Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon vs Uncoated Balloon for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: The AGENT IDE Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Drug-coated balloons offer a potentially beneficial treatment strategy for the management of coronary in-stent restenosis. However, none have been previously evaluated or approved for use in coronary circulation in the United States.

Objective

To evaluate whether a paclitaxel-coated balloon is superior to an uncoated balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Design, Setting, and Participants

AGENT IDE, a multicenter randomized clinical trial, enrolled 600 patients with in-stent restenosis (lesion length <26 mm and reference vessel diameter >2.0 mm to ≤4.0 mm) at 40 centers across the United States between May 2021 and August 2022. One-year clinical follow-up was completed on October 2, 2023.

Interventions

Participants were randomized in a 2:1 allocation to undergo treatment with a paclitaxel-coated (n = 406) or an uncoated (n = 194) balloon.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point of 1-year target lesion failure-defined as the composite of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or cardiac death-was tested for superiority.

Results

Among 600 randomized patients (mean age, 68 years; 157 females [26.2%]; 42 Black [7%], 35 Hispanic [6%] individuals), 574 (95.7%) completed 1-year follow-up. The primary end point at 1 year occurred in 17.9% in the paclitaxel-coated balloon group vs 28.6% in the uncoated balloon group, meeting the criteria for superiority (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.42-0.84]; 2-sided P = .003). Target lesion revascularization (13.0% vs 24.7%; HR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.34-0.74]; P = .001) and target vessel-related myocardial infarction (5.8% vs 11.1%; HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.28-0.92]; P = .02) occurred less frequently among patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloon. The rate of cardiac death was 2.9% vs 1.6% (HR, 1.75 [95% CI, 0.49-6.28]; P = .38) in the coated vs uncoated balloon groups, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among patients undergoing coronary angioplasty for in-stent restenosis, a paclitaxel-coated balloon was superior to an uncoated balloon with respect to the composite end point of target lesion failure. Paclitaxel-coated balloons are an effective treatment option for patients with coronary in-stent restenosis.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04647253.

Early Utilization of Mechanical Circulatory Support in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: The National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative

BACKGROUND

Acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices increase systemic blood pressure and end organ perfusion while reducing cardiac filling pressures.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative (NCT03677180) is a single-arm, multicenter study. The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of utilizing early MCS with Impella in patients presenting with AMI-CS. The primary end point was in-hospital mortality. A total of 406 patients were enrolled at 80 sites between 2016 and 2020. Average age was 64±12 years, 24% were female, 17% had a witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, 27% had in-hospital cardiac arrest, and 9% were under active cardiopulmonary resuscitation during MCS implantation. Patients presented with a mean systolic blood pressure of 77.2±19.2 mm Hg, 85% of patients were on vasopressors or inotropes, mean lactate was 4.8±3.9 mmol/L and cardiac power output was 0.67±0.29 watts. At 24 hours, mean systolic blood pressure improved to 103.9±17.8 mm Hg, lactate to 2.7±2.8 mmol/L, and cardiac power output to 1.0±1.3 watts. Procedural survival, survival to discharge, survival to 30 days, and survival to 1 year were 99%, 71%, 68%, and 53%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Early use of MCS in AMI-CS is feasible across varying health care settings and resulted in improvements to early hemodynamics and perfusion. Survival rates to hospital discharge were high. Given the encouraging results from our analysis, randomized clinical trials are warranted to assess the role of utilizing early MCS, using a standardized, multidisciplinary approach.

Semaglutide for cardiovascular event reduction in people with overweight or obesity: SELECT study baseline characteristics

OBJECTIVE

This paper describes the baseline characteristics of the Semaglutide Effects on Heart Disease and Stroke in Patients with Overweight or Obesity (SELECT) study, one of the largest cardiovascular (CV) outcome studies in the field of obesity, which evaluates the effect of semaglutide versus placebo on major CV events.

METHODS

SELECT enrolled individuals with overweight or obesity without diabetes, with prior myocardial infarction, stroke, and/or peripheral artery disease. This study reports participants' baseline characteristics in the full study population and subgroups defined by baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c ; <5.7%, ≥5.7 to <6.0%, ≥6.0 to <6.5%), baseline waist to height ratio tertile, and qualifying prior CV event or condition.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 17,605 participants (72.5% male) with an average (SD) age of 61.6 (8.9) years and BMI of 33.34 (5.04) kg/m² . The most common prior CV event was myocardial infarction (76.3% of participants), followed by stroke (23.3%) and peripheral artery disease (8.6%). Furthermore, 24.3% had a heart failure diagnosis. Two-thirds of participants (66%) had HbA_1c in the prediabetes range (5.7%-6.4%). Across groups of increasing HbA_1c , prevalence of all CV risk factors increased.

CONCLUSIONS

The enrolled population in SELECT includes participants across a broad range of relevant risk categories. This will allow the study to garner information about the CV benefits of semaglutide across these relevant clinical subgroups.

Effects of liraglutide on visceral and ectopic fat in adults with overweight and obesity at high cardiovascular risk: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Visceral and ectopic fat are key drivers of adverse cardiometabolic outcomes in obesity. We aimed to evaluate the effects of injectable liraglutide 3·0 mg daily on body fat distribution in adults with overweight or obesity without type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular disease risk.

METHODS

In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 4, single centre trial, we enrolled community-dwelling adults, recruited from the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, with BMI of at least 30 kg/m² or BMI of at least 27 kg/m² with metabolic syndrome but without diabetes and randomly assigned them, in a 1:1 ratio, to 40 weeks of treatment with once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide 3·0 mg or placebo, in addition to a 500 kcal deficient diet and guideline-recommended physical activity counselling. The primary endpoint was percentage reduction in visceral adipose tissue (VAT) measured with MRI. All randomly assigned participants with a follow-up imaging assessment were included in efficacy analyses and all participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analyses. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03038620.

FINDINGS

Between July 20, 2017 and Feb 21, 2020 from 235 participants assessed for eligibility, 185 participants were randomly assigned (n=92 liraglutide, n=93 placebo) and 128 (n=73 liraglutide, n=55 placebo) were included in the final analysis (92% female participants, 37% Black participants, 24% Hispanic participants, mean age 50·2 years (SD 9·4), mean BMI 37·7 kg/m²). Mean change in VAT over median 36·2 weeks was -12·49% (SD 9·3%) with liraglutide compared with -1·63% (SD 12·3%) with placebo, estimated treatment difference -10·86% (95% CI -6·97 to -14·75, p<0·0001). Effects seemed consistent across subgroups of age, sex, race-ethnicity, BMI, and baseline prediabetes. The most frequently reported adverse events were gastrointestinal-related (43 [47%] of 92 with liraglutide and 12 [13%] of 93 with placebo) and upper respiratory tract infections (10 [11%] of 92 with liraglutide and 14 [15%] of 93 with placebo).

INTERPRETATION

In adults with overweight or obesity at high cardiovascular disease risk, once-daily liraglutide 3·0 mg plus lifestyle intervention significantly lowered visceral adipose tissue over 40 weeks of treatment. Visceral fat reduction may be one mechanism to explain the benefits seen on cardiovascular outcomes in previous trials with liraglutide among patients with type 2 diabetes.

FUNDING

NovoNordisk.

Outcomes of retrograde chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention: A report from the OPEN-CTO registry

OBJECTIVES

We sought to assess in-hospital and long-term outcomes of retrograde compared with antegrade-only percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total occlusion (CTO PCI).

BACKGROUND

Procedural and clinical outcomes following retrograde compared with antegrade-only CTO PCI remain unknown.

METHODS

Using the core-lab adjudicated OPEN-CTO registry, we compared the outcomes of retrograde to antegrade-only CTO PCI. Primary endpoints included were in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction [MI], emergency cardiac surgery, or clinically significant perforation) and MACCE at 1-year (all-cause death, MI, stroke, target lesion revascularization, or target vessel reocclusion).

RESULTS

Among 885 single CTO procedures from the OPEN-CTO registry, 454 were retrograde and 431 were antegrade-only. Lesion complexity was higher (J-CTO score: 2.7 vs. 1.9; p < .001) and technical success lower (82.4 vs. 94.2%; p < .001) in retrograde compared with antegrade-only procedures. All-cause death was higher in the retrograde group in-hospital (2 vs. 0%; p = .003), but not at 1-year (4.9 vs. 3.3%; p = .29). Compared with antegrade-only procedures, in-hospital MACCE rates (composite of all-cause death, stroke, MI, emergency cardiac surgery, and clinically significant perforation) were higher in the retrograde group (10.8 vs. 3.3%; p < .001) and at 1-year (19.5 vs. 13.9%; p = .03). In sensitivity analyses landmarked at discharge, there was no difference in MACCE rates at 1 year following retrograde versus antegrade-only CTO PCI. Improvements in Seattle Angina Questionnaire Quality of Life scores at 1-year were similar between the retrograde and antegrade-only groups (29.9 vs 30.4; p = .58).

CONCLUSIONS

In the OPEN-CTO registry, retrograde CTO procedures were associated with higher rates of in-hospital MACCE compared with antegrade-only; however, post-discharge outcomes, including quality of life improvements, were similar between technical modalities.

Effects of Liraglutide on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Diabetes With or Without Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

More data regarding effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and heart failure (HF) are required.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of liraglutide on cardiovascular events and mortality in LEADER (Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results) participants, by HF history.

METHODS

In the multinational, double-blind, randomized LEADER trial, 9,340 patients with T2D and high cardiovascular risk were assigned 1:1 to liraglutide (1.8 mg daily or maximum tolerated dose up to 1.8 mg daily) or placebo plus standard care, and followed for 3.5 to 5 years. New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class IV HF was an exclusion criterion. The primary composite major adverse cardiovascular events outcome was time to first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Post hoc Cox regression analyses of outcomes by baseline HF history were conducted.

RESULTS

At baseline, 18% of patients had a history of NYHA functional class I to III HF (liraglutide: n = 835 of 4,668; placebo: n = 832 of 4,672). Effects of liraglutide versus placebo on major adverse cardiovascular events were consistent in patients with (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.81 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.65 to 1.02]) and without (HR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.78 to 1.00]) a history of HF (p interaction = 0.53). In both subgroups, fewer deaths were observed with liraglutide (HR: 0.89 [95% CI: 0.70 to 1.14] with HF; HR: 0.83 [95% CI: 0.70 to 0.97] without HF; p interaction = 0.63) versus placebo. No increased risk of HF hospitalization was observed with liraglutide, regardless of HF history (HR: 0.98 [95% CI: 0.75 to 1.28] with HF; HR: 0.78 [95% CI: 0.61 to 1.00] without HF; p interaction = 0.22). Effects of liraglutide on the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death were consistent in patients with (HR: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.74 to 1.15]) and without (HR: 0.77 [95% CI: 0.65 to 0.91]) a history of HF (p interaction = 0.19).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on these findings, liraglutide should be considered suitable for patients with T2D with or without a history of NYHA functional class I to III HF. (Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results [LEADER]; NCT01179048).

Risk of severe hypoglycaemia and its impact in type 2 diabetes in DEVOTE

AIMS

To undertake a post-hoc analysis, utilizing a hypoglycaemia risk score based on DEVOTE trial data, to investigate if a high risk of severe hypoglycaemia was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, and whether reduced rates of severe hypoglycaemia in patients identified as having the highest risk affected the risk of cardiovascular outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The DEVOTE population was divided into quartiles according to patients' individual hypoglycaemia risk scores. For each quartile, the observed incidence and rate of severe hypoglycaemia, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) and all-cause mortality were determined to investigate whether those with the highest risk of hypoglycaemia were also at the greatest risk of MACE and all-cause mortality. In addition, treatment differences within each risk quartile [insulin degludec (degludec) vs. insulin glargine 100 units/mL (glargine U100)] in terms of severe hypoglycaemia, MACE and all-cause mortality were investigated.

RESULTS

Patients with the highest risk scores had the highest rates of severe hypoglycaemia, MACE and all-cause mortality. Treatment ratios between degludec and glargine U100 in the highest risk quartile were 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 (0.39; 0.80) (severe hypoglycaemia), 95% CI 0.76 (0.58; 0.99) (MACE) and 95% CI 0.77 (0.55; 1.07) (all-cause mortality).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk score demonstrated that a high risk of severe hypoglycaemia was associated with a high incidence of MACE and all-cause mortality and that, in this high-risk group, those treated with degludec had a lower incidence of MACE. These observations support the hypothesis that hypoglycaemia is a risk factor for cardiovascular events.

Development of a hypoglycaemia risk score to identify high-risk individuals with advanced type 2 diabetes in DEVOTE

AIMS

The ability to differentiate patient populations with type 2 diabetes at high risk of severe hypoglycaemia could impact clinical decision making. The aim of this study was to develop a risk score, using patient characteristics, that could differentiate between populations with higher and lower 2-year risk of severe hypoglycaemia among individuals at increased risk of cardiovascular disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two models were developed for the risk score based on data from the DEVOTE cardiovascular outcomes trials. The first, a data-driven machine-learning model, used stepwise regression with bidirectional elimination to identify risk factors for severe hypoglycaemia. The second, a risk score based on known clinical risk factors accessible in clinical practice identified from the data-driven model, included: insulin treatment regimen; diabetes duration; sex; age; and glycated haemoglobin, all at baseline. Both the data-driven model and simple risk score were evaluated for discrimination, calibration and generalizability using data from DEVOTE, and were validated against the external LEADER cardiovascular outcomes trial dataset.

RESULTS

Both the data-driven model and the simple risk score discriminated between patients at higher and lower hypoglycaemia risk, and performed similarly well based on the time-dependent area under the curve index (0.63 and 0.66, respectively) over a 2-year time horizon.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the data-driven model and the simple hypoglycaemia risk score were able to discriminate between patients at higher and lower risk of severe hypoglycaemia, the latter doing so using easily accessible clinical data. The implementation of such a tool (http://www.hyporiskscore.com/) may facilitate improved recognition of, and education about, severe hypoglycaemia risk, potentially improving patient care.

Effects of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide on kidney function and safety in patients with type 2 diabetes: a post-hoc analysis of the SUSTAIN 1-7 randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Patients with type 2 diabetes have a high risk of developing chronic kidney disease. We examined the effects of semaglutide on kidney function and safety in a large, broad type 2 diabetes population.

METHODS

We did a post-hoc analysis of 8416 patients with type 2 diabetes enrolled in the SUSTAIN 1-5 and SUSTAIN 7 randomised controlled trials, and the SUSTAIN 6 cardiovascular outcomes trial, to examine the effects of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 0·5 mg and 1·0 mg versus comparators (active treatments or placebo) on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR), and kidney adverse events. Data from SUSTAIN 1-5 and SUSTAIN 7 were pooled. eGFR and UACR were also analysed by kidney function and albuminuria status.

FINDINGS

In SUSTAIN 1-5 and SUSTAIN 7, eGFR decreased from baseline to week 12 with all active treatments; estimated treatment differences (ETDs) versus placebo were -2·15 (95% CI -3·47 to -0·83) mL/min per 1·73 m² with semaglutide 0·5 mg and -3·00 (-4·31 to -1·68) mL/min per 1·73 m² with semaglutide 1·0 mg; after week 12, eGFR plateaued. In SUSTAIN 1-5 and SUSTAIN 7, from baseline to end of treatment the decline in eGFR was greater with semaglutide than with placebo (ETD -1·58 [95% CI -2·92 to -0·25] mL/min per 1·73 m² with semaglutide 0·5 mg and -2·02 [-3·35 to -0·68] mL/min per 1·73 m² with semaglutide 1·0 mg). In SUSTAIN 6, the decline in eGFR was greater with semaglutide than with placebo from baseline to week 16 (ETD -1·29 [95% CI -2·07 to -0·51] mL/min per 1·73 m² with semaglutide 0·5 mg and -1·56 [-2·33 to -0·78] mL/min per 1·73 m² with semaglutide 1·0 mg), but not from week 16 to week 104 (1·29 [0·30 to 2·28] mL/min per 1·73 m² with semaglutide 0·5 mg and 2·44 [1·45 to 3·44] mL/min per 1·73 m² with semaglutide 1·0 mg). Overall (ie, from baseline to week 104), the eGFR decline in SUSTAIN 6 was similar between semaglutide and placebo (ETD 0·07 [95% CI -0·92 to 1·07] mL/min per 1·73 m² with semaglutide 0·5 mg and 0·97 [-0·03 to 1·97] mL/min per 1·73 m² with semaglutide 1·0 mg). In SUSTAIN 1-5, UACR ratios at end of treatment to baseline were 0·917 with semaglutide 0·5 mg, 0·836 with semaglutide 1·0 mg, and 1·239 with placebo; at end of treatment, greater reductions in UACR were observed with semaglutide versus placebo (estimated treatment ratios 0·74 [95% CI 0·64 to 0·85] for semaglutide 0·5 mg and 0·68 [0·59 to 0·78] for semaglutide 1·0 mg). In SUSTAIN 6, UACR ratios at end of treatment (week 104) to baseline were 0·973 with semaglutide 0·5 mg, 0·858 with semaglutide 1·0 mg, and 1·302 with placebo; at week 104, greater reductions in UACR were observed with semaglutide versus placebo (estimated treatment ratios 0·75 [95% CI 0·66 to 0·85] for semaglutide 0·5 mg and 0·66 [0·58 to 0·75] for semaglutide 1·0 mg). In SUSTAIN 1-7, eGFR initially declined in patients with normal kidney function (and in those with mild kidney impairment with semaglutide 1·0 mg in SUSTAIN 6), but overall (ie, by week 30 for SUSTAIN 1-5 and SUSTAIN 7, and week 104 for SUSTAIN 6), eGFR did not differ between semaglutide and placebo. In SUSTAIN 1-6, UACR decreased in patients with pre-existing microalbuminuria or macroalbuminuria at baseline; it did not change or increased in those with normoalbuminuria at baseline. Kidney adverse events were balanced between treatment groups.

INTERPRETATION

Across the SUSTAIN 1-7 trials, semaglutide was associated with initial reductions in eGFR that plateaued, and marked reductions in UACR. This post-hoc analysis suggests no increase in the risk of kidney adverse events with semaglutide versus the active comparators used across SUSTAIN 1-7.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

Management of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Complications: Algorithms From the 2018 and 2019 Seattle Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Complications Conference

Complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may have significant impact on patient survival and healthcare costs. PCI procedural complexity and patient risk are increasing, and operators must be prepared to recognize and treat complications, such as perforations, dissections, hemodynamic collapse, no-reflow, and entrapped equipment. Unfortunately, few resources exist to train operators in PCI complication management. Uncertainty regarding complication management could contribute to the undertreatment of patients with high-complexity coronary disease. We, therefore, coordinated the Learning From Complications: How to Be a Better Interventionalist courses to disseminate the collective experience of high-volume PCI operators with extensive experience in chronic total occlusion and high-risk PCI. From these conferences in 2018 and 2019, we developed algorithms that emphasize early recognition, effective treatment, and team-based care of PCI complications. We think that an algorithmic approach will result in a logical and systematic response to life-threatening complications. This construct may be useful for operators who plan to perform complex PCI procedures.

Effects of Liraglutide on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus With or Without History of Myocardial Infarction or Stroke

BACKGROUND

The glucagon-like peptide-1 analog liraglutide reduced cardiovascular events and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the LEADER trial (Liraglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes). In a post hoc analysis, we evaluated the efficacy of liraglutide in those with and without a history of myocardial infarction (MI) and/or stroke.

METHODS

LEADER was a randomized trial of liraglutide (1.8 mg or maximum tolerated dose) versus placebo in 9340 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and high cardiovascular risk, with a median follow-up of 3.8 years. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, or nonfatal stroke (major adverse cardiovascular events). Risk groups in this post hoc analysis were defined by history of MI/stroke, established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease without MI/stroke, or cardiovascular risk factors alone.

RESULTS

Of the 9340 patients, 3692 (39.5%) had a history of MI/stroke, 3083 (33.0%) had established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease without MI/stroke, and 2565 (27.5%) had risk factors alone. Major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 18.8% of patients with a history of MI/stroke (incidence rate, 5.0 per 100 patient-years), 11.6% of patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease without MI/stroke (incidence rate, 3.0 per 100 patient-years), and 9.8% of patients with cardiovascular risk factors alone (incidence rate, 2.6 per 100 patient-years). Liraglutide reduced major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with a history of MI/stroke (322 of 1865 [17.3%] versus 372 of 1827 patients [20.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.99) and in those with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease without MI/stroke (158 of 1538 [10.3%] versus 199 of 1545 patients [12.9%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.94) compared with placebo. In patients with risk factors alone, the hazard ratio for liraglutide versus placebo was 1.08 (95% CI, 0.84-1.38, P_interaction=0.11). Similar results were seen for secondary outcomes across risk groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this post hoc analysis of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and high cardiovascular risk, liraglutide reduced cardiovascular outcomes both in patients with a history of MI/stroke and in those with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease without MI/stroke. The cardiovascular effect appeared neutral in patients with cardiovascular risk factors alone.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01179048.

Long-term Cost-effectiveness of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine U100 in the UK: Evidence from the Basal-bolus Subgroup of the DEVOTE Trial (DEVOTE 16)

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec (degludec) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (glargine U100) in basal-bolus regimens for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) at high cardiovascular (CV) risk based on the DEVOTE CV outcomes trial.

METHODS

A microsimulation model, informed by clinical outcomes from the subgroup of patients using basal-bolus insulin therapy in DEVOTE (NCT01959529) and by the UKPDS Outcomes Model 2 risk equations, was used to model direct costs (2018 GBP) and effectiveness outcomes [quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)] with degludec versus glargine U100 over a 40-year time horizon. The model captured the development of eight diabetes-related complications, death, severe hypoglycemia and insulin dosing. This analysis was conducted from the perspective of National Health Service (NHS) England.

RESULTS

Treatment with degludec versus glargine U100 in basal-bolus regimens was associated with improved clinical outcomes at a higher cost per patient [incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER): £14,956 GBP/QALY]. Degludec remained cost effective versus glargine U100 in all exploratory sensitivity analyses, with ICERs below the widely accepted willingness-to-pay threshold, although the result was most sensitive to assumptions regarding the persistence of treatment effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Our long-term modeling analysis suggested that degludec was cost effective (from the perspective of NHS England) versus glargine U100 in basal-bolus regimens for patients with T2D at high CV risk. Our findings raise important questions regarding how to model the health economics of diabetes therapies.

Cardiovascular safety and lower severe hypoglycaemia of insulin degludec versus insulin glargine U100 in patients with type 2 diabetes aged 65 years or older: Results from DEVOTE (DEVOTE 7)

AIMS

The aim of this study was to describe the risks of cardiovascular (CV) events and severe hypoglycaemia with insulin degludec (degludec) vs insulin glargine 100 units/mL (glargine U100) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) aged 65 years or older.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 7637 patients in the DEVOTE trial, a treat-to-target, randomized, double-blind trial evaluating the CV safety of degludec vs glargine U100, were divided into three age groups (50-64 years, n = 3682; 65-74 years, n = 3136; ≥75 years, n = 819). Outcomes by overall age group and randomized treatment differences were analysed for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause mortality, severe hypoglycaemia and serious adverse events (SAEs).

RESULTS

Patients with increasing age had higher risks of CV death, all-cause mortality and SAEs, and there were non-significant trends towards higher risks of MACE and severe hypoglycaemia. Treatment effects on the risk of MACE, all-cause mortality, severe hypoglycaemia and SAEs were consistent across age groups, based on the non-significant interactions between treatment and age with regard to these outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

There were higher risks of CV death, all-cause mortality and SAEs, and trends towards higher risks of MACE and severe hypoglycaemia with increasing age after adjusting for baseline differences. The effects across age groups of degludec vs glargine U100 on MACE, all-cause mortality and severe hypoglycaemia were comparable, suggesting that the risk of MACE, as well as all-cause mortality, is similar and the risk of severe hypoglycaemia is lower with degludec regardless of age. Evidence is conclusive only until 74 years of age.

Cardiovascular outcomes in patients who experienced a myocardial infarction while treated with liraglutide versus placebo in the LEADER trial

OBJECTIVE

Animal studies demonstrated that glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists reduce myocardial necrosis following regional ischaemia induction. This effect may improve cardiovascular outcomes after myocardial infarction. Risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure after myocardial infarction was evaluated in patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk in the LEADER trial.

METHODS

Data from patients randomised to liraglutide or placebo, in addition to standard of care, in Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results (LEADER) (NCT01179048) were analysed post hoc. Cox regression, with myocardial infarction as a time-dependent covariate, was used to analyse time from randomisation to a composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure.

RESULTS

Patients who experienced myocardial infarction had a sevenfold higher risk of the composite endpoint (with myocardial infarction: n = 148, 25.0%; without myocardial infarction: n = 716, 8.2%; hazard ratio: 7.0; 95% confidence interval: 5.8, 8.4). The risk of the composite endpoint after myocardial infarction was not significantly lower in the liraglutide group ( n = 63, 23.0%) compared with placebo ( n = 85, 26.7%; hazard ratio: 0.91; 95% confidence interval: 0.66, 1.26).

CONCLUSION

The data demonstrated that having myocardial infarction significantly increased the risk of subsequent cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure. However, we did not find evidence for a reduced risk in these cardiovascular outcomes following myocardial infarction in patients treated with liraglutide versus placebo.

Hypoglycemia, Cardiovascular Outcomes, and Death: The LEADER Experience

OBJECTIVE

In the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results (LEADER) cardiovascular (CV) outcomes trial (NCT01179048), liraglutide significantly reduced the risk of CV events (by 13%) and hypoglycemia versus placebo. This post hoc analysis examines the associations between hypoglycemia and CV outcomes and death.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Patients with type 2 diabetes and high risk for CV disease (n = 9,340) were randomized 1:1 to liraglutide or placebo, both in addition to standard treatment, and followed for 3.5-5 years. The primary end point was time to first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (1,302 first events recorded), and secondary end points included incidence of hypoglycemia. We used Cox regression to analyze time to first MACE, CV death, non-CV death, or all-cause death with hypoglycemia as a factor or time-dependent covariate.

RESULTS

A total of 267 patients experienced severe hypoglycemia (liraglutide n = 114, placebo n = 153; rate ratio 0.69; 95% CI 0.51, 0.93). These patients had longer diabetes duration, higher incidence of heart failure and kidney disease, and used insulin more frequently at baseline than those without severe hypoglycemia. In combined analysis (liraglutide and placebo), patients with severe hypoglycemia were more likely to experience MACE, CV death, and all-cause death, with higher risk shortly after hypoglycemia. The impact of liraglutide on risk of MACE was similar in patients with and without severe hypoglycemia (P-interaction = 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients experiencing severe hypoglycemia were at greater risk of CV events and death, particularly shortly after the hypoglycemic episode. While causality remains unclear, reducing hypoglycemia remains an important goal in diabetes management.

DEVOTE 5: Evaluating the Short-Term Cost-Utility of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine U100 in Basal-Bolus Regimens for Type 2 Diabetes in the UK

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term cost-utility of insulin degludec (degludec) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (glargine U100) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in the basal-bolus subgroup of the head-to-head cardiovascular (CV) outcome trial, DEVOTE.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis was conducted over a 2-year time horizon using a decision analytic model to compare costs in patients receiving once daily degludec or glargine U100, both as part of a basal-bolus regimen, in addition to standard care. Clinical outcomes and patient characteristics were taken exclusively from DEVOTE, whilst health-related quality of life utilities and UK-specific costs (expressed in 2016 GBP) were obtained from the literature. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the National Health Service.

RESULTS

Degludec was associated with mean cost savings of GBP 28.78 per patient relative to glargine U100 in patients with type 2 diabetes at high CV risk. Cost savings were driven by the reduction in risk of diabetes-related complications with degludec, which offset the higher treatment costs relative to glargine U100. Degludec was associated with a mean improvement of 0.0064 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with glargine U100, with improvements driven predominantly by lower rates of severe hypoglycemia with degludec versus glargine U100. Improvements in quality-adjusted life expectancy combined with cost neutrality resulted in degludec being dominant over glargine U100. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the incremental cost-utility ratio was stable to variations in the majority of model inputs.

CONCLUSION

The present short-term modeling analysis found that for the basal-bolus subgroup of patients in DEVOTE, with a high risk of CV events, degludec was cost neutral (no additional costs) compared with glargine U100 over a 2-year time horizon in the UK setting. Furthermore, there were QALY gains with degludec, particularly due to the reduction in the risk of severe hypoglycemia.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk A/S.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01959529.

Changes in Heart Rate Associated with Exenatide Once Weekly: Pooled Analysis of Clinical Data in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) improve glycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes, but heart rate increases have been observed.

METHODS

A pooled post hoc analysis of 11 randomized clinical trials (N = 4595) of 10-30 weeks' duration from the exenatide once-weekly (QW) development program evaluated heart rate with exenatide QW (intervention group) and exenatide twice daily (BID), liraglutide, and non-GLP-1RAs (insulin, metformin, pioglitazone, and sitagliptin) (comparison groups). The time course and size of heart rate changes from baseline and the relationship of heart rate change with baseline heart rate were studied. A multivariate analysis (9 studies; N = 3903) examined associations between patient characteristics or treatments and heart rate increases.

RESULTS

Mean baseline heart rate ± standard deviation was 75.0 ± 8.5 beats per minute (bpm) with exenatide QW (n = 2096), 75.8 ± 8.7 bpm with exenatide BID (n = 606), 75.2 ± 8.9 bpm with liraglutide (n = 450), and 74.5 ± 8.6 bpm with non-GLP-1RAs (n = 1443). Least-squares mean ± standard error changes from baseline to final heart rate were + 2.7 ± 0.2, + 1.0 ± 0.3, and + 3.0 ± 0.4 bpm with exenatide QW, exenatide BID, and liraglutide, respectively, and - 0.8 ± 0.2 bpm with non-GLP-1RAs. The size and direction of heart rate changes in individual patients varied within each treatment group at all time points. At posttreatment follow-up, heart rate reverted to the baseline level after GLP-1RA discontinuation. Heart rate changes correlated negatively with baseline heart rate for all therapies (r = - 0.3 to - 0.4). Baseline heart rate was the strongest predictor of increased heart rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Small increases in heart rate were associated with exenatide QW, exenatide BID, and liraglutide treatments but reverted to baseline after discontinuation. Increases were more likely in patients with a low baseline heart rate. The clinical relevance of these heart rate increases is unknown but will be clarified by several ongoing and recently completed cardiovascular outcome studies.

DEVOTE 3: temporal relationships between severe hypoglycaemia, cardiovascular outcomes and mortality

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

The double-blind Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Insulin Degludec vs Insulin Glargine in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes at High Risk of Cardiovascular Events (DEVOTE) assessed the cardiovascular safety of insulin degludec. The incidence and rates of adjudicated severe hypoglycaemia, and all-cause mortality were also determined. This paper reports a secondary analysis investigating associations of severe hypoglycaemia with cardiovascular outcomes and mortality.

METHODS

In DEVOTE, patients with type 2 diabetes were randomised to receive either insulin degludec or insulin glargine U100 (100 units/ml) once daily (between dinner and bedtime) in an event-driven, double-blind, treat-to-target cardiovascular outcomes trial. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of an adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke). Adjudicated severe hypoglycaemia was the pre-specified secondary outcome. In the present analysis, the associations of severe hypoglycaemia with both MACE and all-cause mortality was evaluated in the pooled trial population using time-to-event analyses, with severe hypoglycaemia as a time-dependent variable and randomised treatment as a fixed factor. An investigation with interaction terms indicated that the effect of severe hypoglycaemia on the risk of MACE and all-cause mortality were the same for both treatment arms, and so the temporal association for severe hypoglycaemia with subsequent MACE and all-cause mortality is reported for the pooled population.

RESULTS

There was a non-significant difference in the risk of MACE for individuals who had vs those who had not experienced severe hypoglycaemia during the trial (HR 1.38, 95% CI 0.96, 1.96; p = 0.080) and therefore there was no temporal relationship between severe hypoglycaemia and MACE. There was a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality for patients who had vs those who had not experienced severe hypoglycaemia during the trial (HR 2.51, 95% CI 1.79, 3.50; p < 0.001). There was a higher risk of all-cause mortality 15, 30, 60, 90, 180 and 365 days after experiencing severe hypoglycaemia compared with not experiencing severe hypoglycaemia in the same time interval. The association between severe hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality was maintained after adjustment for the following baseline characteristics: age, sex, HbA1c, BMI, diabetes duration, insulin regimen, hepatic impairment, renal status and cardiovascular risk group.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

The results from these analyses demonstrate an association between severe hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality. Furthermore, they indicate that patients who experienced severe hypoglycaemia were particularly at greater risk of death in the short term after the hypoglycaemic episode. These findings indicate that severe hypoglycaemia is associated with higher subsequent mortality; however, they cannot answer the question as to whether severe hypoglycaemia serves as a risk marker for adverse outcomes or whether there is a direct causal effect.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01959529.

Day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability in DEVOTE: associations with severe hypoglycaemia and cardiovascular outcomes (DEVOTE 2)

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

The Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Insulin Degludec vs Insulin Glargine in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes at High Risk of Cardiovascular Events (DEVOTE) was a double-blind, randomised, event-driven, treat-to-target prospective trial comparing the cardiovascular safety of insulin degludec with that of insulin glargine U100 (100 units/ml) in patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk of cardiovascular events. This paper reports a secondary analysis investigating associations of day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability (pre-breakfast self-measured blood glucose [SMBG]) with severe hypoglycaemia and cardiovascular outcomes.

METHODS

In DEVOTE, patients with type 2 diabetes were randomised to receive insulin degludec or insulin glargine U100 once daily. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of an adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). Adjudicated severe hypoglycaemia was the pre-specified secondary outcome. In this article, day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability was based on the standard deviation of the pre-breakfast SMBG measurements. The variability measure was calculated as follows. Each month, only the three pre-breakfast SMBG measurements recorded before contact with the site were used to determine a day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability measure for each patient. For each patient, the variance of the three log-transformed pre-breakfast SMBG measurements each month was determined. The standard deviation was determined as the square root of the mean of these monthly variances and was defined as day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability. The associations between day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability and severe hypoglycaemia, MACE and all-cause mortality were analysed for the pooled trial population with Cox proportional hazards models. Several sensitivity analyses were conducted, including adjustments for baseline characteristics and most recent HbA_1c.

RESULTS

Day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability was significantly associated with severe hypoglycaemia (HR 4.11, 95% CI 3.15, 5.35), MACE (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.12, 1.65) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.23, 2.03) before adjustments. The increased risks of severe hypoglycaemia, MACE and all-cause mortality translate into 2.7-, 1.2- and 1.4-fold risk, respectively, when a patient's day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability measure is doubled. The significant relationships of day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability with severe hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality were maintained after adjustments. However, the significant association with MACE was not maintained following adjustment for baseline characteristics with either baseline HbA_1c (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.96, 1.47) or the most recent HbA_1c measurement throughout the trial (HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.98, 1.49).

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Higher day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability is associated with increased risks of severe hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01959529.

Effects of Once-Weekly Exenatide on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

The cardiovascular effects of adding once-weekly treatment with exenatide to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes are unknown.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes, with or without previous cardiovascular disease, to receive subcutaneous injections of extended-release exenatide at a dose of 2 mg or matching placebo once weekly. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The coprimary hypotheses were that exenatide, administered once weekly, would be noninferior to placebo with respect to safety and superior to placebo with respect to efficacy.

RESULTS

In all, 14,752 patients (of whom 10,782 [73.1%] had previous cardiovascular disease) were followed for a median of 3.2 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.4). A primary composite outcome event occurred in 839 of 7356 patients (11.4%; 3.7 events per 100 person-years) in the exenatide group and in 905 of 7396 patients (12.2%; 4.0 events per 100 person-years) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.00), with the intention-to-treat analysis indicating that exenatide, administered once weekly, was noninferior to placebo with respect to safety (P<0.001 for noninferiority) but was not superior to placebo with respect to efficacy (P=0.06 for superiority). The rates of death from cardiovascular causes, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, and hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, and the incidence of acute pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, medullary thyroid carcinoma, and serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with type 2 diabetes with or without previous cardiovascular disease, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between patients who received exenatide and those who received placebo. (Funded by Amylin Pharmaceuticals; EXSCEL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01144338 .).

Comparative Efficacy of Endovascular Revascularization Versus Supervised Exercise Training in Patients With Intermittent Claudication: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

The authors performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the efficacy of initial endovascular treatment with or without supervised exercise training (SET) versus SET alone in patients with intermittent claudication.

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend SET as the initial treatment modality for patients with intermittent claudication, in addition to optimal medical therapy. The role of endovascular therapy as primary treatment for claudication has been controversial.

METHODS

The primary outcome was treadmill-measured maximal walk distance at the end of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included resting ankle brachial index (ABI) and treadmill-measured ischemic claudication distance on follow-up. Risk of revascularization or amputations was also compared. Pooled estimates of the difference in outcomes between endovascular therapy with or without SET and SET-only groups were calculated using fixed and random effects models.

RESULTS

A total of 987 patients from 7 trials were included. In pooled analysis, compared with SET only (reference group), patients that underwent combined endovascular therapy and SET had significantly higher maximum walk distance (standardized mean difference 0.79 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.18 to 1.39]; weighted mean difference 98.9 [95% CI: 31.4 to 166.4 feet], and lower risk of revascularization or amputation (odds ratio 0.19 [95% CI: (0.09 to 0.40]; p < 0.0001, number needed to treat = 8) over a median follow-up of 12.4 months. By contrast, revascularization was not associated with significant improvement in exercise capacity or risk of future revascularization or amputation, compared with SET alone. Follow-up ABI was significantly higher among patients that underwent endovascular therapy with or without SET as compared with SET alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with initial SET only, endovascular therapy in combination with SET is associated with significant improvement in total walking distance, ABI, and risk of future revascularization or amputation. By contrast, endovascular therapy-only was not associated with any improvement in functional capacity or clinical outcomes over an intermediate duration of follow-up.

Liraglutide and Renal Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

In a randomized, controlled trial that compared liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, with placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk who were receiving usual care, we found that liraglutide resulted in lower risks of the primary end point (nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes) and death. However, the long-term effects of liraglutide on renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes are unknown.

METHODS

We report the prespecified secondary renal outcomes of that randomized, controlled trial in which patients were assigned to receive liraglutide or placebo. The secondary renal outcome was a composite of new-onset persistent macroalbuminuria, persistent doubling of the serum creatinine level, end-stage renal disease, or death due to renal disease. The risk of renal outcomes was determined with the use of time-to-event analyses with an intention-to-treat approach. Changes in the estimated glomerular filtration rate and albuminuria were also analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9340 patients underwent randomization, and the median follow-up of the patients was 3.84 years. The renal outcome occurred in fewer participants in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group (268 of 4668 patients vs. 337 of 4672; hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67 to 0.92; P=0.003). This result was driven primarily by the new onset of persistent macroalbuminuria, which occurred in fewer participants in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group (161 vs. 215 patients; hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.91; P=0.004). The rates of renal adverse events were similar in the liraglutide group and the placebo group (15.1 events and 16.5 events per 1000 patient-years), including the rate of acute kidney injury (7.1 and 6.2 events per 1000 patient-years, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This prespecified secondary analysis shows that, when added to usual care, liraglutide resulted in lower rates of the development and progression of diabetic kidney disease than placebo. (Funded by Novo Nordisk and the National Institutes of Health; LEADER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01179048 .).

Efficacy and Safety of Degludec versus Glargine in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Degludec is an ultralong-acting, once-daily basal insulin that is approved for use in adults, adolescents, and children with diabetes. Previous open-label studies have shown lower day-to-day variability in the glucose-lowering effect and lower rates of hypoglycemia among patients who received degludec than among those who received basal insulin glargine. However, data are lacking on the cardiovascular safety of degludec.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 7637 patients with type 2 diabetes to receive either insulin degludec (3818 patients) or insulin glargine U100 (3819 patients) once daily between dinner and bedtime in a double-blind, treat-to-target, event-driven cardiovascular outcomes trial. The primary composite outcome in the time-to-event analysis was the first occurrence of an adjudicated major cardiovascular event (death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) with a prespecified noninferiority margin of 1.3. Adjudicated severe hypoglycemia, as defined by the American Diabetes Association, was the prespecified, multiplicity-adjusted secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Of the patients who underwent randomization, 6509 (85.2%) had established cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, or both. At baseline, the mean age was 65.0 years, the mean duration of diabetes was 16.4 years, and the mean (±SD) glycated hemoglobin level was 8.4±1.7%; 83.9% of the patients were receiving insulin. The primary outcome occurred in 325 patients (8.5%) in the degludec group and in 356 (9.3%) in the glargine group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.06; P<0.001 for noninferiority). At 24 months, the mean glycated hemoglobin level was 7.5±1.2% in each group, whereas the mean fasting plasma glucose level was significantly lower in the degludec group than in the glargine group (128±56 vs. 136±57 mg per deciliter, P<0.001). Prespecified adjudicated severe hypoglycemia occurred in 187 patients (4.9%) in the degludec group and in 252 (6.6%) in the glargine group, for an absolute difference of 1.7 percentage points (rate ratio, 0.60; P<0.001 for superiority; odds ratio, 0.73; P<0.001 for superiority). Rates of adverse events did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events, degludec was noninferior to glargine with respect to the incidence of major cardiovascular events. (Funded by Novo Nordisk and others; DEVOTE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01959529 .).

Liraglutide for weight management: a critical review of the evidence

Objective

To review the efficacy, safety, and clinical applicability of liraglutide for weight management from phase III clinical trials.

Methods

A search of the English language literature was performed using PubMed search terms: “liraglutide”, “glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist”, and “randomized clinical trial”. Articles and bibliographies relevant to the subject were reviewed and additional references known to the authors were included.

Results

Five randomized, placebo‐controlled trials of liraglutide for weight management were identified. In addition to recommended diet and physical activity, liraglutide consistently resulted in a 4 to 6 kg weight loss, with a greater proportion of patients achieving at least 5 and 10% weight loss compared with placebo. The most common adverse effects were gastrointestinal and primarily occurred early in the treatment course. Comparative data suggest that weight loss with liraglutide is greater than that seen with orlistat or lorcaserin, but slightly less that seen with phentermine/topiramate. Liraglutide 1.8 mg was recently shown to have cardiovascular benefit in a large outcomes trial; applicability of these results for the 3.0 mg formulation in a more diverse weight loss population at high cardiovascular risk is not currently known. Barriers to real‐world clinical use as a first‐line agent include gastrointestinal side effects, high cost, and need for injection.

Conclusions

Liraglutide helps to induce and sustain weight loss in patients with obesity. Its efficacy is comparable to other available agents but it offers the unique benefit of improved glycemic control. Additional studies are needed to determine its long term efficacy and safety profile.

Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Regulatory guidance specifies the need to establish cardiovascular safety of new diabetes therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes in order to rule out excess cardiovascular risk. The cardiovascular effects of semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue with an extended half-life of approximately 1 week, in type 2 diabetes are unknown.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 3297 patients with type 2 diabetes who were on a standard-care regimen to receive once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 mg or 1.0 mg) or placebo for 104 weeks. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. We hypothesized that semaglutide would be noninferior to placebo for the primary outcome. The noninferiority margin was 1.8 for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio.

RESULTS

At baseline, 2735 of the patients (83.0%) had established cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, or both. The primary outcome occurred in 108 of 1648 patients (6.6%) in the semaglutide group and in 146 of 1649 patients (8.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.95; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred in 2.9% of the patients receiving semaglutide and in 3.9% of those receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08; P=0.12); nonfatal stroke occurred in 1.6% and 2.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.99; P=0.04). Rates of death from cardiovascular causes were similar in the two groups. Rates of new or worsening nephropathy were lower in the semaglutide group, but rates of retinopathy complications (vitreous hemorrhage, blindness, or conditions requiring treatment with an intravitreal agent or photocoagulation) were significantly higher (hazard ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.11 to 2.78; P=0.02). Fewer serious adverse events occurred in the semaglutide group, although more patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 2 diabetes who were at high cardiovascular risk, the rate of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke was significantly lower among patients receiving semaglutide than among those receiving placebo, an outcome that confirmed the noninferiority of semaglutide. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; SUSTAIN-6 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01720446 .).

Design of DEVOTE (Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Insulin Degludec vs Insulin Glargine in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes at High Risk of Cardiovascular Events) - DEVOTE 1

DEVOTE was designed to evaluate the cardiovascular safety of insulin degludec (IDeg) vs insulin glargine U100 (IGlar) in patients with T2D at high risk of cardiovascular events. DEVOTE is a phase 3b, multicenter, international, randomized, double-blind, active comparator-controlled trial, designed as an event-driven trial that would continue until 633 positively adjudicated primary events were accrued. The primary end point was the time from randomization to a composite outcome consisting of the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Patients with T2D at high risk of cardiovascular complications were randomized 1:1 to receive either IDeg or IGlar, each added to background therapies. This trial was designed to demonstrate statistical noninferiority of IDeg vs IGlar for the primary end point. DEVOTE enrolled 7,637 patients between October 2013 and November 2014 at 436 sites in 20 countries. Of these, 6,506 patients had prior cardiovascular disease or chronic kidney disease, and the remainder had multiple cardiovascular risk factors. DEVOTE was designed to provide conclusive evidence regarding the cardiovascular safety of IDeg relative to IGlar in a high-risk population of patients with T2D.

Review: The pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is increasing in prevalence, and is a potent risk factor for the development of atherosclerotic vascular disease and increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events. Approximately 15—25% of patients presenting with ischaemic heart disease have a history of diabetes mellitus. This cohort of patients continues to be at heightened short and long-term risk. This review highlights the many proposed biological drivers that likely play a deterministic role in the cardiovascular outcome of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Liraglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

The cardiovascular effect of liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, when added to standard care in patients with type 2 diabetes, remains unknown.

METHODS

In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk to receive liraglutide or placebo. The primary composite outcome in the time-to-event analysis was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The primary hypothesis was that liraglutide would be noninferior to placebo with regard to the primary outcome, with a margin of 1.30 for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio. No adjustments for multiplicity were performed for the prespecified exploratory outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 9340 patients underwent randomization. The median follow-up was 3.8 years. The primary outcome occurred in significantly fewer patients in the liraglutide group (608 of 4668 patients [13.0%]) than in the placebo group (694 of 4672 [14.9%]) (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 0.97; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.01 for superiority). Fewer patients died from cardiovascular causes in the liraglutide group (219 patients [4.7%]) than in the placebo group (278 [6.0%]) (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.93; P=0.007). The rate of death from any cause was lower in the liraglutide group (381 patients [8.2%]) than in the placebo group (447 [9.6%]) (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.97; P=0.02). The rates of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure were nonsignificantly lower in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group. The most common adverse events leading to the discontinuation of liraglutide were gastrointestinal events. The incidence of pancreatitis was nonsignificantly lower in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

In the time-to-event analysis, the rate of the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus was lower with liraglutide than with placebo. (Funded by Novo Nordisk and the National Institutes of Health; LEADER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01179048.).

Impact of TCFA on Unanticipated Ischemic Events in Medically Treated Diabetes Mellitus: Insights From the PROSPECT Study

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to investigate the relationship between thin-cap fibroatheromas (TCFAs) on major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) arising from medically treated nonculprit lesions (NCLs) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) with and without diabetes mellitus (DM).

BACKGROUND

MACEs occur frequently in patients with DM and ACS. The impact of plaque composition on subsequent MACEs in DM patients with ACS is unknown.

METHODS

In the PROSPECT (Providing Regional Observations Study Predictors of Events in the Coronary Tree) study, using 3-vessel radiofrequency intravascular ultrasound, we analyzed the incidence of NCL-MACE in 2 propensity-matched groups according to the presence of DM and TCFA.

RESULTS

Among 697 patients, 119 (17.7%) had DM. The 3-year total MACE rate (29.4% vs. 18.8%; p = 0.01) was significantly higher in patients with versus without DM, driven by a higher rate of NCL-MACE in DM (18.7% vs. 10.4%; p = 0.02). Propensity score matching generated 2 balanced groups with and without DM of 82 patients each. Among DM patients, the presence of ≥1 TCFA was associated with higher NCL-MACE at 3 years (27.8% vs. 8.9% in patients without a TCFA, hazard ratio: 3.56; 95% confidence interval: 0.98 to 12.96; p = 0.04). DM patients without a TCFA had a similar 3-year rate of NCL-MACE as patients without DM (8.9% vs. 8.9%; hazard ratio: 1.09; 95% confidence interval: 0.27 to 4.41; p = 0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

ACS patients with DM and ≥1 TCFA have a high rate of NCL-MACE at 3 years. In contrast, the prognosis of ACS patients with DM but no TCFAs is favorable and similar to patients without DM.

Liraglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

The cardiovascular effect of liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, when added to standard care in patients with type 2 diabetes, remains unknown.

METHODS

In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk to receive liraglutide or placebo. The primary composite outcome in the time-to-event analysis was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The primary hypothesis was that liraglutide would be noninferior to placebo with regard to the primary outcome, with a margin of 1.30 for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio. No adjustments for multiplicity were performed for the prespecified exploratory outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 9340 patients underwent randomization. The median follow-up was 3.8 years. The primary outcome occurred in significantly fewer patients in the liraglutide group (608 of 4668 patients [13.0%]) than in the placebo group (694 of 4672 [14.9%]) (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 0.97; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.01 for superiority). Fewer patients died from cardiovascular causes in the liraglutide group (219 patients [4.7%]) than in the placebo group (278 [6.0%]) (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.93; P=0.007). The rate of death from any cause was lower in the liraglutide group (381 patients [8.2%]) than in the placebo group (447 [9.6%]) (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.97; P=0.02). The rates of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure were nonsignificantly lower in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group. The most common adverse events leading to the discontinuation of liraglutide were gastrointestinal events. The incidence of pancreatitis was nonsignificantly lower in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

In the time-to-event analysis, the rate of the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus was lower with liraglutide than with placebo. (Funded by Novo Nordisk and the National Institutes of Health; LEADER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01179048.).

LEADER 7: cardiovascular risk profiles of US and European participants in the LEADER diabetes trial differ

AIMS

To determine whether US and European participants in the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of cardiovascular outcome Results (LEADER) trial differ regarding risk factors for cardiovascular mortality and morbidity.

METHODS

Baseline data, stratified for prior cardiovascular disease (CVD), were compared using multivariable logistic regression analysis to establish whether region is an independent determinant of achieved targets for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), blood pressure (BP), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol.

RESULTS

Independent of CVD history, US participants were more often of non-White origin and had a longer history of type 2 diabetes, higher body weight, and higher baseline HbA1c. They had substantially lower systolic and diastolic BP, and a marginally lower LDL-cholesterol level. Fewer US participants were diagnosed with left ventricular dysfunction. In the largest group of patients, those with prior CVD and the highest cardiovascular risk, US participants were more often female, had a higher waist circumference, and had a decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate, but less frequently prior myocardial infarction or angina pectoris.

CONCLUSIONS

There were baseline differences between US and European participants. These differences may result from variation in regional targets for cardiovascular risk factor management, and should be considered in the analysis and reporting of the trial results. Clinical trial identifier: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01179048.

LEADER-4: blood pressure control in patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk: baseline data from the LEADER randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

As glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists lower blood pressure (BP) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), we examined BP control in relation to targets set by international bodies prior to randomization in the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of cardiovascular outcome Results (LEADER) trial.

METHODS

We analyzed baseline data from LEADER (NCT01179048), an ongoing phase 3B, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled cardiovascular outcomes trial examining the cardiovascular safety of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide in 9340 people with T2DM from 32 countries [age (all mean ± SD) 64 ± 7.2 years, BMI 32.5 ± 6.3 kg/m, duration of diabetes 12.7 ± 8.0 years], all of whom were at high risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD).

RESULTS

A total of 81% (n = 7592) of participants had prior CVD and 90% (n = 8408) had a prior history of hypertension. Despite prescription of multiple antihypertensive agents at baseline, only 51% were treated to a target BP of less than 140/85 mmHg and only 26% to the recommended baseline BP target of less than 130/80 mmHg. In univariate analyses, those with prior CVD were prescribed more agents (P < 0.001) and had lower BP than those without (137 ± 18.8/78 ± 10.6 mmHg versus 140 ± 17.7/80 ± 9.9 mmHg; P < 0.001). In logistic regression analyses, residency in North America (64% treated to <140/85 mmHg; 38% treated to <130/80 mmHg) was the strongest predictor of BP control.

CONCLUSION

These contemporary data confirm that BP remains insufficiently controlled in a large proportion of individuals with T2DM at high cardiovascular risk, particularly outside North America. Longitudinal data from the LEADER trial may provide further insights into BP control in relation to cardiovascular outcomes in this condition.

Rationale and design of the EXenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) trial

Exenatide once-weekly is an extended release formulation of exenatide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, which can improve glycemic control, body weight, blood pressure, and lipid levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The EXenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) will compare the impact of adding exenatide once-weekly to usual care with usual care alone on major cardiovascular outcomes. EXSCEL is an academically led, phase III/IV, double-blind, pragmatic placebo-controlled, global trial conducted in 35 countries aiming to enrol 14,000 patients with T2DM and a broad range of cardiovascular risk over approximately 5 years. Participants will be randomized (1:1) to receive exenatide once-weekly 2 mg or matching placebo by subcutaneous injections. The trial will continue until 1,360 confirmed primary composite cardiovascular end points, defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, have occurred. The primary efficacy hypothesis is that exenatide once-weekly is superior to usual care with respect to the primary composite cardiovascular end point. EXSCEL is powered to detect a 15% relative risk reduction in the exenatide once-weekly group, with 85% power and a 2-sided 5% alpha. The primary safety hypothesis is that exenatide once-weekly is noninferior to usual care with respect to the primary cardiovascular composite end point. Noninferiority will be concluded if the upper limit of the CI is <1.30. EXSCEL will assess whether exenatide once-weekly can reduce cardiovascular events in patients with T2DM with a broad range of cardiovascular risk. It will also provide long-term safety information on exenatide once-weekly in people with T2DM. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01144338.

Association between health status and long-term mortality after percutaneous revascularization of peripheral artery disease

OBJECTIVES

To explore the association of health status change and long-term survival among patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD).

BACKGROUND

Early gains in health status after successful endovascular therapy (EVT) for symptomatic PAD can be maintained up to 1 year. Whether such health status improvements are associated with long-term survival benefits is unknown.

METHODS

Between February 2001 and August 2004, 258 patients with symptomatic PAD treated with EVT participated in a prospective study evaluating baseline and 1 year health status using the Peripheral Artery Questionnaire (range 0-100, higher scores = better). All-cause mortality was assessed for all patients at a median of 9.4 years following EVT.

RESULTS

The mean age at enrollment was 68 ± 11 years; 61% were male, 97% were Caucasian, and 38% had diabetes. Patients with a clinically meaningful health status improvement (≥8 points) 1 year after their index procedure (79%) were identified as responders. Responders had a significantly better 10 year survival compared with nonresponders (60% vs 38%, p = 0.025). Responder status was associated with a survival advantage that persisted in risk-adjusted analysis (adjusted hazard ratio for long-term mortality, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.45-0.97]; p = 0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with symptomatic PAD undergoing EVT, improvement of PAD-specific health status at 1 year follow-up was associated with improved long-term survival. Whether additional treatment for patients with poor response to EVT could improve long-term survival warrants further investigation. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.