Metabolic effects of antihyperglycemic agents and mortality: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Effect of Antidiabetic Therapy on Clinical Outcomes of COVID-19 Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background:

No study has yet systematically evaluated the effect of antidiabetic therapy on clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Objective:

We aimed to evaluate the effect of different antidiabetic therapy on clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients with T2D.

Methods:

We comprehensively retrieved the published research which examined the effect of antidiabetic therapy on clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients with T2D. The odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for clinical outcomes were calculated using the random-effects model, and meta-regression was adopted to evaluate the potential sources of heterogeneity between studies.

Results:

A total of 54 studies were included in this study. We found that the use of metformin (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.58-0.75), SGLT-2i (OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.73-0.88), and GLP-1ra (OR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.70-0.98) were significantly associated with lower mortality risk in COVID-19 patients with T2D, while insulin use might unexpectedly increase the ICU admission rate (OR = 2.32, 95% CI: 1.34-4.01) and risk of death (OR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.32-1.75). No statistically significant associations were identified for DPP-4i, SUs, AGIs, and TZDs.

Conclusion and Relevance:

We demonstrated that the usage of metformin, SGLT-2i, and GLP-1ra could significantly decrease mortality in COVID-19 patients with T2D. The heterogeneity across the studies, baseline characteristics of the included patients, shortage of dosage and the duration of antidiabetic drugs and autonomy of drug selection might limit the objectivity and accuracy of results. Further adequately powered and high-quality randomized controlled trials are warranted for conclusive findings.

Is HbA1c a valid surrogate for mortality in type 2 diabetes? Evidence from a meta-analysis of randomized trials

AIMS

Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) has been repeatedly questioned as a valid surrogate marker, especially for patient-relevant outcomes. The aim of this study was to validate the HbA1c value as a surrogate for all-cause mortality in people with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

The effect estimates for HbA1c lowering after treatment as well as reductions in all-cause mortality of randomized trials were extracted from a systematic review and updated. For the measurement of actual surrogacy, weighted linear regression models with a random intercept for the study effect were used with the all-cause mortality estimate (risk difference and log relative risk) as the outcome and the estimate for HbA1c difference as the covariate. Surrogacy was assessed according to the criteria of Daniels and Hughes.

RESULTS

A total of 346 HbA1c-mortality-pairs from 205 single randomized trials were included in the analysis. Regarding the risk difference of all-cause mortality, there was no evidence for surrogacy of the HbA1c value. For the log relative risk, a small positive association between HbA1c and the all-cause mortality estimate (slope 0.129 [95% confidence interval -0.043; 0.302]) was observed. However, there was no sign of valid surrogacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of more than 200 randomized trials, HbA1c is not a valid surrogate marker for all-cause mortality in people with type 2 diabetes.

2022 update to the position statement by Primary Care Diabetes Europe: a disease state approach to the pharmacological management of type 2 diabetes in primary care

Type 2 diabetes and its associated comorbidities are growing more prevalent, and the complexity of optimising glycaemic control is increasing, especially on the frontlines of patient care. In many countries, most patients with type 2 diabetes are managed in a primary care setting. However, primary healthcare professionals face the challenge of the growing plethora of available treatment options for managing hyperglycaemia, leading to difficultly in making treatment decisions and contributing to treatment and therapeutic inertia. This position statement offers a simple and patient-centred clinical decision-making model with practical treatment recommendations that can be widely implemented by primary care clinicians worldwide through shared-decision conversations with their patients. It highlights the importance of managing cardiovascular disease and elevated cardiovascular risk in people with type 2 diabetes and aims to provide innovative risk stratification and treatment strategies that connect patients with the most effective care.

Association Between Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist and Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor Use and COVID-19 Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To determine the respective associations of premorbid glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1-RA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) use, compared with premorbid dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor (DPP4i) use, with severity of outcomes in the setting of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We analyzed observational data from SARS-CoV-2-positive adults in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), a multicenter, longitudinal U.S. cohort (January 2018-February 2021), with a prescription for GLP1-RA, SGLT2i, or DPP4i within 24 months of positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. The primary outcome was 60-day mortality, measured from positive SARS-CoV-2 test date. Secondary outcomes were total mortality during the observation period and emergency room visits, hospitalization, and mechanical ventilation within 14 days. Associations were quantified with odds ratios (ORs) estimated with targeted maximum likelihood estimation using a super learner approach, accounting for baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

The study included 12,446 individuals (53.4% female, 62.5% White, mean ± SD age 58.6 ± 13.1 years). The 60-day mortality was 3.11% (387 of 12,446), with 2.06% (138 of 6,692) for GLP1-RA use, 2.32% (85 of 3,665) for SGLT2i use, and 5.67% (199 of 3,511) for DPP4i use. Both GLP1-RA and SGLT2i use were associated with lower 60-day mortality compared with DPP4i use (OR 0.54 [95% CI 0.37-0.80] and 0.66 [0.50-0.86], respectively). Use of both medications was also associated with decreased total mortality, emergency room visits, and hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Among SARS-CoV-2-positive adults, premorbid GLP1-RA and SGLT2i use, compared with DPP4i use, was associated with lower odds of mortality and other adverse outcomes, although DPP4i users were older and generally sicker.