Cardiovascular prevention with glucose‐lowering drugs in type 2 diabetes: An evidence‐based approach to the categories of primary and secondary prevention
Authors' conclusion
The distinction between patients with ASCVD and those without ASCVD and MRF appears therefore justified by available evidence.
Study context
- Population
- People with T2D in cardiovascular outcome trials of SGLT2i or GLP-1 RA, with or without established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD)
- Comparison
- SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA vs control in T2D with vs without established ASCVD
- Outcome
- MACE
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
MACE with SGLT2i or GLP-1 RA, by ASCVD status
Estimate (95% CI)
SGLT2i
inverse variance OR 0.91(0.86: 0.97)
GLP-1 RA
Mantel-Haenszel OR 0.85(0.81: 0.90)
Further pooled results
Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) incidence, ASCVD vs no ASCVD
- MACE incidence higher with ASCVD, SGLT2i trials
- 2.8-fold
- MACE incidence higher with ASCVD, GLP-1 RA trials
- 3.9-fold
- Definitions of ASCVD and multiple risk factors (MRF) heterogeneous across trials
NNT to prevent one MACE, assuming same benefit in MRF
- SGLT2i, secondary prevention
- 35
- SGLT2i, primary prevention
- 99
- GLP-1 RA, secondary prevention
- 21
- GLP-1 RA, primary prevention
- 82
Original publication
Cardiovascular prevention with glucose‐lowering drugs in type 2 diabetes: An evidence‐based approach to the categories of primary and secondary prevention. Diabetes Obes Metab. Published 2 August 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →