Key result
Appendix outlines study design comparing SGLT-2i, GLP-1RA, and DPP-4i cardiovascular outcomes in older T2D adults.
Why the study?
The comparative cardiovascular effectiveness and safety of SGLT-2i, GLP-1RA, and DPP-4i in older adults with type 2 diabetes across different frailty strata needed evaluation.
Do SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists improve cardiovascular outcomes compared to DPP-4 inhibitors in older adults with type 2 diabetes across different frailty strata?
Cohort (n=1,182,541)
Do SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists improve cardiovascular outcomes compared to DPP-4 inhibitors in older adults with type 2 diabetes across different frailty strata?
SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists safely improve cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality compared to DPP-4 inhibitors in older adults with type 2 diabetes, with the greatest absolute benefit seen in frail patients.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
SGLT-2 inhibitors were associated with lower cardiovascular risk than DPP-4 inhibitors in older adults with type 2 diabetes; extends evidence across frailty strata but leaves confirmation to randomized trials.
Objective To evaluate the comparative cardiovascular effectiveness and safety of sodium-glucose-cotransporter-2-inhibitors (SGLT-2i), glucagon-like-peptide-1-receptor-agonists (GLP-1RA) and dipeptidyl-peptidase-4-inhibitors (DPP-4i) in older adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) across different frailty strata. Research Design and Methods We performed three 1:1 propensity-score-matched cohort studies, each stratified by three frailty strata, using data from Medicare beneficiaries (2013-2019) with T2D who initiated SGLT-2i, GLP-1RA, or DPP-4i. In time-to-event analyses, we assessed the primary cardiovascular effectiveness composite outcome of acute myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, hospitalization for heart failure and all-cause mortality. The primary safety outcome was a composite of severe adverse events that have been linked to SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA use. Results Compared with DPP-4i, the overall HR for the primary effectiveness outcome associated with SGLT-2i (n=120,202 matched pairs) was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.69-0.75), corresponding to an incidence rate difference (IRD) of -13.35 (95% CI, -15.06--11.64). IRD ranged from -6.74 (95% CI, -8.61--4.87) in non-frail to -27.24 (95% CI, -41.64--12.84) in frail people (Pinteraction<0.01). Consistent benefits were observed for GLP-1RA compared with DPP-4i (n=113,864) with an overall HR of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.71-0.77) and an IRD of -15.49 (95% CI, -17.46--13.52). IRD in the lowest frailty stratum was -7.02 (95% CI, -9.23--4.81) and -25.88 (95% CI, -38.30--13.46) in the highest (Pinteraction<0.01). Results for SGLT-2i versus GLP-1RA (n=89,865) were comparable. Severe adverse events were not more frequent with SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA than DPP-4i. Conclusions SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA safely improved cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality with largest absolute benefits among frail people.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kutz et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in type 2 diabetes (n=1,182,541). SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists vs. DPP-4 inhibitors was evaluated on Composite of hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction or ischemic stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or all-cause mortality. The supplementary appendix outlines the study design and sensitivity analyses for comparing the cardiovascular effectiveness and safety of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and DPP-4 inhibitors in older adults with type 2 diabetes, without providing the primary numerical results.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: