1Division of Population Health and Genomics, School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, U.K.
2Guangdong Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Science, Guangdong, China.
Diabetes Care. 2023 May 1;46(5):967-977. doi: 10.2337/dc22-1238.
To assess the real-world cardiovascular (CV) safety for sulfonylureas (SU), in comparison with dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4i) and thiazolidinediones (TZD), through development of robust methodology for causal inference in a whole nation study.
A cohort study was performed including people with type 2 diabetes diagnosed in Scotland before 31 December 2017, who failed to reach HbA1c 48 mmol/mol despite metformin monotherapy and initiated second-line pharmacotherapy (SU/DPP4i/TZD) on or after 1 January 2010. The primary outcome was composite major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including hospitalization for myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, heart failure, and CV death. Secondary outcomes were each individual end point and all-cause death. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression and an instrumental variable (IV) approach were used to control confounding in a similar way to the randomization process in a randomized control trial.
Comparing SU to non-SU (DPP4i/TZD), the hazard ratio (HR) for MACE was 1.00 (95% CI: 0.91-1.09) from the multivariable Cox regression and 1.02 (0.91-1.13) and 1.03 (0.91-1.16) using two different IVs. For all-cause death, the HR from Cox regression and the two IV analyses was 1.03 (0.94-1.13), 1.04 (0.93-1.17), and 1.03 (0.90-1.17).
Our findings contribute to the understanding that second-line SU for glucose lowering are unlikely to increase CV risk or all-cause mortality. Given their potent efficacy, microvascular benefits, cost effectiveness, and widespread use, this study supports that SU should remain a part of the global diabetes treatment portfolio.
通过开发一种稳健的因果推理方法,在一项全国性研究中,评估磺酰脲类药物(SU)与二肽基肽酶 4 抑制剂(DPP4i)和噻唑烷二酮类(TZD)相比,在真实世界中的心血管(CV)安全性。
进行了一项队列研究,纳入了 2017 年 12 月 31 日前在苏格兰被诊断为 2 型糖尿病的患者,这些患者在接受二甲双胍单药治疗后,未能达到 HbA1c<48mmol/mol,并在 2010 年 1 月 1 日或之后开始二线药物治疗(SU/DPP4i/TZD)。主要结局是复合主要不良心血管事件(MACE),包括心肌梗死、缺血性卒中和心力衰竭住院和心血管死亡。次要结局是每个单独的终点和全因死亡。多变量 Cox 比例风险回归和工具变量(IV)方法以类似于随机对照试验中的随机化过程的方式,用于控制混杂因素。
与非 SU(DPP4i/TZD)相比,SU 组的 MACE 风险比(HR)多变量 Cox 回归为 1.00(95%CI:0.91-1.09),而使用两种不同 IV 时为 1.02(0.91-1.13)和 1.03(0.91-1.16)。对于全因死亡,Cox 回归和两个 IV 分析的 HR 为 1.03(0.94-1.13)、1.04(0.93-1.17)和 1.03(0.90-1.17)。
我们的研究结果有助于理解,对于降低血糖,二线 SU 不太可能增加 CV 风险或全因死亡率。鉴于其强大的疗效、微血管获益、成本效益和广泛应用,这项研究支持 SU 应继续成为全球糖尿病治疗方案的一部分。