Time filter

Source Type

Firenze, Italy

Monami M.,Section of Geriatric Cardiology and Medicine | Ahren B.,Lund University | Dicembrini I.,Obesity Agency | Mannucci E.,Diabetes Agency
Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism | Year: 2013

Aims: Preliminary data from randomized trials with metabolic outcomes have shown that treatment with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) could be associated with a reduced incidence of major cardiovascular events (MACE). The present meta-analysis is aimed at verifying this protective effect, collecting all available data from randomized trials. Methods: A comprehensive search for published and unpublished trials with a duration ≥24 weeks comparing DPP4i with placebo or other drugs was performed, retrieving all MACE reported as serious adverse events together with death from any cause. Mantel-Haenzel odds ratio (MH-OR) was calculated with random effect models for MACE, myocardial infarction, stroke and mortality. When available, effects on glycated haemoglobin, lipid profile and blood pressure were also assessed and used for the estimation of the modification of risk for myocardial infarction using the UKPDS risk engine. Results: A total of 70 trials, enrolling 41959 patients with a mean follow-up of 44.1 weeks, was collected and included in the analysis. The MH-OR (95% Confidence Interval) was 0.71[0.59;0.86], 0.64[0.44;0.94], 0.77[0.48;1.24] and 0.60[0.41;0.88] for MACE, myocardial infarction, stroke and mortality, respectively. Conclusions: Treatment with DPP4i reduces the risk of cardiovascular events (particularly myocardial infarction) and all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes. The reduction in the incidence of myocardial infarction is greater than what predicted on the basis of conventional risk factors, suggesting a role for other mechanisms. © 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Source

Monami M.,Geriatric Cardiology | Genovese S.,Diabetes and Metabolic Diseases Unit | Mannucci E.,Diabetes Agency
Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism | Year: 2013

Aim: Cardiovascular safety of sulfonylurea has been questioned by some authors. This article aims at collecting all available data on this issue from randomized trials. Methods: A meta-analysis was performed including all trials with a duration of at least 6months, comparing a sulfonylurea with a non-sulfonylurea agent in type 2 diabetes. Major cardiovascular events (MACE) and mortality were retrieved and combined to calculate Mantel-Haenzel odds ratio (MH-OR). Results: Of the 115 selected trials, 62 reported information on MACE, and 30 reported at least one event. MH-OR for sulfonylurea was 1.08 [0.86-1.36], p=0.52 (1.85 [1.20-2.87], p=0.005, in the five trials vs. DPP4 inhibitors, no significant differences vs. other comparators). The MH-OR for myocardial infarction and stroke was 0.88 [0.75-1.04], p=0.13 and 1.28 [1.03-1.60], p=0.026, respectively. Mortality was significantly increased with sulfonylureas (MH-OR: 1.22 [1.01-1.49], p=0.047). Conclusions: In type 2 diabetes, the use of sulfonylureas is associated with increased mortality and a higher risk of stroke, whereas the overall incidence of MACE appears to be unaffected. Significant differences in cardiovascular risk could be present in direct comparisons with specific classes of glucose-lowering agents, such as DPP4 inhibitors, but this hypothesis needs to be confirmed in long-term cardiovascular outcomes trials. The results of this meta-analysis need to be interpreted with caution, mainly because of limitations in trial quality and under-reporting of information on cardiovascular events and mortality. However, the cardiovascular safety of sulfonylureas cannot be considered established unless it is evaluated in long-term cardiovascular outcomes trials. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Source

Monami M.,Geriatric Cardiology | Dicembrini I.,Obesity Agency | Mannucci E.,Diabetes Agency
Acta Diabetologica | Year: 2014

Recent epidemiological data have contributed to the formulation of the hypothesis about the long-term safety of pioglitazone, a thiazolidinedione (TZD), with respect to malignancies, in particular bladder cancer. The primary aim of this meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, not designed a priori to test this hypothesis, was to explore whether TZDs affect the risk of cancer. A meta-analysis was performed including published and unpublished randomized trials with a duration of at least 52 weeks, enrolling patients with or without diabetes, comparing TZDs with either placebo or other drug therapies on various different outcomes. We found 22 trials reporting at least one cancer and enrolling 13,197 patients to TZD (pioglitazone: n = 3,710 and rosiglitazone: n = 9,487) and 12,359 to placebo or active comparator groups. The mean follow-up was 26.1 months. Overall, those assigned at random to TZDs had a significant reduction (MH-OR 0.85 [0.73-0.98]; p = 0.027) in the incidence of malignancies, with no significant difference in effect between pioglitazone and rosiglitazone. Specifically, subgroup analyses showed a significant reduction for rosiglitazone (MH-OR 0.82 [0.69-0.98]; p = 0.029), but not for pioglitazone (MH-OR 0.66 [0.34-1.28]; p = 0.22). In further subgroup analyses of site-specific malignancies based on the data from four trials, the risk of bladder cancer with pioglitazone (MH-OR) was 2.05 [0.84-5.02]; p = 0.12. Further, rosiglitazone, but not pioglitazone, was associated with a significantly reduced risk of bowel cancer. In contrast, pioglitazone, but not rosiglitazone, was associated with a significant reduction in breast cancer. The present meta-analysis of trials, not designed a priori to test the hypothesis, provides reassuring evidence that TZDs are not associated with risk of overall malignancies. In fact, they are compatible with the possibility of a decreased risk of cancer. In site-specific subgroup analyses, for rosiglitazone, there was a significant decreased risk of bowel cancer. Subgroup analyses for pioglitazone did not allow to exclude an increased risk of bladder cancer, while the risk of breast cancer was significantly decreased. While these data are also useful to formulate not test hypotheses, they provide somewhat more cogent evidence than the previously published epidemiological data. © 2013 Springer-Verlag Italia. Source

Monami M.,Section of Geriatric Cardiology and Medicine | Dicembrini I.,Obesity Agency | Antenore A.,Section of Geriatric Cardiology and Medicine | Mannucci E.,Diabetes Agency
Diabetes Care | Year: 2011

OBJECTIVE - Thiazolidinediones and insulin are associated with a higher risk of fractures in type 2 diabetic patients. Incretin hormones increase bone density in experimental models, but the effect of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors on bone fractures has not been reported so far. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - A meta-analysis was performed including all randomized clinical trials with a duration of at least 24 weeks, enrolling patients with type 2 diabetes, comparing DPP-4 inhibitors with placebo or active drugs. RESULTS - Twenty-eight trials enrolling 11,880 and 9,175 patients for DPP-4 inhibitors and comparators, respectively, were included, reporting 63 fractures. DPP-4 inhibitors, compared with placebo or other treatments, were associated with a reduced risk of fractures (Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio [MH-OR] 0.60, 95% CI 0.37-0.99, P = 0.045), even after the exclusion of comparisons with thiazolidinediones or sulfonylureas (MH-OR 0.56, 0.33-0.93, P = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS - The present meta-analysis suggests that treatment with DPP-4 inhibitors could be associated with a reduced risk of bone fractures. © 2011 by the American Diabetes Association. Source

Deacon C.F.,Copenhagen University | Mannucci E.,Diabetes Agency | Ahren B.,Lund University
Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism | Year: 2012

Aims: During recent years, two strategies of incretin-based therapy [glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonism and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibition] have entered the market for pharmacological management of type 2 diabetes. A main indication for this therapy is as add-on to on-going metformin therapy in subjects with type 2 diabetes who have insufficient glycaemic control with metformin alone. The aim of this study was to compare improvements in glycaemic control and changes in body weight, as well as adverse events, in comparable studies with incretin-based therapy as add-on to metformin. Methods: Studies having a duration of 16-30 weeks were identified from PubMed. Results: A total of 27 study groups in 21 studies fulfilled the criteria of examining incretin-based therapy as add-on to metformin at clinically recommended doses in patients with type 2 diabetes for 16-30 weeks; 7 of these used a short-acting GLP-1 receptor agonist (exenatide BID), 7 used longer acting GLP-1 receptor agonists (liraglutide or exenatide LAR), whereas 14 studies examined DPP-4 inhibitors. In all studies, incretin-based therapy reduced HbA1c concentrations. The reduction in HbA1c was significantly greater in study groups with long-acting GLP-1 receptor agonists than with the other two groups (both p < 0.001), whereas there were no differences between exenatide BID and DPP-4 inhibitors. Across all study groups, there was a negative linear correlation between baseline HbA1c and change in HbA1c (r = -0.70; p < 0.001). Fasting glucose also fell significantly more in study groups given liraglutide or exenatide LAR than in those given exenatide BID or DPP-4 inhibitors (both p < 0.001). Furthermore, body weight was reduced by a similar extent in the two groups with GLP-1 receptor agonists and was not significantly altered in the groups with DPP-4 inhibitors. Lipids, blood pressure and heart rate were not reported consistently, which did not allow general conclusions. Adverse events were rare, apart from increased incidence of nausea and vomiting with GLP-1 receptor agonists. Conclusion: Incretin-based therapy efficiently improves glycaemia when added to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes, and within 16-30 weeks there is a more pronounced reduction in HbA1c with long-acting GLP-1 receptor agonists (liraglutide and exenatide LAR) than with exenatide BID and DPP-4 inhibitors, although the magnitude of the effect is dependent on the baseline values. Both strategies appear to be associated with a very low risk of adverse events, including hypoglycaemia. Finally, the injectable GLP-1 receptor agonists also reduce body weight (whereas the DPP-4 inhibitors are weight neutral) but are also associated with a greater incidence of gastrointestinal side effects and a tendency to increase heart rate. © 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Source

Discover hidden collaborations