Observational studyMedicine2017
Comparative safety for cardiovascular outcomes of DPP-4 inhibitors versus glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes: A retrospective cohort study.
Observational study in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- A prospective cohort study on effects of gemigliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (OPTIMUS study).Scientific reports · 2020Trial
- Cardiovascular Events and Heart Failure in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors: A Meta-Analysis.Current therapeutic research, clinical and experimental · 2025Review
- Cardiovascular outcomes of type 2 diabetic patients treated with DPP‑4 inhibitors versus sulphonylureas as add-on to metformin in clinical practice.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Effect of Teneligliptin versus Sulfonylurea on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Real-World Study in Korea.Endocrinology and metabolism (Seoul, Korea) · 2021Article
- Review of the cardiovascular safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and the clinical relevance of the CAROLINA trial.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2019Review
- The Effect of Linagliptin versus Metformin Treatment-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2019Article
- The perceptions of natural compounds against dipeptidyl peptidase 4 in diabetes: fromTherapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2019Review
- Risk of heart failure hospitalization among users of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors compared to glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2018Observational
- The role of dipeptidylpeptidase-4 inhibitors in management of cardiovascular disease in diabetes; focus on linagliptin.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2018Review
- Pharmacovigilance Evaluation of the Association Between DPP-4 Inhibitors and Heart Failure: Stimulated Reporting and Moderation by Drug Interactions.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2018Article
- A Review on Cardiovascular Outcome Studies of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors.Indian journal of endocrinology and metabolismReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Concerns about the cardiovascular safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors persist. This study sought to determine whether there is a differential risk of hospitalization for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) between DPP-4 inhibitors and glimepiride.We conducted this retrospective cohort study by using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database from December 1, 2008, to December 31, 2013. The study subjects were new users of DPP-4 inhibitors or glimepiride for type 2 diabetes. Outcome was defined as hospitalization for CVDs, including angina pectoris, myocardial infarction, transient cerebral ischemic attack, heart failure, or cerebrovascular disease or any procedure involving coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention. We used a Cox proportional hazard model to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), to assess the risk of CVDs associated with the use of DPP-4 inhibitors compared with glimepiride.The cohort consisted of 1,045,975 patients, with 6504 in the DPP-4 inhibitors group and 13,447 in the glimepiride group. No significant increased risk of total CVDs was found (aHR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75-1.01) in the DPP-4 inhibitors versus glimepiride group. A decreased risk of hospitalization for CVDs was found among patients with a history of visit for CVDs (aHR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56-0.97) or with >2.5 years' duration of type 2 diabetes (aHR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66-0.91) in the DPP-4 inhibitors versus glimepiride group.DPP-4 inhibitors did not increase cardiovascular risk compared with glimepiride regardless of CVD history and diabetes duration.
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.