Effect of Sotagliflozin on Early Mortality and Heart Failure-Related Events: A Post Hoc Analysis of SOLOIST-WHF.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 25% of patients admitted to hospitals for worsening heart failure (WHF) are readmitted within 30 days. OBJECTIVES: The authors conducted a post hoc analysis of the SOLOIST-WHF (Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Post-WHF) trial to evaluate the efficacy of sotagliflozin versus placebo to decrease mortality and HF-related events among patients who began study treatment on or before discharge from their index hospitalization. METHODS: The main endpoint of interest was cardiovascular death or HF-related event (HF hospitalization or urgent care visit) occurring within 90 and 30 days after discharge for the index WHF hospitalization. Treatment comparisons were by proportional hazards models, generating HRs, 95% CIs, and P values. RESULTS: Of 1,222 randomized patients, 596 received study drug on or before their date of discharge. Sotagliflozin reduced the main endpoint at 90 days after discharge (HR: 0.54 [95% CI: 0.35-0.82]; P = 0.004) and at 30 days (HR: 0.49 [95% CI: 0.27-0.91]; P = 0.023) and all-cause mortality at 90 days (HR: 0.39 [95% CI: 0.17-0.88]; P = 0.024). In subgroup analyses, sotagliflozin reduced the 90-day main endpoint regardless of sex, age, estimated glomerular filtration rate, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, left ventricular ejection fraction, or mineralocorticoid receptor agonist use. Sotagliflozin was well-tolerated but with slightly higher rates of diarrhea and volume-related events than placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Starting sotagliflozin before discharge in patients with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for WHF significantly decreased cardiovascular deaths and HF events through 30 and 90 days after discharge, emphasizing the importance of beginning sodium glucose cotransporter treatment before discharge.

Use of Real-World Data in Population Science to Improve the Prevention and Care of Diabetes-Related Outcomes.

The past decade of population research for diabetes has seen a dramatic proliferation of the use of real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) generation from non-research settings, including both health and non-health sources, to influence decisions related to optimal diabetes care. A common attribute of these new data is that they were not collected for research purposes yet have the potential to enrich the information around the characteristics of individuals, risk factors, interventions, and health effects. This has expanded the role of subdisciplines like comparative effectiveness research and precision medicine, new quasi-experimental study designs, new research platforms like distributed data networks, and new analytic approaches for clinical prediction of prognosis or treatment response. The result of these developments is a greater potential to progress diabetes treatment and prevention through the increasing range of populations, interventions, outcomes, and settings that can be efficiently examined. However, this proliferation also carries an increased threat of bias and misleading findings. The level of evidence that may be derived from RWD is ultimately a function of the data quality and the rigorous application of study design and analysis. This report reviews the current landscape and applications of RWD in clinical effectiveness and population health research for diabetes and summarizes opportunities and best practices in the conduct, reporting, and dissemination of RWD to optimize its value and limit its drawbacks.

Protein Biomarkers and Cardiovascular Outcomes in People With Type 2 Diabetes and Acute Coronary Syndrome: The ELIXA Biomarker Study.

OBJECTIVE: To use protein biomarkers to identify people with type 2 diabetes at high risk of cardiovascular outcomes and death. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Biobanked serum from 4,957 ELIXA (Evaluation of Lixisenatide in Acute Coronary Syndrome) trial participants was analyzed. Forward-selection Cox models identified independent protein risk factors for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and death that were compared with a previously validated biomarker panel. RESULTS: NT-proBNP and osteoprotegerin predicted both outcomes. In addition, trefoil factor 3 predicted MACE, and angiopoietin-2 predicted death (C = 0.70 and 0.79, respectively, compared with 0.63 and 0.66 for clinical variables alone). These proteins had all previously been identified and validated. Notably, C statistics for just NT-proBNP plus clinical risk factors were 0.69 and 0.78 for MACE and death, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: NT-proBNP and other proteins independently predict cardiovascular outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes following acute coronary syndrome. Adding other biomarkers only marginally increased NT-proBNP's prognostic value.

Efficacy and safety outcomes of dulaglutide by baseline HbA1c: A post hoc analysis of the REWIND trial.

AIM: To assess cardiovascular, glycaemic, weight and safety outcomes of long-term treatment with dulaglutide 1.5 mg compared with placebo in patients with a baseline HbA1c of less than 7% versus 7% or higher. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intention-to-treat analyses were performed on REWIND participants with a baseline HbA1c measurement, using Cox proportional hazards regression and mixed model for repeated measures. Subgroup analyses with factors for baseline HbA1c categories and their interaction with treatment group, as well as analyses within the HbA1c subgroups, were conducted. Additionally, sensitivity analyses were performed for baseline HbA1c subgroups of 6.5% or less and more than 6.5%. RESULTS: Of the 9876 eligible participants, 3921 and 5955 had a baseline HbA1c of less than 7% and 7% or higher, respectively. Mean baseline HbA1c was 6.3% and 8.0% and the mean duration of diabetes was 9.0 and 11.6 years in the respective subgroups. The less than 7% subgroup was slightly older and less frequently insulin-treated. There was no evidence of a differential dulaglutide treatment effect on body mass index (BMI) reduction, cardiovascular or safety outcomes of interest between the baseline HbA1c subgroups. Treatment-by-baseline HbA1c group interaction was significant for HbA1c change from baseline (P < .001), with a greater reduction in the subgroup with higher baseline HbA1c values. Sensitivity analyses by baseline HbA1c subgroups of 6.5% or less and more than 6.5% showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: The reduced incidence of cardiovascular events, and the reduction in BMI in participants treated with once-weekly dulaglutide, were independent of the baseline HbA1c level. Conversely, participants with a higher baseline HbA1c level had greater reductions in HbA1c. Dulaglutide has a positive benefit-risk profile and can be considered in patients with comparatively well-controlled HbA1c levels seeking optimal metabolic control and cardiovascular benefits.

Novel Indices of Cognitive Impairment and Incident Cardiovascular Outcomes in the REWIND Trial.

CONTEXT: Low cognitive scores are risk factors for cardiovascular outcomes. Whether this relationship is stronger using novel cognitive indices is unknown. METHODS: Participants in the Researching Cardiovascular Events with a Weekly Incretin in Diabetes (REWIND) trial who completed both the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score and Digit Substitution Test (DSST) at baseline (N = 8772) were included. These scores were used to identify participants with baseline substantive cognitive impairment (SCI), defined as a baseline score on either the MoCA or DSST ≥ 1.5 SD below either score's country-specific mean, or SCI-GM, which was based on a composite index of both scores calculated as their geometric mean (GM), and defined as a score that was ≥ 1.5 SD below their country's average GM. Relationships between these measures and incident major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and either stroke or death were analyzed. RESULTS: Compared with 7867 (89.7%) unaffected participants, the 905 (10.3%) participants with baseline SCI had a higher incidence of MACE (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.34; 95% CI 1.11, 1.62; P = 0.003), and stroke or death (unadjusted HR 1.60; 95% CI 1.33, 1.91; P < 0.001). Stronger relationships were noted for SCI-GM and MACE (unadjusted HR 1.61; 95% CI 1.28, 2.01; P < 0.001), and stroke or death (unadjusted HR 1.85; 95% CI 1.50, 2.30; P < 0.001). For SCI-GM but not SCI, all these relationships remained significant in models that adjusted for up to 10 SCI risk factors. CONCLUSION: Country-standardized SCI-GM was a strong independent predictor of cardiovascular events in people with type 2 diabetes in the REWIND trial.

Risk Estimates of Imminent Cardiovascular Death and Heart Failure Hospitalization Are Improved Using Serial Natriuretic Peptide Measurements in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and Type 2 Diabetes.

Background Baseline and temporal changes in natriuretic peptide (NP) concentrations have strong prognostic value with regard to long-term cardiovascular risk stratification. To increase the clinical utility of NP sampling for patient management, we wanted to assess the incremental predictive value of 2 serial NP measurements compared with a single measurement and provide absolute risk estimates for cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (HFH) within 6 months based on 2 serial NP measurements. Methods and Results Consecutive NP samples obtained from 5393 patients with a recent coronary event and type 2 diabetes enrolled in the ELIXA (Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes After Acute Coronary Syndrome During Treatment With Lixisenatide) trial were used to construct best logistic regression models with outcome of cardiovascular death or HFH (136 events). Absolute risk estimates of cardiovascular death or HFH within 6 months using either BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide) or NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-BNP) serial measurements were depicted based on the concentrations of 2 serial NP measurements. During the 6-month follow-up periods, the incidence rate (±95% CIs) of cardiovascular death or HFH for patients was 14.0 (11.8‒16.6) per 1000 patient-years. Risk prediction depended on NP concentrations from both prior and current sampling. NP sampling 6 months apart improved the predictive value and reclassification of patients compared with a single sample (AUROC [Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve]: BNP, P=0.003. NT-proBNP, P<0.0001), with a majority of moderate-risk patients (6-month risk between 1% and 10%) being reclassified on the basis of the second NP sample. Conclusions Serial NP measurements improved prediction of imminent cardiovascular death or HFH in patients with coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes. The absolute risk estimates provided may aid clinicians in decision-making and help patients understand their short-term risk profile.

Consensus Report: Definition and Interpretation of Remission in Type 2 Diabetes.

Improvement of glucose levels into the normal range can occur in some people living with diabetes, either spontaneously or after medical interventions, and in some cases can persist after withdrawal of glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy. Such sustained improvement may now be occurring more often due to newer forms of treatment. However, terminology for describing this process and objective measures for defining it are not well established, and the long-term risks versus benefits of its attainment are not well understood. To update prior discussions of this issue, an international expert group was convened by the American Diabetes Association to propose nomenclature and principles for data collection and analysis, with the goal of establishing a base of information to support future clinical guidance. This group proposed "remission" as the most appropriate descriptive term, and HbA1c < 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) measured at least 3 months after cessation of glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy as the usual diagnostic criterion. The group also made suggestions for active observation of individuals experiencing a remission and discussed further questions and unmet needs regarding predictors and outcomes of remission.

Consensus report: Definition and interpretation of remission in type 2 diabetes.

Improvement of glucose levels into the normal range can occur in some people living with diabetes, either spontaneously or after medical interventions, and in some cases can persist after withdrawal of glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy. Such sustained improvement may now be occurring more often due to newer forms of treatment. However, terminology for describing this process and objective measures for defining it are not well established, and the long-term risks versus benefits of its attainment are not well understood. To update prior discussions of this issue, an international expert group was convened by the American Diabetes Association to propose nomenclature and principles for data collection and analysis, with the goal of establishing a base of information to support future clinical guidance. This group proposed "remission" as the most appropriate descriptive term, and HbA1c <6.5% (48 mmol/mol) measured at least 3 months after cessation of glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy as the usual diagnostic criterion. The group also made suggestions for active observation of individuals experiencing a remission and discussed further questions and unmet needs regarding predictors and outcomes of remission.

Exploring potential mediators of the cardiovascular benefit of dulaglutide in type 2 diabetes patients in REWIND.

BACKGROUND: The REWIND trial demonstrated cardiovascular (CV) benefits to patients with type 2 diabetes and multiple CV risk factors or established CV disease. This exploratory analysis evaluated the degree to which the effect of dulaglutide on CV risk factors could statistically account for its effects on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in the REWIND trial. METHODS: Potential mediators of established CV risk factors that were significantly reduced by dulaglutide were assessed in a post hoc analysis using repeated measures mixed models and included glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and urine albumin/creatinine ratio (UACR). These factors, for which the change in level during follow-up was significantly associated with incident MACE, were identified using Cox regression modeling. Each identified variable was then included as a covariate in the Cox model assessing the effect of dulaglutide on MACE to estimate the degree to which the hazard ratio of dulaglutide vs placebo was attenuated. The combined effect of the variables associated with attenuation was assessed by including all variables in an additional Cox model. RESULTS: Although all evaluated variables were significantly improved by treatment, only changes in HbA1c and UACR were associated with MACE and a reduction in the effect of dulaglutide on this outcome was observed. The observed hazard ratio for MACE for dulaglutide vs placebo reduced by 36.1% by the updated mean HbA1c, and by 28.5% by the updated mean UACR. A similar pattern was observed for change from baseline in HbA1c and UACR and a reduction of 16.7% and 25.4%, respectively in the hazard ratio for MACE with dulaglutide vs placebo was observed. When HbA1c and UACR were both included, the observed hazard ratio reduced by 65.4% for the updated mean and 41.7% for the change from baseline with no HbA1c-UACR interaction (P interaction = 0.75 and 0.15, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment-induced improvement in HbA1c and UACR, but not changes in weight, systolic blood pressure, or LDL cholesterol, appear to partly mediate the beneficial effects of dulaglutide on MACE outcomes. These observations suggest that the proven effects of dulaglutide on cardiovascular disease benefit are partially related to changes in glycemic control and albuminuria, with residual unexplained benefit. Clinicaltrials.gov; Trial registration number: NCT01394952. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01394952.

Consensus report: definition and interpretation of remission in type 2 diabetes.

Improvement of glucose levels into the normal range can occur in some people living with diabetes, either spontaneously or after medical interventions, and in some cases can persist after withdrawal of glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy. Such sustained improvement may now be occurring more often due to newer forms of treatment. However, terminology for describing this process and objective measures for defining it are not well established, and the long-term risks vs benefits of its attainment are not well understood. To update prior discussions of this issue, an international expert group was convened by the American Diabetes Association to propose nomenclature and principles for data collection and analysis, with the goal of establishing a base of information to support future clinical guidance. This group proposed 'remission' as the most appropriate descriptive term, and HbA1c <48 mmol/mol (6.5%) measured at least 3 months after cessation of glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy as the usual diagnostic criterion. The group also made suggestions for active observation of individuals experiencing a remission and discussed further questions and unmet needs regarding predictors and outcomes of remission.

Consensus Report: Definition and Interpretation of Remission in Type 2 Diabetes.

Improvement of glucose levels into the normal range can occur in some people living with diabetes, either spontaneously or after medical interventions, and in some cases can persist after withdrawal of glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy. Such sustained improvement may now be occurring more often due to newer forms of treatment. However, terminology for describing this process and objective measures for defining it are not well established, and the long-term risks versus benefits of its attainment are not well understood. To update prior discussions of this issue, an international expert group was convened by the American Diabetes Association to propose nomenclature and principles for data collection and analysis, with the goal of establishing a base of information to support future clinical guidance. This group proposed "remission" as the most appropriate descriptive term, and HbA1c <6.5% (48 mmol/mol) measured at least 3 months after cessation of glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy as the usual diagnostic criterion. The group also made suggestions for active observation of individuals experiencing a remission and discussed further questions and unmet needs regarding predictors and outcomes of remission.