Absolute treatment effects of novel antidiabetic drugs on a composite renal outcome: meta-analysis of digitalized individual patient data.

BACKGROUND: Absolute treatment benefits-expressed as numbers needed to treat-of the glucose lowering and cardiovascular drugs, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and sodium-glucose transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors on renal outcomes remain uncertain. With the present meta-analysis of digitalized individual patient data, we aimed to display and compare numbers needed to treat of both drugs on a composite renal outcome. METHODS: From Kaplan-Meier plots of major cardiovascular outcome trials of GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors vs. placebo, we digitalized individual patient time-to-event information on composite renal outcomes with WebPlotDigitizer 4.2; numbers needed to treat from individual cardiovascular outcome trials were estimated using parametric Weibull regression models and compared to original data. Random-effects meta-analysis generated meta-numbers needed to treat with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Twelve cardiovascular outcome trials (three for GLP-1 receptor agonists, nine for SGLT2 inhibitors) comprising 90,865 participants were included. Eight trials were conducted in primary type 2 diabetes populations, two in a primary heart failure and two in a primary chronic kidney disease population. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate at baseline ranged between 37.3 and 85.3 ml/min/1.73 m2. Meta-analyses estimated meta-numbers needed to treat of 85 (95% CI 60; 145) for GLP-1 receptor agonists and 104 (95% CI 81; 147) for SGLT2 inhibitors for the composite renal outcome at the overall median follow-up time of 36 months. CONCLUSION: The present meta-analysis of digitalized individual patient data revealed moderate and similar absolute treatment benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors compared to placebo for a composite renal outcome.

Meta-analysed numbers needed to treat of novel antidiabetic drugs for cardiovascular outcomes.

AIMS: Absolute treatment effects-i.e. numbers needed to treat (NNTs)-of novel antidiabetic drugs for cardiovascular outcomes have not been comprehensively evaluated. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of digitalized individual patient outcomes to display and compare absolute treatment effects. METHODS AND RESULTS: Individual patient time-to-event information from Kaplan-Meier plots of cardiovascular mortality (CM) and/or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) endpoints from cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) evaluating dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, and sodium glucose transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors vs. placebo were digitalized using WebPlotDigitizer 4.2 and the R code of Guyot et al.; Weibull regression models were generated, validated, and used to estimate NNT for individual trials; random-effects meta-analysis generated Meta-NNT with 95% confidence intervals. Sixteen CVOTs reported time-to-event information (14 in primary diabetes and 2 in primary heart failure populations). Thirteen studies including 96 860 patients were meta-analysed for CM: At the median follow-up of 30 months, Meta-NNTs were 178 (64 to ∞ to -223) for DPP-4 inhibitors, 261 (158 to 745) for GLP-1 receptor agonists, and 118 (68 to 435) for SGLT2 inhibitors. Ten studies including 96 128 patients were meta-analysed for HHF: At the median follow-up of 29 months, estimated Meta-NNTs were -644 (229 to ∞ to -134) for DPP-4 inhibitors, 441 (184 to ∞ to -1100) for GLP-1 receptor agonists, and 126 (91 to 208) for SGLT2 inhibitors. SGLT2 inhibitors were especially effective for HHF in primary heart failure populations [Meta-NNT 25 (19 to 39)] vs. primary diabetes populations [Meta-NNT 233 (167 to 385)] at 16 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: We found only modest treatment benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors for CM and HHF in primary type 2 diabetes mellitus populations. In primary heart failure populations, SGLT2 inhibitor benefits were substantial and comparable in efficacy to established heart failure medication.

Absolute treatment effects for the primary outcome and all-cause mortality in the cardiovascular outcome trials of new antidiabetic drugs: a meta-analysis of digitalized individual patient data.

AIMS: Treatment effects from the large cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) of new antidiabetic drugs are almost exclusively communicated as hazard ratios, although reporting guidelines recommend to report treatment effects also on an absolute scale, e.g. as numbers needed to treat (NNT). We aimed to analyse NNTs in CVOTs comparing dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to placebo. METHODS: We digitalized individual time-to-event information for the primary outcome and all-cause mortality from 19 CVOTs that compared DPP-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, or SGLT2 inhibitors to placebo. We estimated Weibull models for each trial and outcome and derived monthly NNTs. NNTs were summarized across all trials and within drug classes by random effects meta-analysis methods. RESULTS: Treatment effects in the CVOTs appear smaller if they are reported as NNTs: Overall, 100 (95%-CI: 60, 303) patients have to be treated for 29 months (the median follow-up time across all trials) to avoid a single event of the primary outcome, and 128 (95%-CI: 85, 265) patients have to be treated for 39 months to avoid a single death. NNT time courses are very similar for GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors, whereas treatment effects with DPP-4 inhibitors are smaller. CONCLUSIONS: We found that the respective treatment effects look less impressive when communicated on an absolute scale, as numbers needed to treat. For a valid overall picture of the benefit of new antidiabetic drugs, trial authors should also report treatment effects on an absolute scale.