ReviewProgress in cardiovascular diseases
Cardiovascular outcome trials of the newer anti-diabetic medications.
Review in Progress in cardiovascular diseases. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Heterogeneity of antidiabetic treatment effect on the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2020Pooled it
- Diabetes Mellitus and Cardiovascular Disease: Exploring Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, and Treatment Strategies.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Assessing Cardiovascular Target Attainment in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients in Tertiary Diabetes Center in Romania.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- [Prevention of ischemic stroke in old age].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2024Review
- Rodent models to study type 1 and type 2 diabetes induced human diabetic nephropathy.Molecular biology reports · 2023Review
- Adeno-associated viral (AAV) vector-mediated therapeutics for diabetic cardiomyopathy - current and future perspectives.Clinical science (London, England : 1979) · 2021Review
- Potential Role of Melatonin as an Adjuvant for Atherosclerotic Carotid Arterial Stenosis.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Comparative Cardio-Renal Outcomes of Type 2 Diabetes Patients Administered Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists: A Network Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Estimating the attributable risk of vascular disorders in different ranges of fasting plasma glucose and assessing the effectiveness of anti-diabetes agents on risk reduction; questioning the current diagnostic criteria.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2020Article
- Effect of ertugliflozin on glycemic levels, blood pressure and body weight of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2020Review
- Article
- Can SGLT2 Inhibitor be Used for Diabetes Mellitus or Vascular Diseases?Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Concerns of elevated cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk with some anti-diabetic medications warranted phase 4 clinical trials to demonstrate CVD safety of newly marketed anti-diabetic drugs. Although initially designed to evaluate safety, some of these CVD outcome trials (CVOTs) have in fact shown CVD benefits. New medication classes, like glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) analogues and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, have shown reductions in the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) including, myocardial infarction, stroke, CV death, and heart failure (HF). Perhaps more importantly, SGLT2 inhibitors demonstrated reduction in the risk of HF hospitalizations, being the first class of anti-diabetic drugs to do so. Conversely, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors did not significantly affect atherosclerotic CVD end-points and some actually increased the risk of HF hospitalizations. Further, the adverse/beneficial CVD effects of these medications may not be class specific. This review focuses on the main results of these CVOTs while highlighting the heterogeneity of CVD end-points within each class and discusses important mechanistic insights and adverse effect profiles.
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.