Kuss Oliver, Roden Michael, Schlesinger Sabrina, Hoyer Annika
Institute for Biometrics and Epidemiology, German Diabetes Center, Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Auf'm Hennekamp 65, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Centre for Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Acta Diabetol. 2024 Dec 12. doi: 10.1007/s00592-024-02425-8.
Two prerequisites must be met for the precision treatment approach to be beneficial for treated individuals. First, there must be treatment heterogeneity; second, in case of treatment heterogeneity, clinical predictors to identify people who would benefit from one treatment more than from others must be available. There is an established meta-regression approach to assess these two prerequisites that relies on measuring the variability of a clinical outcome after treatment in placebo-controlled randomised trials. We recently applied this approach to the treatment of type 2 diabetes for the clinical outcomes of glycaemic control and body weight and repeat it for the clinical outcome of all-cause mortality.
We performed a meta-regression analysis using digitalized individual participant information on time to death from 10 large cardiovascular outcome trials (7563 deaths from 99,746 participants) on DPP-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and SGLT-2 inhibitors with respect to the variability of all-cause mortality and its potential predictors after treatment.
The adjusted difference in log(SD) values of time to death between the verum and placebo arms was -0.036 (95%-CI: -0.059; -0.013), showing larger variability of time to death in the placebo arms. No clinical predictors were found to explain treatment heterogeneity.
This analysis suggests that the potential of the precision treatment approach in type 2 diabetes is low, at least with regard to improvement of all-cause mortality in population with high cardiovascular risk. This extends our previous findings for the clinical outcomes of glycaemic control and body weight.
精准治疗方法要对接受治疗的个体有益,必须满足两个前提条件。首先,必须存在治疗异质性;其次,在存在治疗异质性的情况下,必须有临床预测指标来识别那些从一种治疗中比从其他治疗中获益更多的人。有一种既定的meta回归方法来评估这两个前提条件,该方法依赖于在安慰剂对照随机试验中测量治疗后临床结局的变异性。我们最近将这种方法应用于2型糖尿病的治疗,以评估血糖控制和体重等临床结局,并将其重复用于全因死亡率这一临床结局。
我们使用来自10项大型心血管结局试验(99746名参与者中有7563人死亡)的数字化个体参与者信息,对二肽基肽酶-4抑制剂、胰高血糖素样肽-1受体激动剂和钠-葡萄糖协同转运蛋白-2抑制剂治疗后全因死亡率的变异性及其潜在预测指标进行了meta回归分析。
治疗组与安慰剂组之间死亡时间的log(SD)值调整差异为-0.036(95%置信区间:-0.059;-0.013),表明安慰剂组死亡时间的变异性更大。未发现临床预测指标可解释治疗异质性。
该分析表明,至少在改善心血管高风险人群的全因死亡率方面,精准治疗方法在2型糖尿病中的潜力较低。这扩展了我们之前关于血糖控制和体重临床结局的研究结果。