Safety and effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors in a UK population with type 2 diabetes and aged over 70 years: an instrumental variable approach.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Older adults are under-represented in trials, meaning the benefits and risks of glucose-lowering agents in this age group are unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in people with type 2 diabetes aged over 70 years using causal analysis. METHODS: Hospital-linked UK primary care data (Clinical Practice Research Datalink, 2013-2020) were used to compare adverse events and effectiveness in individuals initiating SGLT2i compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i). Analysis was age-stratified: <70 years (SGLT2i n=66,810, DPP4i n=76,172), ≥70 years (SGLT2i n=10,419, DPP4i n=33,434). Outcomes were assessed using the instrumental variable causal inference method and prescriber preference as the instrument. RESULTS: Risk of diabetic ketoacidosis was increased with SGLT2i in those aged ≥70 (incidence rate ratio compared with DPP4i: 3.82 [95% CI 1.12, 13.03]), but not in those aged <70 (1.12 [0.41, 3.04]). However, incidence rates with SGLT2i in those ≥70 was low (29.6 [29.5, 29.7]) per 10,000 person-years. SGLT2i were associated with similarly increased risk of genital infection in both age groups (incidence rate ratio in those <70: 2.27 [2.03, 2.53]; ≥70: 2.16 [1.77, 2.63]). There was no evidence of an increased risk of volume depletion, poor micturition control, urinary frequency, falls or amputation with SGLT2i in either age group. In those ≥70, HbA1c reduction was similar between SGLT2i and DPP4i (-0.3 mmol/mol [-1.6, 1.1], -0.02% [0.1, 0.1]), but in those <70, SGLT2i were more effective (-4 mmol/mol [4.8, -3.1], -0.4% [-0.4, -0.3]). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Causal analysis suggests SGLT2i are effective in adults aged ≥70 years, but increase risk for genital infections and diabetic ketoacidosis. Our study extends RCT evidence to older adults with type 2 diabetes.

Recent UK type 2 diabetes treatment guidance represents a near whole population indication for SGLT2-inhibitor therapy.

Recent type 2 diabetes guidance from the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) proposes offering SGLT2-inhibitor therapy to people with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or heart failure, and considering SGLT2-inhibitor therapy for those at high-risk of cardiovascular disease defined as a 10-year cardiovascular risk of > 10% using the QRISK2 algorithm. We used a contemporary population-representative UK cohort of people with type 2 diabetes to assess the implications of this guidance. 93.1% of people currently on anti-hyperglycaemic treatment are now recommended or considered for SGLT2-inhibitor therapy under the new guidance, with the majority (59.6%) eligible on the basis of QRISK2 rather than established ASCVD or heart failure (33.6%). Applying these results to the approximately 2.20 million people in England currently on anti-hyperglycaemic medication suggests 1.75 million people will now be considered for additional SGLT2-inhibitor therapy, taking the total cost of SGLT2-inhibitor therapy in England to over £1 billion per year. Given that older people, those of non-white ethnic groups, and those at lower cardiovascular disease risk were underrepresented in the clinical trials which were used to inform this guidance, careful evaluation of the impact and safety of increased SGLT2-inhibitor prescribing across different populations is urgently required. Evidence of benefit should be weighed against the major cost implications for the UK National Health Service.

Time trends and geographical variation in prescribing of drugs for diabetes in England from 1998 to 2017.

AIMS: To measure the variation in prescribing of second-line non-insulin diabetes drugs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated time trends for the period 1998 to 2016, using England's publicly available prescribing datasets, and stratified these by the order in which they were prescribed to patients using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We calculated the proportion of each class of diabetes drug as a percentage of the total per year. We evaluated geographical variation in prescribing using general practice-level data for the latest 12 months (to August 2017), with aggregation to Clinical Commissioning Groups. We calculated percentiles and ranges, and plotted maps. RESULTS: Prescribing of therapy after metformin is changing rapidly. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor use has increased markedly, with DPP-4 inhibitors now the most common second-line drug (43% prescriptions in 2016). The use of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors also increased rapidly (14% new second-line, 27% new third-line prescriptions in 2016). There was wide geographical variation in choice of therapies and average spend per patient. In contrast, metformin was consistently used as a first-line treatment in accordance with guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: In England there is extensive geographical variation in the prescribing of diabetes drugs after metformin, and increasing use of higher-cost DPP-4 inhibitors and SGLT-2 inhibitors compared with low-cost sulphonylureas. Our findings strongly support the case for comparative effectiveness trials of current diabetes drugs.

Can clinical features be used to differentiate type 1 from type 2 diabetes? A systematic review of the literature.

OBJECTIVE: Clinicians predominantly use clinical features to differentiate type 1 from type 2 diabetes yet there are no evidence-based clinical criteria to aid classification of patients. Misclassification of diabetes is widespread (7-15% of cases), resulting in patients receiving inappropriate treatment. We sought to identify which clinical criteria could be used to discriminate type 1 and type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Systematic review of all diagnostic accuracy studies published since 1979 using clinical criteria to predict insulin deficiency (measured by C-peptide). DATA SOURCES: 14 databases including: MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process and EMBASE. The search strategy took the form of: (terms for diabetes) AND (terms for C-Peptide). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Diagnostic accuracy studies of any routinely available clinical predictors against a reference standard of insulin deficiency defined by cut-offs of C-peptide concentrations. No restrictions on race, age, language or country of origin. RESULTS: 10,917 abstracts were screened, and 231 full texts reviewed. 11 studies met inclusion criteria, but varied by age, race, year and proportion of participants who were C-peptide negative. Age at diagnosis was the most discriminatory feature in 7/9 studies where it was assessed, with optimal cut-offs (>70% mean sensitivity and specificity) across studies being <30 years or <40 years. Use of/time to insulin treatment and body mass index (BMI) were also discriminatory. When combining features, BMI added little over age at diagnosis and/or time to insulin (<1% improvement in classification). CONCLUSIONS: Despite finding only 11 studies, and considerable heterogeneity between studies, age at diagnosis and time to insulin were consistently the most discriminatory criteria. BMI, despite being widely used in clinical practice, adds little to these two criteria. The criteria identified are similar to the Royal College of General Practitioners National Health Service (RCGP/NHS) Diabetes classification guidelines, which use age at diagnosis <35 years and time to insulin <6 m. Until further studies are carried out, these guidelines represent a suitable classification scheme. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO reference CRD42012001736.