We have located links that may give you full text access.
Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk With Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Using an Alternative Measure to the Hazard Ratio.
Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2018 July
BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials with the aim of evaluating the cardiovascular risks associated with glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, lixisenatide, liraglutide, semaglutide, and exenatide, have been conducted. They showed different results among the agents, but the reason has not been explained.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cardiovascular risks associated with GLP-1 receptor agonists by using an alternative measure to the hazard ratio.
METHODS: We used the difference in restricted mean survival time (RMST) as a measure of cardiovascular risks. Four randomized clinical trials with cardiovascular events as a primary endpoint, ELIXA (lixisenatide), LEADER (liraglutide), SUSTAIN-6 (semaglutide), and EXSCEL (exenatide), were reevaluated by estimating the RMSTs for each of the agents and placebo based on the reconstructed individual patient data for each time-to-event outcome from publicly available information.
RESULTS: The differences of RMSTs (GLP-1 receptor agonist minus placebo: point estimate and 95% CI) for primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular events were 0 days [-14, 14] in ELIXA (1080 days follow-up), 20 days [6, 34] in LEADER (1620 days follow-up), 8 days [1, 15] in SUSTAIN-6 (672 days follow-up), and 11 days [-3, 26] in EXSCEL (1825 days follow-up). As for the risk of other cardiovascular outcomes, there were no substantial differences between GLP-1 receptor agonists and placebo.
CONCLUSIONS: Liraglutide and semaglutide decrease the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with placebo when using the difference in RMST. The previously reported result that GLP-1 receptor agonists do not increase the risk of cardiovascular outcomes compared with placebo is also confirmed.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cardiovascular risks associated with GLP-1 receptor agonists by using an alternative measure to the hazard ratio.
METHODS: We used the difference in restricted mean survival time (RMST) as a measure of cardiovascular risks. Four randomized clinical trials with cardiovascular events as a primary endpoint, ELIXA (lixisenatide), LEADER (liraglutide), SUSTAIN-6 (semaglutide), and EXSCEL (exenatide), were reevaluated by estimating the RMSTs for each of the agents and placebo based on the reconstructed individual patient data for each time-to-event outcome from publicly available information.
RESULTS: The differences of RMSTs (GLP-1 receptor agonist minus placebo: point estimate and 95% CI) for primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular events were 0 days [-14, 14] in ELIXA (1080 days follow-up), 20 days [6, 34] in LEADER (1620 days follow-up), 8 days [1, 15] in SUSTAIN-6 (672 days follow-up), and 11 days [-3, 26] in EXSCEL (1825 days follow-up). As for the risk of other cardiovascular outcomes, there were no substantial differences between GLP-1 receptor agonists and placebo.
CONCLUSIONS: Liraglutide and semaglutide decrease the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with placebo when using the difference in RMST. The previously reported result that GLP-1 receptor agonists do not increase the risk of cardiovascular outcomes compared with placebo is also confirmed.
Full text links
Trending Papers
A Personalized Approach to the Management of Congestion in Acute Heart Failure.Heart International 2023
Potential Mechanisms of the Protective Effects of the Cardiometabolic Drugs Type-2 Sodium-Glucose Transporter Inhibitors and Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Heart Failure.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 Februrary 21
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app