Time-dependent event accumulation in a cardiovascular outcome trial of patients with type 2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Estimating cardiovascular (CV) event accrual is important for outcome trial planning. Limited data exist describing event accrual patterns in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We compared apparent CV event accrual patterns with true event rates in the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS). METHODS: Centrally adjudicated event dates and accrual rates for a 4-point major adverse CV event composite (MACE-4; includes CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or unstable angina hospitalization), MACE-4 components, all-cause mortality (ACM), and heart failure hospitalization were compiled. We used three graphical methods (Weibull probability plot, plot of negative log of the Kaplan-Meier survival distribution estimate, and the Epanechnikov kernel-smoothed estimate of the hazard rate) to examine hazard rate morphology over time for the 7 outcomes. RESULTS: Plots for all outcomes showed real-time constant event hazard rates for the duration of the follow-up, confirmed by Weibull shape parameters. The Weibull shape parameters for ACM (1.14, 95% CI 1.08-1.21) and CV death (1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.16) were not sufficiently > 1 as to require non-constant hazard rate models to accurately depict the data. The time lag between event occurrence and event adjudication being completed, the adjudication gap, improved over the course of the trial. CONCLUSIONS: In TECOS, the nonfatal event hazard rates were constant over time. Small increases over time in the hazard rate for fatal events would not require complex modelling to predict event accrual, providing confidence in traditional modelling methods for predicting CV outcome trial event rates in this population. The adjudication gap provides a useful metric to monitor within-trial event accrual patterns. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00790205.

Biomarker Changes Associated With Both Dulaglutide and Cardiovascular Events in the REWIND Randomized Controlled Trial: A Nested Case-Control Post Hoc Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide reduced MACE in the Researching Cardiovascular Events with a Weekly Incretin in Diabetes (REWIND) trial. This article expores the relationship of selected biomarkers to both dulaglutide and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this post hoc analysis, stored fasting baseline and 2-year plasma samples from 824 REWIND participants with MACE during follow-up and 845 matched non-MACE participants were analyzed for 2-year changes in 19 protein biomarkers. Two-year changes in 135 metabolites were also analyzed in 600 participants with MACE during follow-up and in 601 matched non-MACE participants. Linear and logistic regression models were used to identify proteins that were associated with both dulaglutide treatment and MACE. Similar models were used to identify metabolites that were associated with both dulaglutide treatment and MACE. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, dulaglutide was associated with a greater reduction or lesser 2-year rise from baseline in N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and a greater 2-year rise in C-peptide. Compared with placebo, dulaglutide was also associated with a greater fall from baseline in 2-hydroxybutyric acid and a greater rise in threonine (P < 0.001). Increases from baseline in two of the proteins (but neither metabolite) were associated with MACE, including NT-proBNP (OR 1.267; 95% CI 1.119, 1.435; P < 0.001) and GDF-15 (OR 1.937; 95% CI 1.424, 2.634; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Dulaglutide was associated with a reduced 2-year rise from baseline of NT-proBNP and GDF-15. Higher rises of these biomarkers were also associated with MACE.

Gender differences in cardiovascular risk, treatment, and outcomes: a post hoc analysis from the REWIND trial.

Objectives. To assess whether the use of cardioprotective therapies for type 2 diabetes varies by gender and whether the risk of cardiovascular events is higher in women versus men in the REWIND trial, including an international type 2 diabetes patient population with a wide range of baseline risk. Design. Gender differences in baseline characteristics, cardioprotective therapy, and the achieved clinical targets at baseline and two years were analyzed. Hazards for cardiovascular outcomes (fatal/nonfatal stroke, fatal/nonfatal myocardial infarction, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and heart failure hospitalization), in women versus men were analyzed using two Cox proportional hazard models, adjusted for randomized treatment and key baseline characteristics respectively. Time-to-event analyses were performed in subgroups with or without history of cardiovascular disease using Cox proportional hazards models that included gender, subgroup, randomized treatment, and gender-by-subgroup interactions. Results. Of 9901 participants, 46.3% were women. Significantly fewer women than men had a cardiovascular disease history. Although most women met treatment targets for blood pressure (96.7%) and lipids (72.8%), fewer women than men met the target for cardioprotective therapies at baseline and after two years, particularly those with prior cardiovascular disease, who used less renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors, statins, and aspirin than men. Despite these differences, women had lower hazards than men for all outcomes except stroke. No significant gender and cardiovascular disease history interactions were identified for cardiovascular outcomes. Conclusions. In REWIND, most women met clinically relevant treatment targets, but in lower proportions than men. Women had a lower risk for all cardiovascular outcomes except stroke. Clinical trials.gov registration number: NCT01394952.

Dulaglutide and cardiovascular and heart failure outcomes in patients with and without heart failure: a post-hoc analysis from the REWIND randomized trial.

AIMS: People with diabetes are at high risk for cardiovascular events including heart failure (HF). We examined the effect of the glucagon-like peptide 1 agonist dulaglutide on incident HF events and other cardiovascular outcomes in those with or without prior HF in the randomized placebo-controlled Researching Cardiovascular Events with a Weekly Incretin in Diabetes (REWIND) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: The REWIND major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) outcome was the first occurrence of a composite endpoint of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes (including unknown causes). In this post-hoc analysis, a HF event was defined as an adjudication-confirmed hospitalization or urgent evaluation for HF. Of the 9901 participants studied over a median follow-up of 5.4 years, 213/4949 (4.3%) randomly assigned to dulaglutide and 226/4952 (4.6%) participants assigned to placebo experienced a HF event (hazard ratio [HR] 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-1.12; p = 0.456). In the 853 (8.6%) participants with HF at baseline, there was no change in either MACE or HF events with dulaglutide as compared to participants without HF (p = 0.44 and 0.19 for interaction, respectively). Combined cardiovascular death and HF events were marginally reduced with dulaglutide compared to placebo (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78-1.00; p = 0.050) but unchanged in patients with and without HF at baseline (p = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: Dulaglutide was not associated with a reduction in HF events in patients with type 2 diabetes regardless of baseline HF status over 5.4 years of follow-up.

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.

Gastrointestinal Tolerability of Once-Weekly Dulaglutide 3.0 mg and 4.5 mg: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Incidence and Prevalence of Nausea, Vomiting, and Diarrhea in AWARD-11.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) events are the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported for glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist therapies. This post hoc analysis of the AWARD-11 phase 3 trial assessed the GI tolerability of dulaglutide at once-weekly doses of 1.5, 3.0, and 4.5 mg. METHODS: The AWARD-11 trial randomized patients to once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg (n = 612), 3.0 mg (n = 616), or 4.5 mg (n = 614) for 52 weeks. Patients started on dulaglutide 0.75 mg for 4 weeks before escalating stepwise every 4 weeks until the final randomized dose was reached. This study analyzes the onsets, incidences, prevalences, and severities of nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea events reported through 52 weeks. RESULTS: The highest incidences of nausea (≤ 8%), vomiting (≤ 2%), and diarrhea (≤ 4%) were primarily observed soon after the initiation of dulaglutide treatment at 0.75 mg. Incidence then declined throughout the remainder of the study, even with dose escalation to 1.5, 3.0, and 4.5 mg. Most of these GI TEAEs were mild to moderate in severity, with severe nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea events occurring in ≤ 0.6% of patients. Treatment discontinuation due to nausea was low across treatment groups (≤ 1.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The tolerability profiles of dulaglutide 3.0 mg and 4.5 mg were consistent with that of the 1.5-mg dose. Patients experiencing GI events were most likely to do so within 2 weeks of treatment initiation, and few patients experienced a new GI event after escalating to the 3.0-mg or 4.5-mg dose. Severe events were infrequent, and when they did occur, no relationship with dose at time of event was observed. Supplementary file1 (MP4 33880 kb).

Dulaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) prescribed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). The most frequently reported side effects of GLP-1 RAs are nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea. This analysis of a 52-week study in adult patients with T2D details the tolerability of dulaglutide injected once weekly at a dose of 1.5 mg, 3 mg, or 4.5 mg, as assessed by looking at the nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea events reported during the study. All patients started dulaglutide at 0.75 mg before escalating to 1.5 mg after 4 weeks. Depending on the group they were randomly assigned to, the patients then either remained on the 1.5-mg dose, escalated to 3 mg after another 4 weeks and remained on this dose, or escalated further to 4.5 mg after another 4 weeks. The minority of patients who experienced nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea events (less than 16% of patients in each case) generally did so at the beginning of treatment, when all groups were taking the same dose (0.75 mg). Episodes of nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea then became less frequent, even as patients escalated to each of the higher doses. Most of these events were mild to moderate in severity, and most did not cause patients to stop taking the treatment. In general, this analysis shows that, for the minority of patients who experienced nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea, these events were most likely to happen shortly after starting treatment and lessened over time, even as patients escalated to higher dulaglutide doses.

Glycaemic efficacy of an expanded dose range of dulaglutide according to baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) subgroup: Post hoc analysis of AWARD-11.

The AWARD-11 trial demonstrated the safety and efficacy of dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg compared to dulaglutide 1.5 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin. This post hoc analysis examined the change from baseline in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and proportions of patients achieving HbA1c <7% at weeks 36 and 52 with dulaglutide 1.5 mg, 3.0 mg or 4.5 mg across clinically relevant baseline HbA1c subgroups (<8%; 8.0% to < 9.0%; 9.0% to < 10%; and ≥ 10%). Mean reductions in HbA1c were observed across all baseline HbA1c subgroups at 36 weeks (range of HbA1c change: 1.5 mg: -1.0% to -2.2%; 3.0 mg: -1.2% to -2.5%; and 4.5 mg: -1.2% to -3.2%). More patients randomized to 3.0 mg or 4.5 mg (vs. 1.5 mg) achieved HbA1c <7% at 36 weeks regardless of baseline HbA1c; the difference in proportions was greater at higher baseline HbA1c (P-interaction = 0.096). Similar patterns in glycaemic improvement and proportions achieving HbA1c <7% were observed at 52 weeks. Hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal adverse events were similar among the HbA1c subgroups. Glycaemic control was improved with dulaglutide dose escalation from 1.5 mg to 3.0 mg or 4.5 mg across baseline HbA1c subgroups (<8%; 8.0% to < 9.0%; 9.0% to < 10%; and ≥ 10%).

Risk Factors Associated with COVID-19 Hospitalization and Mortality: A Large Claims-Based Analysis Among People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetes has been identified as a high-risk comorbidity for COVID-19 hospitalization. We evaluated additional risk factors for COVID-19 hospitalization and in-hospital mortality in a nationwide US database. METHODS: This retrospective study utilized the UnitedHealth Group Clinical Discovery Database (January 1, 2019-July 15, 2020) containing de-identified nationwide administrative claims, SARS-CoV-2 laboratory test results, and COVID-19 inpatient admissions data. Logistic regression was used to understand risk factors for hospitalization and in-hospital mortality among people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and in the overall population. Robustness of associations was further confirmed by subgroup and sensitivity analyses in the T2D population. RESULTS: A total of 36,364 people were identified who were either SARS-CoV-2+ or hospitalized for COVID-19. T2D was associated with increased COVID-19-related hospitalization and mortality. Factors associated with increased hospitalization risk were largely consistent in the overall population and the T2D subgroup, including age, male sex, and these top five comorbidities: dementia, metastatic tumor, congestive heart failure, paraplegia, and metabolic disease. Biguanides (mainly metformin) were consistently associated with lower odds of hospitalization, whereas sulfonylureas and insulins were associated with greater odds of hospitalization among people with T2D. CONCLUSION: In this nationwide US analysis, T2D was identified as an independent risk factor for COVID-19 complications. Many factors conferred similar risk of hospitalization across both populations; however, particular diabetes medications may be markers for differential risk. The insights on comorbidities and medications may inform population health initiatives, including prevention efforts for high-risk patient populations such as those with T2D.

Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg in patients aged younger than 65 and 65 years or older: Post hoc analysis of the AWARD-11 trial.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg versus 1.5 mg when used as an add-on to metformin in subgroups defined by age (<65 and ≥65 years). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 1842 patients included in this post hoc analysis, 438 were aged 65 years or older and 1404 were younger than 65 years. The intent-to-treat (ITT) population, while on treatment without rescue medication, was used for all efficacy analyses; the ITT population without rescue medication was used for hypoglycaemia analyses; all other safety analyses used the ITT population. RESULTS: Patients aged 65 years or older and those younger than 65 years had a mean age of 69.5 and 53.2 years, respectively. In each age subgroup, the reduction from baseline in HbA1c and body weight (BW), and the proportion of patients achieving a composite endpoint of HbA1c of less than 7% (<53 mmol/mol) with no weight gain and no documented symptomatic or severe hypoglycaemia, were larger for dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg compared with dulaglutide 1.5 mg, but the treatment-by-age interactions were not significant. The safety profile for the additional dulaglutide doses was consistent with that of dulaglutide 1.5 mg and was similar between the age subgroups. CONCLUSION: Dulaglutide doses of 3.0 or 4.5 mg provided clinically relevant, dose-related improvements in HbA1c and BW with no significant treatment-by-age interactions, and with a similar safety profile across age subgroups.

HbA1c Change and Diabetic Retinopathy During GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Cardiovascular Outcome Trials: A Meta-analysis and Meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Long-term glycemic control reduces retinopathy risk, but transient worsening can occur with glucose control intensification. Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) lower glucose, but the long-term impact on retinopathy is unknown. GLP-1RA cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) provide long-term follow-up, allowing examination of retinopathy outcomes. PURPOSE: To examine the associations between retinopathy, HbA1c, systolic blood pressure (SBP), and weight in GLP-1RA CVOTs. DATA SOURCES: Systematic review identified six placebo-controlled GLP-1RA CVOTs reporting prespecified retinopathy outcomes. STUDY SELECTION: Published trial reports were used as the primary data sources. DATA EXTRACTION: HbA1c, SBP, and weight data throughout follow-up by treatment group were extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Random-effects model meta-analysis showed no association between GLP-1RA treatment and retinopathy (odds ratio [OR] 1.10; 95% CI 0.93, 1.30), with high heterogeneity between studies (I 2 = 52.2%; Q statistic P = 0.063). Univariate meta-regression showed an association between retinopathy and average HbA1c reduction during the overall follow-up (slope = 0.77, P = 0.007), but no relationship for SBP or weight. Sensitivity analyses for HbA1c showed a relationship at 3 months (P = 0.006) and 1 year (P = 0.002). A 0.1% (1.09 mmol/mol) increase in HbA1c reduction was associated with 6%, 14%, or 8% increased Ln(OR) for retinopathy at the 3-month, 1-year, and overall follow-up, respectively. LIMITATIONS: CVOTs were not powered to assess retinopathy outcomes and differed in retinopathy-related criteria and methodology. The median follow-up of 3.4 years is short compared with the onset of retinopathy. CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c reduction was significantly associated with increased retinopathy risk in meta-regression for GLP-1RA CVOTs. The magnitude of HbA1c reduction was correlated with retinopathy risk in people with diabetes and additional cardiovascular risk factors, but the long-term impact of improved glycemic control on retinopathy was unmeasured in these studies. Retinopathy status should be assessed when intensifying glucose-lowering therapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Dulaglutide 3.0 mg and 4.5 mg Versus Dulaglutide 1.5 mg in Metformin-Treated Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in a Randomized Controlled Trial (AWARD-11).

OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy and safety of dulaglutide at doses of 3.0 and 4.5 mg versus 1.5 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg, 3.0 mg, or 4.5 mg for 52 weeks. The primary objective was determining superiority of dulaglutide 3.0 mg and/or 4.5 mg over 1.5 mg in HbA1c reduction at 36 weeks. Secondary superiority objectives included change in body weight. Two estimands addressed efficacy objectives: treatment regimen (regardless of treatment discontinuation or rescue medication) and efficacy (on treatment without rescue medication) in all randomly assigned patients. RESULTS: Mean baseline HbA1c and BMI in randomly assigned patients (N = 1,842) was 8.6% (70 mmol/mol) and 34.2 kg/m2, respectively. At 36 weeks, dulaglutide 4.5 mg provided superior HbA1c reductions compared with 1.5 mg (treatment-regimen estimand: -1.77 vs. -1.54% [-19.4 vs. -16.8 mmol/mol], estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0.24% (-2.6 mmol/mol), P < 0.001; efficacy estimand: -1.87 vs. -1.53% [-20.4 vs. -16.7 mmol/mol], ETD -0.34% (-3.7 mmol/mol), P < 0.001). Dulaglutide 3.0 mg was superior to 1.5 mg for reducing HbA1c, using the efficacy estimand (ETD -0.17% [-1.9 mmol/mol]; P = 0.003) but not the treatment-regimen estimand (ETD -0.10% [-1.1 mmol/mol]; P = 0.096). Dulaglutide 4.5 mg was superior to 1.5 mg for weight loss at 36 weeks for both estimands (treatment regimen: -4.6 vs. -3.0 kg, ETD -1.6 kg, P < 0.001; efficacy: -4.7 vs. -3.1 kg, ETD -1.6 kg, P < 0.001). Common adverse events through 36 weeks included nausea (1.5 mg, 13.4%; 3 mg, 15.6%; 4.5 mg, 16.4%) and vomiting (1.5 mg, 5.6%; 3 mg, 8.3%; 4.5 mg, 9.3%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by metformin, escalation from dulaglutide 1.5 mg to 3.0 mg or 4.5 mg provided clinically relevant, dose-related reductions in HbA1c and body weight with a similar safety profile.

Exploring the Possible Impact of Unbalanced Open-Label Drop-In of Glucose-Lowering Medications on EXSCEL Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: EXSCEL (Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering) assessed the impact of once-weekly exenatide 2 mg versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, while aiming for glycemic equipoise. Consequently, greater drop-in of open-label glucose-lowering medications occurred in the placebo group. Accordingly, we explored the potential effects of their unbalanced use on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or nonfatal stroke, and all-cause mortality (ACM), given that some of these agents are cardioprotective. METHODS: Cox hazard models were performed by randomized treatment for drug classes where >5% open-label drop-in glucose-lowering medication occurred, and for glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs; 3.0%) using three methodologies: drop-in visit right censoring, inverse probability for treatment weighting (IPTW), and applying drug class risk reductions. RESULTS: Baseline glucose-lowering medications for the 14 752 EXSCEL participants (73.1% with previous cardiovascular disease) did not differ between treatment groups. During median 3.2 years follow-up, open-label drop-in occurred in 33.4% of participants, more frequently with placebo than exenatide (38.1% versus 28.8%), with metformin (6.1% versus 4.9%), sulfonylurea (8.7% versus 6.9%), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (10.6% versus 7.5%), SGLT-2i (10.3% versus 8.1%), GLP-1 RA (3.4% versus 2.4%), and insulin (13.8% versus 9.4%). The MACE effect size was not altered meaningfully by right censoring, but the favorable HR for exenatide became nominally significant in the sulfonylurea and any glucose-lowering medication groups, while the ACM HR and p-values were essentially unchanged. IPTW decreased the MACE HR from 0.91 (P=0.061) to 0.85 (P=0.008) and the ACM HR from 0.86 (P=0.016) to 0.81 (P=0.012). Application of literature-derived risk reductions showed no meaningful changes in MACE or ACM HRs or P values, although simulations of substantially greater use of drop-in cardioprotective glucose-lowering agents demonstrated blunting of signal detection. CONCLUSIONS: EXSCEL-observed HRs for MACE and ACM remained robust after right censoring or application of literature-derived risk reductions, but the exenatide versus placebo MACE effect size and statistical significance were increased by IPTW. Effects of open-label drop-in cardioprotective medications need to be considered carefully when designing, conducting, and analyzing cardiovascular outcome trials of glucose-lowering agents under the premise of glycemic equipoise. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01144338.

Prediction and validation of exenatide risk marker effects on progression of renal disease: Insights from EXSCEL.

AIM: To assess whether the previously developed multivariable risk prediction framework (PRE score) could predict the renal effects observed in the EXSCEL cardiovascular outcomes trial using short-term changes in cardio-renal risk markers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Changes from baseline to 6 months in HbA1c, systolic blood pressure (SBP), body mass index (BMI), haemoglobin, total cholesterol, and new micro- or macroalbuminuria were evaluated. The renal outcomes were defined as a composite of a sustained 30% or 40% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Relationships between risk markers and long-term renal outcomes were determined in patients with type 2 diabetes from the ALTITUDE study using multivariable Cox regression analysis, and then applied to short-term changes in risk markers observed in EXSCEL to predict the exenatide-induced impact on renal outcomes. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, mean HbA1c, BMI, SBP and total cholesterol were lower at 6 months with exenatide, as was the incidence of new microalbuminuria. The PRE score predicted a relative risk reduction for the 30% eGFR decline + ESRD endpoint of 11.3% (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.83-0.94), compared with 12.7% (HR 0.87; 0.77-0.99) observed risk reduction. For the 40% eGFR decline + ESRD endpoint, the predicted and observed risk reductions were 11.0% (HR 0.89; 0.82-0.97) and 13.7% (HR 0.86, 0.72-1.04), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating short-term risk marker changes into a multivariable risk score predicted the magnitude of renal risk reduction observed in EXSCEL.

Within-Trial Evaluation of Medical Resources, Costs, and Quality of Life Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Participating in the Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL).

OBJECTIVE: To compare medical resource use, costs, and health utilities for 14,752 patients with type 2 diabetes who were randomized to once-weekly exenatide (EQW) or placebo in addition to usual diabetes care in the Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Medical resource use data and responses to the EuroQol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D) instrument were collected at baseline and throughout the trial. Medical resources and medications were assigned values by using U.S. Medicare payments and wholesale acquisition costs, respectively. Secondary analyses used English costs. RESULTS: Patients were followed for an average of 3.3 years, during which time those randomized to EQW experienced 0.41 fewer inpatient days (7.05 vs. 7.46 days; relative rate ratio 0.91; P = 0.05). Rates of outpatient medical visits were similar, as were total inpatient and outpatient costs. Mean costs for nonstudy diabetes medications over the study period were ∼$1,600 lower with EQW than with placebo (P = 0.01). Total within-study costs, excluding study medication, were lower in the EQW arm than in the placebo arm ($28,907 vs. $30,914; P ≤ 0.01). When including the estimated cost of EQW, total mean costs were significantly higher in the EQW group than in the placebo group ($42,697 vs. $30,914; P < 0.01). With English costs applied, mean total costs, including exenatide costs, were £1,670 higher in the EQW group than the placebo group (£10,874 vs. £9,204; P < 0.01). There were no significant differences in EQ-5D health utilities between arms over time. CONCLUSIONS: Medical costs were lower in the EQW arm than the placebo arm, but total costs were significantly higher once the cost of branded exenatide was incorporated.

Microvascular and Cardiovascular Outcomes According to Renal Function in Patients Treated With Once-Weekly Exenatide: Insights From the EXSCEL Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of once-weekly exenatide (EQW) on microvascular and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes by baseline renal function in the Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Least squares mean difference (LSMD) in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) from baseline between the EQW and placebo groups was calculated for 13,844 participants. Cox regression models were used to estimate effects by group on incident macroalbuminuria, retinopathy, and major adverse CV events (MACE). Interval-censored time-to-event models estimated effects on renal composite 1 (40% eGFR decline, renal replacement, or renal death) and renal composite 2 (composite 1 variables plus macroalbuminuria). RESULTS: EQW did not change eGFR significantly (LSMD 0.21 mL/min/1.73 m2 [95% CI -0.27 to 0.70]). Macroalbuminuria occurred in 2.2% of patients in the EQW group and in 2.5% of those in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87 [95% CI 0.70-1.07]). Neither renal composite was reduced with EQW in unadjusted analyses, but renal composite 2 was reduced after adjustment (HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.74-0.98]). Retinopathy rates did not differ by treatment group or in the HbA1c-lowering or prior retinopathy subgroups. CV outcomes in those with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 did not differ by group. Those with eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2 had nominal risk reductions for MACE, all-cause mortality, and CV death, but interactions by renal function group were significant for only stroke (HR 0.74 [95% CI 0.58-0.93]; P for interaction = 0.035) and CV death (HR 1.08 [95% CI 0.85-1.38]; P for interaction = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: EQW had no impact on unadjusted retinopathy or renal outcomes. CV risk was modestly reduced only in those with eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2 in analyses unadjusted for multiplicity.

Confirming the Bidirectional Nature of the Association Between Severe Hypoglycemic and Cardiovascular Events in Type 2 Diabetes: Insights From EXSCEL.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to confirm a bidirectional association between severe hypoglycemic events (SHEs) and cardiovascular (CV) event risk and to characterize individuals at dual risk. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a post hoc analysis of 14,752 Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) participants, we examined time-dependent associations between SHEs and subsequent major adverse cardiac events (CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI] or stroke), fatal/nonfatal MI, fatal/nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (hACS), hospitalization for heart failure (hHF), and all-cause mortality (ACM), as well as time-dependent associations between nonfatal CV events and subsequent SHEs. RESULTS: SHEs were uncommon and not associated with once-weekly exenatide therapy (hazard ratio 1.13 [95% CI 0.94-1.36], P = 0.179). In fully adjusted models, SHEs were associated with an increased risk of subsequent ACM (1.83 [1.38-2.42], P < 0.001), CV death (1.60 [1.11-2.30], P = 0.012), and hHF (2.09 [1.37-3.17], P = 0.001), while nonfatal MI (2.02 [1.35-3.01], P = 0.001), nonfatal stroke (2.30 [1.25-4.23], P = 0.007), hACS (2.00 [1.39-2.90], P < 0.001), and hHF (3.24 [1.98-5.30], P < 0.001) were all associated with a subsequent increased risk of SHEs. The elevated bidirectional time-dependent hazards linking SHEs and a composite of all CV events were approximately constant over time, with those individuals at dual risk showing higher comorbidity scores compared with those without. CONCLUSIONS: These findings, showing greater risk of SHEs after CV events as well as greater risk of CV events after SHEs, validate a bidirectional relationship between CV events and SHEs in patients with high comorbidity scores.

Meta-analysis of the impact of alpha-glucosidase inhibitors on incident diabetes and cardiovascular outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (AGIs) have been shown to reduce incident type 2 diabetes but their impact on cardiovascular (CV) disease remains controversial. We sought to identify the overall impact of AGIs with respect to incident type 2 diabetes in individuals with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), and CV outcomes in those with IGT or type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We used PubMed and SCOPUS to identify randomized controlled trials reporting the incidence of type 2 diabetes and/or CV outcomes that had compared AGIs with placebo in populations with IGT or type 2 diabetes, with or without established CV disease. Eligible studies were required to have ≥ 500 participants and/or ≥ 100 endpoints of interest. Meta-analyses of available trial data were performed using random effects models to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for incident type 2 diabetes and CV outcomes. RESULTS: Of ten trials identified, three met our inclusion criteria for incident type 2 diabetes and four were eligible for CV outcomes. The overall HR (95% CI) comparing AGI with placebo for incident type 2 diabetes was 0.77 (0.67-0.88), p < 0.0001, and for CV outcomes was 0.98 (0.89-1.10), p = 0.85. There was little to no heterogeneity between studies, with I2 values of 0.03% (p = 0.43) and 0% (p = 0.79) for the two outcomes respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Allocation of people with IGT to an AGI significantly reduced their risk of incident type 2 diabetes by 23%, whereas in those with IGT or type 2 diabetes the impact on CV outcomes was neutral.

Changes in Serum Calcitonin Concentrations, Incidence of Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma, and Impact of Routine Calcitonin Concentration Monitoring in the EXenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL).

OBJECTIVE: Increases in serum calcitonin, a tumor marker for medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC), have been associated with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist use in some preclinical studies. We report calcitonin changes in exenatide-treated and placebo-administered participants and MTC incidence in the EXenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) and consider the impact of within-trial calcitonin monitoring. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: EXSCEL participants were randomized 1:1 to once-weekly exenatide 2 mg or placebo. Serum calcitonin was measured at baseline (with trial medication discontinued if >40 ng/L) and annually thereafter (with trial medication discontinued if ≥50 ng/L). Median calcitonin concentrations were calculated at each time point, and thyroid malignancies were collected prospectively. Data regarding follow-up after an elevated calcitonin were collected retrospectively. RESULTS: At baseline, 52 (30 exenatide and 22 placebo) participants had calcitonin >40 ng/L, and during follow-up an additional 23 participants (15 exenatide and 8 placebo) had calcitonin ≥50 ng/L in the intention-to-treat population. Median calcitonin concentrations were similar between treatment groups at baseline with no increase over time. Confirmed MTC occurred in three participants (2 exenatide and 1 placebo), all of whom had significantly elevated baseline calcitonin values (413, 422, and 655 ng/L). CONCLUSIONS: During a median 3.2 years' follow-up, no change in serum calcitonin was seen with exenatide therapy. The three confirmed cases of MTC all occurred in participants with markedly elevated baseline calcitonin levels, measured prior to trial medication administration. Regular calcitonin monitoring identified no additional cases of MTC, suggesting no benefit of routine calcitonin monitoring during exenatide treatment.

Progression of glucose-lowering diabetes therapy in TECOS.

AIMS: TECOS was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial assessing the impact of sitagliptin vs. placebo on cardiovascular outcomes when added to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes. We report the use of concomitant diabetes medications and the risk for progression to insulin during follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: TECOS enrolled 14 671 participants with HbA1c 6.5%-8.0% on monotherapy with metformin, pioglitazone, sulfonylurea (SU), or dual therapy with two oral agents or insulin with or without metformin. Subsequent diabetes management was by the participant's usual care physician. Time to initiation of insulin and risk of hypoglycaemia were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: The most common glucose-lowering regimens at baseline were metformin monotherapy (30.2%), SU monotherapy (8.5%), metformin/SU therapy (35.1%), and insulin with or without metformin (13.9% and 8.6%, respectively). Over a median 3.0 years' follow-up, diabetes therapy was intensified in 25.2% of participants (sitagliptin 22.0%, placebo 28.3%). Medications most commonly added were SU (8.3%) or insulin (8.8%). Insulin initiation in the usual care setting occurred at mean (standard deviation) HbA1c of 8.5 (1.5)%. Sitagliptin did not impact rates of severe hypoglycaemia, but delayed progression to insulin when added to metformin or metformin/SU regimens. CONCLUSION: Consistent with the trial's pragmatic design, TECOS participants underwent typical progression of diabetes medications. Sitagliptin was associated with lower HbA1c, without increased risk for severe hypoglycaemia and was associated with delayed progression to insulin when added to metformin with or without SU.

Comparison of nine platelet function tests used to determine responses to different aspirin dosages in people with type 2 diabetes.

The antiplatelet efficacy of aspirin (ASA) is reduced in type 2 diabetes (T2D). As the best ex vivo method of measuring ASA efficacy remains uncertain, we compared nine platelet function tests to assess responsiveness to three ASA dosing regimens in 24 T2D patients randomized in a three-treatment crossover design to ASA 100 mg/day, 200 mg/day, or 100 mg twice daily for 2-week treatment periods. Platelet function tests compared were as follows: light transmission aggregometry (LTA)-0.5 mg/mL of arachidonic acid (AA) and 10 µM adenosine diphosphate (ADP); multiplate whole blood aggregometry (WBA)-0.5 mM AA and 6.5 µM ADP; platelet function analyzer (PFA)-100™-collagen and ADP (CADP) and collagen and epinephrine (CEPI); VerifyNow™-ASA; and urinary 11-dehydro-thromboxane B2 (TxB2) and serum TxB2. All cyclo-oxygenase (COX-1)-dependent tests and some COX-1-independent tests (PFA-CEPI, LTA-ADP) demonstrated significant reductions in platelet reactivity with all ASA doses. Two COX-1-independent tests (WBA-ADP and PFA-CADP) showed no overall reduction in platelet reactivity. Overall classifications for detecting all ASA doses, compared to baseline, were as follows: very good-LTA-AA (k = 0.95) and VerifyNow™-ASA (k = 0.85); good-serum TxB2 (k = 0.79); moderate-LTA-ADP (k = 0.59), PFA-100™-CEPI (k = 0.56), urinary TxB2 (k = 0.55), WBA-AA (k = 0.47); and poor-PFA-100™-CADP (k = -0.02) and WBA-ADP (k = -0.07). No significant kappa statistic differences were seen for each test for each ASA dose. Correlations for each test with serum TxB2 measurements were as follows: very good-VerifyNow™-ASA (k = 0.81, R2 = 0.56) and LTA-AA (k = 0.85, R2 = 0.65); good-PFA-100TM-CEPI (k = 0.62, R2 = 0.30); moderate-urinary TxB2 (k = 0.57, R2 = 0.51) and LTA-ADP (k = 0.47, R2 = 0.56); fair-WBA-AA (k = 0.31, R2 = 0.31); and poor-PFA-100™-CADP (k = 0.04, R2 = 0.003) and WBA-ADP (k = -0.04, R2 = 0.0005). The platelet function tests we assessed were not equally effective in measuring the antiplatelet effect of ASA and correlated poorly amongst themselves, but COX-1-dependent tests performed better than non-COX-1-dependent tests.