Dataset Information

Cardiovascular Outcomes Comparison of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors versus Sulfonylurea as Add-on Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Recent studies have raised concern about the cardiovascular safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors. We performed a systematic review through meta-analysis to compare cardiovascular outcomes of sulfonylurea (SU) versus DPP4 inhibitors when used in combination with metformin.

Methods

After searching for trials using combination therapy of metformin with DPP4 inhibitor or SU in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase, one prospective observation study and 15 randomized controlled studies were selected.

Results

Regarding the primary analysis endpoint, there were no significant differences in the risk of all-cause mortality between SU and DPP4 inhibitors as an add-on therapy to metformin (random-effect relative risk [RR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.33; p=0.811; I²=0%). Cardiovascular death was also similar between the two drug classes in the five studies which reported outcomes (random-effect RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.83-1.27; p=0.517; I²=0%). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac events (MACE), coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke and heart failure. However, there were less hypoglycemic events and weight gain in the DPP4 inhibitor group as compared with the SU group (random-effect RR, 3.79; 95% CI, 1.53-9.39; p<0.001; I²=98.2 and weighted mean difference, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.07-2.29; p<0.001; I²=94.7, respectively).

Conclusion

As add-on therapy to metformin, there were no significant differences in all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality between DPP4 inhibitors and SUs.

SUBMITTER: Jeon WK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8159755 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionNo study has compared the effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4is) on patients' quality-of-life (QOL).MethodsWe enrolled 253 drug-naïve Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), randomly assigned them into a dapagliflozin (SGLT2i) group or DPP4i group in approximately 1:1 ratio, and monitored them for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects indicating improvement in the "overall quality of life" domain of SHIELD-WQ-9 at week 24. Secondary endpoints included other domains of SHIELD-WQ-9, DTR-QOL, EQ-5D-5L, medication preference, medication adherence, diet therapy adherence, body weight, body mass index (BMI), abdominal circumference, HbA1c, and frequency of adverse events.ResultsThe proportion of subjects indicating improvement in the "overall quality of life" domain of SHIELD-WQ-9 at week 24 was higher in the dapagliflozin group (28.4%) than in the DPP4i group (18.6%) (p = 0.08). The proportion of subjects indicating improvement in the "physical health" domain of SHIELD-WQ-9 at week 24 was significantly higher in the dapagliflozin group (42.2%) than in the DPP4i group (23.7%) (p = 0.004). Total scores and domain 1 scores of DTR-QOL showed greater improvement in the dapagliflozin group (14.3 ± 15.6 and 15.5 ± 20.8, respectively) than in the DPP4i group (10.2 ± 15.6 and 10.3 ± 19.5, respectively) (both p = 0.05). EQ-5D-5L scores had significantly improved in the DPP4i group (0.023 ± 0.088) (p = 0.005); the intergroup difference was not significant (p = 0.14). Body weight (p < 0.001), BMI (p < 0.001), and abdominal circumference (p = 0.019) had significantly decreased in the dapagliflozin group compared with the corresponding values in the DPP4i group.ConclusionDapagliflozin showed a comparable or more favorable benefit on Japanese patients' QOL compared with DPP4is. Dapagliflozin was well tolerated. It significantly reduced body weight, which was significantly correlated with improvement in the patients' QOL. This study demonstrates that dapagliflozin can be used as a first-line drug for T2DM in Japan with a beneficial impact on patients' QOL.Trial registrationUniversity Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000030514); Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCTs051180165).

Project description:IntroductionClinical trials conducted in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) treated with glucose-lowering drugs and examining cardiovascular-related outcomes have yielded mixed results. In this work, we aimed to assess the relative treatment effects of empagliflozin versus sitagliptin and saxagliptin (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors) on cardiovascular-related outcomes in patients with T2DM.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature review to identify clinical trials assessing cardiovascular-related outcomes for sitagliptin-, saxagliptin-, and empagliflozin-treated patients with T2DM. A network meta-analysis of indirect treatment comparisons was conducted in a Bayesian framework. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% credible intervals (CrI) were computed for six cardiovascular-related outcomes to estimate the relative efficacies of these agents.ResultsEmpagliflozin showed a statistically significant superiority over saxagliptin (HR 0.60; 95% CrI 0.46-0.80) and sitagliptin (HR 0.60; 95% CrI 0.46-0.79) to reduce the risk for cardiovascular-related mortality. For all-cause mortality, empagliflozin showed a statistically significant risk reduction compared to saxagliptin (HR 0.61; 95% CrI 0.49-0.76) and sitagliptin (HR 0.67; 95% CrI 0.54-0.83). A similar pattern was observed in the risk reduction for hospitalization due to heart failure, where empagliflozin was found to be statistically significantly superior to saxagliptin (HR 0.51; 95% CrI 0.37-0.70) and sitagliptin (HR 0.65; 95% CrI 0.47-0.90). Empagliflozin was not statistically significantly different to sitagliptin and saxagliptin with regard to the risk of a composite endpoint composed of death, stroke or myocardial infarction.ConclusionIn this indirect comparison to the DPP-4 inhibitors saxagliptin and sitagliptin, empagliflozin significantly lowered the risk of cardiovascular-related mortality, all-cause mortality and hospitalizations due to heart failure.FundingBoehringer Ingelheim GmbH.