Search

In high-income countries, rates of atherosclerotic complications in type 2 diabetes have declined markedly over time due to better management of traditional risk factors including lipids, blood pressure, and glycemia levels. Population-wide reductions in smoking have also helped lower atherosclerotic complications and so reduce premature mortality in type 2 diabetes. However, as excess adiposity is a stronger driver for heart failure (HF), and obesity levels have remained largely unchanged, HF risks have not declined as much and may even be rising in the increasing number of people developing type 2 diabetes at younger ages. Excess weight is also an underrecognized risk factor for chronic kidney disease (CKD). Based on evidence from a range of sources, we explain how excess adiposity must be influencing most risks well before diabetes develops, particularly in younger-onset diabetes, which is linked to greater excess adiposity. We also review potential mechanisms linking excess adiposity to HF and CKD and speculate on how some of the responsible pathways-e.g., hemodynamic, cellular overnutrition, and inflammatory-could be favorably influenced by intentional weight loss (via lifestyle or drugs). On the basis of available evidence, we suggest that the cardiorenal outcome benefits seen with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors may partially derive from their interference of some of these same pathways. We also note that many other complications common in diabetes (e.g., hepatic, joint disease, perhaps mental health) are also variably linked to excess adiposity, the aggregated exposure to which has now increased in type 2 diabetes. All such observations suggest a greater need to tackle excess adiposity earlier in type 2 diabetes., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Background: The effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors on heart failure (HF) outcomes and cardiovascular (CV) death in patients with varying combinations of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), HF, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are uncertain., Objectives: The authors conducted a meta-analysis assessing the effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on HF outcomes and CV death across different patient populations., Methods: Online databases were queried up to November 2022 for primary and secondary analyses of trials of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with HF, T2DM, or CKD. Outcomes of interest were composite of first heart failure hospitalization (HFH) or CV death (first HFH/CV death), first HFH, and CV death. Data were pooled by means of a random-effects model to derive HRs and 95% CIs., Results: Thirteen trials (n = 90,413) were included. Compared with placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors reduced the risk of first HFH/CV death by 24% in HF (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.72-0.81), 23% in T2DM (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.73-0.81), and 23% in CKD (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.72-0.82). The benefit was consistent in HF with reduced or preserved ejection fraction, HF with or without T2DM, and HF with or without CKD. The benefit was also consistent in T2DM with or without CKD, T2DM without HF, CKD without HF, and in patients with all 3 comorbidities. SGLT2 inhibitors significantly reduced CV death by 16% in HF, 15% in T2DM, and 12% in CKD., Conclusions: SGLT2 inhibitors reduce HF events and CV death in cohorts of HF, T2DM and CKD, and these effects appear consistent in patients with varying combinations of these diseases., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Anker has received grants or personal fees from Vifor Int, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Servier, Abbott Vascular, Cardiac Dimensions, Actimed, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Bioventrix, Janssen, Respicardia, V-Wave, Brahms, Cordio, and Occlutech outside of the submitted work. Dr Bakris has received research funding paid to the University of Chicago Medicine from Bayer, Novo Nordisk, and Vascular Dynamics; and has acted as a consultant for and received personal fees from Alnylam, Merck, and Ionisand Relypsa. Dr Bhatt has served on the Advisory Board for Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences, and Stasys; has served on the Board of Directors for Angiowave (stock options), Boston VA Research Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb (stock), DRS.LINQ (stock options), High Enroll (stock), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, and TobeSoft; Inaugural Chair of American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee; has been a consultant for Broadview Ventures; has served on the Data Monitoring Committee for Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (Chair, PEITHO trial), Cleveland Clinic (including for the ExCEED trial, funded by Edwards), Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi-Sankyo; and the ABILITY-DM trial, funded by Concept Medical), Novartis, Population Health Research Institute, and Rutgers University (for the NIH-funded MINT Trial); has received honoraria from the American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; and Chair, ACC Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), and Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for Clinical Trial Steering Committee for RE-DUAL PCI (funded by Boehringer Ingelheim) and Executive Committee for AEGIS-II (funded by CSL Behring), and from Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (Clinical Trial Steering Committees), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (Clinical Trial Steering Committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, Interdisciplinary Curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME Steering Committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (Course Director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS Operations Committee, Publications Committee, Steering Committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), Slack Publications (Chief Medical Editor, Cardiology Today’s Intervention), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care (Secretary/Treasurer), WebMD (CME Steering Committees), and Wiley (Steering Committee); Deputy Editor, Clinical Cardiology, Registry Steering Committee (Chair) for NCDR-ACTION, Research and Publications Committee (Chair) for VA CART; named on patent for sotagliflozin (no income), assigned to Brigham and Women’s Hospital (no income), who assigned to Lexicon; has received research funding from Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio; has received royalties from Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); is site co-investigator for Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions; is a trustee of American College of Cardiology; and has performed unfunded research for FlowCo and Takeda. Dr Fillipatos lectures and/or has committee member contributions in trials sponsored by Medtronic, Vifor, Servier, Novartis, Bayer, Amgen, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and has received research grants from the European Union. Dr Fonarow has received research support from the National Institutes of Health; and has consulted for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, and Novartis. Dr Greene has received research support from the Duke University Department of Medicine Chair's Research Award, American Heart Association, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has served on advisory boards for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, scPharmaceuticals, and Sanofi; serves as a consultant for Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corteria Pharmaceuticals, CSL Vifor, Merck, PharmaIN, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Tricog Health, and Urovant Pharmaceuticals; and has received speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Januzzi is a Trustee of the American College of Cardiology; is a board member of Imbria Pharmaceuticals; has received grant support from Abbott Diagnostics, Applied Therapeutics, Innolife, and Novartis; has received consulting income from Abbott Diagnostics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, and Roche Diagnostics; and participates in clinical endpoint committees/data safety monitoring boards for AbbVie, Siemens, Takeda, and Vifor. Dr Kosiborod has received research grants from AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim; has consultant/advisory board roles at Amgen, Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Esperion Therapeutics, Janssen, Merck (Diabetes and Cardiovascular), Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, and Vifor Pharma; has received financial support for analysis from AstraZeneca; and has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk. Dr McGuire has had leadership roles in clinical trials for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eisai, Esperion, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lexicon, Merck & Co, Novo Nordisk, CSL Behring, and Sanofi USA; and has received consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly USA, Merck & Co, Pfizer, Novo Nordisk, Metavant, Afimmune, and Sanofi. Dr Piña is on the advisory board for Vifor and AstraZeneca; and is on the steering committee of the DIAMOND trial (funded by Vifor). Dr Rosenstock has served on advisory boards for Applied Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Hanmi, Intarcia, Novo Nordisk, Oramed, Sanofi, Structure Therapeutics, Terns Pharmaceuticals, and Zealand; and has received research support from Applied Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Hanmi, Intarcia, Lexicon, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Oramed, Pfizer, and Sanofi. Dr Vaduganathan has received research grant support, served on advisory boards, or had speaker engagements with American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Baxter Healthcare, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cytokinetics, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Relypsa, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, and Tricog Health; and participates on clinical trial committees for studies sponsored by AstraZeneca, Galmed, Novartis, Bayer, Occlutech, and Impulse Dynamics. Dr Verma has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Sun Pharmaceuticals, and Toronto Knowledge Translation Working Group; has received grants and personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Merck; has received grants from Bristol Myers Squibb; and has received personal fees from Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. Dr Zieroth has received personal fees for Speakers Bureau and/or consulting in advisory board for Abbott, Akcea AstraZeneca, Amgen, Alnylam, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; and serves on a clinical trial committee or as a national lead for studies sponsored by AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work. Dr Butler is a consultant to Abbott, Adrenomed, American Regent, Arca Biopharma, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardior CVRx, Cytokinetics, Edwards, Element Science, Fast Biomedical, G3 Pharmaceutical, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova Janssen, Johnson and Johnson, Medtronics, Merck, Occlutech, Nestle, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Roche, Sanofi, Sequana, SQ Innovation, 3live, and Vifor. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Finerenone, a selective, non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, improves cardiovascular (CV) and kidney outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). This subgroup analysis of FIDELITY, a pre-specified, pooled, individual patient-data analysis of FIDELIO-DKD (NCT02540993) and FIGARO-DKD (NCT02545049), compared finerenone vs. placebo in patients with and without baseline history of atherosclerotic CV disease (ASCVD)., Methods and Results: Outcomes included a composite CV outcome [CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF)]; CV death or HHF; a composite kidney outcome (kidney failure, sustained estimated glomerular filtration rate decrease ≥57%, or kidney-related death); all-cause mortality; and safety by baseline history of ASCVD.Of 13 026 patients, 5935 (45.6%) had a history of ASCVD. The incidence of the composite CV outcome, CV death or HHF, and all-cause mortality was higher in patients with ASCVD vs. those without, with no difference between groups in the composite kidney outcome. Finerenone consistently reduced outcomes vs. placebo in patients with and without ASCVD (P-interaction for the composite CV outcome, CV death or HHF, the composite kidney outcome, and all-cause mortality 0.38, 0.68, 0.33, and 0.38, respectively). Investigator-reported treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent between treatment arms across ASCVD subgroups., Conclusion: Finerenone reduced the risk of CV and kidney outcomes consistently across the spectrum of CKD in patients with T2D, irrespective of prevalent ASCVD., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Objective: Current guidelines recommend prescribing SGLT2 inhibitors to patients with type 2 diabetes and established or at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), irrespective of HbA1c levels. We studied the association of HbA1c with cardiovascular and renal outcomes and whether the benefit of dapagliflozin varies by baseline HbA1c., Research Design and Methods: In the Dapagliflozin Effect on Cardiovascular Events trial (DECLARE-TIMI 58), 17,160 patients with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to dapagliflozin or placebo for a median follow-up of 4.2 years. Cardiovascular and renal outcomes by baseline HbA1c in the overall population and with dapagliflozin versus placebo in HbA1c subgroups were studied by Cox regression models., Results: In the overall population, higher baseline HbA1c was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF); major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke; and cardiorenal outcomes (adjusted hazard ratios 1.12 [95% CI 1.06-1.19], 1.08 [1.04-1.13], and 1.17 [1.11-1.24] per 1% higher level, respectively). Elevated HbA1c was associated with a greater increased risk for MACE and cardiorenal outcomes in patients with multiple risk factors (MRF) than in established ASCVD (P-interaction = 0.0064 and 0.0093, respectively). Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin decreased the risk of cardiovascular death/HHF, HHF, and cardiorenal outcomes, with no heterogeneity by baseline HbA1c (P-interaction > 0.05)., Conclusions: Higher HbA1c levels were associated with greater cardiovascular and renal risk, particularly in the MRF population, yet the benefits of dapagliflozin were observed in all subgroups irrespective of baseline HbA1c, including patients with HbA1c <7%., (© 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Background: Results of cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) suggest Asians may derive greater benefit than Whites from newer classes of antihyperglycemic medications., Purpose: To provide summary hazard ratio (HR) estimates for cardiovascular efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) stratified by race (Asian vs. White)., Data Sources: A systematic review performed in PubMed from 1 January 2015 to 8 December 2020., Study Selection: Randomized placebo-controlled CVOTs of SGLT2is and GLP-1RAs that reported HRs (95% CIs) for 1 ) major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) in patients with diabetes and 2 ) cardiovascular (CV) death/hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)., Data Extraction and Synthesis: HRs (95% CIs) for selected outcomes in Asians and Whites were extracted from each trial, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to examine differences between the selected outcomes in Asians versus Whites., Results: In four SGLT2i trials in type 2 diabetes, the MACE outcome HR (95% CI) in 3,298 Asians versus 20,258 Whites was 0.81 (0.57, 1.04) vs. 0.90 (0.80, 1.00), respectively ( P interaction = 0.46). In two SGLT2i trials in patients with HFrEF, the CV death/HHF outcome HR in 1,788 Asians versus 5,962 Whites was 0.60 (0.47, 0.74) vs. 0.82 (0.73, 0.92), respectively ( P interaction = 0.01). In six GLP-1RA trials, the MACE outcome HR in 4,195 Asians versus 37,530 Whites was 0.68 (0.53, 0.84) vs. 0.87 (0.81, 0.94), respectively ( P interaction = 0.03)., Limitations: Lack of individual patient-level data, relatively short duration of trial observation, and lack of granular categorization of race within broadly defined Asian subgroups., Conclusions: Compared with Whites, Asians may derive greater CV death/HHF benefit from SGLT2is in patients with HFrEF, and MACE benefit from GLP-1RAs in patients with type 2 diabetes., (© 2021 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Objective: International guidelines propose prescribing sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) as secondary prevention in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or for primary prevention of cardiovascular events in high-risk patients with multiple risk factors (MRF) for ASCVD. The current analyses expand on the cardiovascular renal and metabolic effects of SGLT2 inhibitors in MRF patients., Research Design and Methods: In DECLARE-TIMI 58, 17,160 patients with T2D and MRF (59.4%) or established ASCVD (40.6%) were randomized to dapagliflozin versus placebo; patients were followed for a median of 4.2 years. The cardiovascular and renal outcomes in the MRF cohort were studied across clinically relevant subgroups for treatment effect and subgroup-based treatment interaction., Results: Among patients with MRF, the reduction with dapagliflozin in risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (CVD/HHF) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.84, 95% CI 0.67-1.04) and the renal-specific outcome (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.37-0.69) did not differ from that for patients with ASCVD ( P interaction 0.99 and 0.72, respectively). The effect on CVD/HHF was entirely driven by a reduction in HHF (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.46-0.88). The benefits of dapagliflozin on HHF and on the renal-specific outcome, among the subset with MRF, were directionally consistent across clinically relevant subgroups. At 48 months, HbA 1c , weight, systolic blood pressure, and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio were lower with dapagliflozin versus placebo and estimated glomerular filtration rate was higher ( P < 0.001)., Conclusions: In patients with T2D and MRF, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of HHF and adverse renal outcomes regardless of baseline characteristics. These analyses support the benefit of dapagliflozin for important outcomes in a broad primary prevention population., (© 2021 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Aims: Whether glycaemic control is associated with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is unclear. Consequently, we assessed the relationship between glycated haemoglobin (HbA 1c ) and cardiovascular outcomes in a placebo-controlled randomized trial which demonstrated no cardiovascular effect of sitagliptin in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic vascular disease., Methods and Results: Secondary analysis of 14 656 TECOS participants with time to event analyses using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. During a median 3.0 (interquartile range 2.3-3.8) year follow-up, 456 (3.1% of 14 656) patients had first hospitalization for heart failure (HF), 1084 (11.5%) died, 1406 (9.6%) died or were hospitalized for HF, and 1689 (11.5%) had a non-HF cardiovascular event (cardiovascular death, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina). Associations between baseline or time-varying HbA 1c and cardiovascular outcomes were U-shaped, with the lowest risk when HbA 1c was around 7%. Each one-unit increase in the time-varying HbA 1c above 7% was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.21 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-1.33] for first HF hospitalization, 1.11 (1.03-1.21) for all-cause death, 1.18 (1.09-1.26) for death or HF hospitalization, and 1.10 (1.02-1.17) for non-HF cardiovascular events. Each one-unit decrease in the time-varying HbA 1c below 7% was associated with an adjusted HR of 1.35 (95% CI 1.12-1.64) for first HF hospitalization, 1.37 (1.16-1.61) for death, 1.42 (1.23-1.64) for death or HF hospitalization, and 1.22 (1.06-1.41) for non-HF cardiovascular events., Conclusion: Glycated haemogobin exhibits a U-shaped association with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic vascular disease, with nadir around 7%., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00790205., (© 2020 European Society of Cardiology.)

Importance: Previous trial results have suggested that dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor (DPP4i) use might increase heart failure (HF) risk in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The DPP4i sitagliptin has been shown to be noninferior to placebo with regard to primary and secondary composite atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes With Sitagliptin (TECOS)., Objective: To assess the association of sitagliptin use with hospitalization for HF (hHF) and related outcomes., Design, Setting, and Participants: TECOS was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the CV safety of sitagliptin vs placebo, each added to usual antihyperglycemic therapy and CV care among patients with T2DM and prevalent atherosclerotic vascular disease. The median follow-up was 2.9 years. The setting was 673 sites in 38 countries. Participants included 14 671 patients with T2DM and atherosclerotic vascular disease. The study dates were December 2008 through March 2015., Interventions: Patients were randomized to sitagliptin vs placebo added to standard care., Main Outcomes and Measures: Prespecified secondary analyses compared the effect on hHF, hHF or CV death, and hHF or all-cause death composite outcomes overall and in prespecified subgroups. Supportive analyses included total hHF events (first plus recurrent) and post-hHF death. Meta-analyses evaluated DPP4i effects on hHF and on hHF or CV death., Results: Of 14 671 patients, 7332 were randomized to sitagliptin and 7339 to placebo. Hospitalization for HF occurred in 3.1% (n = 228) and 3.1% (n = 229) of the sitagliptin and placebo groups, respectively (unadjusted hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83-1.19). There was also no difference in total hHF events between the sitagliptin (n = 345) and placebo (n = 347) groups (unadjusted hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.80-1.25). Post-hHF all-cause death was similar in the sitagliptin and placebo groups (29.8% vs 28.8%, respectively), as was CV death (22.4% vs 23.1%, respectively). No heterogeneity for the effect of sitagliptin on hHF was observed in subgroup analyses across 21 factors (P > .10 for all interactions). Meta-analysis of the hHF results from the 3 reported DPP4i CV outcomes trials revealed moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 44.9, P = .16)., Conclusions and Relevance: Sitagliptin use does not affect the risk for hHF in T2DM, both overall and among high-risk patient subgroups., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00790205.

Following regulatory guidance set forth in 2008 by the US Food and Drug Administration for new drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus, many large randomized, controlled trials have been conducted with the primary goal of assessing the safety of antihyperglycemic medications on the primary end point of major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Heart failure (HF) was not specifically mentioned in the US Food and Drug Administration guidance and therefore it was not a focus of these studies when planned. Several trials subsequently showed the impact of antihyperglycemic drugs on HF outcomes, which were not originally specified as the primary end point of the trials. The most impressive finding has been the substantial and consistent risk reduction in HF hospitalization seen across 4 trials of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. However, to date, these results have not led to regulatory approval of any of these drugs for a HF indication or a recommendation for use by US HF guidelines. It is therefore important to explore to what extent persuasive treatment effects on nonprimary end points can be used to support regulatory claims and guideline recommendations. This topic was discussed by researchers, clinicians, industry sponsors, regulators, and representatives from professional societies, who convened on the US Food and Drug Administration campus on March 6, 2019. This report summarizes these discussions and the key takeaway messages from this meeting.

For all other aspects concerning the management of patients with diabetes, we refer to the recommendations from diabetes associations, e.g. the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) or the American Diabetes Association (ADA).[1] These Guidelines offer evidence-based recommendations to manage CV risk in patients with diabetes and provide guidance for the treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in patients with diabetes. The impact of diabetes on peripheral atherosclerosis Diabetes is one of the most important risk factors for the development and progression of atherosclerosis.[[749], [751], [753]] The number of patients with atherosclerosis associated with diabetes is steadily increasing alongside the increasing number of patients with diabetes worldwide. There has not been a specific trial on revascularization strategies in patients with diabetes; however, a review of 56 studies including patients with diabetes suggested higher limb-salvage rates after revascularization (78-85% at 1 year) compared with conservative management.[770] Due to disease progression, long-term follow-up is very important in patients with diabetes and LEAD.[771] 10.1.2. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Among individuals with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is common and confers increased risk for morbidity and mortality. Differentiating risk is key to optimize efficiency of treatment selection. Our objective was to develop and validate a model to predict risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) comprising the first event of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke for individuals with both T2DM and ASCVD. Methods: Using data from the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS), we used Cox proportional hazards models to predict MACE among participants with T2DM and ASCVD. All baseline covariates collected in the trial were considered for inclusion, although some were excluded immediately because of large missingness or collinearity. A full model was developed using stepwise selection in each of 25 imputed datasets, and comprised candidate variables selected in 20 of the 25 datasets. A parsimonious model with a maximum of 10 degrees of freedom was created using Cox models with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), where the adjusted R-square was used as criterion for selection. The model was then externally validated among a cohort of participants with similar criteria in the ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) trial. Discrimination of both models was assessed using Harrell's C-index and model calibration by the Greenwood-Nam-D'Agostino statistic based on 4-year event rates. Results: Overall, 1491 (10.2%) of 14,671 participants in TECOS and 130 (9.3%) in the ACCORD validation cohort (n = 1404) had MACE over 3 years' median follow-up. The final model included 9 characteristics (prior stroke, age, chronic kidney disease, prior MI, sex, heart failure, insulin use, atrial fibrillation, and microvascular complications). The model had moderate discrimination in both the internal and external validation samples (C-index = 0.65 and 0.61, respectively). The model was well calibrated across the risk spectrum—from a cumulative MACE rate of 6% at 4 years in the lowest risk quintile to 26% in the highest risk quintile. Conclusion: Among patients with T2DM and prevalent ASCVD, this 9-factor risk model can quantify the risk of future ASCVD complications and inform decision making for treatments and intensity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI), therapies that could further reduce the risk of adverse cardiovascular and metabolic outcomes are needed. In this international registry-based, randomized, double-blind trial, patients without prior diabetes or chronic heart failure, presenting with acute MI and impaired left ventricular systolic function, were randomly assigned 10 mg of dapagliflozin or placebo, given once daily. The primary outcome was the hierarchical composite of death, hospitalization for heart failure, nonfatal MI, atrial fibrillation/flutter, type 2 diabetes mellitus, New York Heart Association Functional Classification at the last visit, and body weight decrease of 5% or greater at the last visit using the win ratio analysis method. The key secondary outcome was the same hierarchical composite excluding the body weight component. We enrolled 4017 patients of whom 2019 were assigned to dapagliflozin and 1998 to placebo. The analysis of the primary hierarchical composite outcome resulted in significantly more wins for dapagliflozin than for placebo (win ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20 to 1.50; P<0.001). The win ratio outcome, which was adopted in a change of analysis during trial performance because of low event accrual, was mainly driven by the added cardiometabolic outcomes. The composite of time to cardiovascular death/hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 50/2019 (2.5%) patients assigned to dapagliflozin and 52/1998 (2.6%) patients assigned to placebo (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.40). The rates of other cardiovascular events were low, with differences between the groups not reaching nominal statistical significance. No safety concerns were identified. In patients with acute MI as noted above, after approximately 1 year of treatment with dapagliflozin there were significant benefits with regard to improvement in cardiometabolic outcomes but no impact on the composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure compared with placebo. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrial.gov number, NCT04564742.) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The prevalence of obesity has significantly increased in high-income countries over the past 40 years, while rates of smoking, high blood pressure, and high cholesterol have decreased. This has led to a rise in cardiovascular diseases such as heart failure, myocardial infarction, and stroke. New evidence suggests that obesity plays a larger role in cardiovascular conditions than previously thought, and weight loss interventions, including medications and surgery, have shown promising results in reducing cardiovascular events and improving quality of life. However, more research is needed to fully understand the mechanisms and benefits of weight loss in cardiovascular medicine. The cardiology profession must address the growing problem of obesity to prevent further increases in multimorbidity rates and cardiovascular diseases. [Extracted from the article]

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]

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) consistently improve heart failure and kidney-related outcomes; however, effects on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) across different patient populations are less clear. METHODS: This was a collaborative trial-level meta-analysis from the SGLT2i Meta-analysis Cardio-Renal Trialists Consortium, which includes all phase 3, placebo-controlled, outcomes trials of SGLT2i across 3 patient populations (patients with diabetes at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure [HF], or chronic kidney disease). The outcomes of interest were MACE (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), individual components of MACE (inclusive of fatal and nonfatal events), all-cause mortality, and death subtypes. Effect estimates for SGLT2i versus placebo were metaanalyzed across trials and examined across key subgroups (established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, previous myocardial infarction, diabetes, previous HF, albuminuria, chronic kidney disease stages, and risk groups). RESULTS: A total of 78 607 patients across 11 trials were included: 42 568 (54.2%), 20 725 (26.4%), and 15 314 (19.5%) were included from trials of patients with diabetes at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, HF, or chronic kidney disease, respectively. SGLT2i reduced the rate of MACE by 9% (hazard ration [HR], 0.91 [95% CI, 0.87-0.96], P<0.0001) with a consistent effect across all 3 patient populations (I²=0%) and across all key subgroups. This effect was primarily driven by a reduction in cardiovascular death (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.81-0.92], P<0.0001), with no significant effect for myocardial infarction in the overall population (HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.87-1.04], P=0.29), and no effect on stroke (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.91-1.07], P=0.77). The benefit for cardiovascular death was driven primarily by reductions in HF death and sudden cardiac death (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.46-1.02] and HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.78-0.95], respectively) and was generally consistent across subgroups, with the possible exception of being more apparent in those with albuminuria (Pinteraction=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: SGLT2i reduce the risk of MACE across a broad range of patients irrespective of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, diabetes, kidney function, or other major clinical characteristics at baseline. This effect is driven primarily by a reduction of cardiovascular death, particularly HF death and sudden cardiac death, without a significant effect on myocardial infarction in the overall population, and no effect on stroke. These data may help inform selection for SGLT2i therapies across the spectrum of cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: cardiovascular diseases; diabetes mellitus, type 2; metformin; sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitors EN cardiovascular diseases diabetes mellitus, type 2 metformin sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitors 652 654 3 08/22/22 20220823 NES 220823 The universal guidance of treating patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) with metformin first has been questioned since positive cardiovascular outcomes trials of antihyperglycemic agents were reported between 2015 and 2021, demonstrating cardiovascular efficacy of multiple glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. Sources of Funding This study was sponsored by Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, in collaboration with Pfizer Inc., New York, NY. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Diabetes is associated with abnormalities in cardiac remodeling and high risk of heart failure (HF).Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prevalence and prognostic implications of diabetes with cardiomyopathy (DbCM) among community-dwelling individuals.Methods: Adults without prevalent cardiovascular disease or HF were pooled from 3 cohort studies (ARIC [Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities], CHS [Cardiovascular Health Study], CRIC [Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort]). Among participants with diabetes, DbCM was defined using different definitions: 1) least restrictive: ≥1 echocardiographic abnormality (left atrial enlargement, left ventricle hypertrophy, diastolic dysfunction); 2) intermediate restrictive: ≥2 echocardiographic abnormalities; and 3) most restrictive: elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels (>125 in normal/overweight or >100 pg/mL in obese) plus ≥2 echocardiographic abnormalities. Adjusted Fine-Gray models were used to evaluate the risk of HF.Results: Among individuals with diabetes (2,900 of 10,208 included), the prevalence of DbCM ranged from 67.0% to 11.7% in the least and most restrictive criteria, respectively. Higher fasting glucose, body mass index, and age as well as worse kidney function were associated with higher risk of DbCM. The 5-year incidence of HF among participants with DbCM ranged from 8.4%-12.8% in the least and most restrictive definitions, respectively. Compared with euglycemia, DbCM was significantly associated with higher risk of incident HF with the highest risk observed for the most restrictive definition of DbCM (HR: 2.55 [95% CI: 1.69-3.86]; least restrictive criteria HR: 1.99 [95% CI: 1.50-2.65]). A similar pattern of results was observed across cohort studies, across sex and race subgroups, and among participants without hypertension or obesity.Conclusions: Regardless of the criteria used to define cardiomyopathy, DbCM identifies a high-risk subgroup for developing HF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiple sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) have been shown to impart significant cardiovascular and kidney benefits, but are underused in clinical practice. Both SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA were first studied as glucose-lowering drugs, which may have impeded uptake by cardiologists in the wake of proven cardiovascular efficacy. Their significant effect on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes, which are largely independent of glucose-lowering effects, must drive a broader use of these drugs. Cardiologists are 3 times more likely than endocrinologists to see patients with both type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, thus they are ideally positioned to share responsibility for SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA treatment with primary care providers. In order to increase adoption, SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA must be reframed as primarily cardiovascular and kidney disease risk-reducing agents with a side effect of glucose-lowering. Coordinated and multifaceted interventions engaging clinicians, patients, payers, professional societies, and health systems must be implemented to incentivize the adoption of these medications as part of routine cardiovascular and kidney care. Greater use of SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA will improve outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular and kidney disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). We assessed the effect of ertugliflozin on HHF and related outcomes.Methods: VERTIS CV (Evaluation of Ertugliflozin Efficacy and Safety Cardiovascular Outcomes Trial), a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) disease to once-daily ertugliflozin 5 mg, 15 mg, or placebo. Prespecified secondary analyses compared ertugliflozin (pooled doses) versus placebo on time to first event of HHF and composite of HHF/CV death, overall and stratified by prespecified characteristics. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used with the Fine and Gray method to account for competing mortality risk, and Andersen-Gill modeling to analyze total (first+recurrent) HHF and total HHF/CV death events.Results: A total of 8246 patients were randomly assigned to ertugliflozin (n=5499) or placebo (n=2747); n=1958 (23.7%) had a history of heart failure (HF) and n=5006 (60.7%) had pretrial ejection fraction (EF) available, including n=959 with EF ≤45%. Ertugliflozin did not significantly reduce first HHF/CV death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88 [95% CI, 0.75-1.03]). Overall, ertugliflozin reduced risk for first HHF (HR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.54-0.90]; P=0.006). Previous HF did not modify this effect (HF: HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.44-0.90]; no HF: HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.54-1.15]; P interaction=0.40). In patients with HF, the risk reduction for first HHF was similar for those with reduced EF ≤45% versus preserved EF >45% or unknown. However, in the overall population, the risk reduction tended to be greater for those with EF ≤45% (HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.30-0.76]) versus EF >45% (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.58-1.29]). Effect on risk for first HHF was consistent across most subgroups, but greater benefit of ertugliflozin was observed in 3 populations: baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2, albuminuria, and diuretic use (each P interaction <0.05). Ertugliflozin reduced total events of HHF (rate ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.56-0.87]) and total HHF/CV death (rate ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.72-0.96]).Conclusions: In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, ertugliflozin reduced the risk for first and total HHF and total HHF/CV death, adding further support for the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in primary and secondary prevention of HHF. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01986881. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Responding to concerns about the potential for increased risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, specifically myocardial infarction, associated with certain glucose-lowering therapies, the US Food and Drug Administration and the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use of the European Medicines Agency issued guidance to the pharmaceutical industry in 2008. Glucose-lowering therapies were granted regulatory approval primarily from smaller studies that have demonstrated reductions in glycated hemoglobin concentration. Such studies were overall underpowered and of insufficient duration to show any effect on cardiovascular outcomes. The 2008 guidance aimed to ensure the cardiovascular safety of new glucose-lowering therapies to treat patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This resulted in a plethora of new cardiovascular outcome trials, most designed primarily as placebo-controlled noninferiority trials, but with many also powered for superiority. Several of these outcome trials demonstrated cardiovascular benefits of the newer agents, resulting in the first-ever cardiovascular protection indications for glucose-lowering therapies. Determining whether the guidance continues to have value in its current form is critically important as we move forward after the first decade of implementation. In February 2018, a think tank comprising representatives from academia, industry, and regulatory agencies convened to consider the guidance in light of the findings of the completed cardiovascular outcome trials. The group made several recommendations for future regulatory guidance and for cardiovascular outcome trials of glucose-lowering therapies. These recommendations include requiring only the 1.3 noninferiority margin for regulatory approval, conducting trials for longer durations, considering studying glucose-lowering therapies as first-line management of type 2 diabetes mellitus, considering heart failure or kidney outcomes within the primary outcome, considering head-to-head active comparator trials, increasing the diversity of patients enrolled, evaluating strategies to streamline registries and the study of unselected populations, and identifying ways to improve translation of trial results to general practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial (BI 10773 [Empagliflozin] Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, in comparison with placebo, empagliflozin reduced the risks of 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events (3-point MACE), cardiovascular and all-cause death, and hospitalization for heart failure. We investigated whether these effects varied across the spectrum of baseline cardiovascular risk.Methods: Cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, 3-point MACE, and hospitalization for heart failure in the pooled empagliflozin and placebo groups were analyzed in subgroups by prior myocardial infarction and stroke at baseline, and by estimated baseline cardiovascular risk based on the 10-point TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) Risk Score for Secondary Prevention.Results: Of 7020 patients who received the study drug, 65% had a prior myocardial infarction or stroke, and 12%, 40%, 30%, and 18% were at low, intermediate, high, and highest estimated cardiovascular risk according to TIMI Risk Score for Secondary Prevention (≤2, 3, 4, and ≥5 points, respectively). In the placebo group, 3-point MACE occurred during the trial in 7.3%, 9.4%, 12.6%, and 20.6% of patients at low, intermediate, high, and highest estimated baseline risk, respectively. Relative reductions in risk of cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, 3-point MACE and hospitalization for heart failure with empagliflozin versus placebo were consistent in patients with and without prior myocardial infarction and/or stroke and across subgroups by TIMI Risk Score for Secondary Prevention at baseline ( P>0.05 for randomized group-by-subgroup interactions).Conclusions: Despite all patients having atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, patients in EMPA-REG OUTCOME demonstrated a broad risk spectrum for cardiovascular events. Reductions in key cardiovascular outcomes and mortality with empagliflozin versus placebo were consistent across the range of cardiovascular risk.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01131676. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background--Diabetes mellitus and heart failure frequently coexist. However, few diabetes mellitus trials have prospectively evaluated and adjudicated heart failure as an end point. Methods and Results--A total of 16492 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and a history of, or at risk of, cardiovascular events were randomized to saxagliptin or placebo (mean follow-up, 2.1 years). The primary end point was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke. Hospitalization for heart failure was a predefined component of the secondary end point. Baseline N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide was measured in 12301 patients. More patients treated with saxagliptin (289, 3.5%) were hospitalized for heart failure compared with placebo (228, 2.8%; hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% confidence intercal, 1.07-1.51 ;P=0.007). Corresponding rates at 12monthswere 1.9% versus 1.3% (hazard ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.88; P=0.002), with no significant difference thereafter (time-varying interaction, P=0.017). Subjects at greatest risk of hospitalization for heart failure had previous heart failure, an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤60 mL/min, or elevated baseline levels of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide. There was no evidence of heterogeneity between N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide and saxagliptin (P for interaction=0.46), although the absolute risk excess for heart failure with saxagliptin was greatest in the highest N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide quartile (2.1 %). Even in patients at high risk of hospitalization for heart failure, the risk of the primary and secondary end points were similar between treatment groups. Conclusions--In the context of balanced primary and secondary end points, saxagliptin treatment was associated with an increased risk or hospitalization for heart failure. This increase in risk was highest among patients with elevated levels of natriuretic peptides, previous heart failure, or chronic kidney disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]