Dataset Information

Sulfonylureas as second line drugs in type 2 diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular and hypoglycaemic events: population based cohort study.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To assess whether adding or switching to sulfonylureas is associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular death, all cause mortality, and severe hypoglycaemia, compared with remaining on metformin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN:Population based cohort study. SETTING:General practices contributing data to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. PARTICIPANTS:Patients with type 2 diabetes initiating metformin monotherapy between 1998 and 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Using the prevalent new-user cohort design we matched 1:1 patients adding or switching to sulfonylureas with those remaining on metformin monotherapy on high-dimensional propensity score, haemoglobin A1c, and number of previous metformin prescriptions. The two groups were compared using Cox proportional hazards models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the study outcomes. RESULTS:Among 77?138 metformin initiators, 25?699 added or switched to sulfonylureas during the study period. During a mean follow-up of 1.1 years, sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (incidence rate 7.8 v 6.2 per 1000 person years, hazard ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.56), all cause mortality (27.3 v 21.5, 1.28, 1.15 to 1.44), and severe hypoglycaemia (5.5 v 0.7, 7.60, 4.64 to 12.44) compared with continuing metformin monotherapy. There was a trend towards increased risks of ischaemic stroke (6.7 v 5.5, 1.24, 0.99 to 1.56) and cardiovascular death (9.4 v 8.1, 1.18, 0.98 to 1.43). Compared with adding sulfonylureas, switching to sulfonylureas was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (hazard ratio 1.51, 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 2.24) and all-cause mortality (1.23, 1.00 to 1.50). No differences were observed for ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular death, or severe hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSIONS:Sulfonylureas as second line drugs are associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, all cause mortality, and severe hypoglycaemia, compared with remaining on metformin monotherapy. Continuing metformin when introducing sulfonylureas appears to be safer than switching.

SUBMITTER: Douros A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6050517 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Sulfonylureas as second line drugs in type 2 diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular and hypoglycaemic events: population based cohort study.

Douros Antonios A Dell'Aniello Sophie S Yu Oriana Hoi Yun OHY Filion Kristian B KB Azoulay Laurent L Suissa Samy S

BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20180718

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess whether adding or switching to sulfonylureas is associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular death, all cause mortality, and severe hypoglycaemia, compared with remaining on metformin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes.<h4>Design</h4>Population based cohort study.<h4>Setting</h4>General practices contributing data to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.<h4>Participants</h4>Patients with type 2 diabetes i ...[more]

PMID: 30021781

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceUnderstanding cardiovascular outcomes of initiating second-line antidiabetic medications (ADMs) may help inform treatment decisions after metformin alone is not sufficient or not tolerated. To date, no studies have compared the cardiovascular effects of all major second-line ADMs during this early decision point in the pharmacologic management of type 2 diabetes.ObjectiveTo examine the association of second-line ADM classes with major adverse cardiovascular events.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort study among 132 737 insured adults with type 2 diabetes who started therapy with a second-line ADM after taking either metformin alone or no prior ADM. This study used 2011-2015 US nationwide administrative claims data. Data analysis was performed from January 2017 to October 2018.ExposuresDipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, thiazolidinediones (TZDs), basal insulin, and sulfonylureas or meglitinides (both referred to as sulfonylureas hereafter). The DPP-4 inhibitors served as the comparison group in all analyses.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was time to first cardiovascular event after starting the second-line ADM. This composite outcome was based on hospitalization for the following cardiovascular conditions: congestive heart failure, stroke, ischemic heart disease, or peripheral artery disease.ResultsAmong 132 737 insured adult patients with type 2 diabetes (men, 55%; aged 45-64 years, 58%; white, 63%), there were 3480 incident cardiovascular events during 169 384 person-years of follow-up. Patients were censored after the first cardiovascular event, discontinuation of insurance coverage, transition from International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) to end of ICD-9 coding, or 2 years of follow-up. After adjusting for patient, prescriber, and health plan characteristics, the risk of composite cardiovascular events after starting GLP-1 receptor agonists was lower than DPP-4 inhibitors (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.63-0.96), but this finding was not significant in all sensitivity analyses. Cardiovascular event rates after starting treatment with SGLT-2 inhibitors (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.57-1.53) and TZDs (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.76-1.11) were not statistically different from DPP-4 inhibitors. The comparative risk of cardiovascular events was higher after starting treatment with sulfonylureas (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.23-1.49) or basal insulin (HR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.81-2.27) than DPP-4 inhibitors.Conclusions and relevanceAmong insured adult patients with type 2 diabetes initiating second-line ADM therapy, the short-term cardiovascular outcomes of GLP-1 receptor agonists, SGLT-2 inhibitors, and DPP-4 inhibitors were similar. Higher cardiovascular risk was associated with use of sulfonylureas or basal insulin compared with newer ADM classes. Clinicians may consider prescribing GLP-1 receptor agonists, SGLT-2 inhibitors, or DPP-4 inhibitors more routinely after metformin rather than sulfonylureas or basal insulin.

Project description:BackgroundSafety of sulfonylurea drugs in the treatment of Type 2 Diabetes is still under debate. The aim of this study was to compare the all-cause mortality and cardiovascular adverse events of sulfonylureas and drugs with a low risk for hypoglycaemia in adults with type 2 diabetes.MethodsSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sourcesMEDLINE (PubMed, OVID), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, WOS and Lilacs.Study selectionRandomised controlled head-to-head trials that compared sulfonylureas with active control with low hypoglycaemic potential in adults (≥ 18 years old) with type 2 diabetes published up to August 2015. The drug classes involved in the analysis were metformin, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists.OutcomesThe primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. The secondary endpoints were MACE, cardiovascular events and severe hypoglycaemia.Synthesis of resultsTwo reviewers checked study eligibility, independently extracted data and assessed quality with disagreements resolved through discussion. We assessed the risk of bias of the included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials v2. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were estimated by using fixed effects model. The study is registered on PROSPERO (26/05/2016 CRD42016038780).ResultsOur final analysis comprised 31 studies (26,204 patients, 11,711 patients given sulfonylureas and 14,493 given comparator drugs). In comparison to drugs with low hypoglycaemic potential, sulfonylureas had higher odds for all-cause mortality (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.00-1.75), MACE (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.07-1.61), myocardial infarction (fatal and non-fatal) (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.17-2.38) and hypoglycaemia (OR 5.24, 95% CI 4.20-6.55). Subsequent sensitivity analysis revealed differences in the effect of sulfonylureas, with an increased risk of all-cause mortality with glipizide but not the other molecules.ConclusionOur meta-analysis raises concern about the safety of SUs compared to alternative drugs involved in current analysis. Important differences may exist within the drug class, and glimepiride seems to have best safety profile.

Project description:BackgroundType 2 diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease affecting millions of people worldwide. Achieving and maintaining glycemic control is essential to prevent or delay complications and different strategies are available as second-line treatment options for patients with type 2 diabetes who do not achieve glycemic control with metformin monotherapy.ObjectiveThe aim of this work is to describe the impact of initiating a combination treatment to reduce glycated hemoglobin in patients with type 2 diabetes with insufficient glycemic control.MethodsWe included patients with a type 2 diabetes diagnosis between 2015 and 2020 at the Information System for Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP) database in Catalonia, Spain. The primary outcome was the time to glycated hemoglobin control (≤ 7%) during the first 720 days, expressed as the restricted mean survival time. Adjusted differences of the restricted mean survival time were compared to analyze the performance of each treatment versus the combination with a sulfonylurea. Adherence was calculated as the medication possession ratio using an algorithm to model treatment exposure.ResultsA total of 28,425 patients were analyzed. The most frequent combinations were those with sulfonylureas and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. All treatments reduced glycated hemoglobin and the restricted mean survival time for the sulfonylurea treatment was 455 (451-459) days although combinations with glucagon-like peptide-1 and insulin reached glycemic control earlier, - 126 days (- 152 to - 100, p < 0.001) and - 69 days (- 88 to - 50, p < 0.001), respectively. Adherence was high in all groups apart from the insulin combination and had a significant effect in reducing glycated hemoglobin except in sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors and insulin. Glucagon-like peptide-1 and sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors showed significant reductions in weight.ConclusionsPatients achieved the glycated hemoglobin goal with second-line treatments. Glucagon-like peptide-1 and insulin combinations achieved the goal earlier than sulfonylurea combinations. Adherence significantly reduced the time to glycated hemoglobin control except for the combination with sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors.

Project description:BackgroundOutcomes of diabetes screening in contemporary, multi-ethnic populations are unknown. We examined the association of prior outpatient diabetes screening with the risks of cardiovascular events and mortality in Ontario, Canada.MethodsWe conducted a population-based cohort study using administrative databases among adults aged ≥ 20 years with incident diabetes diagnosed during 2014-2016. The exposure was outpatient diabetes screening performed within 3 years prior to diabetes diagnosis. The co-primary outcomes were (1) a composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalization for myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, and (2) all-cause mortality (followed up until 2018). We calculated standardized rates of each outcome and conducted cause-specific hazard modelling to determine the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of the outcomes, adjusting for prespecified confounders and accounting for the competing risk of death.ResultsWe included 178,753 Ontarians with incident diabetes (70.2% previously screened). Individuals receiving prior screening were older (58.3 versus 53.4 years) and more likely to be women (49.6% versus 40.0%) than previously unscreened individuals. Individuals receiving prior screening had relatively lower standardized event rates than those without prior screening across all outcomes (composite: 12.8 versus 18.1, mortality: 8.2 versus 11.1 per 1000 patient-years). After multivariable adjustment, prior screening was associated with 34% and 32% lower risks of the composite (HR 0.66, 0.63-0.69) and mortality (0.68, 0.64-0.72) outcomes. Among those receiving prior screening, a result in the prediabetes range was associated with lower risks of the composite (0.82, 0.77-0.88) and mortality (0.71, 0.66-0.78) outcomes than a result in the normoglycemic range.ConclusionsPreviously screened individuals with diabetes had lower risks of cardiovascular events and mortality versus previously unscreened individuals. Better risk assessment tools are needed to support wider and more appropriate uptake of diabetes screening, especially among young adults.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of multiple risk factor control (MRFC) at reducing mortality and cardiovascular events in diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD) in clinical practice. DESIGN:Population-based cohort study. SETTING:Primary care database in the UK, linked with inpatient and mortality data. PARTICIPANTS:Participants aged 40-79 years with type 2 diabetes and valid serum creatinine measurements, including 11?431 participants with CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate: eGFR 15-59?mL/min/1.73?m2) and 36?429 participants with non-CKD (eGFR ?60?mL/min/1.73?m2). EXPOSURES:MRFC consisted of four components: Haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <53?mmol/mol (<7.0%), blood pressure <140/90?mm Hg, total cholesterol <5?mmol/L and no smoking. The main exposure variable was the number of risk factors controlled at baseline. OUTCOME MEASURES:All-cause and cardiovascular mortality in the overall participants. Cardiovascular events, including coronary heart disease and stroke, in participants limited to those without a history of cardiovascular diseases at baseline. RESULTS:In participants with CKD, 37% or 13% met three or four MRFC criteria, respectively. Increasing numbers of risk factors controlled were associated with lower relative hazards for all outcomes studied compared with those meeting no or one criterion. For participants with CKD meeting four criteria, the adjusted HR for all-cause mortality was 0.60 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.69) and the adjusted subdistribution HR for cardiovascular mortality was 0.60 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.70), considering a competing risk of non-cardiovascular death. Participants meeting four criteria also had lower relative hazards for coronary heart disease (adjusted subdistribution HR 0.73, 95%?CI 0.59 to 0.91) and stroke (0.63, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.89), considering death as a competing risk. CONCLUSIONS:MRFC may lower the increased risks for mortality and cardiovascular events in people with diabetes and CKD. Further research is needed to evaluate appropriateness of MRFC according to individual participants' health status for improved management of cardiovascular risks in this population.

Dataset Information

Sulfonylureas as second line drugs in type 2 diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular and hypoglycaemic events: population based cohort study.

Publications

Sulfonylureas as second line drugs in type 2 diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular and hypoglycaemic events: population based cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets