Retrieved-Dropout-Based multiple imputation for time-to-event data in cardiovascular outcome trials.

Recently, retrieved-dropout-based multiple imputation has been used in some therapeutic areas to address the treatment policy estimand, mostly for continuous endpoints. In this approach, data from subjects who discontinued study treatment but remained in study were used to construct a model for multiple imputation for the missing data of subjects in the same treatment arm who discontinued study. We extend this approach to time-to-event endpoints and provide a practical guide for its implementation. We use a cardiovascular outcome trial dataset to illustrate the method and compare the results with those from Cox proportional hazard and reference-based multiple imputation methods.

Semaglutide reduces cardiovascular events regardless of metformin use: a post hoc subgroup analysis of SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) are conducted on a background of standard of care including metformin. These analyses sought to determine whether the cardiovascular (CV) effects of semaglutide and other glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) vary according to baseline metformin use. METHODS: A post hoc analysis was conducted using pooled SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6 CVOT data in subjects with and without metformin use at baseline. Additionally, a trial-level meta-analysis was conducted using data from seven CVOTs with GLP-1RAs-SUSTAIN 6, PIONEER 6, HARMONY OUTCOMES, LEADER, REWIND, EXSCEL and AMPLITUDE-O-including adults with type 2 diabetes at high CV risk, and a primary endpoint of time to first major adverse CV event (MACE). RESULTS: In the post hoc analysis, the no-metformin subgroup was older, with a higher body mass index, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate and higher CV risk at baseline vs the metformin subgroup. Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for the reduction in risk of MACE with semaglutide vs placebo in the metformin and no-metformin subgroups were 0.70 (0.55;0.89) and 0.86 (0.60;1.22), respectively. No significant interaction between the treatment effect on MACE and metformin subgroup was observed. Findings for other CV endpoints were similar. In the meta-analysis, treatment effect (GLP-1RA vs placebo) on CV outcomes was no different with vs without baseline metformin (overall ratio between the hazard ratios for metformin vs no-metformin 1.09 [0.96;1.22]). CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that the CV outcomes for semaglutide were similar regardless of baseline metformin use, which may also apply to all GLP-1RAs. Trial registration SUSTAIN 6 (NCT01720446), PIONEER 6 (NCT02692716).

The efficacy and safety of novel classes of glucose-lowering drugs for cardiovascular outcomes: a network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Several cardiovascular outcome trials on sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have been released recently, including trials enrolling patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Comparisons of the efficacy and safety of SGLT2i, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) thus require an update. Assessments in patient subgroups, i.e., as stratified by age or the presence of CHF, CKD or atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), are also currently lacking. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases for relevant studies published up until 5 December 2020. RCTs comparing SGLT2i, GLP-1RA and DPP-4i with placebo (or other controls) or with each other with cardiovascular (CV) or renal outcomes were eligible for inclusion. The primary efficacy endpoint was 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events (3P-MACE), which are defined as CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and non-fatal ischaemic stroke. All-cause mortality, hospitalisation for heart failure (HHF) and composite renal outcomes were also analysed. Pre-specified subgroup analyses of 3P-MACE were also performed. RESULTS: A total of 21 trials with 170,930 participants were included in this network meta-analysis. Both GLP-1RA and SGLT2i were associated with lower risks of 3P-MACE than placebo (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84, 0.94 and RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.83, 0.94, respectively). GLP-1RA and SGLT2i were also associated with lower risks of 3P-MACE than DPP-4i (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82, 0.98 and RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81, 0.97, respectively). A comparison between SGLT2i and GLP-1RA demonstrated no difference in their risks of 3P-MACE (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91, 1.08). Only GLP-1RA was associated with a lower risk of stroke compared with placebo (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76, 0.94). SGLT2i is superior to GLP-1RA in reducing HHF (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.68, 0.84) and renal outcomes (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65, 0.93). Subgroup analyses indicated that the benefits of SGLT2i and GLP-1RA were more pronounced in elderly patients, white and Asian patients, those with established ASCVD and those with longer durations of diabetes mellitus and worse glycaemic control. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: SGLT2i and GLP-1RA are superior to DPP-4i in terms of CV and renal outcomes. GLP-1RA is the only drug class that reduces the risk of stroke. SGLT2i is superior in reducing HHF and renal outcomes. Therefore, the choice between SGLT2i and GLP-1RA should be individualised according to patient profiles. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020206600.

External applicability of SGLT2 inhibitor cardiovascular outcome trials to patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Recent treatment guidelines support the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease based on the results of cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs). Applicability of these trials to everyday patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease is however unknown. The aim of this study is to assess the external applicability of SGLT2i CVOTs in daily clinical practice type 2 diabetes patients with established cardiovascular disease. METHODS: Trial in- and exclusion criteria from EMPA-REG OUTCOME, CANVAS, DECLARE-TIMI 58 and VERTIS-CV were applied to 1389 type 2 diabetes patients with cardiovascular disease in the Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Secondary Manifestations of ARTerial disease (UCC-SMART). To evaluate the difference in cardiovascular risk (MACE) and all-cause mortality between trial eligible and ineligible patients, age and sex-adjusted Cox-regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: After applying trial in- and exclusion criteria, 48% of UCC-SMART patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease would have been eligible for DECLARE-TIMI 58, 35% for CANVAS, 29% for EMPA-REG OUTCOME and 21% for VERTIS-CV. Without the eligibility criteria of HbA1c, eligibility was 58-88%. For all trials the observed risk for cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality was similar in eligible and ineligible patients after adjustment for age and gender. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease in daily clinical practice would have been eligible for participation in the SGLT2i CVOTs. Trial eligible and ineligible patients have the same risk for MACE and all-cause mortality.

[Empagliflozin and heart failure: position paper of the experts on the results of the online meeting and discussion of the EMPEROR-Preserved Trial].

At an international online expert meeting held on September 16, 2021, the results of the empagliflozin research program EMPA-REG Outcome, EMPEROR-Reduced and EMPEROR-Preserved were reviewed. We analyzed cardiovascular and renal outcomes during the treatment with empagliflozin in patients with chronic heart failure, regardless of the presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The positive results of the EMPEROR-Preserved study are updated and their significance for clinical practice is discussed. Several proposals have been adopted that will accelerate the introduction of empagliflozin therapy into practice in patients with heart failure and overcome clinical inertia.

Clinical application of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor into a real-world setting of heart failure care.

For years there have been concerns whether the results of large-scale clinical trials that include limited specific patient populations can be applied to patients in real-world clinical practice. Therefore, it is crucially important to verify whether emerging evidences obtained from large-scale clinical trials on limited specific patient populations can be applied to patients at real-world clinical settings. Recent cardiovascular outcome trials with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors showed a consistent risk reduction of approximately 30% for hospitalization for heart failure (HF), and the SGLT2 inhibitors had a great potential to be effective for prevention of HF in a wide variety of type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients independent of their history of HF or cardiovascular disease (CVD). Furthermore, the DAPA-HF trial also demonstrated that dapagliflozin proved clinically effective in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction regardless of diabetes, suggesting its robust benefits in some specific patients with HF. According to these evidences, SGLT2 inhibitor is increasingly recognized as an emerging and promising option to reduce the risk of HF in patient with T2D. To use appropriately SGLT2 inhibitors for HF prevention in the real-world setting, it would be required to determine the optimal patient population who can receive better clinical benefits from SGLT2 inhibitors. In this commentary, based on the current understandings and lessons learned from the most recent studies, we discussed the importance of future research on the safety and efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitor in clinical situations of HF other than those examined in previous cardiovascular outcome trials.

Computing and interpreting the Number Needed to Treat for Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials : Perspective on GLP-1 RA and SGLT-2i therapies.

The recent results of Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials (CVOTs) in type 2 diabetes have clearly established the cardiovascular (CV) safety or even the benefit of two therapeutic classes, Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) and Sodium-Glucose Co-Transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i). Publication of the latest CVOTs for these therapeutic classes also led to an update of ESC guidelines and ADA/EASD consensus report in 2019, which considers using GLP-1 RA or SGLT-2i with proven cardiovascular benefit early in the management of type 2 diabetic patient with established cardiovascular disease (CVD) or at high risk of atherosclerotic CVD. The main beneficial results of these time-to event studies are supported by conventional statistical measures attesting the effectiveness of GLP-1 RA or SGLT2i on cardiovascular events (absolute risk, absolute risk difference, relative risk, relative risk reduction, odds ratio, hazard ratio). In addition, another measure whose clinical meaning appears to be easier, the Number Needed to Treat (NNT), is often mentioned while discussing the results of CVOTs, in order to estimating the clinical utility of each drug or sometimes trying to establish a power ranking. While the value of the measure is admittedly of interest, the subtleties of its computation in time-to-event studies are little known. We provide in this article a clear and practical explanation on NNT computation methods that should be used in order to estimate its value, according to the type of study design and variables available to describe the event of interest, in any randomized controlled trial. More specifically, a focus is made on time-to-event studies of which CVOTs are part, first to describe in detail an appropriate and adjusted method of NNT computation and second to help properly interpreting NNTs with the example of CVOTs conducted with GLP-1 RA and SGLT-2i. We particularly discuss the risk of misunderstanding of NNT values in CVOTs when some specific parameters inherent in each study are not taken into account, and the following risk of erroneous comparison between NNTs across studies. The present paper highlights the importance of understanding rightfully NNTs from CVOTs and their clinical impact to get the full picture of a drug's effectiveness.

Diabetes drugs and stroke risk: Intensive versus conventional glucose-lowering strategies, and implications of recent cardiovascular outcome trials.

People with diabetes mellitus are at higher risk of ischaemic stroke and worse outcomes thereafter. However, whether it is better to prescribe intensive glucose-lowering treatment compared with conventional treatment in people with diabetes to prevent recurrent stroke is debated. It is also crucial to consider whether specific antidiabetic agents are more efficacious and safer than others for prevention of stroke. In this review, we provide an overview of the efficacy of intensive and conventional glucose-lowering treatment in post-stroke management. Our conclusion is that the overall evidence for a beneficial effect of intensive glycaemic control on risk of stroke is limited. We also discuss evidence from recent large clinical trials of thiazolidinediones and new antidiabetic medications, including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors. On the basis of the findings of these trials, our conclusion is that pioglitazone and the GLP-1RA class (other than short-acting lixisenatide) are likely to lessen the occurrence of cerebrovascular disease (by mechanisms not dependent on glucose-lowering per se), whereas there is no consistent evidence for other drug classes.

Sodium-glucose linked transporter-2 inhibitor renal outcome modification in type 2 diabetes: Evidence from studies in patients with high or low renal risk.

Data from three completed cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs), EMPA-REG OUTCOME, CANVAS Program and DECLARE-TIMI 58, add to the evidence supporting the potential renoprotective effects of sodium-glucose linked transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes. Despite recommendations in recent guidelines, it is difficult to support a view that definitive evidence for renoprotection exists from these SGLT2 inhibitor CVOT results. To date, the only dedicated trial to report definitive data on the renal impact of SGLT2 inhibition is CREDENCE. Notably, the total number of patient-relevant renal endpoint events (dialysis, transplant or renal death) observed in CREDENCE was significantly higher than the total for all three CVOTs collectively (183 events/4401 patients vs. 69 events/34 322 patients, respectively), which shows the increased statistical power of CREDENCE for these renal endpoints. Treatment with canagliflozin was associated with a 30% relative risk reduction (RRR) in the primary composite endpoint of end-stage kidney disease, doubling of serum creatinine, or death from renal or cardiovascular causes and a 34% RRR for the renal-specific elements of this primary endpoint (P <0.001). Canagliflozin has therefore become the first US-approved SGLT2 inhibitor to include an indication for RRR, in addition to type 2 diabetes glycaemic control and cardiovascular risk reduction. While confirmatory of the exploratory data from CVOTs, CREDENCE provides the first robust data on the effects of canagliflozin on patient-relevant renal endpoints. Extrapolation to a conclusion of a SGLT2 inhibitor class effect cannot be made until additional renal trials with other SGLT2 inhibitors are reported.

Evidence-based and tailored medication in type 2 diabetes: a pathway learned from clinical trials.

In Japan, the choice of anti-diabetic medication is officially recommended according to the patient's glycemic condition and disease phenotype, unlike most other regions where metformin is recommended as the first-line medication. There has been an increase in the number of available glucose-lowering agents, making it necessary to select these agents based on ever-improving evidence obtained from clinical trials. For the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor class of drugs, nine drugs are currently available on the market in Japan. Although previous cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) demonstrated non-inferiority for both major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and safety for some drugs of the class, the design and results of the CARMELINA trial seemed to be slightly different from earlier trials in that it showed the drugs were safe and partially effective even in patients with renal impairment. Thus, recent CVOTs on newer glucose-lowering agents have mainly focused on the major impacts of individual classes and drugs on clinical outcomes behind their glucose-lowering action. The diverse features of the classes and individual drugs may have also highlighted not only the class-effects, but also the drug-effects of glucose-lowering agents. This will lead to clinical-based evidence and assist with optimum selection of the class and/or drug for tailored medication in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Cardiovascular risk reduction with once-weekly semaglutide in subjects with type 2 diabetes: a post hoc analysis of gender, age, and baseline CV risk profile in the SUSTAIN 6 trial.

BACKGROUND: The SUSTAIN 6 trial demonstrated that once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 and 1.0 mg) significantly reduced major adverse cardiovascular (CV) events (MACE) vs placebo in subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and high CV risk. The effects of gender, age and baseline CV risk on outcomes are important considerations for further study. METHODS: Subjects were grouped according to gender, age (50-65 years and > 65 years), and CV risk profile at baseline (prior myocardial infarction [MI] or stroke vs no prior MI or stroke, and established CV disease [CVD] vs CV risk factors alone, including subjects with chronic kidney disease). Time to MACE and its individual components (CV death, nonfatal MI, nonfatal stroke), hospitalization for unstable angina or heart failure, and revascularization (coronary and peripheral) were analyzed for all subgroups. Additional analyses were performed for gender and age to investigate change from baseline in HbA1c and body weight, as well as tolerability. RESULTS: A total of 3297 subjects were included. The majority of subjects (60.7%) were male; 43% were > 65 years of age; 41.5% had a history of MI or stroke; and 76.8% had established CVD. Compared with placebo, semaglutide reduced the risk of the first occurrence of MACE and each MACE component consistently across all subgroups (gender, age, and baseline CV risk profile). Revascularizations, HbA1c and body weight were also reduced consistently across all subgroups compared with placebo. Gastrointestinal adverse events in all treatment groups were more common among women than men, but rates of premature treatment discontinuation were similar for both genders. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of SUSTAIN 6, once-weekly semaglutide vs placebo reduced the risk of MACE in all subjects included in the trial, regardless of gender, age, or baseline CV risk profile. Trial registry Clinicaltrials.gov, Identifying number: NCT01720446, Date of registration: October 29, 2012.

How representative of a general type 2 diabetes population are patients included in cardiovascular outcome trials with SGLT2 inhibitors? A large European observational study.

AIMS: Enrollment criteria vary substantially among cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is), which impacts the relationship between a trial population and the general type 2 diabetes (T2D) population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the representativeness of four SGLT-2i CVOTs of a general T2D population. METHODS: T2D patients from Germany, The Netherlands, Norway and Sweden were included in the study. Given the available data per country, key inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined by diagnoses, procedures and drug treatments to facilitate comparability among countries. Representativeness was determined by dividing the number of patients fulfilling the key enrolment criteria of each CVOT (CANVAS, DECLARE-TIMI 58, EMPA-REG OUTCOME, VERTIS-CV) by the total T2D population. RESULTS: In 2015, a total T2D population of 803 836 patients was identified in Germany (n = 239 485), in The Netherlands (n = 36 213), in Norway (n = 149 782) and in Sweden (n = 378 356). These populations showed a 25% to 44% cardiovascular (CV) disease baseline prevalence and high CV-preventive drug use (>80%). The general T2D population had less prevalent CV disease and patients were slightly older than those included in the CVOTs. The DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial had the highest representativeness, 59% compared to the general T2D population, and this representativeness was almost 2-, 3- and 4-fold higher compared to the CANVAS (34%), EMPA-REG OUTCOME (21%) and VERTIS-CV (17%) trials, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In large T2D populations within Europe, consistent patterns of representativeness of CVOTs were found when applying the main enrolment criteria. The DECLARE-TMI 58 trial had the highest representativeness, indicating that it included and examined patients who are most representative of the general T2D patients in the studied countries.

Targeting renal glucose reabsorption to treat hyperglycaemia: the pleiotropic effects of SGLT2 inhibition.

Healthy kidneys filter ∼160 g/day of glucose (∼30% of daily energy intake) under euglycaemic conditions. To prevent valuable energy from being lost in the urine, the proximal tubule avidly reabsorbs filtered glucose up to a limit of ∼450 g/day. When blood glucose levels increase to the point that the filtered load exceeds this limit, the surplus is excreted in the urine. Thus, the kidney provides a safety valve that can prevent extreme hyperglycaemia as long as glomerular filtration is maintained. Most of the capacity for renal glucose reabsorption is provided by sodium glucose cotransporter (SGLT) 2 in the early proximal tubule. In the absence or with inhibition of SGLT2, the renal reabsorptive capacity for glucose declines to ∼80 g/day (the residual capacity of SGLT1), i.e. the safety valve opens at a lower threshold, which makes it relevant to glucose homeostasis from day-to-day. Several SGLT2 inhibitors are now approved glucose lowering agents for individuals with type 2 diabetes and preserved kidney function. By inducing glucosuria, these drugs improve glycaemic control in all stages of type 2 diabetes, while their risk of causing hypoglycaemia is low because they naturally stop working when the filtered glucose load falls below ∼80 g/day and they do not otherwise interfere with metabolic counterregulation. Through glucosuria, SGLT2 inhibitors reduce body weight and body fat, and shift substrate utilisation from carbohydrates to lipids and, possibly, ketone bodies. Because SGLT2 reabsorbs sodium along with glucose, SGLT2 blockers are natriuretic and antihypertensive. Also, because they work in the proximal tubule, SGLT2 inhibitors increase delivery of fluid and electrolytes to the macula densa, thereby activating tubuloglomerular feedback and increasing tubular back pressure. This mitigates glomerular hyperfiltration, reduces the kidney's demand for oxygen and lessens albuminuria. For reasons that are less well understood, SGLT2 inhibitors are also uricosuric. These pleiotropic effects of SGLT2 inhibitors are likely to have contributed to the results of the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial in which the SGLT2 inhibitor, empagliflozin, slowed the progression of chronic kidney disease and reduced major adverse cardiovascular events in high-risk individuals with type 2 diabetes. This review discusses the role of SGLT2 in the physiology and pathophysiology of renal glucose reabsorption and outlines the unexpected logic of inhibiting SGLT2 in the diabetic kidney.

Improved outcome with repeated intracoronary injection of bone marrow-derived cells within a registry: rationale for the randomized outcome trial REPEAT.

AIMS: Regenerative therapies have evolved as a promising new option in the treatment of post-infarction heart failure. A major limitation of intracoronary application of autologous bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells (BM-MNCs) is that homing of the applied cells is profoundly reduced in patients with post-infarction heart failure compared with patients with acute myocardial infarction. However, early pilot and also randomized controlled trials have demonstrated significant improvements in overall cardiac function. The aim of the present analysis was to quantify a potential mortality risk reduction and reduced hospitalization in order to provide data for a prospective outcome trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: The results of an ongoing single-centre registry including 297 post-infarction heart failure patients suggest that repeated intracoronary application of autologous bone marrow-derived cells is associated with a significant better 2-year survival compared with a single BM-MNC application (2-year survival 93.6 vs. 84.0%, P = 0.03). Likewise, mortality is significantly lower at 2-year follow-up compared with the mortality estimated by the use of the Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM) in patients receiving repeated BM-MNC application (observed mortality 6.4%, predicted mortality 16.2%, P = 0.02). Although the trend persisted at 3-year follow-up, the mortality reduction was no longer statistically significant between single and repeated treatment (mortality 21.9 vs. 13.7%, P = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Repeated intracoronary administration of BM-MNC appears to be associated with improved clinical outcome compared with single treatment at 2 years. This registry provides the rationale for the design of the multicentre randomized, controlled, open-label REPEAT trial, which prospectively compares the effects of single vs. repeated intracoronary application of autologous BM-MNC on total and SHFM-predicted mortality in patients with chronic post-infarction heart failure.

Imputation of Missing Data for Time-to-Event Endpoints Using Retrieved Dropouts.

We have explored several statistical approaches to impute missing time-to-event data that arise from outcome trials with relatively long follow-up periods. Aligning with the primary estimand, such analyses evaluate the robustness of results by imposing an assumption different from censoring at random (CAR). Although there have been debates over which assumption and which method is more appropriate to be applied to the imputation, we propose to use the collection of retrieved dropouts as the basis of missing data imputation. As retrieved dropouts share a similar disposition, such as treatment discontinuation, with subjects who have missing data, they can reasonably be assumed to characterize the distribution of time-to-event among subjects with missing data. In terms of computational intensity and robustness to violation of underlying distributional assumption, we have compared parametric approaches via MCMC or MLE multivariate sampling procedures to a non-parametric bootstrap approach with respect to baseline hazard function. Each of these approaches follows a process of multiple imputation ("proper imputations"), analysis of complete datasets, and final combination. The type-I error, and power rates are examined under a wide range of scenarios to inform the performance characteristics. A subset of a real unblinded phase III CVOT is used to demonstrate the application of the proposed approaches, compared to the Cox proportional hazards model and jump-to-reference multiple imputation.

Underuse of GLP-1 receptor agonists in the management of type 2 diabetes despite a favorable benefit-safety profile.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are at high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and cardiovascular death. Cardiovascular protection is a key objective in T2DM. AREAS COVERED: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have proven their efficacy in reducing major cardiovascular events in high-risk patients with T2DM in placebo-controlled trials, a finding confirmed in observational studies compared with other glucose-lowering agents. Overall, GLP-1RAs have a good safety profile associated with a favorable benefit/risk ratio for the management of T2DM, even if their cost-effectiveness might be questionable. International guidelines recommend GLP-1RAs as preferred glucose-lowering agents in patients with ASCVD and as a valuable alternative in overweight/obese patients with T2DM. However, real-life studies worldwide revealed that only a minority of patients receive a GLP-1RA, despite a positive trend for increased prescriptions in recent years. Surprisingly, however, fewer patients with established ASCVD are treated with these cardioprotective antihyperglycemic agents versus patients without ASCVD. EXPERT OPINION: The reasons for GLP-1RA underuse in clinical practice are multiple. Multifaceted and coordinated interventions targeting all actors of the health-care system must be implemented to stimulate the adoption of GLP-1RAs as part of routine cardiovascular care among patients with T2DM, especially in those with ASCVD.

Patients with type 2 diabetes are at high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, especially myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. Cardiovascular protection should be considered as a key objective when treating those patients. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), an injectable therapy for the treatment of hyperglycemia, have proven their efficacy in reducing major cardiovascular events (cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke) both in controlled trials compared to placebo and in real-life studies compared with other glucose-lowering agents. These consistent findings profoundly influence international guidelines which recommend GLP-1RAs as preferred glucose-lowering agents in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or at high risk of developing this complication. However, real-life studies worldwide revealed that only a minority of patients receive a GLP-1RA. An even more surprising finding was that GLP-1RAs are less prescribed in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, including antecedents of coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease, than in patients without such cardiovascular complications. The reasons for GLP-1RA underuse in clinical practice are multiple and concern physicians, patients, and health-care system. Bridging the gap between evidence-based cardiovascular protection with GLP-1RAs and their underuse in daily clinical practice in patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk is crucial from a public health viewpoint.

Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) Inhibitors and Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Review of Literature.

Coronary arterial diseases are a major contributor to disease and death worldwide and are most often compounded by several other underlying medical conditions. A key concern is type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Despite progress in medical advancements, these life-threatening illnesses are still underdiagnosed and undermanaged. A relatively newer class of anti-diabetic drugs, the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGL2-Is), also termed gliflozins, have shown promising results in reducing cardiovascular risk, regardless of diabetic status. These drugs have on-target (promoting renal glycosuria and diuresis by acting on the SGLT-2 channels in the proximal convoluted tubule) and off-target effects contributing to the reported cardiovascular benefit. Some emerging theories about its impact on myocardial energetics, calcium balance, and renal physiology exist. In this review article, we explored three major cardiovascular outcome trials: the Dapagliflozin Effect on Cardiovascular Events-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 58 (DECLARE-TIMI 58) trial, the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) program, and the Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients-Removing Excess Glucose (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) trial to evaluate the cardiovascular effects of SGLT2-Is.

A review of the evidence on cardiovascular outcomes from obesity treatment.

Background: Obesity is a chronic disease with a myriad of complications including cardiovascular disease. There is a growing interest to examine if obesity treatment is associated with cardiovascular outcomes. Methods: In this narrative review, we focused on randomized controlled trials (RCT) with cardiovascular outcomes (CVO) from lifestyle intervention, bariatric surgery, glucagon-like peptide-1 analogues (GLP-1a) and other pharmacotherapy. Additionally, we provide a comprehensive look into the RCT of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and CVO in obesity, while also summarizing several ongoing randomized cardiovascular outcome controlled trials for the pharmacological treatment of obesity. Results: To date, the results from the randomized controlled trials supported the association between obesity treatment and cardiovascular outcomes. Studies have large sample sizes, conducted over long duration, with the majority demonstrating superiority in primary cardiovascular outcome end points compared to placebo. Conclusion: Future data from several ongoing anti-obesity medications cardiovascular outcome trials such as SELECT, SURPASS, SUMMIT and SURMOUNT-MMO hold promises. Further studies are warranted to investigate the long term cardiovascular outcomes following lifestyle intervention and bariatric surgery.

Bridging the gap in cardiovascular care in diabetic patients: are cardioprotective antihyperglycemic agents underutilized?

INTRODUCTION: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and heart failure (HF) are two major complications of type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Cardiovascular protection is a key objective, yet not fully reached in clinical practice. AREAS COVERED: Both glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) have proven their efficacy in reducing major cardiovascular events in high-risk patients with T2DM and SGLT2is in reducing hospitalization for HF in placebo-controlled randomized trials. However, real-life studies worldwide revealed that only a minority of patients with T2DM receive either a GLP-1RA or an SGLT2i and surprisingly even less patients with established ASCVD or HF are treated with these cardioprotective antihyperglycemic agents. EXPERT OPINION: Bridging the gap between evidence-based cardiovascular protection with GLP-1RAs and SGLT2is and their underuse in daily clinical practice in patients with T2DM at high risk is crucial from a public health viewpoint. However, the task appears hazardous and the goal not attained considering the current failure. Education of specialists/primary care physicians and patients is critical. Multifaceted and coordinated interventions involving all actors (physicians, patients and broadly health-care system) must be implemented to stimulate the adoption of these cardioprotective antihyperglycemic medications as part of routine cardiovascular care among patients with T2DM.

Type 2 diabetes can lead to major cardiovascular complications including cardiovascular disease linked to narrowing of the arteries (atherosclerosis), and heart failure. These complications are associated with lower quality of life and life expectancy. Thus, cardiovascular protection in people with type 2 diabetes is an important objective. However, clinical practice often fails in fully achieving this goal.Two types of medications that lower blood sugar (so-called antidiabetic agents) have shown efficacy in reducing major cardiovascular events (such as strokes and heart attacks) in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes. One of them has also shown effectiveness in decreasing hospitalizations due to heart failure. However, in clinical practice, most patients with type 2 diabetes do not receive these medications, even people with known cardiovascular disease or heart failure, despite the proven effectiveness of these drugs. Many studies worldwide have highlighted socioeconomic inequities regarding the use of these medications, which can be expensive.From a public health perspective, it is imperative to bridge the gap between the under-use of cardioprotective antidiabetic agents in routine daily practice among high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes and the clear-cut recommendations of international guidelines. Given the current limitations, this task appears challenging. Education of physicians (both primary care practitioners and specialists, including cardiologists) and patients is most important in addressing this issue. Finally, in every country, the global health-care system should facilitate the use of these agents among patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and heart failure.