Explore the vast range of titles available.

The SELECT trial previously reported a 20% reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events with semaglutide ( n  = 8,803) versus placebo ( n  = 8,801) in patients with overweight/obesity and established cardiovascular disease, without diabetes. In the present study, we examined the effect of once-weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg on kidney outcomes in the SELECT trial. The incidence of the pre-specified main composite kidney endpoint (death from kidney disease, initiation of chronic kidney replacement therapy, onset of persistent estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 15 ml min −1  1.73 m − 2 , persistent ≥50% reduction in eGFR or onset of persistent macroalbuminuria) was lower with semaglutide (1.8%) versus placebo (2.2%): hazard ratio (HR) = 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63, 0.96; P  = 0.02. The treatment benefit at 104 weeks for eGFR was 0.75 ml min −1  1.73 m − 2 (95% CI 0.43, 1.06; P  < 0.001) overall and 2.19 ml min −1  1.73 m − 2 (95% CI 1.00, 3.38; P  < 0.001) in patients with baseline eGFR <60 ml min −1  1.73 m − 2 . These results suggest a benefit of semaglutide on kidney outcomes in individuals with overweight/obesity, without diabetes. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03574597 . In a pre-specified secondary analysis of the SELECT trial, once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2.4 mg in patients with obesity was associated with a 22% reduction in the main 5-component kidney composite endpoint compared to patients on placebo.

AbstractObjectiveTo compare the benefits and harms of drug treatments for adults with type 2 diabetes, adding non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (including finerenone) and tirzepatide (a dual glucose dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP)/glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist) to previously existing treatment options.DesignSystematic review and network meta-analysis.Data sourcesOvid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central up to 14 October 2022.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesEligible randomised controlled trials compared drugs of interest in adults with type 2 diabetes. Eligible trials had a follow-up of 24 weeks or longer. Trials systematically comparing combinations of more than one drug treatment class with no drug, subgroup analyses of randomised controlled trials, and non-English language studies were deemed ineligible. Certainty of evidence was assessed following the GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation) approach.ResultsThe analysis identified 816 trials with 471 038 patients, together evaluating 13 different drug classes; all subsequent estimates refer to the comparison with standard treatments. Sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors (odds ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.83 to 0.94; high certainty) and GLP-1 receptor agonists (0.88, 0.82 to 0.93; high certainty) reduce all cause death; non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, so far tested only with finerenone in patients with chronic kidney disease, probably reduce mortality (0.89, 0.79 to 1.00; moderate certainty); other drugs may not. The study confirmed the benefits of SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists in reducing cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, admission to hospital for heart failure, and end stage kidney disease. Finerenone probably reduces admissions to hospital for heart failure and end stage kidney disease, and possibly cardiovascular death. Only GLP-1 receptor agonists reduce non-fatal stroke; SGLT-2 inhibitors are superior to other drugs in reducing end stage kidney disease. GLP-1 receptor agonists and probably SGLT-2 inhibitors and tirzepatide improve quality of life. Reported harms were largely specific to drug class (eg, genital infections with SGLT-2 inhibitors, severe gastrointestinal adverse events with tirzepatide and GLP-1 receptor agonists, hyperkalaemia leading to admission to hospital with finerenone). Tirzepatide probably results in the largest reduction in body weight (mean difference −8.57 kg; moderate certainty). Basal insulin (mean difference 2.15 kg; moderate certainty) and thiazolidinediones (mean difference 2.81 kg; moderate certainty) probably result in the largest increases in body weight. Absolute benefits of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and finerenone vary in people with type 2 diabetes, depending on baseline risks for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes (https://matchit.magicevidence.org/230125dist-diabetes).ConclusionsThis network meta-analysis extends knowledge beyond confirming the substantial benefits with the use of SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists in reducing adverse cardiovascular and kidney outcomes and death by adding information on finerenone and tirzepatide. These findings highlight the need for continuous assessment of scientific progress to introduce cutting edge updates in clinical practice guidelines for people with type 2 diabetes.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42022325948.

Diabetes is an independent risk factor for cognitive impairment. We aimed to investigate the association between the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist dulaglutide and cognitive impairment as an exploratory analysis within the Researching Cardiovascular Events With a Weekly Incretin in Diabetes (REWIND) trial. REWIND is a randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled trial at 371 sites in 24 countries. We included men and women (aged ≥50 years) with either established or newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes and additional cardiovascular risk factors, glycated haemoglobin of up to 9·5% (80 mmol/mol) on a maximum of two oral glucose-lowering drugs with or without basal insulin, and a body-mass index of at least 23 kg/m2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) subcutaneous injections once a week of either dulaglutide (1·5 mg) or an equal volume of matching placebo. Randomisation was done using a computer-generated code with stratification by site. Participants and all study personnel were masked to treatment allocation until the database was locked. Participants were followed up at least every 6 months for the composite primary outcome of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from cardiovascular or unknown causes. Cognitive function was assessed at baseline and during follow-up using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST). We present here the exploratory primary cognitive outcome, which was the first occurrence of a follow-up score on MoCA or DSST that was 1·5 SDs or more below the baseline mean score in the participant's country. All analyses were done using an intention-to-treat approach. The REWIND trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01394952. Between Aug 18, 2011, and Aug 14, 2013, 9901 participants were randomly assigned to either dulaglutide (n=4949) or placebo (n=4952). During median follow-up of 5·4 (IQR 5·1–5·9) years, 8828 participants provided a baseline and one or more follow-up MoCA or DSST scores, of whom 4456 were assigned dulaglutide and 4372 were assigned placebo. The cognitive outcome occurred in 4·05 per 100 patient-years in participants assigned dulaglutide and 4·35 per 100 patient-years in people assigned placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·93, 95% CI 0·85–1·02; p=0·11). After post-hoc adjustment for individual standardised baseline scores, the hazard of substantive cognitive impairment was reduced by 14% in those assigned dulaglutide (HR 0·86, 95% CI 0·79–0·95; p=0·0018). Long-term treatment with dulaglutide might reduce cognitive impairment in people with type 2 diabetes. Further studies of this drug focused on brain health and cognitive function are clearly indicated. Eli Lilly and Company.

AbstractObjectiveTo provide up-to-date evidence on key benefits, harms, and uncertainties regarding medications for adults with type 2 diabetes.DesignLiving systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), using frequentist random effects and GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation) approaches. Updates are planned at least two times a year.Data sourcesMedline and Embase, searched up to 31 July 2024 for the current iteration.Study selectionRandomised controlled trials of at least 24 weeks comparing one or more medications with standard treatment, placebo, or each other.ResultsThe systematic review and NMA includes 493 168 participants from 869 trials (adding 53 trials since October 2022) reporting data for 13 drug classes (63 drugs) and 26 outcomes of interest. Regarding benefits, moderate to high certainty evidence confirms the well established cardiovascular and kidney benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), and finerenone (the last for patients with established chronic kidney disease). The most effective drugs in reducing body weight were tirzepatide (mean difference (MD) −8.63 kg (95% confidence interval −9.34 to −7.93); moderate certainty) and orforglipron (MD −7.87 kg (−10.24 to −5.50); low certainty), followed by eight other GLP-1RAs (high to moderate certainty). Absolute benefits of medications vary substantially depending on the baseline risk of cardiovascular and kidney outcomes; risk-stratified absolute effects of medications are summarised using an interactive multiple comparisons tool (https://matchit.magicevidence.org/250709dist-diabetes/#!/). Regarding medication-specific harms, SGLT-2 inhibitors increase genital infections (odds ratio (OR) 3.29 (95% CI 2.88 to 3.77); high certainty) and ketoacidosis due to diabetes (OR 2.08 (1.45 to 2.99); high certainty), and probably increase amputations (OR 1.27 (1.01 to 1.61); moderate certainty); tirzepatide and GLP-1RAs probably increase severe gastrointestinal events (most increased risk with tirzepatide (OR 4.21 (1.87 to 9.49); moderate certainty)); finerenone increases severe hyperkalaemia (OR 5.92 (3.02 to 11.62); high certainty); and thiazolidinediones increase major osteoporotic fractures and probably increase hospitalisation for heart failure. Sulfonylureas, insulin, and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors probably increase the risk of severe hypoglycaemia. There is low to very low certainty evidence for effects on other diabetes-related complications, including neuropathy and visual impairment. Despite interest in the issue, there is uncertainty about whether GLP-1RAs may reduce dementia (OR 0.92 (0.83 to 1.02); low certainty).ConclusionsThis living systematic review provides a comprehensive summary of the cardiovascular, kidney, and weight loss benefits, as well as medication-specific harms of medications for adults with type 2 diabetes, including effects of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1RAs, finerenone and tirzepatide.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO number: CRD42022325948. A more detailed protocol is available at https://data.aliveevidence.org/records/q02rv-km486.Readers’ notesThis article is the first version of a living systematic review. It is linked to a living BMJ Rapid Recommendation and other living clinical practice guidelines, presenting risk stratified recommendations for patients with type 2 diabetes at lower, moderate, and higher risk of cardiovascular and kidney complications. The latest evidence will be made available via the BMJ Rapid Recommendation and via an interactive GRADE evidence summary (MATCH-IT: https://matchit.magicevidence.org/250709dist-diabetes/#!/). Major updates will be published in The BMJ.

Background In order to influence every day clinical practice professional organisations issue management guidelines. Cross-sectional surveys are used to evaluate the implementation of such guidelines. The present survey investigated screening for glucose perturbations in people with coronary artery disease and compared patients with known and newly detected type 2 diabetes with those without diabetes in terms of their life-style and pharmacological risk factor management in relation to contemporary European guidelines. Methods A total of 6187 patients (18–80 years) with coronary artery disease and known glycaemic status based on a self reported history of diabetes (previously known diabetes) or the results of an oral glucose tolerance test and HbA1c (no diabetes or newly diagnosed diabetes) were investigated in EUROASPIRE IV including patients in 24 European countries 2012–2013. The patients were interviewed and investigated in order to enable a comparison between their actual risk factor control with that recommended in current European management guidelines and the outcome in previously conducted surveys. Results A total of 2846 (46 %) patients had no diabetes, 1158 (19 %) newly diagnosed diabetes and 2183 (35 %) previously known diabetes. The combined use of all four cardioprotective drugs in these groups was 53, 55 and 60 %, respectively. A blood pressure target of <140/90 mmHg was achieved in 68, 61, 54 % and a LDL-cholesterol target of <1.8 mmol/L in 16, 18 and 28 %. Patients with newly diagnosed and previously known diabetes reached an HbA1c <7.0 % (53 mmol/mol) in 95 and 53 % and 11 % of those with previously known diabetes had an HbA1c >9.0 % (>75 mmol/mol). Of the patients with diabetes 69 % reported on low physical activity. The proportion of patients participating in cardiac rehabilitation programmes was low (≈40 %) and only 27 % of those with diabetes had attended diabetes schools. Compared with data from previous surveys the use of cardioprotective drugs had increased and more patients were achieving the risk factor treatment targets. Conclusions Despite advances in patient management there is further potential to improve both the detection and management of patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease.

In two articles in this issue of the Journal , the members of the GRADE Study Research Group 1,2 report the findings of the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Type 2 Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness (GRADE) Study, which involved participants who had type 2 diabetes without established cardiovascular complications. These articles have been awaited with great anticipation. Most advances related to cardiovascular benefit in the treatment of type 2 diabetes have been derived from cardiovascular outcome trials involving participants with previous cardiovascular disease, and these advances have been related to secondary prevention. On the basis of those trials, the availability of two new . . .

In recent years, several novel agents have become available to treat individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D), such as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i), tirzepatide, which is a dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide receptor agonist (GIP RA)/glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), and finerenone, a non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) that confers significant renal and cardiovascular benefits in individuals with (CKD). New medications have the potential to improve the lives of individuals with diabetes. However, clinicians are challenged to understand the benefits and potential risks associated with these new and emerging treatment options. In this article, we discuss how use of network meta-analyses (NMA) can fill this need.

Background The Researching cardiovascular Events with a Weekly INcretin in Diabetes (REWIND) double blind randomized trial demonstrated that weekly subcutaneous dulaglutide 1.5 mg, a glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonist, versus matched placebo reduced the first outcome of major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or nonfatal stroke (594 versus 663 events) in 9901 persons with type 2 diabetes and either chronic cardiovascular disease or risk factors, and followed during 5.4 years. These findings were based on a time-to-first-event analysis and preclude relevant information on the burden of total major events occurring during the trial. This analysis reports on the total cardiovascular or fatal events in the REWIND participants Methods We compared the total incidence of MACE or non-cardiovascular deaths, and the total incidence of expanded MACE (MACE, unstable angina, heart failure or revascularization) or non-cardiovascular deaths between participants randomized to dulaglutide and those randomized to placebo. Incidences were expressed as number per 1000 person-years. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using the conditional time gap and proportional means models. Results Participants had a mean age of 66.2 years, 46.3% were women and 31% had previous cardiovascular disease. During the trial there were 1972 MACE or non-cardiovascular deaths and 3673 expanded MACE or non-cardiovascular deaths. The incidence of total MACE or non-cardiovascular deaths in the dulaglutide and placebo groups was 35.8 and 40.3 per 1000 person-years, respectively [absolute reduction = 4.5 per 1000 person-years; conditional time gap HR 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82–0.98) p = 0.020 , and proportional means HR 0.89 (95% CI, 0.80–0.98) p = 0.022]. The incidence of total expanded MACE or non-cardiovascular deaths in the dulaglutide and placebo groups was 67.1 and 74.7 per 1000 person-years, respectively [absolute reduction = 7.6 per 1000 person-years; conditional time gap HR 0.93 (95% CI, 0.87–0.99) p = 0.023, and proportional means HR 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82–0.99) p = 0.028]. Conclusions These findings suggest that weekly subcutaneous dulaglutide reduced total cardiovascular or fatal event burden in people with type 2 diabetes at moderate cardiovascular risk. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.clinicaltrials.gouv . Unique Identifier NCT01394952).

The EUROASPIRE surveys (EUROpean Action on Secondary Prevention through Intervention to Reduce Events) demonstrated that most European coronary patients fail to achieve lifestyle, risk factor and therapeutic targets. Here we report on the 2-year incidence of hard cardiovascular (CV) endpoints in the EUROASPIRE IV cohort. EUROASPIRE IV (2012–2013) was a large cross-sectional study undertaken at 78 centres from selected geographical areas in 24 European countries. Patients were interviewed and examined at least 6 months following hospitalization for a coronary event or procedure. Fatal and non-fatal CV events occurring at least 1 year after this baseline screening were registered. The primary outcome in our analyses was the incidence of CV death or non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke or heart failure. Cox regression models, stratified for country, were fitted to relate baseline characteristics to outcome. Our analyses included 7471 predominantly male patients. Overall, 222 deaths were registered of whom 58% were cardiovascular. The incidence of the primary outcome was 42 per 1000 person-years. Comorbidities were strongly and significantly associated with the primary outcome (multivariately adjusted hazard ratio HR, 95% confidence interval): severe chronic kidney disease (HR 2.36, 1.44–3.85), uncontrolled diabetes (HR 1.89, 1.50–2.38), resting heart rate ≥ 75 bpm (HR 1.74, 1.30–2.32), history of stroke (HR 1.70, 1.27–2.29), peripheral artery disease (HR 1.48, 1.09–2.01), history of heart failure (HR 1.47, 1.08–2.01) and history of acute myocardial infarction (HR 1.27, 1.05–1.53). Low education and feelings of depression were significantly associated with increased risk. Lifestyle factors such as persistent smoking, insufficient physical activity and central obesity were not significantly related to adverse outcome. Blood pressure and LDL-C levels appeared to be unrelated to cardiovascular events irrespective of treatment. In patients with stabilized CHD, comorbid conditions that may reflect the ubiquitous nature of atherosclerosis, dominate lifestyle-related and other modifiable risk factors in terms of prognosis, at least over a 2-year follow-up period.

Recent clinical practice guidelines for diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) emphasise a holistic, person-centred approach to care. However, they do not include recommendations for the assessment of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), which would – dependent on the topic of guideline – be important for improving shared decision-making, patients’ concordance with guideline recommendations, clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The Taskforce of the Guideline Workshop discussed PROs in diabetes, obesity, CVD and CKD as well as the relevance of their inclusion in clinical practice guidelines for the management of these conditions. Highlights Patient engagement in disease management is a topic that is becoming increasingly important, also in terms of improving clinical outcomes Person-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are tools to assess person-reported outcomes (PROs) in an efficient and standardized manner Validated disease-specific measures for diabetes, obesity, CVD, and CKD as well as generic measures are available Currently underutilised in the routine care of cardio-renal-metabolic diseases, the integration of recommendations on PROs and PROMs into clinical practice guidelines may help to overcome the barriers to their implementation