Search

Aims To evaluate the performance of the WATCH-DM risk score, a clinical risk score for heart failure (HF), in patients with dysglycaemia and in combination with natriuretic peptides (NPs). Methods and results Adults with diabetes/pre-diabetes free of HF at baseline from four cohort studies (ARIC, CHS, FHS, and MESA) were included. The machine learning-[WATCH-DM(ml)] and integer-based [WATCH-DM(i)] scores were used to estimate the 5-year risk of incident HF. Discrimination was assessed by Harrell's concordance index (C-index) and calibration by the Greenwood-Nam-D'Agostino (GND) statistic. Improvement in model performance with the addition of NP levels was assessed by C-index and continuous net reclassification improvement (NRI). Of the 8938 participants included, 3554 (39.8%) had diabetes and 432 (4.8%) developed HF within 5 years. The WATCH-DM(ml) and WATCH-DM(i) scores demonstrated high discrimination for predicting HF risk among individuals with dysglycaemia (C-indices = 0.80 and 0.71, respectively), with no evidence of miscalibration (GND P =0.10). The C-index of elevated NP levels alone for predicting incident HF among individuals with dysglycaemia was significantly higher among participants with low/intermediate (<13) vs. high (=13)WATCH-DM(i) scores [0.71 (95% confidence interval 0.68-0.74) vs. 0.64 (95% confidence interval 0.61-0.66)]. When NP levels were combined with the WATCH-DM(i) score, HF risk discrimination improvement and NRI varied across the spectrum of risk with greater improvement observed at low/intermediate risk [WATCH-DM(i)<13] vs. high risk [WATCH-DM(i) =13] (C-index = 0.73 vs. 0.71; NRI = 0.45 vs. 0.17). Conclusion TheWATCH-DM risk score can accurately predict incident HF risk in community-based individuals with dysglycaemia. The addition of NP levels is associated with greater improvement in the HF risk prediction performance among individuals with low/intermediate risk than those with high risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2008, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a guidance to industry statement concerning evaluation of the cardiovascular (CV) safety of new antihyperglycaemic therapies for type 2 diabetes. Fifteen CV outcome trials assessing three novel classes of antihyperglycaemic therapies, DPP‐4 inhibitors, GLP‐1 receptor agonists and SGLT‐2 inhibitors, were completed by the end of 2018 and several others are ongoing. In addition, one comparative insulin trial also has been completed. None of these trials reported an increase in risk for major adverse CV events (MACE), and six agents have demonstrated CV benefits. This experience has led to the first FDA‐approved indications for antihyperglycaemic medications to reduce the risk of CV death (empagliflozin) and to reduce the risk of MACE (liraglutide, canagliflozin), both indications specific to patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Because of the aggregate results from dedicated CV outcomes trials conducted in response to the FDA guidance statement, the contemporary paradigm for treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes has evolved substantially. However, the guidance has substantially increased the cost of developing new medications to address this important disease that afflicts hundreds of millions of adults worldwide, with reduction in quality of life as well as in life expectancy. The cost burden of drug development of medications proven effective that may directly impact cost to patients and to their insurers might be alleviated by modifications to the present guidance statement. These include areas of trial design, aspects of trial operation, expansion of composite outcomes to include broader component CV outcomes and continued evolution of analytic methodology. The guidance statement will benefit from consideration of a number of modifications to support continued innovation and, of course, the safety of marketed medications for type 2 diabetes. However, the requirement to assess each new antihyperglycaemic medication in at least one large‐scale standard randomized clinical outcomes trial should remain, so that clinicians can be reassured about the favourable efficacy/safety profiles of the medications they prescribe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To examine sex differences in baseline characteristics and outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic vascular disease. Materials and methods: Cox models were used to analyse the association between sex and outcomes in the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS), a randomized, placebo‐controlled trial assessing the impact of sitagliptin on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic vascular disease. Results: A total of 4297 women and 10 374 men were followed for a median of 3.0 years. Women were slightly older and more often had cerebrovascular disease and peripheral arterial disease but less often coronary heart disease than men. At baseline, women were less likely to use aspirin or statins. The primary composite outcome of CV death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina occurred in 418 women (9.7%) and 1272 men (12.3%; 3.48 vs 4.38 events/100 participant‐years, crude hazard ratio [HR] 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71‐0.89, adjusted HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.55‐0.74; P < .0001). Women also had a significantly lower risk of secondary CV outcomes and all‐cause death. Conclusions: In this large prospective study of people with type 2 diabetes and CV disease, women had different CV disease burden, worse CV risk factor profiles, and less use of indicated medications than men. Despite this, women had significantly lower risk of CV events, suggesting that the cardioprotective effects of female sex extend to populations with type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]