Evidence Hub

Cardiovascular outcomes in trials of new antidiabetic drug classes: a network meta-analysis

Yue Fei, Man Fung Tsoi, Bernard Man Yung Cheung

Cardiovascular Diabetology, 2019

121,047 participants · 164 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent trials suggested that glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors reduced cardiovascular events. Comparative effectiveness of these new antidiabetic drug classes remains unclear. We therefore performed a network meta-analysis to compare the effect on cardiovascular outcomes among GLP-1 RAs, SGLT-2 and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and congress proceedings from recent cardiology conferences were searched up to April 20, 2019. Cardiovascular outcome trials and renal outcome trials reporting cardiovascular outcomes on GLP-1 RAs, SGLT-2 and DPP-4 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were included. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Secondary outcomes were nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, hospitalisation for heart failure (HF), and renal composite outcome. ORs and 95% CI were calculated using random-effects models. RESULTS: Fourteen trials enrolling 121,047 patients were included. SGLT-2 inhibitors reduced cardiovascular deaths and all-cause deaths compared to placebo (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.73-0.93 and OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77-0.92) and DPP-4 inhibitors (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70-0.99 and OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73-0.94), respectively. SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 RAs significantly reduced MACE (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82-0.95 and OR…

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: 121,047 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