An overview of precision oncology basket and umbrella trials for clinicians.

With advancements in biomarkers and momentum in precision medicine, biomarker-guided trials such as basket trials and umbrella trials have been developed under the master protocol framework. A master protocol refers to a single, overarching design developed to evaluate multiple hypotheses with the general goal of improving the efficiency of trial evaluation. One type of master protocol is the basket trial, in which a targeted therapy is evaluated for multiple diseases that share common molecular alterations or risk factors that may help predict whether the patients will respond to the given therapy. Another variant of a master protocol is the umbrella trial, in which multiple targeted therapies are evaluated for a single disease that is stratified into multiple subgroups based on different molecular or other predictive risk factors. Both designs follow the core principle of precision medicine-to tailor intervention strategies based on the patient's risk factor(s) that can help predict whether they will respond to a specific treatment. There have been increasing numbers of basket and umbrella trials, but they are still poorly understood. This article reviews common characteristics of basket and umbrella trials, key trials and recent US Food and Drug Administration approvals for precision oncology, and important considerations for clinical readers when critically evaluating future publications on basket trials and umbrella trials and for researchers when designing these clinical trials.

Early Treatment with Pegylated Interferon Lambda for Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of a single dose of pegylated interferon lambda in preventing clinical events among outpatients with acute symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, adaptive platform trial involving predominantly vaccinated adults with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in Brazil and Canada. Outpatients who presented with an acute clinical condition consistent with Covid-19 within 7 days after the onset of symptoms received either pegylated interferon lambda (single subcutaneous injection, 180 µg) or placebo (single injection or oral). The primary composite outcome was hospitalization (or transfer to a tertiary hospital) or an emergency department visit (observation for >6 hours) due to Covid-19 within 28 days after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 933 patients were assigned to receive pegylated interferon lambda (2 were subsequently excluded owing to protocol deviations) and 1018 were assigned to receive placebo. Overall, 83% of the patients had been vaccinated, and during the trial, multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants had emerged. A total of 25 of 931 patients (2.7%) in the interferon group had a primary-outcome event, as compared with 57 of 1018 (5.6%) in the placebo group, a difference of 51% (relative risk, 0.49; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.30 to 0.76; posterior probability of superiority to placebo, >99.9%). Results were generally consistent in analyses of secondary outcomes, including time to hospitalization for Covid-19 (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.33 to 0.95) and Covid-19-related hospitalization or death (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.35 to 0.97). The effects were consistent across dominant variants and independent of vaccination status. Among patients with a high viral load at baseline, those who received pegylated interferon lambda had lower viral loads by day 7 than those who received placebo. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among predominantly vaccinated outpatients with Covid-19, the incidence of hospitalization or an emergency department visit (observation for >6 hours) was significantly lower among those who received a single dose of pegylated interferon lambda than among those who received placebo. (Funded by FastGrants and others; TOGETHER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04727424.).

Effect of Early Treatment with Ivermectin among Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of ivermectin in preventing hospitalization or extended observation in an emergency setting among outpatients with acutely symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), the disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, adaptive platform trial involving symptomatic SARS-CoV-2-positive adults recruited from 12 public health clinics in Brazil. Patients who had had symptoms of Covid-19 for up to 7 days and had at least one risk factor for disease progression were randomly assigned to receive ivermectin (400 µg per kilogram of body weight) once daily for 3 days or placebo. (The trial also involved other interventions that are not reported here.) The primary composite outcome was hospitalization due to Covid-19 within 28 days after randomization or an emergency department visit due to clinical worsening of Covid-19 (defined as the participant remaining under observation for >6 hours) within 28 days after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 3515 patients were randomly assigned to receive ivermectin (679 patients), placebo (679), or another intervention (2157). Overall, 100 patients (14.7%) in the ivermectin group had a primary-outcome event, as compared with 111 (16.3%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.90; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.70 to 1.16). Of the 211 primary-outcome events, 171 (81.0%) were hospital admissions. Findings were similar to the primary analysis in a modified intention-to-treat analysis that included only patients who received at least one dose of ivermectin or placebo (relative risk, 0.89; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.69 to 1.15) and in a per-protocol analysis that included only patients who reported 100% adherence to the assigned regimen (relative risk, 0.94; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.67 to 1.35). There were no significant effects of ivermectin use on secondary outcomes or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with ivermectin did not result in a lower incidence of medical admission to a hospital due to progression of Covid-19 or of prolonged emergency department observation among outpatients with an early diagnosis of Covid-19. (Funded by FastGrants and the Rainwater Charitable Foundation; TOGETHER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04727424.).

Adaptive designs in public health: Vaccine and cluster randomized trials go Bayesian.

Clinical trials in public health-particularly those conducted in low- and middle-income countries-often involve communicable and non-communicable diseases with high disease burden and unmet needs. Trials conducted in these regions often are faced with resource limitations, so improving the efficiencies of these trials is critical. Adaptive trial designs have the potential to save trial time and resources and reduce the number of patients receiving ineffective interventions. In this paper, we provide a detailed account of the implementation of vaccine and cluster randomized trials within the framework of Bayesian adaptive trials, with emphasis on computational efficiency and flexibility with regard to stopping rules and allocation ratios. We offer an educated approach to selecting prior distributions and a data-driven empirical Bayes method for plug-in estimates for nuisance parameters.

Oral Fluvoxamine With Inhaled Budesonide for Treatment of Early-Onset COVID-19 : A Randomized Platform Trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous trials have demonstrated the effects of fluvoxamine alone and inhaled budesonide alone for prevention of disease progression among outpatients with COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the combination of fluvoxamine and inhaled budesonide would increase treatment effects in a highly vaccinated population. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled, adaptive platform trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04727424). SETTING: 12 clinical sites in Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: Symptomatic adults with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and a known risk factor for progression to severe disease. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to either fluvoxamine (100 mg twice daily for 10 days) plus inhaled budesonide (800 mcg twice daily for 10 days) or matching placebos. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was a composite of emergency setting retention for COVID-19 for more than 6 hours, hospitalization, and/or suspected complications due to clinical progression of COVID-19 within 28 days of randomization. Secondary outcomes included health care attendance (defined as hospitalization for any cause or emergency department visit lasting >6 hours), time to hospitalization, mortality, patient-reported outcomes, and adverse drug reactions. RESULTS: Randomization occurred from 15 January to 6 July 2022. A total of 738 participants were allocated to oral fluvoxamine plus inhaled budesonide, and 738 received placebo. The proportion of patients observed in an emergency setting for COVID-19 for more than 6 hours or hospitalized due to COVID-19 was lower in the treatment group than the placebo group (1.8% [95% credible interval {CrI}, 1.1% to 3.0%] vs. 3.7% [95% CrI, 2.5% to 5.3%]; relative risk, 0.50 [95% CrI, 0.25 to 0.92]), with a probability of superiority of 98.7%. No relative effects were found between groups for any of the secondary outcomes. More adverse events occurred in the intervention group than the placebo group, but no important differences between the groups were detected. LIMITATION: Low event rate overall, consistent with contemporary trials in vaccinated populations. CONCLUSION: Treatment with oral fluvoxamine plus inhaled budesonide among high-risk outpatients with early COVID-19 reduced the incidence of severe disease requiring advanced care. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Latona Foundation, FastGrants, and Rainwater Charitable Foundation.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection and Pregnancy in Sub-Saharan Africa: A 6-Country Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available on COVID-19 outcomes among pregnant women in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), where high-risk comorbidities are prevalent. We investigated the impact of pregnancy on SARS-CoV-2 infection and of SARS-CoV-2 infection on pregnancy to generate evidence for health policy and clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a 6-country retrospective cohort study among hospitalized women of childbearing age between 1 March 2020 and 31 March 2021. Exposures were (1) pregnancy and (2) a positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test. The primary outcome for both analyses was intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Secondary outcomes included supplemental oxygen requirement, mechanical ventilation, adverse birth outcomes, and in-hospital mortality. We used log-binomial regression to estimate the effect between pregnancy and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Factors associated with mortality were evaluated using competing-risk proportional subdistribution hazards models. RESULTS: Our analyses included 1315 hospitalized women: 510 pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2, 403 nonpregnant women with SARS-CoV-2, and 402 pregnant women without SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among women with SARS-CoV-2 infection, pregnancy was associated with increased risk for ICU admission (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]: 2.38; 95% CI: 1.42-4.01), oxygen supplementation (aRR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.44-2.42), and hazard of in-hospital death (adjusted sub-hazard ratio [aSHR]: 2.00; 95% CI: 1.08-3.70). Among pregnant women, SARS-CoV-2 infection increased the risk of ICU admission (aRR: 2.0; 95% CI: 1.20-3.35), oxygen supplementation (aRR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.17-2.11), and hazard of in-hospital death (aSHR: 5.03; 95% CI: 1.79-14.13). CONCLUSIONS: Among hospitalized women in SSA, both SARS-CoV-2 infection and pregnancy independently increased risks of ICU admission, oxygen supplementation, and death. These data support international recommendations to prioritize COVID-19 vaccination among pregnant women.

Long-Term Effect of Group Support Psychotherapy on Depression and HIV Treatment Outcomes: Secondary Analysis of a Cluster Randomized Trial in Uganda.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the effect of group support psychotherapy (GSP) compared with group HIV education (GHE) on depression and HIV treatment outcomes 24 months after treatment. We further aimed to investigate the mediating role of depression and antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence in the relationship between GSP and viral load suppression. METHODS: Thirty HIV clinics across three districts were randomly assigned to deliver either GSP or GHE for depression. Depression and optimal (≥95%) ART adherence was assessed at baseline and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after treatment. Viral load was drawn from the medical charts at baseline and 12 and 24 months after treatment. Multilevel mixed-effects regression models and generalized structural equation modeling were used to estimate 24-month outcomes and mediation effects. RESULTS: Participants ( N = 1140) were enrolled from HIV clinics offering either GSP ( n = 578 [51%]) or GHE ( n = 562 [49%]). Fewer GSP than GHE participants met the criteria for depression at 24 months after treatment (1% versus 25%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.002, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.0002-0.018). More GSP than GHE participants reported optimal (≥95%) ART adherence (96% versus 88%; aOR = 20.88, 95% CI = 5.78-75.33) and improved viral suppression (96% versus 88%; aOR = 3.38, 95% CI = 1.02-11.02). The indirect effects of GSP through sequential reduction in depression and improvement in ART adherence at 12 months may partially explain the higher viral suppression rates at 24 months in GSP than GHE groups. CONCLUSION: In settings where the HIV epidemic persists, depression treatment with GSP may be critical for optimal HIV treatment outcomes.Trial Registration: The Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, number PACTR201608001738234.

How to Use and Interpret the Results of a Platform Trial: Users' Guide to the Medical Literature.

Platform trials are a type of randomized clinical trial that allow simultaneous comparison of multiple intervention groups against a single control group that serves as a common control based on a prespecified interim analysis plan. The platform trial design enables introduction of new interventions after the trial is initiated to evaluate multiple interventions in an ongoing manner using a single overarching protocol called a master (or core) protocol. When multiple treatment candidates are available, rapid scientific therapeutic discoveries may be made. Platform trials have important potential advantages in creating an efficient trial infrastructure that can help address critical clinical questions as the evidence evolves. Platform trials have recently been used in investigations of evolving therapies for patients with COVID-19. The purpose of this Users' Guide to the Medical Literature is to describe fundamental concepts of platform trials and master protocols and review issues in the conduct and interpretation of these studies. This Users' Guide is intended to help clinicians and readers understand articles reporting on interventions evaluated using platform trial designs.

The Critical Need for Pooled Data on Coronavirus Disease 2019 in African Children: An AFREhealth Call for Action Through Multicountry Research Collaboration.

Globally, there are prevailing knowledge gaps in the epidemiology, clinical manifestations, and outcomes of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among children and adolescents; and these gaps are especially wide in African countries. The availability of robust age-disaggregated data is a critical first step in improving knowledge on disease burden and manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among children. Furthermore, it is essential to improve understanding of SARS-CoV-2 interactions with comorbidities and coinfections such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), tuberculosis, malaria, sickle cell disease, and malnutrition, which are highly prevalent among children in sub-Saharan Africa. The African Forum for Research and Education in Health (AFREhealth) COVID-19 Research Collaboration on Children and Adolescents is conducting studies across Western, Central, Eastern, and Southern Africa to address existing knowledge gaps. This consortium is expected to generate key evidence to inform clinical practice and public health policy-making for COVID-19 while concurrently addressing other major diseases affecting children in African countries.

Towards elimination of mother-to-child transmission of HIV in Rwanda: a nested case-control study of risk factors for transmission.

BACKGROUND: Mother-to-child HIV transmission (MTCT) has substantially declined since the scale-up of prevention programs around the world, including Rwanda. To achieve full elimination of MTCT, it is important to understand the risk factors associated with residual HIV transmission, defined as MTCT at the population-level that still occurs despite universal access to PMTCT. METHODS: We performed a case control study of children born from mothers with HIV with known vital status at 18 months from birth, who were followed in three national cohorts between October and December 2013, 2014, and 2015 in Rwanda. Children with HIV were matched in a ratio of 1:2 with HIV-uninfected children and a conditional logistic regression model was used to investigate risk factors for MTCT. RESULTS: In total, 84 children with HIV were identified and matched with 164 non-infected children. The median age of mothers from both groups was 29 years (interquartile range (IQR): 24-33). Of these mothers, 126 (51.4 %) initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART) before their pregnancy on record. In a multivariable regression analysis, initiation of ART in the third trimester (Adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR]: 9.25; 95 % Confidence Interval [95 % CI]: 2.12-40.38) and during labour or post-partum (aOR: 8.87; 95 % CI: 1.92-40.88), compared to initiation of ART before pregnancy, increased the risk of MTCT. Similarly, offspring of single mothers (aOR: 7.15; 95 % CI: 1.15-44.21), and absence of postpartum neonatal ART prophylaxis (aOR: 7.26; 95 % CI: 1.66-31.59) were factors significantly associated with MTCT. CONCLUSIONS: Late ART initiation for PMTCT and lack of postpartum infant prophylaxis are still the most important risk factors to explain MTCT in the era of universal access. Improved early attendance at antenatal care, early ART initiation, and enhancing the continuum of care especially for single mothers is crucial for MTCT elimination in Rwanda.

Clinical Trial Data Sharing for COVID-19-Related Research.

This paper aims to provide a perspective on data sharing practices in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The scientific community has made several important inroads in the fight against COVID-19, and there are over 2500 clinical trials registered globally. Within the context of the rapidly changing pandemic, we are seeing a large number of trials conducted without results being made available. It is likely that a plethora of trials have stopped early, not for statistical reasons but due to lack of feasibility. Trials stopped early for feasibility are, by definition, statistically underpowered and thereby prone to inconclusive findings. Statistical power is not necessarily linear with the total sample size, and even small reductions in patient numbers or events can have a substantial impact on the research outcomes. Given the profusion of clinical trials investigating identical or similar treatments across different geographical and clinical contexts, one must also consider that the likelihood of a substantial number of false-positive and false-negative trials, emerging with the increasing overall number of trials, adds to public perceptions of uncertainty. This issue is complicated further by the evolving nature of the pandemic, wherein baseline assumptions on control group risk factors used to develop sample size calculations are far more challenging than those in the case of well-documented diseases. The standard answer to these challenges during nonpandemic settings is to assess each trial for statistical power and risk-of-bias and then pool the reported aggregated results using meta-analytic approaches. This solution simply will not suffice for COVID-19. Even with random-effects meta-analysis models, it will be difficult to adjust for the heterogeneity of different trials with aggregated reported data alone, especially given the absence of common data standards and outcome measures. To date, several groups have proposed structures and partnerships for data sharing. As COVID-19 has forced reconsideration of policies, processes, and interests, this is the time to advance scientific cooperation and shift the clinical research enterprise toward a data-sharing culture to maximize our response in the service of public health.

Utilizing Bayesian predictive power in clinical trial design.

The Bayesian paradigm provides an ideal platform to update uncertainties and carry them over into the future in the presence of data. Bayesian predictive power (BPP) reflects our belief in the eventual success of a clinical trial to meet its goals. In this paper we derive mathematical expressions for the most common types of outcomes, to make the BPP accessible to practitioners, facilitate fast computations in adaptive trial design simulations that use interim futility monitoring, and propose an organized BPP-based phase II-to-phase III design framework.

The effect of computerised tomography on operative planning in posterior malleolus ankle fractures.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this project was to analyse whether a CT influences surgical planning in ankle fracture involving the posterior malleolus. METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients with fractures involving the posterior malleolus were retrospectively selected and had their plain radiographs and CT scan anonymised. Initially, radiographs alone were presented to nine trauma surgeons to formulate a surgical plan individually. After a minimum of 6 weeks, the same process was repeated with CT scans available. RESULTS: The surgical approach for ankle fracture fixation changed in 32.7% of cases following CT scan review. A CT scan altered the decision to stabilise the posterior malleolus in 25.6% and the decision of whether to stabilise the syndesmosis in 16.6% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that a pre-operative CT scan changes the surgical approach in 32.7% of cases and therefore we recommend use of CT scanning in this subset of ankle injuries.

Retention in care and virological failure among adult HIV+ patients on second-line ART in Rwanda: a national representative study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) in sub-Saharan Africa. To address this challenge, outcomes of second-line protease inhibitor (PI) based ART in Rwanda were assessed. METHODS: A two-stage cluster sampling design was undertaken. 49 of 340 health facilities linked to the open-source electronic medical record (EMR) system of Rwanda were randomly sampled. Data sampling criteria included adult HIV positive patients with documented change from first to second-line ART regimen. Retention in care and treatment failure (viral load above 1000 copies/mL) were evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards and logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 1688 patients (60% females) initiated second-line ART PI-based regimen by 31st December 2016 with a median follow-up time of 26 months (IQR 24-36). Overall, 92.5% of patients were retained in care; 83% achieved VL ≤ 1000 copies/ml, 2.8% were lost to care and 2.2% died. Defaulting from care was associated with more recent initiation of ART- PI based regimen, CD4 cell count ≤500 cells/mm3 at initiation of second line ART and viral load > 1000 copies/ml at last measurement. Viral failure was associated with younger age, WHO stage III&IV at ART initiation, CD4 cell count ≤500 cells/mm3 at switch, atazanavir based second-line ART and receiving care at a health center compared to hospital settings. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of patients on second-line ART are doing relatively well in Rwanda and retained in care with low viral failure rates. However, enhanced understandings of adherence and adherence interventions for less healthy individuals are required. Routine viral load measurement and tracing of loss to follow-up is fundamental in resource limited settings, especially among less healthy patients.

Statin use and all-cause mortality in people living with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether statin use among people living with HIV results in a reduction in all-cause mortality. We aimed to evaluate the effect of statin use on all-cause mortality among people living with HIV. METHODS: We conducted comprehensive literature searches of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and cross-references up to April 2018. We included randomised, quasi-randomised trials and prospective cohort studies that examined the association between statin use and cardio-protective and mortality outcomes among people living with HIV. Two reviewers independently abstracted the data. Hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled using empirical Bayesian random-effect meta-analysis. A number of sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: We included seven studies with a total of 35,708 participants. The percentage of participants on statins across the studies ranged from 8 to 35%. Where reported, the percentage of participants with hypertension ranged from 14 to 35% and 7 to 10% had been diagnosed with diabetes mellitus. Statin use was associated with a 33% reduction in all-cause mortality (pooled HR = 0.67, 95% Credible Interval 0.39 to 0.96). The probability that statin use conferred a moderate mortality benefit (i.e. decreased risk of mortality of at least 25%, HR ≤ 0.75) was 71.5%. Down-weighting and excluding the lower quality studies resulted in a more conservative estimate of the pooled HR. CONCLUSION: Statin use appears to confer moderate mortality benefits in people living with HIV.

The role of community health workers and local leaders in reducing attrition among participant in the AIDS indicator survey and HIV incidence in a national cohort study in Rwanda.

BACKGROUND: Retention of participants in longitudinal prospective surveys can challenging for population health researchers. Community health workers (CHWs) may help reduce attrition. METHODS: We used data came from a longitudinal prospective household-based survey targeting women and men in Rwanda, collected between June 2013 and December 2014. The sample was drawn from a population that included all residents of all 30 districts, 416 sectors, and 14,837 villages in Rwanda. The outcome measure was time to loss-to-follow-up. Follow up visits occurred at three, six and nine, and 12 months. A Cox proportional hazards model was constructed to identify factors independently associated with time to loss-to-follow-up. RESULTS: Overall, 14,222 respondents consented to be interviewed at baseline. At the end of 12 months of follow up, 13,728 were revisited and consented to participate at 12 months of follow up. The overall attrition rate was 8.0%. A majority of those lost (54.3%) were less than 25 years of age, male (55.1%), not living in union (67.3%), had no education level or had primary education level (71.4%), or were in the highest wealth index (54.2%). Compared to illiterate, secondary education was negatively associated with attrition. CONCLUSION: The Rwanda AIDS indicator and HIV incidence survey recorded a very high retention of participants after 12 months. CHWs and local leaders played a major role to reduce attrition rate and identifying factors associated with loss-to-follow-up can help CHWs strengthen the quality of longitudinal survey data.

Cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality associated with sulphonylureas compared with other antihyperglycaemic drugs: A Bayesian meta-analysis of survival data.

AIM: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality associated with sulphonylureas (SUs) vs other glucose lowering drugs in patients with T2DM (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of Medline, Embase, Cochrane and clinicaltrials.gov was conducted for studies comparing SUs with placebo or other antihyperglycaemic drugs in patients with T2DM. A cloglog model was used in the Bayesian framework to obtain comparative hazard ratios (HRs) for the different interventions. For the analysis of observational data, conventional fixed-effect pairwise meta-analyses were used. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 82 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 26 observational studies. Meta-analyses of RCT data showed an increased risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular-related mortality for SUs compared with all other treatments combined (HR 1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.44 and HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.21-1.77, respectively). The risk of myocardial infarction was significantly higher for SUs compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (HR 2.54, 95% CI 1.14-6.57 and HR 41.80, 95% CI 1.64-360.4, respectively). The risk of stroke was significantly higher for SUs than for DPP-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists, thiazolidinediones and insulin. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis showed an association between SU therapy and a higher risk of major cardiovascular disease-related events compared with other glucose lowering drugs. Results of ongoing RCTs, which should be available in 2018, will provide definitive results on the risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality associated with SUs vs other antihyperglycaemic drugs.