Key result
Linagliptin matches glimepiride for MACE but reduces moderate-to-severe hypoglycemia.
Why the study?
The cardiovascular safety of linagliptin compared with glimepiride in older and younger people with type 2 diabetes and elevated cardiovascular risk was uncertain.
Does linagliptin reduce cardiovascular events or improve safety compared to glimepiride in older people with type 2 diabetes?
RCT (n=6,033)
Does linagliptin reduce cardiovascular events or improve safety compared to glimepiride in older people with type 2 diabetes?
Hazard Ratio: 0.98 (95% CI 0.84–1.14)
Linagliptin provides comparable cardiovascular safety to glimepiride across age groups but significantly reduces the risk of hypoglycemia, falls, and fractures, making it a safer option for older adults with type 2 diabetes.
Comparable CV safety for linagliptin versus glimepiride across ages; confirms age-independent noninferiority with fewer hypoglycemia and falls.
AIM: To compare the cardiovascular (CV) safety of linagliptin with glimepiride in older and younger participants in the CAROLINA trial in both prespecified and post hoc analyses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: People aged 40 to 85 years with relatively early type 2 diabetes, inadequate glycaemic control and elevated CV risk were randomly assigned to linagliptin 5 mg or glimepiride 1 to 4 mg. The primary endpoint was time to first occurrence of three-point major adverse CV events (MACE: CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke). We evaluated clinical and safety outcomes across age groups. RESULTS: Of 6033 participants, 50.7% were aged <65 years, 35.3% were aged 65 to 74 years, and 14.0% were aged ≥75 years. During the 6.3-year median follow-up, CV/mortality outcomes did not differ between linagliptin and glimepiride overall (hazard ratio [HR] for three-point MACE 0.98, 95.47% confidence interval [CI] 0.84, 1.14) or across age groups (interaction P >0.05). Between treatment groups, reductions in glycated haemoglobin were comparable across age groups but moderate-to-severe hypoglycaemia was markedly reduced with linagliptin (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.15, 0.21) with no differences among age groups (P = 0.23). Mean weight was -1.54 kg (95% CI -1.80, -1.28) lower for linagliptin versus glimepiride. Adverse events increased with age, but were generally balanced between treatment groups. Significantly fewer falls or fractures occurred with linagliptin. CONCLUSIONS: Linagliptin and glimepiride were comparable for CV/mortality outcomes across age groups. Linagliptin had significantly lower risk of hypoglycaemia and falls or fractures than glimepiride, including in "older-old" individuals for whom these are particularly important treatment considerations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Espeland et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in type 2 diabetes (n=6,033). Linagliptin vs. Glimepiride 1 to 4 mg was evaluated on time to first occurrence of three-point major adverse CV events (MACE: CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke) (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.84-1.14). Linagliptin was comparable to glimepiride for three-point MACE (HR 0.98; 95.47% CI 0.84-1.14) across age groups, but significantly reduced the risk of moderate-to-severe hypoglycaemia.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: