Evidence mapPaperPMID 30021781Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2018

Sulfonylureas as second line drugs in type 2 diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular and hypoglycaemic events: population based cohort study.

Antonios Douros, Sophie Dell'Aniello, Oriana Hoi Yun Yu, Kristian B Filion, Laurent Azoulay, Samy Suissa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  20. [Metformin use and risk of ischemic stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes: A cohort study].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Antonios DourosCentre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, 3755 Cote Ste-Catherine, H-461 Montréal, QC H3T 1E2, Canada.
Sophie Dell'AnielloCentre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, 3755 Cote Ste-Catherine, H-461 Montréal, QC H3T 1E2, Canada.
Oriana Hoi Yun YuCentre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, 3755 Cote Ste-Catherine, H-461 Montréal, QC H3T 1E2, Canada.
Kristian B FilionCentre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, 3755 Cote Ste-Catherine, H-461 Montréal, QC H3T 1E2, Canada.
Laurent AzoulayCentre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, 3755 Cote Ste-Catherine, H-461 Montréal, QC H3T 1E2, Canada.
Samy SuissaCentre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, 3755 Cote Ste-Catherine, H-461 Montréal, QC H3T 1E2, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess whether adding or switching to sulfonylureas is associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular death, all cause mortality, and severe hypoglycaemia, compared with remaining on metformin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes.

designPopulation based cohort study.

settingGeneral practices contributing data to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

participantsPatients with type 2 diabetes initiating metformin monotherapy between 1998 and 2013.

main outcome measuresUsing the prevalent new-user cohort design we matched 1:1 patients adding or switching to sulfonylureas with those remaining on metformin monotherapy on high-dimensional propensity score, haemoglobin A1c, and number of previous metformin prescriptions. The two groups were compared using Cox proportional hazards models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the study outcomes.

resultsAmong 77 138 metformin initiators, 25 699 added or switched to sulfonylureas during the study period. During a mean follow-up of 1.1 years, sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (incidence rate 7.8

conclusionsSulfonylureas as second line drugs are associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, all cause mortality, and severe hypoglycaemia, compared with remaining on metformin monotherapy. Continuing metformin when introducing sulfonylureas appears to be safer than switching.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesCohort StudiesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Drug SubstitutionFemaleHumansHypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsSulfonylurea CompoundsUnited KingdomHypoglycemic AgentsSulfonylurea Compounds

Identifiers

PMID30021781
PMCPMC6050517

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.