Observational studyCardiovascular diabetology2020

Add-on therapy in metformin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes at moderate cardiovascular risk: a nationwide study.

David Thein, Mia Nielsen Christiansen, Ulrik Madvig Mogensen, Johan Skov Bundgaard, Rasmus Rørth, Christian Madelaire, Emil Loldrup Fosbøl, Morten Schou, Christian Torp-Pedersen, Gunnar Gislason and 2 more

Open access · goldFull text readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Cardiovascular diabetology, 2020. The graph read 1 number from its abstract, feeding 3 cells of the map: it . Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

1number the graph read from it
3cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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.

← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
1 · no effect
Glycemic controlno clear difference · head-to-head · t2d, heart_failurefeeds 3 cells of the map
HR 1.110.89 to 1.39
During follow-up, 623 (1.3%, range 0.8-2.1%) patients were hospitalised for HF-hazard ratios (HR) were 1.11 (95% CI 0.89-1.39) for GLP-1 RA, 0.84 (0.52-1.36) for SGLT-2 inhibitors, 0.98 (0.77-1.26) for SU and 1.54 (1.25-1.91) for insulin.

clause the extractor read what became the number

2 · Its place on the map

Where it lands on the map

Rows are treatments, columns are outcomes. The coloured squares are the cells this paper feeds, coloured by the vote it casts there. Click one to jump to what this paper adds to it.

supports the treatmentfavours the comparatorno clear differenceread, but no usable result
3 · What it changes

What it adds to each cell

For every cell the paper feeds: the belief in the claim with and without this paper, and this paper's estimate drawn against every other readable study in the cell. The ringed dot is this paper.

GLP-1 receptor agonists×glycemic control

No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →

40 readable studies in this cell: 96 favour the treatment, 17 find no difference, 10 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.91replicated · 68 families support, 7 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
0 · no effect
NCT017204463,297 enrolled · 2013
Δ -0.66-0.80 to -0.52
NCT036893742,274 enrolled · 2018
Δ -0.29-0.38 to -0.20
NCT039879191,879 enrolled · 2019
Δ -0.51-0.64 to -0.38
NCT026078651,864 enrolled · 2016
Δ -0.50-0.60 to -0.40
NCT013360231,663 enrolled · 2011
Treatment contrast -0.64-0.75 to -0.53
NCT040178321,441 enrolled · 2019
Δ -0.20-0.30 to -0.10
NCT018365231,398 enrolled · 2013
Δ -0.20-0.32 to -0.07
NCT019301881,231 enrolled · 2013
Δ -1.06-1.21 to -0.91
NCT007344741,202 enrolled · 2008
Δ -0.71-0.87 to -0.55
NCT020581471,170 enrolled · 2014
Δ -0.29-0.38 to -0.19
NCT003184611,091 enrolled · 2006
Δ -1.09-1.30 to -0.88
NCT021289321,089 enrolled · 2014
Δ -0.81-0.96 to -0.67

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

Insulin×glycemic control

No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →

40 readable studies in this cell: 15 favour the treatment, 14 find no difference, 14 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.50contested · 9 families support, 6 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the comparatorfavours the treatment →
0 · no effect
NCT036893742,274 enrolled · 2018
Δ -0.29-0.38 to -0.20
NCT037306622,002 enrolled · 2018
Δ -0.99-1.13 to -0.86
NCT013360231,663 enrolled · 2011
Treatment contrast -0.64-0.75 to -0.53
NCT038829701,444 enrolled · 2019
Δ -0.86-1.00 to -0.72
NCT045379231,428 enrolled · 2020
Δ -1.10-1.24 to -0.97
NCT032680051,264 enrolled · 2017
Δ -0.04-0.11 to 0.03
NCT020581471,170 enrolled · 2014
Δ -0.78-0.90 to -0.67
NCT021289321,089 enrolled · 2014
Δ -0.81-0.96 to -0.67
NCT009606611,036 enrolled · 2009
Δ -0.04-0.18 to 0.11
NCT00856986987 enrolled · 2009
Δ -0.52-0.68 to -0.36
NCT01117350978 enrolled · 2010
Δ 2.54-3.88 to 8.93
NCT03214380933 enrolled · 2017
Δ 0.06-0.05 to 0.16

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

Sulfonylureas & glinides×glycemic control

No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →

31 readable studies in this cell: 7 favour the treatment, 13 find no difference, 11 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.83established · 5 families support, 1 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the comparatorfavours the treatment →
0 · no effect
NCT017093055,570 enrolled · 2012
Δ 0.190.02 to 0.36
NCT009688121,452 enrolled · 2009
Δ -0.01-0.11 to 0.09
NCT006609071,217 enrolled · 2008
Δ 0.00-0.11 to 0.11
NCT003184611,091 enrolled · 2006
Δ -0.02-0.19 to 0.15
NCT008389031,049 enrolled · 2009
Δ -0.27-0.45 to -0.09
Δ 0.640.33 to 0.95
NCT03332771954 enrolled · 2017
Δ 0.12-0.12 to 0.36
NCT02471404939 enrolled · 2015
Δ 0.160.03 to 0.30
NCT00614120929 enrolled · 2008
Δ -0.06-0.23 to 0.11
NCT00575588891 enrolled · 2007
Δ 0.06-0.05 to 0.16
NCT01682759751 enrolled · 2012
Δ 0.180.06 to 0.30
NCT00294723746 enrolled · 2006
Δ -0.62-0.83 to -0.42

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

4 · 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.

5 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
6 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

7 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

David TheinDepartment of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet Inge Lehmanns vej 7, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Mia Nielsen ChristiansenDepartment of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet Inge Lehmanns vej 7, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Ulrik Madvig MogensenDepartment of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet Inge Lehmanns vej 7, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Johan Skov BundgaardDepartment of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet Inge Lehmanns vej 7, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Rasmus RørthDepartment of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet Inge Lehmanns vej 7, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Christian MadelaireDepartment of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Emil Loldrup FosbølDepartment of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet Inge Lehmanns vej 7, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Morten SchouDepartment of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Christian Torp-PedersenDepartment of Health, Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Gunnar GislasonDepartment of Cardiology, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lars KøberDepartment of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet Inge Lehmanns vej 7, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Søren Lund KristensenDepartment of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet Inge Lehmanns vej 7, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. slk@heart.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-9759-7397
Copenhagen University Hospital · DKGentofte Hospital · DKAalborg University · DKUniversity of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

8 · The paper itself

Abstract

The marked sentences are the ones the graph read a number from.

backgroundIn randomised clinical trials, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors reduced cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) at high cardiovascular risk, as compared to standard care. However, data comparing these agents in patients with T2D who are at moderate risk is sparse.

methodsFrom Danish national registries, we included patients with T2D previously on metformin monotherapy, who started an additional glucose-lowering agent [GLP-1 RA, SGLT-2 inhibitor, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor, sulfonylurea (SU), or insulin] in the period 2010-2016. Patients with a history of cardiovascular events [heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke] were excluded. Patients were followed for up to 2 years. Cause-specific adjusted Cox regression models were used to compare the risk of hospitalisation for HF, a composite endpoint of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (MI, stroke or cardiovascular death), and all-cause mortality for each add-on therapy. Patients who initiated DPP-4 inhibitors were used as reference.

resultsThe study included 46,986 T2D patients with a median age of 61 years and of which 59% were male. The median duration of metformin monotherapy prior to study inclusion was 5.3 years. Add-on therapy was distributed as follows: 13,148 (28%) GLP-1 RAs, 2343 (5%) SGLT-2 inhibitors, 15,426 (33%) DPP-4 inhibitors, 8917 (19%) SUs, and 7152 (15%) insulin. During follow-up, 623 (1.3%, range 0.8-2.1%) patients were hospitalised for HF-hazard ratios (HR) were 1.11 (95% CI 0.89-1.39) for GLP-1 RA, 0.84 (0.52-1.36) for SGLT-2 inhibitors, 0.98 (0.77-1.26) for SU and 1.54 (1.25-1.91) for insulin. The composite MACE endpoint occurred in 1196 (2.5%, range 1.5-3.6%) patients, yielding HRs of 0.82 (0.69-0.97) for GLP-1 RAs, 0.79 (0.56-1.12) for SGLT-2 inhibitors, 1.22 (1.03-1.49) for SU and 1.23 (1.07-1.47) for insulin. 1865 (3.9%, range 1.9-9.0%) died from any cause during follow-up. HRs for all-cause mortality were 0.91 (0.78-1.05) for GLP-1 RAs, 0.79 (0.58-1.07) for SGLT-2 inhibitors, 1.13 (0.99-1.31) for SU and 2.33 (2.08-2.61) for insulin.

conclusionIn a nationwide cohort of metformin-treated T2D patients and no history of cardiovascular events, the addition of either GLP-1 RA or SGLT-2 inhibitor to metformin treatment was associated with a similar risk of hospitalisation for HF and death, and a lower risk of MACE for GLP-1 RA when compared with add-on DPP-4 inhibitors. By contrast, initiation of treatment with SU and insulin were associated with a higher risk of MACE. Additionally, insulin was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality and hospitalisation for HF.

Indexed as

AgedDenmarkDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV InhibitorsDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleGlucagon-Like Peptide-1 ReceptorGlucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor AgonistsHeart FailureHumansHypoglycemic AgentsIncretinsInsulinMaleMetforminMiddle AgedDipeptidyl-Peptidase IV InhibitorsGLP1R protein, humanGlucagon-Like Peptide-1 ReceptorGlucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor AgonistsHypoglycemic AgentsIncretinsInsulinMetforminSodium-Glucose Transporter 2 InhibitorsSulfonylurea CompoundsHeart failureMyocardial infarctionPrognosisTreatmentType 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID32631337
PMCPMC7339487
OpenAlexW3038721408

What Socratic holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
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.