Evidence Hub

Comparative Safety of Second-Line Antihyperglycemic Agents in Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: A Multinational Real-World Evidence From LEGEND-T2DM.

Kim C, Bu F, Blacketer C, Ostropolets A, Duarte-Salles T, Viernes B, Falconer T, Pistillo A et al.

medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025

8 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: As prescribing of newer antihyperglycemic agents expands, there remains limited comparative safety data for older adults-a population particularly vulnerable to adverse drug events and underrepresented in clinical trials. We aimed to evaluate the real-world safety of second-line antihyperglycemic agents among older adults with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS: We conducted a multinational cohort study using nine harmonized electronic health record and claims databases from the U.S. and Europe, applying a consistent analytical framework based on the LEGEND-T2DM initiative. Among adults aged ≥65 years who initiated a second-line agent after metformin monotherapy, we compared safety outcomes across four drug classes: GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RAs), SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2Is), DPP-4 inhibitors (DPP4Is), and sulfonylureas (SUs). We used propensity score adjustment, empirical calibration, and prespecified diagnostics to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for 18 safety outcomes.

RESULTS: In a cohort of 1.8 million older adults, both GLP1RAs and SGLT2Is were linked to significantly lower risks of hypoglycemia (HR 0.21 [95% CI, 0.16-0.27] for GLP1RA vs SU; HR 0.21 [0.13-0.33] for SGLT2I vs SU) and hyperkalemia (HR 0.63 [0.50-0.81] for GLP1RA vs SU; HR 0.75 [0.63-0.90] for SGLT2I vs SU) and peripheral edema (HR 0.81 [0.71-0.92] for GLP1RAs vs. DPP4Is; HR 0.62 [0.46-0.84] for SGLT2Is vs. SU). However, SGLT2Is were associated with a higher risk of diabetic ketoacidosis compared to both…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 8 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