ReviewCureus2025
Cardiovascular Sequel in Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients on Various Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 (DPP-4) Inhibitors: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neurovascular Actions of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors and Their Implications for Cognitive Dysfunction in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.Clinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inhibitors of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) enzyme are one of the commonly recommended hypoglycemic agents. Although efficient in controlling hyperglycemia, their cardiovascular (CV) safety has been debated for long-term use, particularly in relation to heart failure risk. This review analyzed the cardiovascular safety profile after the consumption of various DPP-4 inhibitors in hyperglycemic patients. The systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted by utilizing widespread empirical research and randomized control trials (RCTs), evaluating sitagliptin, saxagliptin, alogliptin, and linagliptin. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Clinical Trials.gov through September 2025. Outcomes assessed were: HHF, i.e., hospitalization for heart failure, MACE, i.e., major adverse cardiovascular events (CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal cerebrovascular attack (CVA), all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular mortality. Random-effects metHFa-analyses were conducted, with heterogeneity assessed via I² statistics. Seven large RCTs (n > 70,000 participants) were included, along with supporting observational data. Pooled analysis demonstrated no significant increase in MACE intake of DPP-4 inhibitors when compared to placebo (hazard ratio (HR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93-1.05, heterogeneity (I²) = 5%). However, an increased probability of HHF was found (HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.27, I² = 28%), largely driven by saxagliptin (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.07-1.51) and, to a lesser extent, alogliptin. While no significant heart failure (HF) risk was observed by the intake of drugs sitagliptin (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.83-1.20) and linagliptin (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.89-1.17), no differences were noted in all-cause or CV mortality across the class. DPP-4 inhibitors, as a group of drugs, are safe with respect to MACE, but saxagliptin and possibly alogliptin are linked with an increased risk of HHF. Sitagliptin and linagliptin appear neutral regarding HF risk. These findings highlight the importance of drug-specific evaluation when selecting a DPP-4 inhibitor for type-2 diabetic patients, particularly those having an elevated risk of heart failure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.