Deng Yihong, Polley Eric C, Herrin Jeph, Swarna Kavya S, Kent David M, Ross Joseph S, Maron Bradley A, Mickelson Mindy M, McCoy Rozalina G
Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery Rochester MN USA.
OptumLabs Eden Prairie MN USA.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2025 Aug 5;14(15):e040217. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.124.040217. Epub 2025 Jul 17.
Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) have favorable cardiovascular outcomes compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is) and sulfonylureas in adults with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk. How these benefits vary across lower levels of cardiovascular risk is unknown.
We used nationwide claims data to emulate a comparative effectiveness trial and examine the heterogeneity of treatment effects of GLP-1RAs, SGLT2is, DPP4is, and sulfonylureas on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) among adults with type 2 diabetes and moderate cardiovascular risk (annualized MACE risk 1%-5%, estimated using the annualized claims-based MACE estimator).
Among 386 276 included adults with type 2 diabetes, 25.2% had baseline ACME-predicted MACE risk >1% to ≤2% (lower-risk patients) and 13.3% had ACME-predicted risk >4% to ≤5% (higher-risk patients). By year 3 of treatment, higher-risk patients derived greater absolute benefit than lower-risk patients when treated with GLP-1RAs versus sulfonylureas (absolute reduction in the estimated rate of MACE of 3.1% in higher-risk patients and 1.6% in lower-risk patients), SGLT2is versus sulfonylureas (absolute reduction, 3.9% in higher-risk patients and 1.3% in lower-risk patients), and GLP-1RAs versus DPP4is (absolute reduction, 1.6% in higher-risk patients and 0.5% in lower-risk patients). The relative benefits for MACE were also greater in higher-risk than lower-risk patients with SGLT2is versus DPP4is (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78 [95% CI, 0.70-0.87] in higher-risk patients; HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.88-1.12] in lower-risk patients). Conversely, the relative benefits of DPP4is and GLP-1RAs versus sulfonylureas were greater in lower-risk patients: HR 0.76 (95% CI, 0.71-0.81) in lower-risk and HR 0.91 (95% CI, 0.97-0.96) in higher-risk patients for DPP4is versus sulfonylureas; HR 0.67 (95% CI, 0.58-0.78) in lower-risk and HR 0.80 (95% CI, 0.70-0.93) in higher-risk patients for GLP-1RAs versus sulfonylurea. Benefits of SGLT2is and GLP-1RAs were comparable across all risk levels.
Cardiovascular benefits of SGLT2is and GLP-1RAs exist across all levels of moderate cardiovascular risk, reinforcing the importance of choosing glucose-lowering therapies that can prevent MACE in all people with type 2 diabetes.
与二肽基肽酶 -4 抑制剂(DPP4is)和磺脲类药物相比,胰高血糖素样肽 -1 受体激动剂(GLP -1RAs)和钠 - 葡萄糖协同转运蛋白 -2 抑制剂(SGLT2is)在患有 2 型糖尿病且心血管风险高的成年人中具有良好的心血管结局。这些益处如何在较低心血管风险水平中变化尚不清楚。
我们使用全国性索赔数据模拟一项比较有效性试验,并研究 GLP -1RAs、SGLT2is、DPP4is 和磺脲类药物对患有 2 型糖尿病且心血管风险中等(使用基于年度索赔的主要不良心血管事件 [MACE] 估计器估计年化 MACE 风险为 1% - 5%)的成年人主要不良心血管事件(MACEs)的治疗效果异质性。
在纳入的 386276 名患有 2 型糖尿病的成年人中,25.2% 的患者基线 ACME 预测的 MACE 风险 >1% 至 ≤2%(低风险患者),13.3% 的患者 ACME 预测风险 >4% 至 ≤5%(高风险患者)。到治疗第 3 年时,与磺脲类药物相比,高风险患者在接受 GLP -1RAs 治疗时比低风险患者获得更大的绝对益处(高风险患者中 MACE 估计发生率的绝对降低为 3.1%,低风险患者为 1.6%),SGLT2is 与磺脲类药物相比(绝对降低,高风险患者为 3.9%,低风险患者为 1.3%),以及 GLP -1RAs 与 DPP4is 相比(绝对降低,高风险患者为 1.6%,低风险患者为