The risk of overall mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving glipizide, glyburide, or glimepiride monotherapy: a retrospective analysis

Clinical Evidence and Practice-Based Guidelines on the Utility of Basal Insulin Combined Oral Therapy (Metformin and Glimepiride) in the Current Era

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Basal insulin combined oral therapy consisting of insulin and oral anti-diabetic drugs (OADs) is recommended for type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on OADs. There is a lack of clear evidence and recommendations on the combined use of basal insulin analogues to more than one OADs (glimepiride plus metformin) in effective control of glycemic parameters and its safety in terms of reduced hypoglycemic events, weight gain and cardiovascular risk. In this context, a group of clinical experts discussed the utility of basal insulin combined oral therapy with metformin and glimepiride in the current era.

METHODS

The clinical experts discussed and provided their inputs virtually. The expert panel included clinical experts comprising endocrinologists and diabetologists from India and Nepal.

RESULTS

The panel thoroughly reviewed existing literature on the subject and proposed clinical evidence and practice-based guidelines.

CONCLUSION

These current clinical practice guidelines highlight the efficacy and safety of basal insulin combination therapy with various available basal insulins including neutral protamine hagedorn, detemir, glargine and degludec in addition to metformin and glimepiride therapy.

Treatment of diabetes mellitus has borne much fruit in the prevention of cardiovascular disease

Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the most alarming complication of diabetes mellitus (DM), and a strategy aiming at cardiovascular event prevention in diabetes mellitus has long been debated. Large landmark clinical trials have shown cardiovascular benefits of intensive glycemic control as a ‘legacy effect’ in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus. In contrast, we have learned that excessive intervention aimed at strong glycemic control could cause unexpected cardiovascular death in patients who are resistant to treatments against hyperglycemia. It has also been shown that the comprehensive multifactorial intervention for cardiovascular risk factors that was advocated in the current guideline provided substantial cardiovascular event reduction. The impact of classical antidiabetic agents launched before 1990s on cardiovascular events is controversial. Although there are many clinical or observational studies assessing the impact of those agents on cardiovascular events, the conclusions are inconsistent owing to variable patient backgrounds and concomitant antidiabetic agents among the studies. Moreover, most of them were not large‐scale, randomized, cardiovascular outcome trials. In contrast, GLP‐1RA (glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist) and SGLT2 (sodium‐glucose cotransporter 2) inhibitors have demonstrated undeniable cardiovascular benefits in large‐scale, randomized, controlled trials. Whereas GLP‐1RAs decrease atherosclerotic disease, especially stroke, SGLT2 inhibitors mainly prevent heart failure. SGLT2 inhibitors are superior to GLP‐1RAs with respect to hard renal outcomes. Therefore, it can be said that drugs such as GLP‐1RAs and SGLT2 inhibitors that prevent cardiovascular events, in addition to their glucose‐lowering effect, are incredible novel tools that we have gained for use in diabetic treatment.

Association Between Specificity of Sulfonylureas to Cardiac Mitochondrial KATP Channels and the Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies have revealed an intraclass difference in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) among sulfonylureas. In vitro and ex vivo studies reported several sulfonylureas to exhibit high-affinity blockage of cardiac mitochondrial ATP-sensitive potassium (mitoKATP) channels and could interfere with ischemic preconditioning, the most important mechanism of self-cardiac protection. However, no studies have examined whether these varying binding affinities of sulfonylureas could account for their intraclass difference in MACE. We compared mitoKATP channel high-affinity versus low-affinity sulfonylureas regarding the MACE risk in real-world settings.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Using the Taiwan nationwide health care claims database, patients with type 2 diabetes initiating sulfonylurea monotherapy between 2007 and 2016 were included in the cohort study. A total of 33,727 new mitoKATP channel high-affinity (glyburide and glipizide) and low-affinity (gliclazide and glimepiride) sulfonylurea users, respectively, were identified after 1:1 propensity score matching. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CI.

RESULTS

MitoKATP channel high-affinity sulfonylureas were associated with a significantly increased risk of three-point MACE (aHR 1.21 [95% CI 1.03-1.44]), ischemic stroke (aHR 1.23 [95% CI 1.02-1.50]), and cardiovascular death (aHR 2.61 [95% CI 1.31-5.20]), but not with that of myocardial infarction (aHR 1.04 [95% CI 0.75-1.46]). The duration-response analyses revealed the highest MACE risk to be within 90 days of therapy (aHR 4.67 [95% CI 3.61-6.06]).

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac mitoKATP channel high-affinity sulfonylureas were associated with an increased MACE risk compared with low-affinity sulfonylureas in a nationwide population with diabetes.

Unravelling the utility of modern sulfonylureas from cardiovascular outcome trials and landmark trials: expert opinion from an international panel

AIM

The primary objective of this review is to develop practice-based expert group opinions on the cardiovascular (CV) safety and utility of modern sulfonylureas (SUs) in cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs).

BACKGROUND

The United States Food and Drug Administration issued new guidance to the pharmaceutical industry in 2008 regarding the development of new antihyperglycemic drugs. The guidance expanded the scope for the approval of novel antihyperglycemic drugs by mandating CVOTs for safety. A few long-term CVOTs on dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors have been completed, while others are ongoing. SUs, which constitute one of the key antihyperglycemic agents used for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), have been used as comparator agents in several CVOTs. However, the need for CVOTs on modern SUs remains debatable. In this context, a multinational group of endocrinologists convened for a meeting and discussed the need for CVOTs of modern SUs to evaluate their utility in the management of patients with T2DM. At the meeting, CVOTs of modern SUs conducted to date and the hypotheses derived from the results of these trials were discussed.

REVIEW RESULTS

The expert group analyzed the key trials emphasizing the CV safety of modern SUs and also reviewed the results of various CVOTs in which modern SUs were used as comparators. Based on literature evidence and individual clinical insights, the expert group opined that modern SUs are cardiosafe and that since they have been used as comparators in other CVOTs, CVOTs of SUs are not required.

CONCLUSION

Modern SUs can be considered a cardiosafe option for the management of patients with diabetes mellitus and CV disease; thus CVOTs among individuals with T2DM are not required.

Linking glycemic dysregulation in diabetes to symptoms, comorbidities, and genetics through EHR data mining

Diabetes is a diverse and complex disease, with considerable variation in phenotypic manifestation and severity. This variation hampers the study of etiological differences and reduces the statistical power of analyses of associations to genetics, treatment outcomes, and complications. We address these issues through deep, fine-grained phenotypic stratification of a diabetes cohort. Text mining the electronic health records of 14,017 patients, we matched two controlled vocabularies (ICD-10 and a custom vocabulary developed at the clinical center Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen) to clinical narratives spanning a 19 year period. The two matched vocabularies comprise over 20,000 medical terms describing symptoms, other diagnoses, and lifestyle factors. The cohort is genetically homogeneous (Caucasian diabetes patients from Denmark) so the resulting stratification is not driven by ethnic differences, but rather by inherently dissimilar progression patterns and lifestyle related risk factors. Using unsupervised Markov clustering, we defined 71 clusters of at least 50 individuals within the diabetes spectrum. The clusters display both distinct and shared longitudinal glycemic dysregulation patterns, temporal co-occurrences of comorbidities, and associations to single nucleotide polymorphisms in or near genes relevant for diabetes comorbidities.

Glucocrinology of Modern Sulfonylureas: Clinical Evidence and Practice-Based Opinion from an International Expert Group

AIM

The primary objective of this document is to develop practice-based expert group opinion on certain important but less discussed endocrine and metabolic effects of modern sulfonylureas (SUs) and their usage in the management of diabetes mellitus (DM).

BACKGROUND

Modern SUs may be considered a panacea in DM care with their beneficial extra-pancreatic, pleiotropic, and cardiovascular effects. Safe glycemic control with SUs could be achieved with appropriate patient selection, drug and dosage selection, and patient empowerment. Additionally, sulfonylureas also exhibit certain endocrine and metabolic effects, which could be considered beneficial in the management of DM. In this regard, a group of international clinical experts discussed the less known beneficial aspects of SUs and safe and smart prescription of modern SUs in DM care.

RESULTS

The concept of glucocrinology or the relationship of glycemia with the endocrine system was emphasized during the meetings. Clinical experts arrived at a consensus for the usage of modern SUs in the presence of other endocrine dysfunction and the impact of these drugs on endocrine health. The beneficial pleiotropic and cardiovascular effects of modern SUs were also discussed. The key discussion points were considered to develop clinical expert opinions for the use of modern SUs in persons with DM. Clinical expert opinions were developed for indications, pleiotropic benefits, cardiovascular outcomes, adherence, and safe use of modern SUs.

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate clinical judgement coupled with a patient-centered approach is crucial to achieve the best outcome in persons with DM. Owing to their safety, efficacy, extra-pancreatic benefits including effects on endocrine and metabolic aspects, and low cost of therapy, modern SUs could be considered as drugs/agents of choice for the treatment of diabetes.

FUNDING

Sanofi India.

Comparison of mortality and cardiovascular event risk associated with various insulin secretagogues: A nationwide real-world analysis

AIMS

Several insulin secretagogues are widely used to treat diabetes; however, few outcome-based comparative studies have clarified which one of these should be used when indicated. We investigated mortality and cardiovascular event risk associated with optimal forms of insulin secretagogues.

METHODS

In this cohort study using real-world data from the diabetes database of Taiwan's National Health Insurance program, patients with diabetes were enrolled if their initial treatment was glimepiride, gliclazide, glipizide, glyburide, or repaglinide from 1999 to 2013. Each group was propensity score-matched to the glimepiride group before comparison. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and the combined cardiovascular event risk of acute myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. Hazard ratios were calculated by Cox proportional hazard regression models.

RESULTS

There were 66,790, 97,426, 38,806, 92,970, and 11,468 participants in the glimepiride, gliclazide, glipizide, glyburide, and repaglinide groups, respectively. The median follow-up time was 8 years. Glimepiride was associated with the best clinical outcome, showing the lowest mortality and lowest cardiovascular event risk of the five insulin secretagogues. Using patients on glimepiride as the reference group, the adjusted hazard ratios of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular event risk were 1.52 (p < 0.001) and 1.22 (p = 0.005) for gliclazide, 1.42 (p < 0.001) and 1.19 (p = 0.073) for glipizide, 1.43 (p < 0.001) and 1.32 (p < 0.001) for glyburide, and 1.88 (p < 0.001) and 1.69 (p = 0.001) for repaglinide.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with diabetes taking an insulin secretagogue, glimepiride was associated with the best clinical outcome, showing the lowest mortality and cardiovascular event risk.

Reflections on the sulphonylurea story: A drug class at risk of extinction or a drug class worth reviving?

The role of sulphonylureas (SUs) in modern clinical practice poses ongoing clinical debate. With the advent of newer agents in diabetes management, there is an increasing shift away from the prescribing of SUs, but not necessarily to more effective agents. This review provides a different perspective on the debate, reflecting in depth upon the physiology of SUs, drawing on insights gained from monogenic diabetes to highlight the potential benefit of lower doses of SUs, and the probable benefit of gliclazide over most other, if not all SUs, in terms of sulphonylurea failure and cardiovascular outcomes.

The Standard of Care in Type 2 Diabetes: Re-evaluating the Treatment Paradigm

There is currently a worldwide epidemic of type 2 diabetes (T2D) that is predicted to increase substantially in the next few years. With 80% of the global T2D population living in low to middle-income countries, there are issues with cost and of access to appropriate medicines. The objective of this symposium was to provide an overview of the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering drugs, focussing in particular on sulfonylureas (SUs) in patients with T2D using data taken from both randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world studies, the application of strategies to ensure optimal patient adherence and clinical outcomes, and the optimal use of SUs in terms of dose adjustment and agent choice to ensure the best clinical outcome. The symposium began by exploring a profile of the typical patient seen in diabetes clinical practice and the appropriate management of such a patient in the real world, before moving on to an overview of the risks associated with T2D and how the currently available agents, including newer antidiabetic medications, mitigate or exacerbate those risks. The final presentation provided an overview of real-world studies, the gap between RCTs and the real world, and the use of available glucose-lowering agents in daily clinical practice. Clinical evidence was presented demonstrating that tight glucose control improved both microvascular and macrovascular outcomes, but that aggressive treatment in patients with a very high cardiovascular risk could lead to adverse outcomes. Real-world data suggest that older agents such as SUs and metformin are being used in a large proportion of patients with T2D with demonstrable effectiveness, indicating that they still have a place in modern T2D management. The symposium, while acknowledging the need for newer antidiabetic drugs in specific situations and patient groups, recommended the continuation of SUs and metformin as the primary oral antidiabetic agents in resource-constrained regions of the world.Funding:Servier.

AMPK is associated with the beneficial effects of antidiabetic agents on cardiovascular diseases

Diabetics have higher morbidity and mortality in cardiovascular disease (CVD). A variety of antidiabetic agents are available for clinical choice. Cardiovascular (CV) safety assessment of these agents is crucial in addition to hypoglycemic effect before clinical prescription. Adenosine 5'-monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK) is an important cell energy sensor, which plays an important role in regulating myocardial energy metabolism, reducing ischemia and ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury, improving heart failure (HF) and ventricular remodeling, ameliorating vascular endothelial dysfunction, antichronic inflammation, anti-apoptosis, and regulating autophagy. In this review, we summarized the effects of antidiabetic agents to CVD according to basic and clinical research evidence and put emphasis on whether these agents can play roles in CV system through AMPK-dependent signaling pathways. Metformin has displayed definite CV benefits related to AMPK. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors also demonstrate sufficient clinical evidence for CV protection, but the mechanisms need further exploration. Glucagon-likepeptide1 analogs, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, α-glucosidase inhibitors and thiazolidinediones also show some AMPK-dependent CV benefits. Sulfonylureas and meglitinides may be unfavorable to CV system. AMPK is becoming a promising target for the treatment of diabetes, metabolic syndrome and CVD. But there are still some questions to be answered.

Assessing use of patient-focused pharmacotherapy in glycemic management through the Diabetes Collaborative Registry (DCR)

BACKGROUND

Although practice guidelines stress individualization of glucose management in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), the extent to which providers take patient factors into account when selecting medications is not well known.

METHODS

Diabetes Collaborative Registry (DCR) is an outpatient diabetes registry including primary care, cardiology, and endocrinology practices. T2D medications were grouped as those which may be suboptimal for key patient subgroups, and we examined patient factors associated with use of these agents using hierarchical, multivariable Poisson models.

RESULTS

In DCR, 157,551 patients from 374 US practices were prescribed a glucose-lowering medication. Patients with morbid obesity were more likely treated with medications prone to cause weight gain (relative rate [RR] 1.09, 95% CI 1.07-1.11). Older patients were more likely to be treated with medications with increased risk of hypoglycemia (RR 1.04 per 5 years, 95% CI 1.04-1.05). Patients with CKD 4/5 were less likely to be treated with agents with known risk in patients with advanced CKD (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.71-0.77). Patients with coronary artery disease were no more or less likely to be treated with medications with potential cardiovascular safety issues (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.96-1.01).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed some targeted use of glucose-lowering therapies in certain subgroups but also identified potential opportunities for better personalization of treatment. Data sources such as the DCR can highlight potential areas for improving targeted approaches to pharmacologic therapy in order to optimize selection of patients most likely to benefit (and least likely to be harmed) from treatments.

Diabetes and the direct secondary use of electronic health records: Using routinely collected and stored data to drive research and understanding

Introduction

Electronic health records provide an unparalleled opportunity for the use of patient data that is routinely collected and stored, in order to drive research and develop an epidemiological understanding of disease. Diabetes, in particular, stands to benefit, being a data-rich, chronic-disease state. This article aims to provide an understanding of the extent to which the healthcare sector is using routinely collected and stored data to inform research and epidemiological understanding of diabetes mellitus.

Methods

Narrative literature review of articles, published in both the medical- and engineering-based informatics literature.

Results

There has been a significant increase in the number of papers published, which utilise electronic health records as a direct data source for diabetes research. These articles consider a diverse range of research questions. Internationally, the secondary use of electronic health records, as a research tool, is most prominent in the USA. The barriers most commonly described in research studies include missing values and misclassification, alongside challenges of establishing the generalisability of results.

Discussion

Electronic health record research is an important and expanding area of healthcare research. Much of the research output remains in the form of conference abstracts and proceedings, rather than journal articles. There is enormous opportunity within the United Kingdom to develop these research methodologies, due to national patient identifiers. Such a healthcare context may enable UK researchers to overcome many of the barriers encountered elsewhere and thus to truly unlock the potential of electronic health records.

Risk of a first-ever acute myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality with sulphonylurea treatment: A population-based cohort study

We investigated the association between the current use of individual sulphonylureas and the risk of a first-ever acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and all-cause mortality, in a population-based cohort study, using primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink database (2004-2012). New users (N = 121 869), aged ≥18 years, with at least one prescription for a non-insulin antidiabetic agent were included. The first prescription defined start of follow-up. Time-dependent Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the risk of a first-ever AMI and all-cause mortality associated with the use of individual sulphonylureas, and other non-insulin glucose-lowering drugs. No differences in risk of a first-ever AMI (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-1.50) or all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.80-1.17) were observed when comparing gliclazide use with non-gliclazide sulphonylurea use. Similar results were found for each individual sulphonylurea. As evidence is accumulating that gliclazide is no safer than other sulphonylureas, current guidelines suggesting superiority should be carefully evaluated.

Management Strategies for Posttransplant Diabetes Mellitus after Heart Transplantation: A Review

Posttransplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) is a well-recognized complication of heart transplantation and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Previous studies have yielded wide ranging estimates in the incidence of PTDM due in part to variable definitions applied. In addition, there is a limited published data on the management of PTDM after heart transplantation and a paucity of studies examining the effects of newer classes of hypoglycaemic drug therapies. In this review, we discuss the role of established glucose-lowering therapies and the rationale and emerging clinical evidence that supports the role of incretin-based therapies (glucagon like peptide- (GLP-) 1 agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase- (DPP-) 4 inhibitors) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in the management of PTDM after heart transplantation. Recently published Consensus Guidelines for the diagnosis of PTDM will hopefully lead to more consistent approaches to the diagnosis of PTDM and provide a platform for the larger-scale multicentre trials that will be needed to determine the role of these newer therapies in the management of PTDM.

Pharmacologic Differences of Sulfonylureas and the Risk of Adverse Cardiovascular and Hypoglycemic Events

OBJECTIVE

Sulfonylureas have been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular adverse events and hypoglycemia, but it is unclear if these risks vary with different agents. We assessed whether the risks of acute myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and severe hypoglycemia differ between sulfonylureas grouped according to pancreas specificity and duration of action.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Using the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Datalink, linked with the Hospital Episodes Statistics and the Office for National Statistics databases, we conducted a cohort study among patients with type 2 diabetes initiating monotherapy with sulfonylureas between 1998 and 2013. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models, comparing use of pancreas-nonspecific, long-acting sulfonylureas (glyburide/glimepiride) to pancreas-specific, short-acting sulfonylureas (gliclazide/glipizide/tolbutamide).

RESULTS

The cohort included 17,604 sulfonylurea initiators (mean [SD] follow-up 1.2 [1.5] years). Compared with specific, short-acting sulfonylureas (15,741 initiators), nonspecific, long-acting sulfonylureas (1,863 initiators) were not associated with an increased risk of acute myocardial infarction (HR 0.86; CI 0.55-1.34), ischemic stroke (HR 0.92; CI 0.59-1.45), cardiovascular death (HR 1.01; CI 0.72-1.40), or all-cause mortality (HR 0.81; CI 0.66-1.003), but with an increased risk of severe hypoglycemia (HR 2.83; CI 1.64-4.88).

CONCLUSIONS

The nonspecific, long-acting sulfonylureas glyburide and glimepiride do not have an increased risk of cardiovascular adverse events compared with the specific, short-acting sulfonylureas gliclazide, glipizide, and tolbutamide. However, nonspecific, long-acting sulfonylureas glyburide and glimepiride have an increased risk of severe hypoglycemia.

The Infamous, Famous Sulfonylureas and Cardiovascular Safety: Much Ado About Nothing?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sulfonylureas (SUs) are one of the most commonly used glucose-lowering agents worldwide. While their efficacy is undisputed, their cardiovascular safety has been debated since the 1970's.

RECENT FINDINGS

With no dedicated cardiovascular studies to definitively answer this question, observational studies and meta-analyses abound and have reported divergent results, fueling the controversy. Studies that compared SUs to metformin or newer agents, like GLP-1 agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors, suggest a difference in cardiovascular events, yet this is likely the result of beneficial effects of the latter. Studies comparing SUs to other agents have been reassuring. SUs remain a common choice of treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes due to their exceptional value. They are effective at lowering glucose and thus contributing to the prevention of microvascular complications. Weight gain and hypoglycemia are their main side effects, although less severe when compared to insulin treatment. Their cardiovascular safety will remain a controversial topic due to lack of conclusive data, but there is no definitive evidence of harm with the second-generation agents.

Enemies or weapons in hands: investigational anti-diabetic drug glibenclamide and cancer risk

Epidemiological evidence suggests that diabetes is associated with elevated cancer risk through the actions of hyperglycemia, hyperinsulinemia and chronic inflammation. Metformin, a first-line medication for type 2 diabetes mellitus, arouses growing concerns on its anti-cancer effect. However, data regarding the effect of glibenclamide on tumor growth and cancer risk are less consistent, which may be a potential anti-cancer drug. Areas covered: In this review, we clarified probable underlying mechanisms in preclinical studies and reviewed epidemiological evidence on glibenclamide's cancer risk in clinical studies. Glibenclamide inhibited carcinogenesis through ATP-binding cassette protein super-family and ATP-sensitive potassium channels, while majority of clinical researches reported an increased or non-significant elevated cancer risk of glibenclamide users compared with metformin users. Other sulfonylureas and diarylsulfonylureas were also briefly introduced. Expert opinion: The inconsistency between the results of studies was probably ascribed to undiscovered mechanisms, confounding factors, inconsistent comparators and publication bias. Existing clinical trials were prone to be afflicted by time-related bias including immortal time bias, time-window bias, and time-lag bias. Glibenclimiade could be a promising and well-tolerated anti-neoplastic drug targeting ATP-binding cassette protein super-family and KATP channels, but its efficacy still needs to be proven in well-designed long-term randomized controlled clinical trials.

PATIENTS TREATED WITH INSULIN AND SULPHONYLUREA ARE AT INCREASED MORTALITY RISK AS COMPARED WITH THOSE TREATED WITH INSULIN PLUS METFORMIN

AIMS

To investigate the effect of sulphonylurea (SU) treatment on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality as compared with metformin (MET), when used in combination with insulin (INS) in type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

All type 2 diabetes patients aged ≥40 years were included at their first prescription of INS+MET or INS+SU, during 2001-2008. They were considered at risk until death or December 31st, 2011. Mortality rates were calculated per 1000 person-years. Crude and adjusted rate ratios (RR) were calculated using time dependent analysis with INS+MET as reference.

RESULTS

There were 7122 patients (60.8% women) included in the analysis, with a mean age at baseline of 62.0±9.9 years. During the 11 years of study, patients on INS+MET contributed 13620 person-years and 330 deaths (mortality rate 24, CI95% 22-27), while those on INS+SU contributed 8720 person-years and 393 deaths (mortality rate 45, CI95% 41-50). Adjusted all-cause mortality RR were: SU 1.6 (CI95% 1.21-2.11, p<0.001), glimepiride 1.18 (CI95% 0.73-1.91, p=0.51), gliclazide 1.78 (CI95% 1.07-2.95, p=0.024), glibenclamide 1.66 (CI95% 0.71-3.88, p=0.23), glipizide 1.24 (CI95% 0.68-2.27, p=0.49), and gliquidonum 2.32 (CI95% 1.54-3.50, p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

When combined with insulin as dual therapy, patients treated with SU were at increased mortality risk as compared with insulin + MET.

Sulfonylureas and the Risks of Cardiovascular Events and Death: A Methodological Meta-Regression Analysis of the Observational Studies

Recent randomized trials have compared the newer antidiabetic agents to treatments involving sulfonylureas, drugs associated with increased cardiovascular risks and mortality in some observational studies with conflicting results. We reviewed the methodology of these observational studies by searching MEDLINE from inception to December 2015 for all studies of the association between sulfonylureas and cardiovascular events or mortality. Each study was appraised with respect to the comparator, the outcome, and study design-related sources of bias. A meta-regression analysis was used to evaluate heterogeneity. A total of 19 studies were identified, of which six had no major design-related biases. Sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and mortality in five of these studies (relative risks 1.16-1.55). Overall, the 19 studies resulted in 36 relative risks as some studies assessed multiple outcomes or comparators. Of the 36 analyses, metformin was the comparator in 27 (75%) and death was the outcome in 24 (67%). The relative risk was higher by 13% when the comparator was metformin, by 20% when death was the outcome, and by 7% when the studies had design-related biases. The lowest predicted relative risk was for studies with no major bias, comparator other than metformin, and cardiovascular outcome (1.06 [95% CI 0.92-1.23]), whereas the highest was for studies with bias, metformin comparator, and mortality outcome (1.53 [95% CI 1.43-1.65]). In summary, sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and mortality in the majority of studies with no major design-related biases. Among studies with important biases, the association varied significantly with respect to the comparator, the outcome, and the type of bias. With the introduction of new antidiabetic drugs, the use of appropriate design and analytical tools will provide their more accurate cardiovascular safety assessment in the real-world setting.

Comparative risk of major cardiovascular events associated with second-line antidiabetic treatments: a retrospective cohort study using UK primary care data linked to hospitalization and mortality records

AIMS

To examine the risk of major cardiovascular events associated with second-line diabetes therapies, in patients with type 2 diabetes, after adjusting for known cardiovascular risk factors.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients prescribed second-line regimens between 1998 and 2011 after first-line metformin. The UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, with linked national hospitalization and mortality data, for the period up to December 2013, was used. Inverse probability of treatment-weighted time-varying Cox regression models was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for developing a major cardiovascular event (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, acute coronary syndrome, unstable angina, or coronary revascularization) associated with second-line therapies. Analyses adjusted for patient demographic characteristics, comorbidities, glycated haemoglobin, socio-economic status, ethnicity, smoking status and concurrent medications.

RESULTS

A total of 10 118 initiators of a second-line add-on to metformin of either a sulphonylurea (n = 6740), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor (n = 1030) or thiazolidinedione (n = 2348) were identified. After a mean (standard deviation) of 2.4 (1.9) years of follow-up, 386, 36 and 95 major cardiovascular events occurred in sulphonylurea-, DPP-4 inhibitor- and thiazolidinedione-initiators, respectively. In comparison with the metformin-sulphonylurea regimen, adjusted HRs were 0.78 (95% CI 0.55; 1.11) for the metformin-DPP-4 inhibitor regimen and 0.68 (95% CI 0.54; 0.85) for the metformin-thiazolidinedione regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

Thiazolidinedione add-on treatments to metformin were associated with lower risks of major cardiovascular disease or cardiovascular death compared with sulphonylurea add-on treatment to metformin. Lower, but non-statistically significant, risks were also found with DPP-4 inhibitor add-on therapies.

Is gliclazide a sulfonylurea with difference? A review in 2016

Sulfonylureas (SUs) remain the most commonly prescribed drug after metformin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), despite the availability of several newer agents. The primary reason of SUs being most popular is their quick glycemic response, time-tested experience and least cost. Although SUs are one amongst the several other second line agents after metformin in all major guidelines, the new Dutch type 2 guidelines specifically advise gliclazide as the preferred second line drug instead of SUs as a class. The World Health Organization (WHO) has also included gliclazide in their Model List of Essential Medicines 2013 motivated by its safety data in elderly patients. Specifically advising gliclazide may have been based on emerging evidence suggesting cardiovascular neutrality of gliclazide over other SUs. This prompted us to do a literature review of gliclazide efficacy and safety data compared to other SUs as well as oral anti-diabetic drugs.

Risk of overall mortality and cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes on dual drug therapy including metformin: A large database study from the Cleveland Clinic

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to assess the risk of overall mortality, coronary artery disease (CAD), and congestive heart failure (CHF) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with metformin (MF) and an additional antidiabetic agent.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using an academic health center enterprise-wide electronic health record (EHR) system to identify 13,185 adult patients (>18 years) with T2DM from January 2008 to June 2013 and received a prescription for MF in combination with a sulfonylurea (SU; n = 9419), thiazolidinedione (TZD; n = 1846), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i; n = 1487), or a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1a; n = 433). Multivariate Cox models with propensity analysis were used to compare cohorts, with MF+SU serving as the comparator group.

RESULTS

The mean (±SD) age was 60.6 ± 12.6 years, with 54.6% male and 75.8% Caucasians. The median follow-up was 4 years. There were 1077 deaths, 1733 CAD events, and 528 CHF events in 55,100 person-years of follow-up. A higher risk of CHF was observed with MF+DPP-4i use (hazard ratio [HR] 1.104; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.17; P = 0.001). A trend towards improved overall survival for users of MF+TZD (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.74-1.0; P = 0.05) and MF+GLP-1a (HR 0.569; 95% CI 0.30-1.07; P = 0.08) was observed. No significant differences in the risk of CAD were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with recent studies, our results raise concern for an increased risk of CHF with use of DPP-4i.

The Use of Glyburide Compared With Other Sulfonylureas and the Risk of Cancer in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the use of glyburide is associated with an increased risk of cancer compared with the use of other second-generation sulfonylureas among patients with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The U.K. Clinical Practice Research Datalink was used to conduct a cohort study among 52,600 patients newly prescribed glyburide or other second-generation sulfonylureas between 1 January 1988 and 31 July 2013. A time-dependent Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs of any cancer associated with the use of glyburide compared with the use of second-generation sulfonylureas. Secondary analyses were conducted to determine whether the association varied with cumulative duration of use and cumulative dose (expressed as defined daily dose [DDD]).

RESULTS

During 280,288 person-years of follow-up, 4,105 patients were given a new diagnosis of cancer (incidence rate 14.6 per 1,000 person-years). Overall, when compared with the use of other second-generation sulfonylureas, the use of glyburide was associated with a nonsignificant increased risk of any cancer (HR 1.09 [95% CI 0.98-1.22]). In secondary analyses, duration- and dose-response relationships were observed, with longer cumulative durations and cumulative doses associated with an increased risk of any cancer (>36 months: HR 1.21 [95% CI: 1.03-1.42]; >1,096 DDDs: HR 1.27 [95% CI 1.06-1.51]).

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based cohort study, longer cumulative durations and higher cumulative doses of glyburide were associated with an increased risk of cancer.

Place of sulfonylureas in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in South Asia: A consensus statement

Since their introduction in clinical practice in the 1950's, Sulfonylureas (SUs) have remained the main-stay of pharmacotherapy in the management of type 2 diabetes. Despite their well-established benefits, their place in therapy is inappropriately being overshadowed by newer therapies. Many of the clinical issues associated with the use of SUs are agent-specific, and do not pertain to the class as such. Modern SUs (glimepiride, gliclazide MR) are backed by a large body of evidence, experience, and most importantly, outcome data, which supports their role in managing patients with diabetes. Person-centred care, i.e., careful choice of SU, appropriate dosage, timing of administration, and adequate patient counseling, will ensure that deserving patients are not deprived of the advantages of this well-established class of anti-diabetic agents. Considering their efficacy, safety, pleiotropic benefits, and low cost of therapy, SUs should be considered as recommended therapy for the treatment of diabetes in South Asia. This initiative by SAFES aims to encourage rational, safe and smart prescription of SUs, and includes appropriate medication counseling.

Impact of glucose-lowering drugs on cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is characterized by multiple pathophysiologic abnormalities. With time, multiple glucose-lowering medications are commonly required to reduce and maintain plasma glucose concentrations within the normal range. Type 2 diabetes mellitus individuals also are at a very high risk for microvascular complications and the incidence of heart attack and stroke is increased two- to three-fold compared with non-diabetic individuals. Therefore, when selecting medications to normalize glucose levels in T2DM patients, it is important that the agent not aggravate, and ideally even improve, cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) and reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In this review, we examine the effect of oral (metformin, sulfonylureas, meglitinides, thiazolidinediones, DPP4 inhibitors, SGLT2 inhibitors, and α-glucosidase inhibitors) and injectable (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and insulin) glucose-lowering drugs on established CVRFs and long-term studies of cardiovascular outcomes. Firm evidence that in T2DM cardiovascular disease can be reversed or prevented by improving glycaemic control is still incomplete and must await large, long-term clinical trials in patients at low risk using modern treatment strategies, i.e., drug combinations designed to maximize HbA1c reduction while minimizing hypoglycaemia and excessive weight gain.

Cardiovascular safety of sulphonylureas: over 40 years of continuous controversy without an answer

More than 40 years after publication of the University Group Diabetes Program trial, the cardiovascular safety of sulphonylureas is still contentious. Although several hypotheses linking sulphonylureas to adverse cardiovascular effects exist, none provide conclusive evidence. Adding to the controversy, current clinical trials and observational studies provide inconsistent, and sometimes conflicting, evidence for the cardiovascular effects of sulphonylureas. Overall, observational evidence suggests that an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes is associated with sulphonylureas; however, these data may be subject to residual confounding and bias. Although evidence from randomized controlled trials has suggested a neutral effect, the majority of these studies were not specifically designed to assess the effect of sulphonylureas on adverse cardiovascular event risk. Current ongoing large clinical trials may provide some clarity on the cardiovascular safety of sulphonylureas, but the results are not expected for several years. With the continued uncertainties concerning the cardiovascular safety of all antidiabetic drugs, a clear answer with regard to sulphonylureas is warranted. The objectives of the present article were to provide an overview of the controversy surrounding sulphonylurea-related cardiovascular effects, to discuss the limitations of the current literature, and to provide recommendations for future studies aiming to elucidate the true relationship between sulphonylureas and adverse cardiovascular effects in people with type 2 diabetes.

Comparative cardiovascular safety of insulin secretagogues following hospitalization for ischemic heart disease among type 2 diabetes patients: a cohort study

AIM

To evaluate the association between insulin secretagogues and adverse cardiovascular sequelae in type 2 diabetes patients hospitalized for ischemic heart disease (IHD).

METHODS

Administrative health records from Alberta, Canada between 1998 and 2010 were used to identify 2,254 gliclazide, 3,289 glyburide and 740 repaglinide users prior to an IHD-related hospitalization. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to compare the 30-day risk of a composite outcome of all-cause mortality or new onset of atrial fibrillation, stroke, heart failure or myocardial infarction according to insulin secretagogue use.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) age was 76.1 (6.9) years, and 60.7% were men. The composite outcome occurred in 322 (30.2%) gliclazide users, 455 (28.1%) glyburide users and 81 (23.4%) repaglinide users within 30 days of IHD hospitalization. There were no differences in risk for glyburide use (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-1.05) or repaglinide use (aHR 0.80; 95% CI 0.63-1.03) compared to gliclazide. Similar results were observed in analyses for each element of the composite outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In older patients with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for IHD, prior use of gliclazide, glyburide, or repaglinide appears to be associated with a similar risk of adverse cardiovascular sequelae.

Comparing kidney outcomes in type 2 diabetes treated with different sulphonylureas in real-life clinical practice

AIM

Although several sulphonylureas are widely used in type 2 diabetes (T2D), their differential impacts on long-term major kidney outcomes remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the effects of the two most commonly prescribed sulphonylureas, glimepiride and gliclazide, on kidney outcomes in patients with T2D.

METHODS

A total of 4486 patients treated with either glimepiride or gliclazide for more than 2 years were followed for up to 5.5 years (median: 4.7 years). A propensity score based on baseline characteristics was used to match 1427 patients treated with glimepiride with 1427 gliclazide-treated patients; incidences of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and sustained doubling of creatinine to>132.6 μmol/L (1.5mg/dL) were also compared.

RESULTS

In the matched cohort with 12,122 person-years of follow-up, there was no significant difference between groups in risk of ESRD [hazard ratio (HR): 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29-1.12] or doubling of creatinine (HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.44-1.26), although there was a trend towards higher risks in the glimepiride group. Subgroup analyses showed that, compared with glimepiride, gliclazide was associated with a lower risk of doubling of creatinine in patients with preserved renal function (glomerular filtration rate ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2), HR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.04-0.99) and good glycaemic control (HbA1c < 7%, HR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.14-0.86), and in older subjects (≥ 62 years, HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.27-0.99).

CONCLUSION

In a real-life setting, there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes of kidney disease for patients treated with glimepiride vs gliclazide. However, gliclazide appeared to protect against renal complication progression in certain populations.

Mortality risk among sulfonylureas: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sulfonylureas are common second-line options for management of type 2 diabetes; however, they are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events compared with other antidiabetic drugs. Since tissue selectivity and risk of hypoglycaemia differ among sulfonylureas, we aimed to assess whether mortality and the risk of cardiovascular events also varies.

METHODS

We searched Medline and Embase from inception to June 11, 2014, to identify controlled studies reporting the risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular-related mortality, or myocardial infarction for at least two sulfonylureas. We examined differences in cardiovascular event risk among sulfonylureas with random effects models for direct pairwise comparisons and network meta-analyses to incorporate direct and indirect data.

FINDINGS

14 970 (9%) of 167 327 patients in 18 studies died: 841 (4%) of 19 334 gliclazide users, 5482 (11%) of 49 389 glimepiride users, 2106 (15%) of 14 464 glipizide users, 5296 (7%) of 77 169 glibenclamide users, 1066 (17%) of 6187 tolbutamide users, and 179 (23%) of 784 chlorpropamide users. Inconsistency was low for the network meta-analysis of all-cause mortality, and the relative risk of death compared with glibenclamide was 0·65 (95% credible interval 0·53-0·79) for gliclazide, 0·83 (0·68-1·00) for glimepiride, 0·98 (0·80-1·19) for glipizide, 1·13 (0·90-1·42) for tolbutamide, and 1·34 (0·98-1·86) for chlorpropamide. Similar associations were noted for cardiovascular-related mortality: the relative risk compared with glibenclamide was 0·60 (95% credible interval 0·45-0·84) for gliclazide, 0·79 (0·57-1·11) for glimepiride, 1·01 (0·72-1·43) for glipizide, 1·11 (0·79-1·55) for tolbutamide, and 1·45 (0·88-2·44) for chlorpropamide.

INTERPRETATION

Gliclazide and glimepiride were associated with a lower risk of all-cause and cardiovascular-related mortality compared with glibenclamide. Clinicians should consider possible differences in risk of mortality when selecting a sulfonylurea.

FUNDING

None.

Metformin in combination with various insulin secretagogues in type 2 diabetes and associated risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality--a retrospective nationwide study

AIMS

Metformin is the first-line treatment for most patients with type 2 diabetes but many patients need additional treatment with insulin secretagogues (IS) to achieve glycemic control. We aimed to compare mortality and cardiovascular risk among users of metformin in combination with pharmacologically different ISs.

METHODS

Using nationwide administrative Danish registries, we followed all individuals without prior stroke or myocardial infarction who initiated metformin and an IS from 1997 through 2009. Rate ratios (RR) of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death were compared between user groups using time-dependent multivariable Poisson regression models. The most common combination, glimepiride+metformin, was used as reference.

RESULTS

A total of 56,827 patients were included, 56% male, the mean age was 61 ± 12.5 years, and median duration of prior monotherapy was 2.2 (inter quartile range 0.5-4.5) years. Crude incidence rates of mortality for combinations of ISs with metformin were; 15.4 (repaglinide), 28.1 (glipizide), 23.7 (glibenclamide), 21.1 (gliclazide), 20.7 (glimepiride), 27.7 (tolbutamide) deaths per 1000 person years. In adjusted analysis, the associated mortality risk was similar for users of gliclazide+metformin (RR=1.01 [0.88-1.15]), repaglinide+metformin (RR=0.81 [0.62-1.05]), glibenclamide+metformin (RR=0.98 [0.87-1.10]), and tolbutamide+metformin (RR=1.04 [0.85-1.28]). Users of glipizide+metformin was associated with increased all-cause mortality (RR=1.16 [1.02-1.32], p=0.02), cardiovascular death (RR=1.21 [1.01-1.46], p=0.04), and the combined endpoint (RR=1.20 [1.06-1.36, p=0.005).

CONCLUSION

Most ISs in combination with metformin were associated with similar mortality and cardiovascular risk. Whether glipizide is associated with increased risk compared with other ISs when used in combinations with metformin warrants further study.

[The use of gliclazide in individualized sulfonylurea therapy]

In addition to the common blood glucose lowering effect, sulfonylurea compounds are different in many aspects from each other. Based on earlier findings the second generation gliclazide has special advantages within this group. Although the number of experimental and clinical observations on gliclazide is continuously increasing, these novel findings are not in the focus anymore due to the appearance of new antidiabetics. This article reviews recent experimental (effect on receptors, the absence of Epac2 activation, antioxidant properties, possible incentive of factors participating in beta-cell differentiation) and pharmacogenomic data, and compares them with clinical observations obtained from gliclazide treatment (hypoglycemias, parameters of cardiovascular outcome). The data underline the advantages of gliclazide, the highly pancreas-selective nature, preservation of the ischemic precondition, favourable hemodynamic properties and potential reduction of the beta-cell loss as compared to other compounds of the group. However, gliclazide is not free from disadvantages characteristic to sulfonylureas in general (blood glucose independent insulin stimulation, beta-cell depletion). Comparing gliclazide with other derivatives of the group, the above data indicate individual benefits for the application when sulfonylurea compound is the drug of choice.

Adding glimepiride to current insulin therapy increases high-molecular weight adiponectin levels to improve glycemic control in poorly controlled type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

To observe the efficacy and safety of adding glimepiride to established insulin therapy in poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) and to assess the relationship of changes in the serum high-molecular weight (HMW) adiponectin levels and glycemic control after glimepiride treatment.

METHODS

Fifty-six subjects with poorly controlled insulin-treated T2D were randomly assigned to either the glimepiride-added group (the group A, n = 29) or the insulin-increasing group (the group B, n = 27) while continuing current insulin-based therapy. Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) value, daily insulin dose, body weight, waist circumference, plasma lipid concentration, serum HMW adiponectin level and the number of hypoglycemic events were evaluated before and after treatment.

RESULTS

At the end of study, insulin doses were significantly reduced, and the mean HbA1c, fasting blood glucose (FBG) and 2-hour postprandial blood glucose (P2BG) were improved greater in the group A compared with the group B. The serum HMW adiponectin levels were significantly increased in the group A compared with the group B. Most importantly, we found that changes in HbA1c were inversely correlated with changes in serum HMW adiponectin in the group A (r = -0.452, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Adding glimepiride to current insulin treatment led to better improvement in glycemic control with a significant smaller daily insulin dose, and the increases in the serum HMW adiponectin levels may directly contribute to improvement glycemic control.

Chronic total artery occlusions in noninfarct-related coronary arteries

It has been rarely encountered some patients in clinical practice with coronary artery chronic total occlusion (CTO) on angiography but no any clinical history or electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, or left ventriculographic evidence of previous myocardial infarction. These noninfarct-related artery CTO (non-IRA CTO) lesions may be used as a clinical role model of endogenous cardioprotective mechanisms in addition to continuing the process of atherosclerosis. The objective of this study was to characterize the clinical characteristics of patients with non-IRA CTO patients and compared them to those with infarct-related CTO (IRA-CTO). We reviewed our invasive cardiology database searching for the CTO of any major coronary arteries, and assessed whether or not they have the clinical history or electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and left ventriculographic evidence of previous myocardial infarction. Interestingly, we detected that all these patients with non-IRA CTO had diabetes mellitus, and the clinical and demographic features of these non-IRA CTO patients were compared with age- and sex-matched diabetic IRA-CTO patients with regard to conventional coronary risk factors and the angiographic collateral grading system. There were total 99 CTO patients (49 patients with non-IRA CTO and 50 patients with IRA-CTO).All patients with non-IRA CTO had better collateral circulation (96 vs. 40% p < 0.001) compared with those having IRA-CTO. The only significant difference between the groups was the status of current smoking (4 vs. 88%; p < 0.001). The present study showed that the non-IRA CTOs were associated with diabetes mellitus and better collateral development compared with IRA-CTO. In diabetic patients, the concomitant smoking use may be harmful by preventing endogenous cardioprotective mechanisms.

Risk of acute coronary events associated with glyburide compared with gliclazide use in patients with type 2 diabetes: a nested case-control study

AIM

Sulfonylureas might increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular events; however, emerging evidence suggests there may be important differences amongst these drugs. Some, like glyburide, inhibit KATP channels in the heart and pancreas, while others, like gliclazide, are more likely to selectively inhibit KATP channels in the pancreas. We hypothesized that the risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) events would be higher in patients using glyburide compared with gliclazide.

METHODS

This nested case-control study used administrative health data from Alberta, Canada. New users of glyburide or gliclazide aged ≥66 years between 1998 and 2010 were included. Cases were individuals with an ACS-related hospitalization or death. Up to four controls were matched based on birth year, sex, cohort-entry year and follow-up time. Multivariable conditional logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (OR), controlling for baseline drug use and co-morbidities.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 7441 gliclazide and 13 884 glyburide users; 51.4% men, mean (s.d.) age 75.5 (6.6) years and mean (s.d.) duration of follow-up 5.5 (4.0) years. A total of 4239 patients had an ACS-related hospitalization or death and were matched to 16 723 controls. Compared with gliclazide use, glyburide use was associated with a higher risk (adjusted OR 1.14; 95% CI 1.06-1.23) of ACS-related hospitalization or death over 5.5 years (number needed to harm: 50).

CONCLUSION

In this observational study, glyburide use was associated with a 14% higher risk of ACS events compared with gliclazide use. Although the difference is small and probably to have implications at the population level rather than the individual patient or clinician, any causal inferences regarding sulfonylurea use and adverse cardiovascular risk should be tested in a large-scale randomized controlled trial.

Cardiovascular safety profile of currently available diabetic drugs

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality among patients with diabetes, underscoring the importance of choosing drugs that do not increase cardiovascular risk and reduce the risk of cardiovascular events. Since 2008, the US Food and Drug Administration has recommended that new drugs for type 2 diabetes undergo clinical trials to demonstrate cardiovascular safety in addition to glycemic benefit. In 2012, the European Medicines Agency issued a similar recommendation.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases from inception through August 2013 and compiled and reviewed the existing data on the cardiovascular safety profiles of currently available diabetic drugs.

RESULTS

While intensive glycemic control in diabetics has been consistently shown to reduce the risk of microvascular complications, the data on macrovascular risk reduction have not been as clear, and questions have been raised about possible increases in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

CONCLUSION

Careful selection of drug therapy-paying particular attention to cardiovascular safety-is important in optimizing diabetic therapy.

Oral hypoglycaemic agents and the development of non-fatal cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIMS

This study aimed to assess the risk of non-fatal cardiovascular events among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who are taking metformin, glimepiride or glyburide.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the National Health Insurance Research database in Taiwan, this retrospective cohort study identified 1159 patients with newly diagnosed T2DM from 1998 to 2007, 30 years and older and without a history of cardiovascular disease at baseline. Patients with cancer, liver cirrhosis or chronic kidney disease were excluded. On the basis of prescription, patients were grouped into three medication subcohorts: metformin (N = 595), glimepiride (N = 234) or glyburide (N = 330) monotherapy for 100% of the follow-up period without any oral anti-diabetic agents added or changed, by the end of 2009. Incidence and hazard ratios of non-fatal cardiovascular events including coronary artery disease, peripheral artery disease, stroke and heart failure among these three subcohorts were compared.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of non-fatal cardiovascular events was the highest for patients taking glyburide (169.1 per 1000 person-years), followed by for those taking glimepiride and metformin (95.2 and 49.1 per 1000 person-years, respectively). Compared with the adjusted hazard ratio for patients taking glyburide, the adjusted hazard ratio for those taking glimepiride was 0.52 (95% CI 0.40-0.69) and for those taking metformin was 0.31 (95% CI 0.24-0.40).

CONCLUSIONS

T2DM patients taking metformin and glimepiride are at lower risk of non-fatal cardiovascular events than those taking glyburide.

Mortality outcomes of different sulphonylurea drugs: the results of a 14-year cohort study of type 2 diabetic patients

OBJECTIVE

Available data about mortality of type 2 diabetic patients treated with different sulphonylureas are scarce and contradictory.

DESIGN

We evaluated the associations between all-cause and cause-specific mortality and treatments with different sulphonylureas in a retrospective cohort of type 2 diabetic patients from a diabetes clinic.

METHODS

All 1277 patients treated with sulphonylureas during 19961997 were enrolled: 159 patients were treated with tolbutamide, 977 glibenclamide and 141 gliclazide. The baseline data (centralised laboratory parameters, anthropometric data and presence of chronic complications) were abstracted from the clinical records. Information on vital status was collected from demographic files after 14-year follow-up. Adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were estimated with Cox (all-cause mortality) or Fine and Gray models (cause-specific mortality), including several potential confounders.

RESULTS

Five hundred and fifty-six patients died during the follow-up: 262 from cardiovascular causes, 158 from cancer and 136 from other causes. When compared with the glibenclamide users, the gliclazide and tolbutamide users showed a significantly lower cancer mortality (HR=0.30; 95% CI 0.16-0.55, and HR=0.48; 95% CI 0.29-0.79 respectively). These results were strongly confirmed in the 555 patients on sulphonylurea monotherapy. None of the patients who were treated with gliclazide monotherapy died from cancer during the follow-up, and the patients on tolbutamide treatment exhibited a lower cancer mortality than the glibenclamide users (HR=0.40; 95% CI 0.22-0.71). Data did not change after stratification for the duration of sulphonylurea treatment from diabetes diagnosis to the study enrollment.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer mortality was markedly reduced in the patients on gliclazide and tolbutamide treatment. These results suggest additional benefits for these drugs beyond their blood glucose-lowering effect and strongly advocate for further investigation.

Treatment persistence, hypoglycaemia and clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes patients with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and sulphonylureas: a primary care database analysis

AIMS

To investigate therapy persistence, frequency of hypoglycaemia and macrovascular outcomes among type 2 diabetes patients with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors (DPP-4) and sulphonylureas (SU).

METHODS

Data from 19,184 DPP-4 (mean age: 64 years; 56% males) and 31,110 SU users (69 years; 51%) with new prescriptions (index date), without additional antidiabetics except metformin, in 1201 general practises in Germany were analysed. Therapy discontinuation (prescription gap >90 days), hypoglycaemia [International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10)] and macrovascular outcomes (ICD-10) (2-year follow-up) were compared adjusting for age, sex, diabetes duration, metformin, previous hypoglycaemia, health insurance, hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, antihypertensives, lipid-lowering and antithrombotic drugs, microvascular complications and Charlson co-morbidity score using logistic or Cox regression models.

RESULTS

Two years after index date, DDP-4 (non-persistence: 39%) were associated with a lower risk of discontinuation compared to SU (49%) [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71-0.76]. Hypoglycaemias (≥1) were documented in 0.18% patients with DPP-4 and in 1.00% with SU [odds ratio (OR): 0.21; 95%CI: 0.08-0.57]. Hypoglycaemias were significantly associated with incident macrovascular complications (HR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1-2.2). Risk of macrovascular events was 26% lower in DPP-4 than in SU users.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of persistence with antidiabetic therapy is frequently found in primary care patients. DPP-4 was associated with lower therapy discontinuation and a fivefold reduced frequency of patients with hypoglycaemia compared to SU. The low absolute numbers of hypoglycaemias are most likely due to the fact that only severe events were documented. DPP-4 treatment was associated with reduced incidence of macrovascular events relative to SU in type 2 diabetes patients in primary care practises.

Comparative effectiveness of sulfonylurea and metformin monotherapy on cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

The effects of sulfonylureas and metformin on outcomes of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in type 2 diabetes are not well-characterized.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of sulfonylureas and metformin on CVD outcomes (acute myocardial infarction and stroke) or death.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

National Veterans Health Administration databases linked to Medicare files.

PATIENTS

Veterans who initiated metformin or sulfonylurea therapy for diabetes. Patients with chronic kidney disease or serious medical illness were excluded.

MEASUREMENTS

Composite outcome of hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction or stroke, or death, adjusted for baseline demographic characteristics; medications; cholesterol, hemoglobin A1c, and serum creatinine levels; blood pressure; body mass index; health care utilization; and comorbid conditions.

RESULTS

Among 253 690 patients initiating treatment (98 665 with sulfonylurea therapy and 155 025 with metformin therapy), crude rates of the composite outcome were 18.2 per 1000 person-years in sulfonylurea users and 10.4 per 1000 person-years in metformin users (adjusted incidence rate difference, 2.2 [95% CI, 1.4 to 3.0] more CVD events with sulfonylureas per 1000 person-years; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.21 [CI, 1.13 to 1.30]). Results were consistent for both glyburide (aHR, 1.26 [CI, 1.16 to 1.37]) and glipizide (aHR, 1.15 [CI, 1.06 to 1.26]) in subgroups by CVD history, age, body mass index, and albuminuria; in a propensity score-matched cohort analysis; and in sensitivity analyses.

LIMITATION

Most of the veterans in the study population were white men; data on women and minority groups were limited but reflective of the Veterans Health Administration population.

CONCLUSION

Use of sulfonylureas compared with metformin for initial treatment of diabetes was associated with an increased hazard of CVD events or death.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.