Dataset Information

Incretin based drugs and risk of acute pancreatitis in patients with type 2 diabetes: cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To determine whether the use of incretin based drugs, compared with sulfonylureas, is associated with an increased risk of acute pancreatitis.

Design

Population based cohort study.

Setting

680 general practices in the United Kingdom contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

Participants

From 1 January 2007 to 31 March 2012, 20 748 new users of incretin based drugs were compared with 51 712 users of sulfonylureas and followed up until 31 March 2013.

Main outcome measures

Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for acute pancreatitis in users of incretin based drugs compared with users of sulfonylureas. Models were adjusted for tenths of high dimensional propensity score (hdPS).

Results

The crude incidence rate for acute pancreatitis was 1.45 per 1000 patients per year (95% confidence interval 0.99 to 2.11) for incretin based drug users and 1.47 (1.23 to 1.76) for sulfonylurea users. The rate of acute pancreatitis associated with the use of incretin based drugs was not increased (hdPS adjusted hazard ratio: 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.70) relative to sulfonylurea use.

Conclusions

Compared with use of sulfonylureas, the use of incretin based drugs is not associated with an increased risk of acute pancreatitis. While this study is reassuring, it does not preclude a modest increased risk, and thus additional studies are needed to confirm these findings.

SUBMITTER: Faillie JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4002758 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists are associated with an increased risk of cholangiocarcinoma in adults with type 2 diabetes.DesignPopulation based cohort study.SettingGeneral practices contributing data to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.Participants154?162 adults newly treated with antidiabetic drugs between 1 January 2007 and 31 March 2017, followed until 31 March 2018.Main outcome measuresUse of DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists was modelled as a time varying variable and compared with use of other second or third line antidiabetic drugs. All exposures were lagged by one year to account for cancer latency and to minimise reverse causality. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals of incident cholangiocarcinoma associated with use of DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists, separately. A post hoc pharmacovigilance analysis was conducted using the World Health Organization's global individual case safety report database, VigiBase, to estimate reporting odds ratios of cholangiocarcinoma.ResultsDuring 614?274 person years of follow-up, 105 incident cholangiocarcinoma events occurred (rate 17.1 per 100?000 person years). Use of DPP-4 inhibitors was associated with a 77% increased hazard of cholangiocarcinoma (hazard ratio 1.77, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 3.01). Use of GLP-1 receptor agonists was associated with an increased hazard with a wide confidence interval (hazard ratio 1.97, 0.83 to 4.66). In the pharmacovigilance analysis, the use of DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists were both associated with increased reporting odds ratios for cholangiocarcinoma, compared with use of sulfonylureas or thiazolidinediones (1.63, 1.00 to 2.66, 4.73, 2.95 to 7.58, respectively).ConclusionCompared with use of other second or third line antidiabetic drugs, use of DPP-4 inhibitors, and possibly GLP-1 receptor agonists, might be associated with an increased risk of cholangiocarcinoma in adults with type 2 diabetes.

Project description:Type 2 diabetes in East Asians is characterized primarily by β-cell dysfunction, and with less adiposity and less insulin resistance compared with that in Caucasians. Such pathophysiological differences can determine the appropriate therapeutics for the disease. Incretins, glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1, are secreted in response to meal ingestion, and enhance insulin secretion glucose-dependently. Incretin-based drugs, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, that ameliorate β-cell dysfunction with limited hypoglycemia risk are now widely used in type 2 diabetes management. Recent meta-analyses of clinical trials on DPP-4i and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists found that the drugs were more effective in Asians, most likely because of amelioration of β-cell dysfunction. In addition, we found increased glycated hemoglobin-lowering effects of DPP-4i to be associated with intake of fish in type 2 diabetes, which suggests that dietary customs of East Asians might also underlie the greater efficacy of DPP-4i. Despite the limited risk, cases of severe hypoglycemia were reported for DPP-4i/sulfonylureas combinations. Importantly, hypoglycemia was more frequent in patients also receiving glibenclamide or glimepiride, which activate exchange protein directly activated by cyclic adenosine monophosphate 2, a critical mediator of incretin signaling, and was less frequent in patients receiving gliclazide, which does not activate exchange protein directly activated by cyclic adenosine monophosphate 2. Prevention of insulin-associated hypoglycemia by DPP-4i has gained attention with regard to the enhancement of hypoglycemia-induced glucagon secretion by insulinotropic polypeptide, but remains to be investigated in East Asians. Despite the safety issues, which are paramount and must be carefully monitored, the incretin-based drugs could have potential as a first choice therapy in East Asian type 2 diabetes patients.

Project description:Aims/hypothesisConcerns have been raised regarding a potential association of use of the incretin-based drugs dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1)-receptor agonists with risk of cholangiocarcinoma. We examined this association in nationwide data from three countries.MethodsWe used data from nationwide registers in Sweden, Denmark and Norway, 2007-2018, to conduct two cohort studies, one for DPP4 inhibitors and one for GLP-1-receptor agonists, to investigate the risk of incident cholangiocarcinoma compared with an active-comparator drug class (sulfonylureas). The cohorts included patients initiating treatment episodes with DPP4 inhibitors vs sulfonylureas, and GLP-1-receptor agonists vs sulfonylureas. We used Cox regression models, adjusted for potential confounders, to estimate hazard ratios from day 366 after treatment initiation to account for cancer latency.ResultsThe main analyses of DPP4 inhibitors included 1,414,144 person-years of follow-up from 222,577 patients receiving DPP4 inhibitors (median [IQR] follow-up time, 4.5 [2.6-7.0] years) and 123,908 patients receiving sulfonylureas (median [IQR] follow-up time, 5.1 [2.9-7.8] years) during which 350 cholangiocarcinoma events occurred. Use of DPP4 inhibitors, compared with sulfonylureas, was not associated with a statistically significant increase in risk of cholangiocarcinoma (incidence rate 26 vs 23 per 100,000 person-years; adjusted HR, 1.15 [95% CI 0.90, 1.46]; absolute rate difference 3 [95% CI -3, 10] events per 100,000 person-years). The main analyses of GLP-1-receptor agonists included 1,036,587 person-years of follow-up from 96,813 patients receiving GLP-1-receptor agonists (median [IQR] follow-up time, 4.4 [2.4-6.9] years) and 142,578 patients receiving sulfonylureas (median [IQR] follow-up time, 5.5 [3.2-8.1] years) during which 249 cholangiocarcinoma events occurred. Use of GLP-1-receptor agonists was not associated with a statistically significant increase in risk of cholangiocarcinoma (incidence rate 26 vs 23 per 100,000 person-years; adjusted HR, 1.25 [95% CI 0.89, 1.76]; absolute rate difference 3 [95% CI -5, 13] events per 100,000 patient-years).Conclusions/interpretationIn this analysis using nationwide data from three countries, use of DPP4 inhibitors and GLP-1-receptor agonists, compared with sulfonylureas, was not associated with a significantly increased risk of cholangiocarcinoma.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To determine whether the use of incretin based drugs compared with sulfonylureas is associated with an increased risk of incident pancreatic cancer in people with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN:Population based cohort. SETTING:Large, international, multicentre study combining the health records from six participating sites in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS:A cohort of 972,384 patients initiating antidiabetic drugs between 1 January 2007 and 30 June 2013, with follow-up until 30 June 2014. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Within each cohort we conducted nested case-control analyses, where incident cases of pancreatic cancer were matched with up to 20 controls on sex, age, cohort entry date, duration of treated diabetes, and duration of follow-up. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for incident pancreatic cancer were estimated, comparing use of incretin based drugs with use of sulfonylureas, with drug use lagged by one year for latency purposes. Secondary analyses assessed whether the risk varied by class (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists) or by duration of use (cumulative duration of use and time since treatment initiation). Site specific hazard ratios were pooled using random effects models. RESULTS:During 2,024,441 person years of follow-up (median follow-up ranging from 1.3 to 2.8 years; maximum 8 years), 1221 patients were newly diagnosed as having pancreatic cancer (incidence rate 0.60 per 1000 person years). Compared with sulfonylureas, incretin based drugs were not associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer (pooled adjusted hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.23). Similarly, the risk did not vary by class and evidence of a duration-response relation was lacking. CONCLUSIONS:In this large, population based study the use of incretin based drugs was not associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer compared with sulfonylureas. Although this potential adverse drug reaction will need to be monitored long term owing to the latency of the cancer, these findings provide some reassurance on the safety of incretin based drugs.

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the risk of pancreatitis associated with the use of incretin-based treatments in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov.Eligibility criteriaRandomised and non-randomised controlled clinical trials, prospective or retrospective cohort studies, and case-control studies of treatment with glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus compared with placebo, lifestyle modification, or active anti-diabetic drugs.Data collection and analysisPairs of trained reviewers independently screened for eligible studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. A modified Cochrane tool for randomised controlled trials and a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies were used to assess bias. We pooled data from randomised controlled trials using Peto odds ratios, and conducted four prespecified subgroup analyses and a post hoc subgroup analysis. Because of variation in outcome measures and forms of data, we describe the results of observational studies without a pooled analysis.Results60 studies (n=353,639), consisting of 55 randomised controlled trials (n=33,350) and five observational studies (three retrospective cohort studies, and two case-control studies; n=320,289) were included. Pooled estimates of 55 randomised controlled trials (at low or moderate risk of bias involving 37 pancreatitis events, raw event rate 0.11%) did not suggest an increased risk of pancreatitis with incretins versus control (odds ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 2.17). Estimates by type of incretin suggested similar results (1.05 (0.37 to 2.94) for GLP-1 agonists v control; 1.06 (0.46 to 2.45) for DPP-4 inhibitors v control). Analyses according to the type of control, mode, duration of treatment, and individual incretin agents suggested no differential effect by subgroups, and sensitivity analyses by alternative statistical modelling and effect measures did not show important differences in effect estimates. Three retrospective cohort studies (moderate to high risk of bias, involving 1466 pancreatitis events, raw event rate 0.47%) also did not suggest an increased risk of pancreatitis associated with either exenatide (adjusted odds ratios 0.93 (0.63 to 1.36) in one study and 0.9 (0.6 to 1.5) in another) or sitagliptin (adjusted hazard ratio 1.0, 0.7 to 1.3); a case-control study at moderate risk of bias (1003 cases, 4012 controls) also suggested no significant association (adjusted odds ratio 0.98, 0.69 to 1.38). Another case-control study (1269 cases, 1269 controls) at moderate risk of bias, however, suggested that the use of either exenatide or sitagliptin was associated with significantly increased odds of acute pancreatitis (use within two years v no use, adjusted odds ratio 2.07, 1.36 to 3.13).ConclusionsThe available evidence suggests that the incidence of pancreatitis among patients using incretins is low and that the drugs do not increase the risk of pancreatitis. Current evidence, however, is not definitive, and more carefully designed and conducted observational studies are warranted to definitively establish the extent, if any, of increased risk.