Sean L Zheng1,2,3, Alistair J Roddick4, Rochan Aghar-Jaffar1,3,5, Matthew J Shun-Shin3, Darrel Francis3, Nick Oliver1,3,5, Karim Meeran1,3,5. 1. Department of Endocrinology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom. 2. Department of Cardiology, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom. 3. Imperial College London, United Kingdom. 4. Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, United Kingdom. 5. Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Imperial College London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
Importance: The comparative clinical efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists, and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors for treatment of type 2 diabetes is unknown. Objective: To compare the efficacies of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists, and DPP-4 inhibitors on mortality and cardiovascular end points using network meta-analysis. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials, and published meta-analyses from inception through October 11, 2017. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials enrolling participants with type 2 diabetes and a follow-up of at least 12 weeks were included, for which SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists, and DPP-4 inhibitors were compared with either each other or placebo or no treatment. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were screened by 1 investigator and extracted in duplicate by 2 investigators. A Bayesian hierarchical network meta-analysis was performed. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome: all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes: cardiovascular (CV) mortality, heart failure (HF) events, myocardial infarction (MI), unstable angina, and stroke; safety end points: adverse events and hypoglycemia. Results: This network meta-analysis of 236 trials randomizing 176 310 participants found SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute risk difference [RD], -1.0%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.80 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.71 to 0.89]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.6%; HR, 0.88 [95% CrI, 0.81 to 0.94]) were associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality than the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, -0.9%; HR, 0.78 [95% CrI, 0.68 to 0.90]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.5%; HR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.96]) were associated with lower mortality than were DPP-4 inhibitors. DPP-4 inhibitors were not significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality (absolute RD, 0.1%; HR, 1.02 [95% CrI, 0.94 to 1.11]) than were the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, -0.8%; HR, 0.79 [95% CrI, 0.69 to 0.91]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.5%; HR, 0.85 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.94]) were significantly associated with lower CV mortality than were the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors were significantly associated with lower rates of HF events (absolute RD, -1.1%; HR, 0.62 [95% CrI, 0.54 to 0.72]) and MI (absolute RD, -0.6%; HR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.97]) than were the control groups. GLP-1 agonists were associated with a higher risk of adverse events leading to trial withdrawal than were SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, 5.8%; HR, 1.80 [95% CrI, 1.44 to 2.25]) and DPP-4 inhibitors (absolute RD, 3.1%; HR, 1.93 [95% CrI, 1.59 to 2.35]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this network meta-analysis, the use of SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists was associated with lower mortality than DPP-4 inhibitors or placebo or no treatment. Use of DPP-4 inhibitors was not associated with lower mortality than placebo or no treatment.
Importance: The comparative clinical efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists, and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors for treatment of type 2 diabetes is unknown. Objective: To compare the efficacies of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists, and DPP-4 inhibitors on mortality and cardiovascular end points using network meta-analysis. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials, and published meta-analyses from inception through October 11, 2017. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials enrolling participants with type 2 diabetes and a follow-up of at least 12 weeks were included, for which SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists, and DPP-4 inhibitors were compared with either each other or placebo or no treatment. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were screened by 1 investigator and extracted in duplicate by 2 investigators. A Bayesian hierarchical network meta-analysis was performed. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome: all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes: cardiovascular (CV) mortality, heart failure (HF) events, myocardial infarction (MI), unstable angina, and stroke; safety end points: adverse events and hypoglycemia. Results: This network meta-analysis of 236 trials randomizing 176 310 participants found SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute risk difference [RD], -1.0%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.80 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.71 to 0.89]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.6%; HR, 0.88 [95% CrI, 0.81 to 0.94]) were associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality than the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, -0.9%; HR, 0.78 [95% CrI, 0.68 to 0.90]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.5%; HR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.96]) were associated with lower mortality than were DPP-4 inhibitors. DPP-4 inhibitors were not significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality (absolute RD, 0.1%; HR, 1.02 [95% CrI, 0.94 to 1.11]) than were the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, -0.8%; HR, 0.79 [95% CrI, 0.69 to 0.91]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.5%; HR, 0.85 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.94]) were significantly associated with lower CV mortality than were the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors were significantly associated with lower rates of HF events (absolute RD, -1.1%; HR, 0.62 [95% CrI, 0.54 to 0.72]) and MI (absolute RD, -0.6%; HR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.97]) than were the control groups. GLP-1 agonists were associated with a higher risk of adverse events leading to trial withdrawal than were SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, 5.8%; HR, 1.80 [95% CrI, 1.44 to 2.25]) and DPP-4 inhibitors (absolute RD, 3.1%; HR, 1.93 [95% CrI, 1.59 to 2.35]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this network meta-analysis, the use of SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists was associated with lower mortality than DPP-4 inhibitors or placebo or no treatment. Use of DPP-4 inhibitors was not associated with lower mortality than placebo or no treatment.
Authors: Benjamin M Scirica; Deepak L Bhatt; Eugene Braunwald; P Gabriel Steg; Jaime Davidson; Boaz Hirshberg; Peter Ohman; Robert Frederich; Stephen D Wiviott; Elaine B Hoffman; Matthew A Cavender; Jacob A Udell; Nihar R Desai; Ofri Mosenzon; Darren K McGuire; Kausik K Ray; Lawrence A Leiter; Itamar Raz Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-09-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Despoina Vasilakou; Thomas Karagiannis; Eleni Athanasiadou; Maria Mainou; Aris Liakos; Eleni Bekiari; Maria Sarigianni; David R Matthews; Apostolos Tsapas Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2013-08-20 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Rury R Holman; M Angelyn Bethel; Robert J Mentz; Vivian P Thompson; Yuliya Lokhnygina; John B Buse; Juliana C Chan; Jasmine Choi; Stephanie M Gustavson; Nayyar Iqbal; Aldo P Maggioni; Steven P Marso; Peter Öhman; Neha J Pagidipati; Neil Poulter; Ambady Ramachandran; Bernard Zinman; Adrian F Hernandez Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael A Nauck; Juris J Meier; Matthew A Cavender; Mirna Abd El Aziz; Daniel J Drucker Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-08-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Brian Hutton; Georgia Salanti; Deborah M Caldwell; Anna Chaimani; Christopher H Schmid; Chris Cameron; John P A Ioannidis; Sharon Straus; Kristian Thorlund; Jeroen P Jansen; Cynthia Mulrow; Ferrán Catalá-López; Peter C Gøtzsche; Kay Dickersin; Isabelle Boutron; Douglas G Altman; David Moher Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2015-06-02 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Mikhail Kosiborod; Matthew A Cavender; Alex Z Fu; John P Wilding; Kamlesh Khunti; Reinhard W Holl; Anna Norhammar; Kåre I Birkeland; Marit Eika Jørgensen; Marcus Thuresson; Niki Arya; Johan Bodegård; Niklas Hammar; Peter Fenici Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Steven P Marso; Gilbert H Daniels; Kirstine Brown-Frandsen; Peter Kristensen; Johannes F E Mann; Michael A Nauck; Steven E Nissen; Stuart Pocock; Neil R Poulter; Lasse S Ravn; William M Steinberg; Mette Stockner; Bernard Zinman; Richard M Bergenstal; John B Buse Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-06-13 Impact factor: 176.079
Authors: Gijs F N Berkelmans; Soffia Gudbjörnsdottir; Frank L J Visseren; Sarah H Wild; Stefan Franzen; John Chalmers; Barry R Davis; Neil R Poulter; Annemieke M Spijkerman; Mark Woodward; Sara L Pressel; Ajay K Gupta; Yvonne T van der Schouw; Ann-Marie Svensson; Yolanda van der Graaf; Stephanie H Read; Bjorn Eliasson; Jannick A N Dorresteijn Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2019-09-07 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Matthew J O'Brien; Susan L Karam; Amisha Wallia; Raymond H Kang; Andrew J Cooper; Nicola Lancki; Margaret R Moran; David T Liss; Theodore A Prospect; Ronald T Ackermann Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2018-12-07
Authors: Jonathan D Newman; Anish K Vani; Jose O Aleman; Howard S Weintraub; Jeffrey S Berger; Arthur Z Schwartzbard Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-10-09 Impact factor: 24.094