise) for treatment and comparison groups. The pooled results were recorded as a weighted mean difference (WMD) in mmol/L, using the fixed effects model for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Pooled data from 176 comparative trials and cohort studies revealed no cases of fatal or nonfatal lactic acidosis in 35,619 patient-years of metformin use or in 30,002 patients-years in the non-metformin group. Using Poisson statistics with 95% confidence intervals the upper limit for the true incidence of metformin-associated lactic acidosis was 8.4 cases per 100,000 patient-years, and the upper limit for the true incidence of lactic acidosis in the non-metformin group was 9 cases per 100,000 patient-years. There was no difference in lactate levels, either as mean treatment levels or as a net change from baseline, for metformin compared to placebo or other non-biguanide therapies. The mean lactate levels were slightly lower for metformin treatment compared to phenformin (WMD -0.75 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.15).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from prospective comparative trials or from observational cohort studies that metformin is associated with an increased risk of lactic acidosis, or with increased levels of lactate, compared to other anti-hyperglycemic treatments if prescribed under the study conditions, taking into account contra-indications.

Decreased mortality associated with the use of metformin compared with sulfonylurea monotherapy in type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between use of metformin and sulfonylurea and mortality in new users of these agents.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Saskatchewan Health databases were used to examine population-based mortality rates for new users of oral antidiabetic agents. Individuals with prescriptions for sulfonylurea or metformin in 1991-1996 and no use in the year prior were identified as new users. Prescription records were prospectively followed for 1-9 years; subjects with any insulin use were excluded. Causes of death were identified based on ICD-9 codes in an electronic vital statistics database. Multivariate logistic regression and survival analyses were used to assess the differences in mortality between drug cohorts, after adjusting for potential confounding variables.

RESULTS

The total study sample comprised 12,272 new users of oral antidiabetic agents; the average length of follow-up was 5.1 (SD 2.2) years. In subjects with at least 1 year of drug exposure and no insulin use, mortality rates were 750/3,033 (24.7%) for those receiving sulfonylurea monotherapy, 159/1,150 (13.8%) for those receiving metformin monotherapy, and 635/4,683 (13.6%) for those receiving combination therapy over an average 5.1 (SD 2.2) years of follow-up. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for all-cause mortality for metformin monotherapy was 0.60 (95% CI 0.49-0.74) compared with sulfonylurea monotherapy. Sulfonylurea plus metformin combination therapy was also associated with reduced all-cause mortality (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.58-0.75). Reduced cardiovascular-related mortality rates were also observed in metformin users compared with sulfonylurea monotherapy users.

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin therapy, alone or in combination with sulfonylurea, was associated with reduced all-cause and cardiovascular mortality compared with sulfonylurea monotherapy among new users of these agents.

Differential effects of metformin and troglitazone on cardiovascular risk factors in patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Traditional cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) only partly explain the excessive risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. There is now an increasing appreciation for many novel CVRF that occur largely as a result of insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia. Therefore, we investigated whether diabetes medications that vary in their mechanism of action and ability to reduce insulin resistance may differ in their effects on both traditional and novel CVRF.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We compared the addition of metformin or troglitazone therapy on CVRF in 22 subjects with type 2 diabetes who remained in poor glycemic control (with HbA1c >8.5%) while taking glyburide 10 mg twice daily. Subjects were initially randomized to either metformin 850 mg once daily or troglitazone 200 mg once daily. Both medications were then titrated upward as needed to achieve fasting plasma glucose <120 mg/dl. Measures of glucose control, insulin resistance, and CVRF (blood pressure, lipids, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, and small dense LDL) were assessed both before and after therapy.

RESULTS

After 4 months of treatment, both metformin and troglitazone led to similar decreases in fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c. The reduction in insulin resistance determined by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp was nearly twofold greater with troglitazone than metformin. Metformin did not induce significant changes in blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, LDL size, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, or plasminogen activator inhibitor-1. However, C-reactive protein did decrease by 33% (6 +/- 1 to 4 +/- 1 mg/l; P < 0.01) [corrected]. Troglitazone therapy was associated with increases in LDL size (26.21 +/- 0.22 to 26.56 +/- 0.25 nm; P=0.04) and HDL cholesterol (33 +/- 3 to 36 +/- 3 mg/dl; P=0.05) and decreases in triglycerides (197 +/- 19 to 155 +/- 23 mg/dl; P=0.07) and C-reactive protein by 60% (8 +/- 3 to 3 +/- 1 mg/l, P < 0.01) [corrected].

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with type 2 diabetes in whom maximal sulfonylurea therapy failed, the addition of the insulin sensitizer troglitazone seemed to have greater benefits on several traditional and novel CVRF than metformin therapy. These differences were not related to glycemic improvement but reflected, in part, the greater reduction in insulin resistance obtained with addition of troglitazone. These data suggest that medications that more effectively address this underlying metabolic defect may be more beneficial in reducing cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes.

Oral antidiabetic treatment in patients with coronary disease: time-related increased mortality on combined glyburide/metformin therapy over a 7.7-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

A sulfonylurea--usually glyburide--plus metformin constitute the most widely used oral antihyperglycemic combination in clinical practice. Both medications present undesirable cardiovascular effects. The issue whether the adverse effects of each of these pharmacologic agents may be additive and detrimental to the prognosis for coronary patients has not yet been specifically addressed.

HYPOTHESIS

This study was designed to examine the survival in type 2 diabetics with proven coronary artery disease (CAD) receiving a combined glyburide/metformin antihyperglycemic treatment over a long-term follow-up period.

METHODS

The study sample comprised 2,275 diabetic patients, aged 45-74 years, with proven CAD, who were screened but not included in the bezafibrate infarction prevention study. In addition, 9,047 nondiabetic patients with CAD represented a reference group. Diabetics were divided into four groups on the basis of their therapeutic regimen: diet alone (n = 990), glyburide (n = 953), metformin (n = 79), and a combination of the latter two (n = 253).

RESULTS

The diabetic groups presented similar clinical characteristics upon recruitment. Crude mortality rate after a 7.7-year follow-up was lower in nondiabetics (14 vs. 31.6%, p<0.001). Among diabetics, 720 patients died: 260 on diet (mortality 26.3%), 324 on glyburide (34%), 25 on metformin alone (31.6%), and 111 patients (43.9%) on combined treatment (p<0.000001). Time-related mortality was almost equal for patients on metformin and on combined therapy over an intermediate follow-up period of 4 years (survival rates 0.80 and 0.79, respectively). The group on combined treatment presented the worst prognosis over the long-term follow-up, with a time-related survival rate of 0.59 after 7 years, versus 0.68 and 0.70 for glyburide and metformin, respectively. After adjustment to variables for prognosis, the use of the combined treatment was associated with an increased hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality of 1.53 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-1.96), whereas glyburide and metformin alone yielded HR 1.22 (95% CI 1.02-1.45) and HR 1.26 (95% CI 0.81-1.96), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that after a 7.7-year follow-up, monotherapy with either glyburide or metformin in diabetic patients with CAD yielded a similar outcome and was associated with a modest increase in mortality. However, time-related mortality was markedly increased when a combined glyburide/metformin treatment was used.

Prevalence and prognostic significance of unrecognized systemic hypertension in patients with diabetes mellitus and healed myocardial infarction and/or stable angina pectoris

Few data are available regarding the prevalence and prognostic significance of the triple coexistence of undiagnosed systemic hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and coronary heart disease. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and prognostic significance of unrecognized hypertension in cardiac diabetic patients previously defined as "normotensives" over a 5-year follow-up period. The study sample comprised 11,515 patients aged 45 to 74 years with a previous myocardial infarction and/or anginal syndrome who were screened but not included in the Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention study. Among them, 9,033 were nondiabetics and 2,482, diabetics. The diabetics were divided into 3 groups: (1) 1,272 normotensives, (2) 152 patients without history of hypertension but with elevated blood pressure ("unrecognized hypertensives"), and (3) 1,058 hypertensives with established diagnosis. The prevalence of both diagnosed and unrecognized hypertension in diabetics pooled together increased from 49% to 69% when World Health Organization and new Joint National Committee-VI criteria were compared. Crude all-cause mortality was lower in nondiabetics than in diabetics (11.2% vs 22.0%; p <0.001). Among diabetics the lowest all-cause mortality was documented for normotensives (19.3%), whereas the highest mortality was observed in unrecognized hypertensives (26.3%, p = 0.003). Both unrecognized and established hypertensives demonstrated a significant stroke-related mortality excess: about four- and threefold increases in cerebrovascular accident-related death, respectively, were observed (p = 0.002). On multivariate analysis, both unrecognized and diagnosed hypertension were consistent predictors of increased all-cause mortality, with a hazard ratio of 1.28 (95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.82) and 1.24 (95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.49), respectively. Our findings demonstrate widespread undiagnosed hypertension in diabetic coronary patients; their 5-year mortality was significantly increased compared with normotensives, and tended to be even higher than in diabetics previously identified as hypertensives.