Donna Shu-Han Lin1,2,3, Jen-Kuang Lee1,3,4,5,6, Chi-Sheng Hung7,8,9,10, Wen-Jone Chen1,2,3,11. 1. Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. 2. Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsin-Chu, Taiwan. 3. Cardiovascular Center, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan. 5. Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan. 6. Telehealth Center, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. 7. Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. petrehcs@gmail.com. 8. Cardiovascular Center, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. petrehcs@gmail.com. 9. Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan. petrehcs@gmail.com. 10. Telehealth Center, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. petrehcs@gmail.com. 11. Department of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University College of Medicine and Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Abstract
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.
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.
Authors: Steven P Marso; Stephen C Bain; Agostino Consoli; Freddy G Eliaschewitz; Esteban Jódar; Lawrence A Leiter; Ildiko Lingvay; Julio Rosenstock; Jochen Seufert; Mark L Warren; Vincent Woo; Oluf Hansen; Anders G Holst; Jonas Pettersson; Tina Vilsbøll Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-09-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mansoor Husain; Andreas L Birkenfeld; Morten Donsmark; Kathleen Dungan; Freddy G Eliaschewitz; Denise R Franco; Ole K Jeppesen; Ildiko Lingvay; Ofri Mosenzon; Sue D Pedersen; Cees J Tack; Mette Thomsen; Tina Vilsbøll; Mark L Warren; Stephen C Bain Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-06-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Hertzel C Gerstein; Helen M Colhoun; Gilles R Dagenais; Rafael Diaz; Mark Lakshmanan; Prem Pais; Jeffrey Probstfield; Jeffrey S Riesmeyer; Matthew C Riddle; Lars Rydén; Denis Xavier; Charles Messan Atisso; Leanne Dyal; Stephanie Hall; Purnima Rao-Melacini; Gloria Wong; Alvaro Avezum; Jan Basile; Namsik Chung; Ignacio Conget; William C Cushman; Edward Franek; Nicolae Hancu; Markolf Hanefeld; Shaun Holt; Petr Jansky; Matyas Keltai; Fernando Lanas; Lawrence A Leiter; Patricio Lopez-Jaramillo; Ernesto German Cardona Munoz; Valdis Pirags; Nana Pogosova; Peter J Raubenheimer; Jonathan E Shaw; Wayne H-H Sheu; Theodora Temelkova-Kurktschiev Journal: Lancet Date: 2019-06-09 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Bernard Zinman; Christoph Wanner; John M Lachin; David Fitchett; Erich Bluhmki; Stefan Hantel; Michaela Mattheus; Theresa Devins; Odd Erik Johansen; Hans J Woerle; Uli C Broedl; Silvio E Inzucchi Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-09-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Salim S Virani; Alvaro Alonso; Emelia J Benjamin; Marcio S Bittencourt; Clifton W Callaway; April P Carson; Alanna M Chamberlain; Alexander R Chang; Susan Cheng; Francesca N Delling; Luc Djousse; Mitchell S V Elkind; Jane F Ferguson; Myriam Fornage; Sadiya S Khan; Brett M Kissela; Kristen L Knutson; Tak W Kwan; Daniel T Lackland; Tené T Lewis; Judith H Lichtman; Chris T Longenecker; Matthew Shane Loop; Pamela L Lutsey; Seth S Martin; Kunihiro Matsushita; Andrew E Moran; Michael E Mussolino; Amanda Marma Perak; Wayne D Rosamond; Gregory A Roth; Uchechukwu K A Sampson; Gary M Satou; Emily B Schroeder; Svati H Shah; Christina M Shay; Nicole L Spartano; Andrew Stokes; David L Tirschwell; Lisa B VanWagner; Connie W Tsao Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-01-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Sarah Rosner Preis; Shih-Jen Hwang; Sean Coady; Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino; Peter J Savage; Daniel Levy; Caroline S Fox Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-03-23 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Alexander Thompson; Emanuele Di Angelantonio; Pei Gao; Nadeem Sarwar; Sreenivasa Rao Kondapally Seshasai; Stephen Kaptoge; Peter H Whincup; Kenneth J Mukamal; Richard F Gillum; Ingar Holme; Inger Njølstad; Astrid Fletcher; Peter Nilsson; Sarah Lewington; Rory Collins; Vilmundur Gudnason; Simon G Thompson; Naveed Sattar; Elizabeth Selvin; Frank B Hu; John Danesh Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-03-03 Impact factor: 91.245
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: Melanie J Davies; Vanita R Aroda; Billy S Collins; Robert A Gabbay; Jennifer Green; Nisa M Maruthur; Sylvia E Rosas; Stefano Del Prato; Chantal Mathieu; Geltrude Mingrone; Peter Rossing; Tsvetalina Tankova; Apostolos Tsapas; John B Buse Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2022-09-24 Impact factor: 10.460