Adverse cardiovascular events during treatment with glyburide (glibenclamide) or gliclazide in a high-risk population

A population-based study of the risk of osteoporosis and fracture with dutasteride and finasteride

Background

Dutasteride is a potent inhibitor of 5-alpha reductase enzymes that reduces concentrations of dihydrotestosterone to a greater extent than finasteride. Whether this has adverse implications for bone health is unknown. We compared the risk of osteoporosis and fractures in older men treated with dutasteride or finasteride.

Methods

We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study with high-dimensional propensity score matching of Ontario men aged 66 years or older who started treatment with dutasteride or finasteride between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2012. The primary outcome was a diagnosis of osteoporosis within 2 years of treatment initiation. A secondary outcome was osteoporotic or fragility fractures.

Results

We studied 31,615 men treated with dutasteride and an equal number of men treated with finasteride. Dutasteride-treated patients had a lower incidence of osteoporosis than those receiving finasteride [2.2 versus 2.6 per 100 person years; hazard ratio (HR) 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.93]. This effect was no longer statistically significant following adjustment for specialty of prescribing physician (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.02)]. There was no differential risk of fractures with dutasteride (HR 1.04; 95% 0.86 to 1.25).

Conclusions

Despite differential effects on 5-alpha reductase, dutasteride is not associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis or fractures in older men relative to finasteride. These findings suggest that dutasteride does not adversely affect bone health.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-018-2076-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The shifting paradigm in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus-A cardiologist's perspective

In patients with diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular (CV) disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality. A multitude of contemporary antidiabetic agents presents different CV safety profiles. Metformin forms the cornerstone agent to reduce CV events. Newer agents, such as glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, have appealing CV benefits. Insulin, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, and sulfonylureas have neutral CV effects. Cardiologists should familiarize themselves with these agents to promote comprehensive CV care in patients with diabetes mellitus.

Sulfonylureas and the Risks of Cardiovascular Events and Death: A Methodological Meta-Regression Analysis of the Observational Studies

Recent randomized trials have compared the newer antidiabetic agents to treatments involving sulfonylureas, drugs associated with increased cardiovascular risks and mortality in some observational studies with conflicting results. We reviewed the methodology of these observational studies by searching MEDLINE from inception to December 2015 for all studies of the association between sulfonylureas and cardiovascular events or mortality. Each study was appraised with respect to the comparator, the outcome, and study design-related sources of bias. A meta-regression analysis was used to evaluate heterogeneity. A total of 19 studies were identified, of which six had no major design-related biases. Sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and mortality in five of these studies (relative risks 1.16-1.55). Overall, the 19 studies resulted in 36 relative risks as some studies assessed multiple outcomes or comparators. Of the 36 analyses, metformin was the comparator in 27 (75%) and death was the outcome in 24 (67%). The relative risk was higher by 13% when the comparator was metformin, by 20% when death was the outcome, and by 7% when the studies had design-related biases. The lowest predicted relative risk was for studies with no major bias, comparator other than metformin, and cardiovascular outcome (1.06 [95% CI 0.92-1.23]), whereas the highest was for studies with bias, metformin comparator, and mortality outcome (1.53 [95% CI 1.43-1.65]). In summary, sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and mortality in the majority of studies with no major design-related biases. Among studies with important biases, the association varied significantly with respect to the comparator, the outcome, and the type of bias. With the introduction of new antidiabetic drugs, the use of appropriate design and analytical tools will provide their more accurate cardiovascular safety assessment in the real-world setting.

Gliclazide

Gliclazide is a second-generation oral hypoglycemic drug used for the treatment of noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. It belongs to the sulfonylurea class that stimulates insulin secretion from pancreatic β-cells by inhibiting ATP-dependent potassium channels. Gliclazide also possesses unique antioxidant properties and other beneficial hemobiological effects. This profile represents a comprehensive description of the physical properties, chemical synthesis, spectroscopic characterization (FTIR, ¹H NMR, ¹³C NMR, UV, and single-crystal X-ray), methods of analysis, pharmacological actions, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the title drug.

Is gliclazide a sulfonylurea with difference? A review in 2016

Sulfonylureas (SUs) remain the most commonly prescribed drug after metformin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), despite the availability of several newer agents. The primary reason of SUs being most popular is their quick glycemic response, time-tested experience and least cost. Although SUs are one amongst the several other second line agents after metformin in all major guidelines, the new Dutch type 2 guidelines specifically advise gliclazide as the preferred second line drug instead of SUs as a class. The World Health Organization (WHO) has also included gliclazide in their Model List of Essential Medicines 2013 motivated by its safety data in elderly patients. Specifically advising gliclazide may have been based on emerging evidence suggesting cardiovascular neutrality of gliclazide over other SUs. This prompted us to do a literature review of gliclazide efficacy and safety data compared to other SUs as well as oral anti-diabetic drugs.

Interaction of risk factors, comorbidities, and comedications with ischemia/reperfusion injury and cardioprotection by preconditioning, postconditioning, and remote conditioning

Pre-, post-, and remote conditioning of the myocardium are well described adaptive responses that markedly enhance the ability of the heart to withstand a prolonged ischemia/reperfusion insult and provide therapeutic paradigms for cardioprotection. Nevertheless, more than 25 years after the discovery of ischemic preconditioning, we still do not have established cardioprotective drugs on the market. Most experimental studies on cardioprotection are still undertaken in animal models, in which ischemia/reperfusion is imposed in the absence of cardiovascular risk factors. However, ischemic heart disease in humans is a complex disorder caused by, or associated with, cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities, including hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, insulin resistance, heart failure, altered coronary circulation, and aging. These risk factors induce fundamental alterations in cellular signaling cascades that affect the development of ischemia/reperfusion injury per se and responses to cardioprotective interventions. Moreover, some of the medications used to treat these risk factors, including statins, nitrates, and antidiabetic drugs, may impact cardioprotection by modifying cellular signaling. The aim of this article is to review the recent evidence that cardiovascular risk factors and their medication may modify the response to cardioprotective interventions. We emphasize the critical need to take into account the presence of cardiovascular risk factors and concomitant medications when designing preclinical studies for the identification and validation of cardioprotective drug targets and clinical studies. This will hopefully maximize the success rate of developing rational approaches to effective cardioprotective therapies for the majority of patients with multiple risk factors.

Comparative cardiovascular safety of insulin secretagogues following hospitalization for ischemic heart disease among type 2 diabetes patients: a cohort study

AIM

To evaluate the association between insulin secretagogues and adverse cardiovascular sequelae in type 2 diabetes patients hospitalized for ischemic heart disease (IHD).

METHODS

Administrative health records from Alberta, Canada between 1998 and 2010 were used to identify 2,254 gliclazide, 3,289 glyburide and 740 repaglinide users prior to an IHD-related hospitalization. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to compare the 30-day risk of a composite outcome of all-cause mortality or new onset of atrial fibrillation, stroke, heart failure or myocardial infarction according to insulin secretagogue use.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) age was 76.1 (6.9) years, and 60.7% were men. The composite outcome occurred in 322 (30.2%) gliclazide users, 455 (28.1%) glyburide users and 81 (23.4%) repaglinide users within 30 days of IHD hospitalization. There were no differences in risk for glyburide use (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-1.05) or repaglinide use (aHR 0.80; 95% CI 0.63-1.03) compared to gliclazide. Similar results were observed in analyses for each element of the composite outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In older patients with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for IHD, prior use of gliclazide, glyburide, or repaglinide appears to be associated with a similar risk of adverse cardiovascular sequelae.

[Hypoglycemia and cardiac arrhythmia in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2]

Hypoglycemia is a common and potentially life-threatening adverse effect of inappropriate diabetes treatment. Typical cardiac complications are ischemia with angina pectoris, myocardial infarction, stroke and arrhythmias, such as atrial fibrillation (AF), ventricular tachycardia and heart failure. Elderly multimorbid patients with type 2 diabetes and polypharmacy and/or cardiac autonomous neuropathy represent a very high risk group for cardiovascular complications associated with hypoglycemia. Targets for glycemic control have to be adapted to the risk of hypoglycemia with a priority of stable glucose homeostasis without rapid fluctuations. Elderly patients with diabetes have a >20% risk of AF. At blood glucose levels of <3 mmol/l with a duration of >30 min, prolongation of QTc time and ventricular tachycardia occur with an increased risk of ventricular fibrillation and sudden death. Ventricular arrhythmias and AF significantly increase mortality in patients with heart failure. Rapid fluctuations with a mean amplitude of glucose excursion (MAGE) >5 mmol/l promote vulnerability of electrical stability of the heart, particularly in frail patients with preexisting coronary heart disease and autonomic neuropathy. Antihyperglycemic agents, such as metformin, acarbose and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have only a low risk of severe hypoglycemia. Dipeptidyl peptase 4 (DPP-IV) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1) analogues as insulin secretagogues have a lower risk for hypoglycemia than sulfonylurea and insulin. Early basal insulin treatment in patients insufficiently controlled with metformin is efficient, safe and convenient. Targets for glucose control and HbA1c have to be individualized and the choice of drugs must be risk-adjusted. Risk of hypoglycemia should be used as guide in decision-making for safe treatment of diabetes.

Mortality risk among sulfonylureas: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sulfonylureas are common second-line options for management of type 2 diabetes; however, they are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events compared with other antidiabetic drugs. Since tissue selectivity and risk of hypoglycaemia differ among sulfonylureas, we aimed to assess whether mortality and the risk of cardiovascular events also varies.

METHODS

We searched Medline and Embase from inception to June 11, 2014, to identify controlled studies reporting the risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular-related mortality, or myocardial infarction for at least two sulfonylureas. We examined differences in cardiovascular event risk among sulfonylureas with random effects models for direct pairwise comparisons and network meta-analyses to incorporate direct and indirect data.

FINDINGS

14 970 (9%) of 167 327 patients in 18 studies died: 841 (4%) of 19 334 gliclazide users, 5482 (11%) of 49 389 glimepiride users, 2106 (15%) of 14 464 glipizide users, 5296 (7%) of 77 169 glibenclamide users, 1066 (17%) of 6187 tolbutamide users, and 179 (23%) of 784 chlorpropamide users. Inconsistency was low for the network meta-analysis of all-cause mortality, and the relative risk of death compared with glibenclamide was 0·65 (95% credible interval 0·53-0·79) for gliclazide, 0·83 (0·68-1·00) for glimepiride, 0·98 (0·80-1·19) for glipizide, 1·13 (0·90-1·42) for tolbutamide, and 1·34 (0·98-1·86) for chlorpropamide. Similar associations were noted for cardiovascular-related mortality: the relative risk compared with glibenclamide was 0·60 (95% credible interval 0·45-0·84) for gliclazide, 0·79 (0·57-1·11) for glimepiride, 1·01 (0·72-1·43) for glipizide, 1·11 (0·79-1·55) for tolbutamide, and 1·45 (0·88-2·44) for chlorpropamide.

INTERPRETATION

Gliclazide and glimepiride were associated with a lower risk of all-cause and cardiovascular-related mortality compared with glibenclamide. Clinicians should consider possible differences in risk of mortality when selecting a sulfonylurea.

FUNDING

None.

Metformin in combination with various insulin secretagogues in type 2 diabetes and associated risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality--a retrospective nationwide study

AIMS

Metformin is the first-line treatment for most patients with type 2 diabetes but many patients need additional treatment with insulin secretagogues (IS) to achieve glycemic control. We aimed to compare mortality and cardiovascular risk among users of metformin in combination with pharmacologically different ISs.

METHODS

Using nationwide administrative Danish registries, we followed all individuals without prior stroke or myocardial infarction who initiated metformin and an IS from 1997 through 2009. Rate ratios (RR) of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death were compared between user groups using time-dependent multivariable Poisson regression models. The most common combination, glimepiride+metformin, was used as reference.

RESULTS

A total of 56,827 patients were included, 56% male, the mean age was 61 ± 12.5 years, and median duration of prior monotherapy was 2.2 (inter quartile range 0.5-4.5) years. Crude incidence rates of mortality for combinations of ISs with metformin were; 15.4 (repaglinide), 28.1 (glipizide), 23.7 (glibenclamide), 21.1 (gliclazide), 20.7 (glimepiride), 27.7 (tolbutamide) deaths per 1000 person years. In adjusted analysis, the associated mortality risk was similar for users of gliclazide+metformin (RR=1.01 [0.88-1.15]), repaglinide+metformin (RR=0.81 [0.62-1.05]), glibenclamide+metformin (RR=0.98 [0.87-1.10]), and tolbutamide+metformin (RR=1.04 [0.85-1.28]). Users of glipizide+metformin was associated with increased all-cause mortality (RR=1.16 [1.02-1.32], p=0.02), cardiovascular death (RR=1.21 [1.01-1.46], p=0.04), and the combined endpoint (RR=1.20 [1.06-1.36, p=0.005).

CONCLUSION

Most ISs in combination with metformin were associated with similar mortality and cardiovascular risk. Whether glipizide is associated with increased risk compared with other ISs when used in combinations with metformin warrants further study.

Sitagliptin use in patients with diabetes and heart failure: a population-based retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The study objective was to evaluate the effects of sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and heart failure (HF).

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty in the literature about whether dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitors cause harm in patients with HF and T2D.

METHODS

We analyzed data from a national commercially insured U.S. claims database. Patients with incident HF were identified from individuals with T2D initially treated with metformin or sulfonylurea and followed over time. Subjects subsequently using sitagliptin were compared with those not using sitagliptin in the 90 days before our primary outcome of all-cause hospital admission or death using a nested case-control analysis after adjustment for demographics and clinical and laboratory data. HF-specific hospital admission or death also was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 7,620 patients with diabetes and incident HF met our inclusion criteria. Mean (SD) age was 54 years (9), and 58% (3,180) were male. Overall, 887 patients (12%) were exposed to sitagliptin therapy (521 patient years of exposure) after incident HF. Our primary composite endpoint occurred in 4,137 patients (54%). After adjustment, sitagliptin users were not at an increased risk for the primary endpoint (7.1% vs. 9.2%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69 to 1.03) or each component (hospital admission 7.5% vs. 9.2%, aOR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.14; death 6.9% vs. 9.3%, aOR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.97). However, sitagliptin use was associated with an increased risk of HF hospitalizations (12.5% vs. 9.0%, aOR: 1.84, 95% CI: 1.16 to 2.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Sitagliptin use was not associated with an increased risk of all-cause hospitalizations or death, but was associated with an increased risk of HF-related hospitalizations among patients with T2D with pre-existing HF.

Cardiovascular risks and benefits with oral drugs for Type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus affects approximately 321 million people worldwide. It is estimated that about half of these patients will die from cardiovascular complications. In spite of these statistics, medications for diabetes are approved based not on outcomes, but on surrogate markers such as blood glucose or glycosylated hemoglobin. In recent years, however, the safety of diabetes medications has come under scrutiny, and more studies are being undertaken to determine the effect(s) of the medications on actual outcomes. In this review the authors review available study results for all of the currently approved classes of oral medications for Type 2 diabetes, and discuss the possible mechanisms for the findings. More studies are necessary for many of these classes, however, to make definitive recommendations regarding their cardiovascular effects.

Risk of acute coronary events associated with glyburide compared with gliclazide use in patients with type 2 diabetes: a nested case-control study

AIM

Sulfonylureas might increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular events; however, emerging evidence suggests there may be important differences amongst these drugs. Some, like glyburide, inhibit KATP channels in the heart and pancreas, while others, like gliclazide, are more likely to selectively inhibit KATP channels in the pancreas. We hypothesized that the risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) events would be higher in patients using glyburide compared with gliclazide.

METHODS

This nested case-control study used administrative health data from Alberta, Canada. New users of glyburide or gliclazide aged ≥66 years between 1998 and 2010 were included. Cases were individuals with an ACS-related hospitalization or death. Up to four controls were matched based on birth year, sex, cohort-entry year and follow-up time. Multivariable conditional logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (OR), controlling for baseline drug use and co-morbidities.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 7441 gliclazide and 13 884 glyburide users; 51.4% men, mean (s.d.) age 75.5 (6.6) years and mean (s.d.) duration of follow-up 5.5 (4.0) years. A total of 4239 patients had an ACS-related hospitalization or death and were matched to 16 723 controls. Compared with gliclazide use, glyburide use was associated with a higher risk (adjusted OR 1.14; 95% CI 1.06-1.23) of ACS-related hospitalization or death over 5.5 years (number needed to harm: 50).

CONCLUSION

In this observational study, glyburide use was associated with a 14% higher risk of ACS events compared with gliclazide use. Although the difference is small and probably to have implications at the population level rather than the individual patient or clinician, any causal inferences regarding sulfonylurea use and adverse cardiovascular risk should be tested in a large-scale randomized controlled trial.

Are users of sulphonylureas at the time of an acute coronary syndrome at risk of poorer outcomes?

AIMS

Adenosine triphosphate sensitive potassium (K(ATP)) channel activity is cardioprotective during ischaemia. One of the purported mechanisms for sulphonylurea adverse effects is through inhibition of these channels. The purpose of this study is to examine whether patients using K(ATP) channel inhibitors at the time of an acute coronary syndrome are at greater risk of death or heart failure (HF) than those not exposed.

METHODS

Using linked administrative databases we identified all adults who had an acute coronary syndrome between April 2002 and October 2006 (n = 21 023).

RESULTS

Within 30 days of acute coronary syndrome, 5.3% of our cohort died and 15.6% were diagnosed with HF. Individuals with diabetes exhibited significantly higher risk of death (adjusted OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.03-1.40) and death or HF (aOR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.59-1.89) than individuals without diabetes. However, there was no significantly increased risk of death (aOR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.76-1.33) or death/HF (aOR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.89-1.26) in patients exposed to K(ATP) channel inhibitors versus patients not exposed to K(ATP) channel inhibitors prior to their acute coronary syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes is associated with an increased risk of death or HF within 30 days of an acute coronary syndrome. However, we did not find any excess risk of death or HF associated with use of K(ATP) channel inhibitors at the time of an acute coronary syndrome, raising doubts about the hypothesis that sulphonylureas inhibit the cardioprotective effects of myocardial K(ATP) channels.

Effects of selected OATP and/or ABC transporter inhibitors on the brain and whole-body distribution of glyburide

Glyburide (glibenclamide, GLB) is a widely prescribed antidiabetic with potential beneficial effects in central nervous system injury and diseases. In vitro studies show that GLB is a substrate of organic anion transporting polypeptide (OATP) and ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporter families, which may influence GLB distribution and pharmacokinetics in vivo. In the present study, we used [(11)C]GLB positron emission tomography (PET) imaging to non-invasively observe the distribution of GLB at a non-saturating tracer dose in baboons. The role of OATP and P-glycoprotein (P-gp) in [(11)C]GLB whole-body distribution, plasma kinetics, and metabolism was assessed using the OATP inhibitor rifampicin and the dual OATP/P-gp inhibitor cyclosporine. Finally, we used in situ brain perfusion in mice to pinpoint the effect of ABC transporters on GLB transport at the blood-brain barrier (BBB). PET revealed the critical role of OATP on liver [(11)C]GLB uptake and its subsequent impact on [(11)C]GLB metabolism and plasma clearance. OATP-mediated uptake also occurred in the myocardium and kidney parenchyma but not the brain. The inhibition of P-gp in addition to OATP did not further influence [(11)C]GLB tissue and plasma kinetics. At the BBB, the inhibition of both P-gp and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) was necessary to demonstrate the role of ABC transporters in limiting GLB brain uptake. This study demonstrates that GLB distribution, metabolism, and elimination are greatly dependent on OATP activity, the first step in GLB hepatic clearance. Conversely, P-gp, BCRP, and probably multidrug resistance protein 4 work in synergy to limit GLB brain uptake.