Evidence Hub

Glucose-Lowering and the Risk of Cardiovascular Events With Antidiabetic Therapies: A Systematic Review and Additive-Effects Network Meta-Analysis

de Carvalho LSF, Nogueira ACC, Bonilha I, Luchiari B, Benchimol A, Couri CEB, Borges JL, Barreto J et al.

Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022

740,295 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

Aim: To assess the impact of the HbA1c levels achieved with antidiabetic therapies (ADTs) on the risk of MACE.

Methods: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials. gov for RCTs published up to March 2022 reporting the occurrence of MACE and all-cause mortality in individuals with T2DM treated with all marketed ADTs, including a sample size ≥100 individuals in each study arm and follow-up ≥24 weeks. A systematic review and additive-effects network meta-analysis with random effects and a multivariate meta-regression were utilized to assess the impact of achieved HbA1c on incident MACE.

Results: We included 126 RCTs with 143 treatment arms, 270,874 individuals, and 740,295 individuals-years who were randomized to an active treatment vs. control group. Among all ADTs, only therapy with SGLT2i, GLP1-RA, or pioglitazone similarly reduced the risk of MACE compared to placebo. The achievement of HbA1c ≤ 7.0% in RCTs with the 3 drug classes in the active arm was associated with an adjusted HR of 0.91 (95% CI 0.80, 0.97; p = 0.017) compared with HbA1c>7.0%, without affecting all-cause mortality. These results, however, were not maintained among all ADTs.

Conclusions: Achieving lower glucose levels with SGLT2i, GLP1-RA, or pioglitazone is linearly associated with a reduced risk of MACEs, without affecting all-cause mortality.

Systematic review registration: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020213127, identifier: CRD42020213127.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 740,295 participants or records.

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