Evidence Hub

Effects of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors on major adverse cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes by race, ethnicity, and region: A meta-analysis

Qiu M, Qiu M, Ding L, Wei X, Wei W, Zhou H

Medicine, 2020

8 citations

Abstract

Background: The effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in type 2 diabetic subgroups defined by race, ethnicity, and region are unestablished.

Methods: We searched PubMed and Embase for related randomized controlled trials. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis, stratified by drug class, on MACE in various subgroups defined by 3 factors of interest (ie, race, ethnicity, and region) to estimate pooled hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval. Random-effects meta-regression was conducted to evaluate the differences between 2 drug classes.

Results: We included 11 randomized controlled trials for pooled analysis. Compared with placebo, SGLT2is and GLP-1 RAs significantly reduced the risk of MACE (HR ranged from 0.76 to 0.93) in most diabetic subgroups defined by 3 factors of interest. The 2 drug classes did not significantly reduced this risk in the Black race group (HR 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.70-1.20). The effect of the 2 drug classes on MACE was not significantly different in all diabetic subgroups of interest (P-value for subgroup differences ranged from .101 to .971).

Conclusions: SGLT2is and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists can significantly reduce the risk of MACE in most type 2 diabetic subgroups defined by race, ethnicity, and region, whereas they fail to do it in Black individuals.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free