Retour
Article pour les cliniciens

Glycemia Reduction in Type 2 Diabetes - Microvascular and Cardiovascular Outcomes.



  • Nathan DM
  • Lachin JM
  • Bebu I
  • Burch HB
  • Buse JB
  • Cherrington AL, et al.
N Engl J Med. 2022 Sep 22;387(12):1075-1088. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2200436. (Original)
PMID: 36129997
Lire le résumé
Disciplines
  • Médecine interne (voir sous-spécialités ci-dessous)
    Relevance - 7/7
    Intérêt médiatique  - 7/7
  • Médecine familiale (MF)/Médecine générale (MG)
    Relevance - 6/7
    Intérêt médiatique  - 5/7
  • Médecine interne générale - Soins primaires
    Relevance - 6/7
    Intérêt médiatique  - 5/7
  • - Endocrinologie
    Relevance - 5/7
    Intérêt médiatique  - 4/7

Résumé (en anglais)

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the comparative effectiveness of commonly used glucose-lowering medications, when added to metformin, with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease outcomes in persons with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS: We assessed the comparative effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications, added to metformin, in achieving and maintaining a glycated hemoglobin level of less than 7.0% in participants with type 2 diabetes. The randomly assigned therapies were insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin. Prespecified secondary outcomes with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease included hypertension and dyslipidemia, confirmed moderately or severely increased albuminuria or an estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area, diabetic peripheral neuropathy assessed with the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument, cardiovascular events (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE], hospitalization for heart failure, or an aggregate outcome of any cardiovascular event), and death. Hazard ratios are presented with 95% confidence limits that are not adjusted for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS: During a mean 5.0 years of follow-up in 5047 participants, there were no material differences among the interventions with respect to the development of hypertension or dyslipidemia or with respect to microvascular outcomes; the mean overall rate (i.e., events per 100 participant-years) of moderately increased albuminuria levels was 2.6, of severely increased albuminuria levels 1.1, of renal impairment 2.9, and of diabetic peripheral neuropathy 16.7. The treatment groups did not differ with respect to MACE (overall rate, 1.0), hospitalization for heart failure (0.4), death from cardiovascular causes (0.3), or all deaths (0.6). There were small differences with respect to rates of any cardiovascular disease, with 1.9, 1.9, 1.4, and 2.0 in the glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin groups, respectively. When one treatment was compared with the combined results of the other three treatments, the hazard ratios for any cardiovascular disease were 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 1.3) in the glargine group, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4) in the glimepiride group, 0.7 (95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9) in the liraglutide group, and 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.5) in the sitagliptin group.

CONCLUSIONS: In participants with type 2 diabetes, the incidences of microvascular complications and death were not materially different among the four treatment groups. The findings indicated possible differences among the groups in the incidence of any cardiovascular disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.).


Commentaires cliniques (en anglais)

Endocrine

This a well-conducted trial with head-to-head comparisons of different anti-glycemic agents confirms what evidence to date from single agent trials has shown.

Endocrine

Medium-sized population followed over 5 years; well-done study. New information not known to providers, which may help to support their current clinical practice.

General Internal Medicine-Primary Care(US)

This study confirms what was already known. I do not feel that any new information was gathered. The use of sulfonylurea and DPP4 agents is baffling when better agents were available to compare. SGLT2i vs GLP1 RA--that’s what needs to be done.

Internal Medicine

While this a very important study, my calculation is that the average ASCVD risk for the patients in this study is 13%--despite 64 % of patients having their lipids lowered by statins at baseline. Thus, there is still no statement on whether patients with low-risk diabetes benefit from GLP1s.

Internal Medicine

Very relevant question, very practical comparisons. Key question for us is the role of sulfonylureas now that there are so many other families.

Internal Medicine

A great article and extremely important to my internal medicine colleagues. It appears to be a given now that if you have CV disease and type 2 diabetes, GLP-1 and SGLT-2 medications are your choices after metformin. This trial attempted to answer the question for patients without known CV disease and inform our choices of a second add-on drug. Unfortunately SGLT-2s were not assessed in this trial because they were not yet approved. Although follow-up duration was only 5 years, no significant difference was seen in albuminuria or diabetic peripheral neuropathy, key microvascular outcomes of interest when choosing medications with different costs to patients. Liraglutide had a lower incidence of CV disease and CV death, a finding seen in secondary prevention trials. Whether a longer follow-up would show more differences in microvascular outcomes is unknown.

Voulez-vous savoir ce que lisent les professionnels? Inscrivez-vous pour accéder gratuitement à tous les contenus professionnels.

S'inscrire