Cardiovascular Outcomes in Trials of Oral Diabetes Medications - A Systematic Review
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 26 October 2008
- journal article
- review article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in Archives of internal medicine (1960)
- Vol. 168 (19) , 2070-2080
- https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.168.19.2070
Abstract
Background: A wide variety of oral diabetes medications are currently available for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, but it is unclear how these agents compare with respect to long-term cardiovascular risk. Our objective was to systematically examine the peer-reviewed literature on the cardiovascular risk associated with oral agents (second-generation sulfonylureas, biguanides, thiazolidinediones, and meglitinides) for treating adults with type 2 diabetes. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception through January 1.9, 2006. Forty publications of controlled trials that reported information on cardiovascular events (primarily myocardial infarction and stroke) met our inclusion criteria. Using standardized protocols, 2 reviewers serially abstracted data from each article. Trials were first described qualitatively. For comparisons with 4 or more independent trials, results were pooled quantitatively using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Results are presented as odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIS). Results: Treatment with metformin hydrochloride was associated with a decreased risk of cardiovascular mortality (pooled OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.89) compared with any other oral diabetes agent or placebo; the results for cardiovascular morbidity and all-cause mortality were similar but not statistically significant. No other significant associations of oral diabetes agents with fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular disease or all-cause mortality were observed. When compared with any other agent or placebo, rosightazone was the only diabetes agent associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity or mortality, but this result was not statistically significant (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 0.92-3.06). Conclusions: Meta-analysis suggested that, compared with other oral diabetes agents and placebo, metformin was moderately protective and rosiglitazone possibly harmful, but lack of power prohibited firmer conclusions. Larger, long-term studies taken to hard end points and better reporting of cardiovascular events in short-term studies will be required to draw firm conclusions about major clinical benefits and risks related to oral diabetes agents.Keywords
This publication has 67 references indexed in Scilit:
- Pioglitazone and Risk of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-analysis of Randomized TrialsYearbook of Endocrinology, 2008
- Effect of early addition of rosiglitazone to sulphonylurea therapy in older type 2 diabetes patients (>60 years): the Rosiglitazone Early vs. SULphonylurea Titration (RESULT) studyDiabetes, Obesity and Metabolism, 2005
- Comparison of uptitration of gliclazide with the addition of rosiglitazone to gliclazide in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on half-maximal doses of a sulphonylureaActa Diabetologica, 2004
- Measuring inconsistency in meta-analysesBMJ, 2003
- Pioglitazone reduces neointimal tissue proliferation after coronary stent implantation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: an intravascular ultrasound scanning studyAmerican Heart Journal, 2003
- Repaglinide in Type 2 Diabetes: A 24-Week, Fixed-Dose Efficacy and Safety StudyThe Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2000
- Efficacy, Safety, and Dose-Response Characteristics of Glipizide Gastrointestinal Therapeutic System on Glycemic Control and Insulin Secretion in NIDDM: Results of two multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trialsDiabetes Care, 1997
- Glimepiride, a New Once-Daily Sulfonylurea: A double-blind placebo-controlled study of NIDDM patientsDiabetes Care, 1996
- Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?Controlled Clinical Trials, 1996
- Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: An overview of the randomized trialsProgress in Cardiovascular Diseases, 1985