Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors and the Risk of Gallbladder and Bile Duct Disease Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: The use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors may be associated with an increased risk of gallbladder and bile duct disease among patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study using an active comparator, new-user design. We used data from the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink to identify patients newly treated with either a DPP-4 inhibitor or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor between January 2013 and December 2020. We fitted Cox proportional hazards models with propensity score fine stratification weighting to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) for incident gallbladder and bile duct disease associated with DPP-4 inhibitors compared to SGLT-2 inhibitors. RESULTS: DPP-4 inhibitors were associated with a 46% increased risk of gallbladder and bile duct disease (4.3 vs. 3.0 events per 1000 person-years, HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.17-1.83). At 6 months and 1 year, 745 and 948 patients, respectively, would need to be treated with DPP-4 inhibitors for one patient to experience a gallbladder or bile duct disease. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based cohort study, the use of DPP-4 inhibitors, when compared with SGLT-2 inhibitors, was associated with a moderately increased risk of gallbladder and bile duct disease among patients with type 2 diabetes. This outcome was still quite rare with a high number needed to harm at 6 months and 1 year.

Effect of combination treatment with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors on incidence of cardiovascular and serious renal events: population based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the combined use of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors is associated with a decreased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and serious renal events compared with either drug class alone among patients with type 2 diabetes, and to assess the effect of the combination on the individual components of major adverse cardiovascular events, heart failure, and all cause mortality. DESIGN: Population based cohort study using a prevalent new-user design, emulating a trial. SETTING: UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care and Office for National Statistics databases. PARTICIPANTS: Two prevalent new-user cohorts were assembled between January 2013 and December 2020, with follow-up until the end of March 2021. The first cohort included 6696 patients who started GLP-1 receptor agonists and added on SGLT-2 inhibitors, and the second included 8942 patients who started SGLT-2 inhibitors and added on GLP-1 receptor agonists. Combination users were matched, in a 1:1 ratio, to patients prescribed the same background drug, duration of background drug, and time conditional propensity score. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to estimate the hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals of major adverse cardiovascular events and serious renal events, separately, comparing the GLP-1 receptor agonist-SGLT-2 inhibitor combination with the background drug, either GLP-1 receptor agonists or SGLT-2 inhibitors, depending on the cohort. Secondary outcomes included associations with the individual components of major adverse cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular mortality), heart failure, and all cause mortality. RESULTS: Compared with GLP-1 receptor agonists, the SGLT-2 inhibitor-GLP-1 receptor agonist combination was associated with a 30% lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (7.0 v 10.3 events per 1000 person years; hazard ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.49 to 0.99) and a 57% lower risk of serious renal events (2.0 v 4.6 events per 1000 person years; hazard ratio 0.43, 0.23 to 0.80). Compared with SGLT-2 inhibitors, the GLP-1 receptor agonist-SGLT-2 inhibitor combination was associated with a 29% lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (7.6 v 10.7 events per 1000 person years; hazard ratio 0.71, 0.52 to 0.98), whereas serious renal events generated a wide confidence interval (1.4 v 2.0 events per 1000 person years; hazard ratio 0.67, 0.32 to 1.41). Secondary outcomes generated similar results but with wider confidence intervals. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort study, the GLP-1 receptor agonist-SGLT-2 inhibitor combination was associated with a lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and serious renal events compared with either drug class alone.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and the risk of lung cancer among patients with type 2 diabetes.

We sought to determine whether the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors is associated with a decreased risk of incident lung cancers among patients with type 2 diabetes. We assembled a new-user, active comparator cohort of SGLT-2 inhibitor and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor users using the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We fit Cox proportional hazards models with propensity score fine stratification weighting to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for incident lung cancer. Crude incidence rates were 0.94 per 1000 person-years among 69 675 SGLT-2 inhibitor users followed for a median of 2.4 years and 1.45 per 1000 person-years among 151 495 DPP-4 inhibitor users followed for a median of 3.7 years. No reduced short-term risk of lung cancer was observed among SGLT-2 inhibitor users after weighting (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.77-1.21). Further research with a longer follow-up period may be warranted.

Glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonists and the risk of skin cancer among patients with type 2 diabetes: Population-based cohort study.

AIMS: The objective of this study was to determine whether the use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) is associated with an increased risk of melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer, separately, compared with the use of sulfonylureas among patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Using the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink (2007-2019), we assembled two new-user active comparator cohorts. In the first cohort assessing melanoma as the outcome, 11,786 new users of GLP-1 RAs were compared with 208,519 new users of sulfonylureas. In the second cohort assessing nonmelanoma skin cancer as the outcome, 11,774 new users of GLP-1 RAs were compared with 207,788 new users of sulfonylureas. Cox proportional hazards models weighted using propensity score fine stratification were fit to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer, respectively. RESULTS: Compared with sulfonylureas, GLP-1 RAs were not associated with an increased risk of either melanoma (42.6 vs. 43.9 per 100,000 person-years, respectively; HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.53-1.75) or nonmelanoma skin cancer (243.9 vs. 229.9 per 100,000 person-years, respectively; HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.80-1.33). There was no evidence of an association between cumulative duration of use with either melanoma or nonmelanoma skin cancer. Consistent results were observed in secondary and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based cohort study, GLP-1 RAs were not associated with an increased risk of melanoma or nonmelanoma skin cancer, compared with sulfonylureas.

Incretin-based drugs and the risk of diabetic retinopathy among individuals with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

AIM: The results from the SUSTAIN-6 trial generated some uncertainty regarding the association between incretin-based drugs [dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs)] and the risk of diabetic retinopathy. Our objective was to synthesize the available evidence from observational studies regarding the use of incretin-based drugs and the risk of diabetic retinopathy among individuals with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systemically searched Cochrane Library, Embase and Medline to identify observational studies of interest. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. Data from included studies were pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effect model with the Hartung-Knapp extension. RESULTS: We included 14 studies in the systematic review, with 10 examining DPP-4 inhibitors and seven examining GLP-1 RAs. Nine studies investigated incident diabetic retinopathy, six investigated diabetic retinopathy progression and two investigated both outcomes. Seven studies were at moderate risk of bias, four at serious risk of bias and three at critical risk of bias. Data pooled across studies showed no association between the use of DPP-4 inhibitors (risk ratio: 0.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.83, 1.17) or GLP-1 RAs (risk ratio: 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.56, 1.34) and the risk of diabetic retinopathy. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the use of incretin-based drugs is not associated with the risk of diabetic retinopathy among individuals with type 2 diabetes. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution considering the limited quality of some of the available evidence.

Outcomes of SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA Therapy Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Varying NAFLD Status.

Importance: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a cardiovascular risk factor, but whether sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) are associated with reduced cardiovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and concomitant NAFLD remains uncertain. Objective: To investigate the outcomes of SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA therapy among patients with T2D varied by the presence or absence of NAFLD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, population-based, nationwide cohort study used an active-comparator new-user design. Two distinct new-user active-comparator cohorts of patients aged 40 years and older who initiated SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA were propensity score matched to patients who initiated dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i). The study was conducted in South Korea from January 2013 to December 2020, and data analysis was conducted from October 2022 to March 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were (1) major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite end point of hospitalization for myocardial infarction, hospitalization for stroke, and cardiovascular death, and (2) hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). The Wald test was applied to assess heterogeneity by NAFLD. Results: After 1:1 propensity score matching, 140 438 patients were retrieved in the first cohort (SGLT-2i vs DPP-4i; mean [SD] age, 57.5 [10.3] years; 79 633 [56.7%] male) and 34 886 patients were identified in the second cohort (GLP-1RA vs DPP-4i; mean [SD] age, 59.5 [10.5] years; 17 894 [51.3%] male). Compared with DPP-4i, SGLT-2i therapy was associated with a lower risk of MACE (HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.71-0.85]) and HHF (HR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.48-0.81]). GLP-1RA therapy was associated with a decreased risk of MACE (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.39-0.62]) but had statistically nonsignificant findings regarding HHF (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.39-1.07]). Stratified analysis by NAFLD status yielded consistent results for SGLT-2i (MACE with NAFLD: HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.62-0.86]; without NAFLD: HR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.72-0.91]; HHF with NAFLD: HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.49-1.17]; without NAFLD: HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.40-0.78]) and for GLP-1RA (MACE with NAFLD: HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.32-0.77]; without NAFLD: HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.37-0.65]; HHF with NAFLD: HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.38-1.76]; without NAFLD: HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.27-1.06]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study, SGLT-2i therapy was associated with a decreased risk of MACE and HHF, while GLP-1RA therapy was associated with a decreased risk of MACE among patients with T2D, irrespective of baseline NAFLD status.

Levothyroxine initiation and the risk of pregnancy loss among pregnant women with subclinical hypothyroidism: An observational study emulating a target trial.

BACKGROUND: While the benefits of levothyroxine are well-established for overt hypothyroidism, they are unclear for subclinical hypothyroidism (SCH) among pregnant women. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of initiation of levothyroxine on pregnancy loss among women with SCH with an emulated target trial using observational data. METHODS: We emulated a target trial using the United Kingdom's Clinical Practice Research Datalink to account for the staggered timing of diagnosis and treatment of SCH and the time of entry of women into prenatal care. We emulated multiple nested trials (at each gestational week) and used an intention-to-treat approach to define levothyroxine use (≥1 prescription in the 7 days prior to trial entry), with eligible users matched to non-users (1:4) on time of diagnosis, gestational week of the first eligible trial and high-dimensional propensity score. Pregnancy losses included spontaneous abortion and stillbirth. A pooled logistic regression model with bootstrap resampling was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Based on 159,177 eligible person-trials (5781 women), the matched cohort included 181 initiators and 640 non-initiators of levothyroxine, with 57 pregnancy losses occurring during follow-up. Overall, the mean age of women was 32.2 years (SD 5.4), 25% were obese, 8% had type 2 diabetes and about 50% were nulliparous. After matching, women who initiated levothyroxine versus not had higher thyroid-stimulating levels during pregnancy and were more likely to have a history of hypothyroidism. The cumulative incidence of pregnancy loss was lower in initiators versus non-initiators of levothyroxine. The adjusted HR for pregnancy loss was 0.87 (95% CI 0.22, 1.56). CONCLUSIONS: Although our assessment of the effect of initiation of levothyroxine for SCH in pregnancy precludes any definitive conclusions due to wide confidence intervals, this study illustrates the feasibility of using the target trial emulation framework to examine the effectiveness of medication use in pregnancy.

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and the risk of skin cancer among patients with type 2 diabetes: a UK population-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) enzyme significantly influences carcinogenic pathways in the skin. The objective of this study was to determine whether DPP-4 inhibitors are associated with the incidence of melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer, compared with sulfonylureas. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Using the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we assembled two new-user active comparator cohorts for each skin cancer outcome from 2007 to 2019. For melanoma, the cohort included 96 739 DPP-4 inhibitor users and 209 341 sulfonylurea users, and 96 411 DPP-4 inhibitor users and 208 626 sulfonylurea users for non-melanoma skin cancer. Propensity score fine stratification weighted Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs of melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer, separately. RESULTS: Overall, DPP-4 inhibitors were associated with a 23% decreased risk of melanoma compared with sulfonylureas (49.7 vs 65.3 per 100 000 person-years, respectively; HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.96). The HR progressively reduced with increasing cumulative duration of use (0-2 years HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.54; 2.1-5 years HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.66; >5 years HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.74). In contrast, these drugs were not associated with the incidence of non-melanoma skin cancer, compared with sulfonylureas (448.1 vs 426.1 per 100 000 person-years, respectively; HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.15). CONCLUSIONS: In this large, population-based cohort study, DPP-4 inhibitors were associated with a reduced risk of melanoma but not non-melanoma skin cancer, compared with sulfonylureas.

Safety of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors on amputation across categories of baseline cardiovascular disease and diuretics use in patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIM: To assess the risk of amputation associated with sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) among patients with type 2 diabetes, across categories of baseline cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diuretic use (DU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an active comparator, new-user cohort study using Korea's nationwide claims data (2015-2020). The study cohort consisted of patients with type 2 diabetes who initiated SGLT2is or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is). Cohort entry was defined by first prescription date. We then classified patients into four discrete subcohorts based on their baseline status of CVD and DU as (1) CVD+/DU+, (2) CVD+/DU-, (3) CVD-/DU+ and (4) CVD-/DU-. We performed 1:1 propensity score (PS) matching within each cohort and estimated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the risk of amputation with SGLT2is versus DPP4is using Cox models. RESULTS: We identified 219 900 PS-matched pairs of SGLT2is and DPP4is (CVD+/DU+, n = 11 719; CVD+/DU-, n = 26 092; CVD-/DU+, n = 26 894; and CVD-/DU-, n = 155 195), with well-balanced baseline covariates across all cohorts. Significantly lower risks of amputation with SGLT2is versus DPP4is were found in CVD+/DU+ (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.14-0.90), CVD+/DU- (0.45, 0.21-0.99) and CVD-/DU- (0.48, 0.33-0.70), but not in CVD-/DU+ (0.54, 0.26-1.12). Consistent trends in estimates were found across various sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Initiating SGLT2is against DPP4is did not increase the risk of amputation across patient populations of varying vulnerability. These findings based on routine practice will reassure clinicians of the safety of SGLT2is with regard to amputation risk in selected high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes.

Occupation as a gendered-role and outcome in systemic sclerosis.

Objective: Sex and gender are of growing scientific interest in disease onset and course. While sex differences have been shown to exist in systemic sclerosis, there is a paucity of data on gender. Our objective was to examine the association between occupation, a gender-related role and outcomes in systemic sclerosis. Methods: An occupation score ranging from 0 to 100, with lower scores representing occupations traditionally held by men and higher scores traditionally held by women, was constructed using the National Occupational Classification 2016 and data from Statistics Canada. Subjects in the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group registry were assigned an occupation score based on self-reported occupation. Multivariate models, adjusted for sex, age, smoking and education were used to estimate the independent effect of occupation score on systemic sclerosis outcomes. Results: We included 1104 subjects, of which 961 were females (87%) and 143 (13%) males. There were differences between females versus males: disease duration (9.9 vs 7.6 years, p = 0.002), diffuse disease (35% vs 54%, p < 0.001), interstitial lung disease (28% vs 37%, p = 0.021) and pulmonary hypertension (10% vs 4%, p = 0.033), but not pain, response to treatment and mortality. The median occupation scores differed between females and males (84.3 (interquartile range 56.8, 89.4) vs 24.9 (4.3, 54.1), p < 0.001). The Spearman correlation between sex and occupation score was 0.44, indicating a weak correlation. In adjusted analyses, occupation score was not an independent predictor of disease subset (diffuse vs limited), interstitial lung disease, pulmonary hypertension, pain, response to treatment or mortality. Conclusion: We did not find independent associations between an occupation score, a gender-related role and outcomes in systemic sclerosis. These results should be interpreted with caution as occupation may be a poor measure of gender. Future research using a validated measure of gender will be needed to generate robust data on the effect of gender in systemic sclerosis.

Long-acting insulin analogues and the risk of diabetic retinopathy among patients with type 2 diabetes: A population-based cohort study.

AIM: To determine whether the use of long-acting insulin analogues is associated with an increased risk of incident diabetic retinopathy (DR) among patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum, this retrospective, population-based cohort study included patients with type 2 diabetes who initiated a long-acting insulin analogue (glargine, detemir, degludec) or Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin. The primary outcome was incident DR. We used Cox proportional hazards models with inverse probability of treatment weighting to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for incident DR with insulin analogues versus NPH insulin. RESULTS: There were 66 280 new users of long-acting insulin analogues and 66 173 new users of NPH insulin. The incidence rate of DR was 101.7 per 1000 person-years (95% CI, 98.7-104.8) for insulin analogues and 93.2 (95% CI, 90.0-96.5) per 1000 person-years for NPH insulin. Compared with the current use of NPH insulin, insulin analogues were not associated with the risk of incident DR (HR 1.04, 95% CI, 0.99-1.09). The adjusted HRs were 0.84 (95% CI, 0.66-1.07) for proliferative DR and 1.02 (95% CI, 0.97-1.08) for non-proliferative DR. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with NPH insulin, long-acting insulin analogues were not associated with the risk of incident DR among patients with type 2 diabetes. This finding provides important reassurance regarding the safety of long-acting insulin analogues with respect to incident DR.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and the risk of venous thromboembolism: A population-based cohort study.

AIMS: The cardiovascular benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2Is) result from their complex impact on coronary and arterial vessels. However, their effect on veins and the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains unclear. Meta-analysis of trials has suggested no significant change in risk, but observational studies on the topic are scarce. Our objective was to determine if the use of SGLT2Is, compared to the use of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4Is), is associated with the risk of VTE among patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to hospitalization and vital statistics databases, we conducted a retrospective cohort study using a prevalent new-user design. SGLT2Is were matched to DPP-4I users on calendar time, diabetes treatment intensity, duration of previous DPP-4I use and time-conditional high-dimensional propensity score. Cox proportional hazard models estimated the hazard ratio (HR) for VTE with SGLT2Is versus DPP-4Is. RESULTS: SGLT2I use was not associated with an increased risk of VTE (HR 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34 to 1.25). This finding was consistent among prevalent (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.42) and incident (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.72) new users. CONCLUSIONS: We found that SGLT2Is were not associated with an increased risk of VTE compared to DPP-4Is. Although we observed a numerically decreased risk of VTE with SGLT2Is, estimates were accompanied by wide 95% CIs. Nonetheless, given the morbidity associated with VTE, our results provide some reassurance regarding the safety of SGLT2Is with respect to VTE.

Metformin and Cancer: Solutions to a Real-World Evidence Failure.

The quest to repurpose metformin, an antidiabetes drug, as an agent for cancer prevention and treatment, which began in 2005 with an observational study that reported a reduction in cancer incidence among metformin users, generated extensive experimental, observational, and clinical research. Experimental studies revealed that metformin has anticancer effects via various pathways, potentially inhibiting cancer cell proliferation. Concurrently, multiple nonrandomized observational studies reported remarkable reductions in cancer incidence and outcomes with metformin use. However, these studies were shown, in 2012, to be affected by time-related biases, such as immortal time bias, which tend to greatly exaggerate the benefit of a drug. The observational studies that avoided these biases did not find an association. Subsequently, the randomized trials of metformin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and as adjuvant therapy for the treatment of various cancers, advanced or metastatic, did not find reductions in cancer incidence or outcomes. Most recently, the largest phase 3 randomized trial of metformin as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer, which enrolled 3,649 women with a 5-year follow-up, found no benefit for disease-free survival or overall survival with metformin. This major failure of observational real-world evidence studies in correctly assessing the effects of metformin on cancer incidence and outcomes was caused by preventable biases which, surprisingly, are still prominent in 2022. Rigorous approaches for observational studies that emulate randomized trials, such as the incident and prevalent new-user designs along with propensity scores, avoid these biases and can provide more accurate real-world evidence for the repurposing of drugs such as metformin.

Use of metformin and insulin among pregnant women with gestation diabetes in the United Kingdom: A population-based cohort study.

AIMS: The contemporary prescription patterns of antidiabetic drugs following guideline changes recommending metformin as first-line gestational diabetes (GDM) pharmacotherapy is underexplored. We aimed to examined use of metformin and insulin during pregnancy among women with GDM over 20 years in the United Kingdom. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study using linked data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, its pregnancy register and Hospital Episode Statistics from 1998 to 2017. We included pregnancies of women without prior diabetes history who received GDM diagnosis or initiated an antidiabetic drug after 20 weeks gestation. Patient-level and practice-level characteristics were compared between metformin initiators and insulin initiators. We described trends of initiating metformin as first-line treatment and described time to initiation of rescue insulin overall, and by body mass index among metformin initiators. RESULTS: Our cohort included 5633 pregnancies from 5393 women with GDM, of whom 38.9% initiated pharmacotherapy (41% insulin, 59% metformin). Metformin prescriptions (as opposed to insulin) increased substantially, from <5% of pregnancies before 2007 to 42.5% in 2008. Over 85% of pregnancies that were prescribed pharmacotherapy were prescribed metformin as first-line treatment in 2015. Among metformin initiators, 16% initiated rescue insulin, typically occurring within 40 days of metformin initiation. Choice of GDM pharmacotherapy varied by characteristics, including smoking, obesity, race/ethnicity and general practice regions. CONCLUSIONS: Metformin was the most prescribed medication for GDM, with large increases over the past 2 decades. The increasing use of oral-antidiabetic drugs during pregnancy, consistent with other regions, highlights the need for future studies examining effectiveness and safety of antidiabetic drug use during pregnancy.

Association of adverse respiratory events with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors versus dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors among patients with type 2 diabetes in South Korea: a nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Impaired respiratory function remains underrecognized in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), despite common pulmonary impairment. Meanwhile, there is little data available on the respiratory effects of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). Hence, we examined the association between SGLT2i use and the risk of adverse respiratory events in a real-world setting. METHODS: We conducted a population-based, nationwide cohort study using an active-comparator new-user design and nationwide claims data of South Korea from January 2015 to December 2020. Among individuals aged 18 years or older, propensity score matching was done to match each new user of SGLT2is with dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4is), with patients followed up according to an as-treated definition. The primary outcome was respiratory events, a composite endpoint of acute pulmonary edema, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), pneumonia, and respiratory failure. Secondary outcomes were the individual components of the primary outcome and in-hospital death. Cox models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs. RESULTS: Of 205,534 patient pairs in the propensity score matched cohort, the mean age of the entire cohort was 53.8 years and 59% were men, with a median follow-up of 0.66 years; all baseline covariates achieved balance between the two groups. Incidence rates for overall respiratory events were 4.54 and 7.54 per 1000 person-years among SGLT2i and DPP4i users, respectively, corresponding to a rate difference of 3 less events per 1000 person-years (95% CI - 3.44 to - 2.55). HRs (95% CIs) were 0.60 (0.55 to 0.64) for the composite respiratory endpoint, 0.35 (0.23 to 0.55) for acute pulmonary edema, 0.44 (0.18 to 1.05) for ARDS, 0.61 (0.56 to 0.66) for pneumonia, 0.49 (0.31 to 0.76) for respiratory failure, and 0.46 (0.41 to 0.51) for in-hospital death. Similar trends were found across individual SGLT2is, subgroup analyses of age, sex, history of comorbidities, and a range of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest a lower risk of adverse respiratory events associated with patients with T2D initiating SGLT2is versus DPP4is. This real-world evidence helps inform patients, clinicians, and guideline writers regarding the respiratory effects of SGLT2i in routine practice.

Sulphonylureas versus metformin and the risk of ventricular arrhythmias among people with type 2 diabetes: A population-based cohort study.

AIM: To determine whether the use of sulphonylurea monotherapy, compared with metformin monotherapy, is associated with an increased risk of ventricular arrhythmia (VA) among patients initiating pharmacotherapy for type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study using electronic health data extracted from the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum. Using the active comparator, new-user cohort design, we compared rates of VA among patients aged 18 years or older using sulphonylurea monotherapy with those using metformin monotherapy as their initial pharmacological treatment for type 2 diabetes from April 1998 to December 2019. We used a Cox proportional hazards model with inverse probability of treatment weighting by propensity score to estimate the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and a corresponding bootstrap 95% confidence interval (CI) for VA with sulphonylurea monotherapy versus metformin monotherapy. RESULTS: The cohort included 92 638 new users of sulphonylurea and 506 882 new users of metformin. A total of 279 VA events occurred among sulphonylurea users (rate per 10 000 person-years: 25.5, 95% CI: 22.7 to 28.7) and 1537 VA events occurred among metformin users (rate per 10 000 person-years: 18.5, 95% CI: 17.6 to 19.5). Compared with metformin, sulphonylureas were associated with an increased risk of VA (aHR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.69). CONCLUSIONS: Sulphonylureas are associated with an increased risk of VA when used as first-line therapy for type 2 diabetes relative to metformin use. This increased risk should be considered when prescribing sulphonylureas as an initial treatment for type 2 diabetes.

Testosterone treatment and the risk of osteonecrosis: a pharmacovigilance analysis in Vigibase.

PURPOSE: Recent reports have raised concerns about a potential risk of osteonecrosis associated with testosterone treatment (TT). The aim of this pharmacovigilance study was to assess the risk of reporting osteonecrosis associated with the use of TT compared with use of any other medication. METHODS: We performed a disproportionality analysis to investigate the risk of reporting osteonecrosis with TT using the WHO database VigiBase®. We estimated the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of reporting osteonecrosis with use of TT vs all other drugs, and the adjusted ROR with use of TT vs use of drugs for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). RESULTS: Among men at least 18 years of age between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2019, we identified 3479 reports of osteonecrosis, 84 of which were associated with TT use, out of a total of 4,667,754 adverse event reports. Reports of osteonecrosis in TT users occurred with both transdermal and injectable forms, and the mean age at report was 55.4 years. TT use was associated with a greater risk of reporting osteonecrosis compared to all other drugs (ROR, 5.13; 95% CI, 4.13-6.37) and compared with use of drugs for BPH (ROR, 3.00; 95% CI, 2.08-4.30). Half of the osteonecrosis reports associated with TT indicated concomitant use of corticosteroids. CONCLUSION: TT was associated with a greater risk of reports of osteonecrosis compared to use of any other drug and use of drugs for BPH. This signal should be confirmed in complementary studies.