Key result
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor therapy did not increase the overall risk of major cardiovascular and renal outcomes compared to sulfonylurea, but was associated with a significantly higher risk of hospitalization for heart failure (HR 1.47).
Why the study?
The study was conducted to determine the impact of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors on major cardiocerebrovascular and renal outcomes compared with sulfonylureas combined with metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Does dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor plus metformin improve cardiocerebrovascular and renal outcomes compared to sulfonylurea plus metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes?
Cohort (n=23,674)
Does dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor plus metformin improve cardiocerebrovascular and renal outcomes compared to sulfonylurea plus metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes?
Hazard Ratio: 1.02 (95% CI 0.88–1.19)
Absolute Event Rate: 8.01% vs 8.06%
p-value: p=0.7702
In patients with type 2 diabetes, DPP4i therapy combined with metformin was associated with a significantly higher risk of hospitalization for heart failure compared to sulfonylurea plus metformin, without differences in other major cardiovascular or renal outcomes.
May increase HHF risk versus SU on metformin in T2DM; leaves open causality and need for prospective confirmation.
BACKGROUND: To determine the impact of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4i) on the risk of major cardiocerebrovascular and renal outcomes compared with sulfonylurea (SU) combined with metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes from a population-based cohort. METHODS: From a nationwide cohort in Korea (2008-2013), 23,674 patients with type 2 diabetes treated with DPP4i plus metformin or SU plus metformin were selected and matched by propensity score. Composite cardiocerebrovascular events including incident ischemic heart disease (IHD), ischemic stroke (IS), hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), and cardiocerebrovascular death, as well as renal events including incident end-stage renal disease or initiation of renal-replacement therapy were assessed by Cox proportional-hazards models. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 19.6 months (interquartile range 7.2-36.4), 762 composite cardiocerebrovascular events and 17 end-stage renal events occurred. There was no significant difference in the risk of IHD (hazard ratio [HR], 1.00; 95% CI 0.81-1.23), IS (HR, 0.95; 95% CI 0.74-1.23), or cardiocerebrovascular death (HR, 0.74; 95% CI 0.46-1.18) in the DPP4i group compared to that in the SU group. Likewise, DPP4i therapy was not associated with the risk of end-stage renal outcomes (HR, 1.23; 95% CI 0.41-3.62). However, the risk of HHF was significantly higher in the DPP4i group than in the SU group (HR, 1.47; 95% CI 1.07-2.04). CONCLUSIONS: This real-world database analysis showed that DPP4i therapy did not increase the overall risk of major cardiovascular and renal outcomes compared to SU therapy. However, the DPP4i-associated risk of HHF remained significant.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Type 2 diabetes (n=23,674). Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4i) plus metformin vs. Sulfonylurea (SU) plus metformin was evaluated on Composite cardiocerebrovascular events at 3 years (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88-1.19, p=0.7702). Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor therapy did not increase the overall risk of major cardiovascular and renal outcomes compared to sulfonylurea, but was associated with a significantly higher risk of hospitalization for heart failure (HR 1.47).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: