ReviewCardiovascular diabetology2016
Current perspectives on cardiovascular outcome trials in diabetes.
Review in Cardiovascular diabetology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparative effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing serious adverse events after primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.Acta orthopaedica · 2025Pooled it
- Fragility of cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) examining nutrition interventions among patients with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Hormones (Athens, Greece) · 2022Pooled it
- [Molecular imaging and biology · 2021Trial
- Long-term Cost-effectiveness of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine U100 in the UK: Evidence from the Basal-bolus Subgroup of the DEVOTE Trial (DEVOTE 16).Applied health economics and health policy · 2019Trial
- Efficacy and Safety of Degludec versus Glargine in Type 2 Diabetes.The New England journal of medicine · 2017Trial
- Emulating the LEADER trial in China: a regulatory science case study on non-interventional research.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- From diabetes to diverse domains: the multifaceted roles of GLP-1 receptor agonists.Molecular biology reports · 2024Review
- Cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease in China.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2021Article
- Beneficial Agents for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease or Obesity: Utilization in an Era of Accumulating Evidence.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2020Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Empagliflozin in Comparison to Sitagliptin and Saxagliptin Based on Cardiovascular Outcome Trials in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Established Cardiovascular Disease.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2019Article
- Cardiovascular Outcome Trials in Type 2 Diabetes: What Do They Mean for Clinical Practice?Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2019Article
- Defining Disease Progression and Drug Durability in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.European endocrinology · 2019Article
- Report from the 4th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit of the Diabetes & Cardiovascular Disease (D&CVD) EASD Study Group.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2019Article
- Consensus recommendations for management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular diseases.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2019Review
- DEVOTE 5: Evaluating the Short-Term Cost-Utility of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine U100 in Basal-Bolus Regimens for Type 2 Diabetes in the UK.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2018Article
- GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.Journal of diabetes research · 2018Review
- Recent novel approaches to limit oxidative stress and inflammation in diabetic complications.Clinical & translational immunology · 2018Review
- Prevalence of cardiovascular disease and evaluation of standard of care in type 2 diabetes: a nationwide study in primary care.Cardiovascular endocrinology · 2017Article
- SGLT2 Inhibitors Through the Windows of EMPA-REG and CANVAS Trials: A Review.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2017Review
- Translating recent results from the Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials into clinical practice: recommendations from the Central and Eastern European Diabetes Expert Group (CEEDEG).Cardiovascular diabetology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is one of the most common diabetes-associated complications, as well as a leading cause for death in type 2 diabetes patients (T2D). Despite the well-known correlation between the two, up until the 2008 FDA industry guidance for licensing of new anti-hyperglycemic drugs, which required an investigation of cardiovascular outcomes (CVO) of glucose-lowering agents, only a few studies had looked into the relationship between glucose lowering drugs and cardiovascular (CV) risk. Thereafter, CVOT design has focused on non-inferiority short-term studies on high-risk patient populations aiming at capturing CV safety issues. Despite the wealth of information and useful data provided by CVOTs, this approach still suffers from certain limitations. The present review will condense the main results of the most recently completed CVOTs, reflect on the lessons learned, discuss on the issues presented by current CVOT design and offer some suggestions for improvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.