Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31276600›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2019

Sulfonylureas as initial treatment for type 2 diabetes and the risk of adverse cardiovascular events: A population-based cohort study.

Kristian B Filion, Antonios Douros, Laurent Azoulay, Hui Yin, Oriana H Yu, Samy Suissa

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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.

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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Kristian B FilionDepartment of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6055-0088
Antonios DourosCenter for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6005-4006
Laurent AzoulayCenter for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5162-3556
Hui YinCenter for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Oriana H YuCenter for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Samy SuissaDepartment of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1281-5296
Jewish General Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsSulfonylureas are recommended as second-line treatment in the management of type 2 diabetes. However, they are still commonly used also as first-line treatment instead of metformin. Given the controversial cardiovascular safety of sulfonylureas, we aimed to determine if their use as first-line treatment is associated with adverse cardiovascular events among patients with newly treated type 2 diabetes compared with metformin.

methodsWe conducted a population-based cohort study of patients with newly treated type 2 diabetes using the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Initiators of metformin and sulfonylurea monotherapy were matched on high-dimensional propensity score, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare the rate of cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality) with sulfonylureas vs metformin.

resultsOur cohort included 94 750 patients initiating treatment for type 2 diabetes, 17 612 on a sulfonylurea and 77 138 on metformin. After matching, sulfonylurea monotherapy, compared with metformin monotherapy, was not associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85-1.25) but was associated with increased risks of ischaemic stroke (HR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.002-1.56), cardiovascular death (HR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.06-1.47), and all-cause mortality (HR: 1.60, 95% CI: 1.45-1.76). This represents an additional 2.0 ischaemic strokes, 3.5 cardiovascular deaths, and 21.4 all-cause deaths per 1,000 patients per year with sulfonylureas.

conclusionsInitiating treatment of type 2 diabetes with a sulfonylurea rather than metformin is associated with higher rates of ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overBrain IschemiaCardiovascular DiseasesCohort StudiesDatabases, FactualDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHumansHypoglycemic AgentsMaleMetforminMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionRiskStrokeHypoglycemic AgentsMetforminSulfonylurea Compoundsmyocardial infarctionpharmacoepidemiologystrokesulfonylureastype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID31276600
PMCPMC6783602
OpenAlexW2954774129

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
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 OpenQuestion graph.