open access

Vol 7, No 5 (2018)
REVIEW ARTICLES
Published online: 2018-11-27
Get Citation

The impact of cardiovascular outcome trials on the choice of insulins in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus: An expert review

Rajesh Rajput, Jagat Jyoti Mukherjee, Vageesh Ayyar S, Samit Ghosal
DOI: 10.5603/DK.2018.0024
·
Clinical Diabetology 2018;7(5):234-246.

open access

Vol 7, No 5 (2018)
REVIEW ARTICLES
Published online: 2018-11-27

Abstract

Introduction. This expert review aims to address the epidemiology and pathophysiology of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), help understand the various statistical considerations and interpretational nuances of cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) in general, and discuss in particular, the CVOTs with insulins, and their impact on the choice of insulins in day-to-day clinical practice. Material and methods. The expert panel critically analysed published data from observational studies, randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses and CVOTs regarding cardiovascular (CV) safety of insulin preparations, and agreed on a series of consensus statements supported by available scientific evidence and the collective clinical judgement of the experts. Results. A proportion of persons with T2DM have a high risk of CVD and CV mortality, which is partly contributed by insulin resistance-related, and hyperglycaemiarelated, risk factors. Over the past decade, CVOTs have become an integral part of the drug approval process of anti-diabetic therapies by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Most insulin preparations in use today, barring a few modern insulins, were introduced much before this regulatory requirement was put in place, and hence, have not undergone rigorous CVOTs. There is a large body of observational data concerning the CV safety of insulin preparations, which are often confusing and, at times, contradictory. In this background, it is reassuring to note that CVOTs of two basal insulin analogues, namely insulin glargine, studied in the Basal Insulin and Cardiovascular and Other Outcomes in Dysglycaemia Trial (ORIGIN), and insulin degludec, studied in the Efficacy and Safety of Degludec versus Glargine in Type 2 Diabetes Trial (DEVOTE), established their long-term CV safety. The DEVOTE trial provided additional safety data reporting fewer severe hypoglycaemic events with insulin degludec in comparison to insulin glargine. Conclusions. This review critically analyses the two CVOTs of basal insulin analogues, in tandem with a general review of the methodological and interpretational aspects of CVOTs in general. The long-term CV safety of analogue basal insulins is discussed. The lack of CVOTs with prandial and pre-mixed insulins, either human or analogue, was identified as the main research gap in this area.

Abstract

Introduction. This expert review aims to address the epidemiology and pathophysiology of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), help understand the various statistical considerations and interpretational nuances of cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) in general, and discuss in particular, the CVOTs with insulins, and their impact on the choice of insulins in day-to-day clinical practice. Material and methods. The expert panel critically analysed published data from observational studies, randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses and CVOTs regarding cardiovascular (CV) safety of insulin preparations, and agreed on a series of consensus statements supported by available scientific evidence and the collective clinical judgement of the experts. Results. A proportion of persons with T2DM have a high risk of CVD and CV mortality, which is partly contributed by insulin resistance-related, and hyperglycaemiarelated, risk factors. Over the past decade, CVOTs have become an integral part of the drug approval process of anti-diabetic therapies by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Most insulin preparations in use today, barring a few modern insulins, were introduced much before this regulatory requirement was put in place, and hence, have not undergone rigorous CVOTs. There is a large body of observational data concerning the CV safety of insulin preparations, which are often confusing and, at times, contradictory. In this background, it is reassuring to note that CVOTs of two basal insulin analogues, namely insulin glargine, studied in the Basal Insulin and Cardiovascular and Other Outcomes in Dysglycaemia Trial (ORIGIN), and insulin degludec, studied in the Efficacy and Safety of Degludec versus Glargine in Type 2 Diabetes Trial (DEVOTE), established their long-term CV safety. The DEVOTE trial provided additional safety data reporting fewer severe hypoglycaemic events with insulin degludec in comparison to insulin glargine. Conclusions. This review critically analyses the two CVOTs of basal insulin analogues, in tandem with a general review of the methodological and interpretational aspects of CVOTs in general. The long-term CV safety of analogue basal insulins is discussed. The lack of CVOTs with prandial and pre-mixed insulins, either human or analogue, was identified as the main research gap in this area.
Get Citation

Keywords

type 2 diabetes; insulin treatment; basal insulin; analogue insulin; cardiovascular safety; cardiovascular outcome trials; ORIGIN; DEVOTE

About this article
Title

The impact of cardiovascular outcome trials on the choice of insulins in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus: An expert review

Journal

Clinical Diabetology

Issue

Vol 7, No 5 (2018)

Pages

234-246

Published online

2018-11-27

DOI

10.5603/DK.2018.0024

Bibliographic record

Clinical Diabetology 2018;7(5):234-246.

Keywords

type 2 diabetes
insulin treatment
basal insulin
analogue insulin
cardiovascular safety
cardiovascular outcome trials
ORIGIN
DEVOTE

Authors

Rajesh Rajput
Jagat Jyoti Mukherjee
Vageesh Ayyar S
Samit Ghosal

References (76)
  1. International Diabetes Federation (IDF). International Diabetes Federation (IDF). In: Dilworth J, Stuart-Jones M. ed. International Year Book and Statesmen's Who's Who. IDF Diabetes Atlas Update, Brussels 2018: 8.
  2. Shaw JE, Sicree RA, Zimmet PZ. Global estimates of the prevalence of diabetes for 2010 and 2030. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2010; 87(1): 4–14.
  3. Low Wang CC, Hess CN, Hiatt WR, et al. Clinical Update: Cardiovascular Disease in Diabetes Mellitus: Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease and Heart Failure in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus – Mechanisms, Management, and Clinical Considerations. Circulation. 2016; 133(24): 2459–2502.
  4. Martín-Timón I, Sevillano-Collantes C, Segura-Galindo A, et al. Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease: Have all risk factors the same strength? World J Diabetes. 2014; 5(4): 444–470.
  5. Rao Kondapally Seshasai S, Kaptoge S, Thompson A, et al. Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration. Diabetes mellitus, fasting glucose, and risk of cause-specific death. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364(9): 829–841.
  6. Laakso M, Lehto S. Epidemiology of macrovascular disease in diabetes. Diabetes Rev. 1997; 5: 294–315.
  7. Haffner SM, Lehto S, Rönnemaa T, et al. Mortality from coronary heart disease in subjects with type 2 diabetes and in nondiabetic subjects with and without prior myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1998; 339(4): 229–234.
  8. Juutilainen A, Lehto S, Rönnemaa T, et al. Type 2 diabetes as a "coronary heart disease equivalent": an 18-year prospective population-based study in Finnish subjects. Diabetes Care. 2005; 28(12): 2901–2907.
  9. Wannamethee SG, Shaper AG, Whincup PH, et al. Impact of diabetes on cardiovascular disease risk and all-cause mortality in older men: influence of age at onset, diabetes duration, and established and novel risk factors. Arch Intern Med. 2011; 171(5): 404–410.
  10. Unnikrishnan R, Anjana RM, Mohan V, et al. The need for obtaining accurate nationwide estimates of diabetes prevalence in India — rationale for a national study on diabetes. Indian J Med Res. 2011; 133(6): 369–380.
  11. Currie CJ, Peters JR, Evans M. Dispensing patterns and financial costs of glucose-lowering therapies in the UK from 2000 to 2008. Diabet Med. 2010; 27(7): 744–752.
  12. Currie CJ, Poole CD, Evans M, et al. Mortality and other important diabetes-related outcomes with insulin vs other antihyperglycemic therapies in type 2 diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013; 98(2): 668–677.
  13. American Diabetes Association. Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2005; 28(Suppl 1): 4–36.
  14. Yudkin JS, Richter B, Gale EAM. Intensified glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes: time for a reappraisal. Diabetologia. 2010; 53(10): 2079–2085.
  15. European Medicines Agency update on ongoing benefit — risk review of Avandia, Avandamet and Avaglim. https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/press-release/european-medicines-agency-update-ongoing-benefit-risk-review-avandia-avandamet-avaglim_en.pdf (2018-10-01).
  16. FDA Drug Safety Communication: Ongoing Safety Review of Actos (pioglitazone) and Potential Increased Risk of Bladder Cancer After Two Years Exposure. https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/Drugsafety/ucm226214.htm (2018-10-01).
  17. John M, Gopalakrishnan Unnikrishnan A, Kalra S, et al. Cardiovascular outcome trials for anti-diabetes medication: A holy grail of drug development? Indian Heart J. 2016; 68(4): 564–571.
  18. Guidance for Industry. Diabetes Mellitus — Evaluating Cardiovascular Risk in New Antidiabetic Therapies to Treat Type 2 Diabetes. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatory%20information/guidances/ucm071627.pdf (2018-10-01).
  19. Hiatt WR, Kaul S, Smith RJ. The cardiovascular safety of diabetes drugs--insights from the rosiglitazone experience. N Engl J Med. 2013; 369(14): 1285–1287.
  20. Mohan V, Shanthirani CS, Deepa M, et al. Mortality rates due to diabetes in a selected urban south Indian population — the Chennai Urban Population Study [CUPS–16]. J Assoc Physicians India. 2006; 54: 113–117.
  21. Shah AD, Langenberg C, Rapsomaniki E, et al. Type 2 diabetes and incidence of cardiovascular diseases: a cohort study in 1.9 million people. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2015; 3(2): 105–113.
  22. Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. Executive Summary of The Third Report of The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, And Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol In Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA. 2001; 285(19): 2486–2497.
  23. Goff D, Lloyd-Jones D, Bennett G, et al. 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart AssociationTask Force on Practice Guidelines. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2014; 63(25): 2935–2959.
  24. Nicholls SJ, Tuzcu EM, Kalidindi S, et al. Effect of diabetes on progression of coronary atherosclerosis and arterial remodeling: a pooled analysis of 5 intravascular ultrasound trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52(4): 255–262.
  25. Rydén L, Grant PJ, Anker SD, et al. The Task Force on diabetes, prédiabetes and cardiovascular diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and developed in collaboration with the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). ESC Guidelines on diabetes, pre-diabetes and cardiovascular diseases, developed in collaboration with the EASD. Eur Heart J. 2013; 34: 3035–3087.
  26. John M, Gopalakrishnan Unnikrishnan A, Kalra S, et al. Cardiovascular outcome trials for anti-diabetes medication: A holy grail of drug development? Indian Heart J. 2016; 68(4): 564–571.
  27. Ghosal S. Cardio Vascular Outcomes Trials (CVOTs) with Anti-Hyperglycemic Agents: Demystifying Statistical Complexities. Journal of Diabetes, Metabolic Disorders & Control. 2017; 4(4): 00116.
  28. Geiger MJ, Mehta C, Turner JR, et al. Clinical Development Approaches and Statistical Methodologies to Prospectively Assess the Cardiovascular Risk of New Antidiabetic Therapies for Type 2 Diabetes. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2015; 49(1): 50–64.
  29. Accessed US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry: diabetes mellitus — evaluating cardiovascular risk in new antidiabetic therapies to treat type 2 diabetes. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm071627.pdf. Published December 2008. (2017-27-02).
  30. Mazzone T, Chait A, Plutzky J. Cardiovascular disease risk in type 2 diabetes mellitus: insights from mechanistic studies. Lancet. 2008; 371(9626): 1800–1809.
  31. St Onge EL, Motycka CA, Miller SA. A review of cardiovascular risks associated with medications used to treat type-2 diabetes mellitus. P T. 2009; 34(7): 368–378.
  32. Panicker GK, Karnad DR, Salvi V, et al. Cardiovascular risk of oral antidiabetic drugs: current evidence and regulatory requirements for new drugs. J Assoc Physicians India. 2012; 60: 56–61.
  33. Meinert CL, Knatterud GL, Prout TE, et al. A study of the effects of hypoglycemic agents on vascular complications in patients with adult-onset diabetes. II. Mortality results. Diabetes. 1970; 19: 789–830.
  34. Patel A, MacMahon S, Chalmers J, et al. ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Intensive blood glucose control and vascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008; 358(24): 2560–2572.
  35. Gerstein HC, Miller ME, Byington RP, et al. Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Study Group. Effects of intensive glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008; 358(24): 2545–2559.
  36. Muraglitazar briefing document. www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/05/briefing/2005-4169B2_02_03-FDA- MedOff-Safety.pdf (2018-10-01).
  37. Nissen SE, Wolski K, Topol EJ. Effect of muraglitazar on death and major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. JAMA. 2005; 294(20): 2581–2586.
  38. Dormandy JA, Charbonnel B, Eckland DJA, et al. PROactive Investigators. Secondary prevention of macrovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes in the PROactive Study (PROspective pioglitAzone Clinical Trial In macroVascular Events): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005; 366(9493): 1279–1289.
  39. Nissen SE, Wolski K. Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes. N Engl J Med. 2007; 356(24): 2457–2471.
  40. Singh S, Loke YK, Furberg CD. Long-term risk of cardiovascular events with rosiglitazone: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2007; 298(10): 1189–1195.
  41. Home PD, Pocock SJ, Beck-Nielsen H, et al. RECORD Study Group. Rosiglitazone evaluated for cardiovascular outcomes — an interim analysis. N Engl J Med. 2007; 357(1): 28–38.
  42. Duckworth W, Abraira C, Moritz T. Glucose Control and Vascular Complications in Veterans with Type 2 Diabetes. Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2009; 360: 129–139.
  43. Kramer CK, Zinman B. Cardiovascular disease and the use of insulin. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013; 15(10): 789–791.
  44. Monnier L, Hanefeld M, Schnell O, et al. Insulin and atherosclerosis: how are they related? Diabetes Metab. 2013; 39(2): 111–117.
  45. Gamble JM, Simpson SH, Eurich DT, et al. Insulin use and increased risk of mortality in type 2 diabetes: a cohort study. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2010; 12(1): 47–53.
  46. Currie CJ, Peters JR, Tynan A, et al. Survival as a function of HbA(1c) in people with type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2010; 375(9713): 481–489.
  47. Colayco DC, Niu F, McCombs JS, et al. A1C and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a nested case-control study. Diabetes Care. 2011; 34(1): 77–83.
  48. Margolis DJ, Hoffstad O, Strom BL. Association between serious ischemic cardiac outcomes and medications used to treat diabetes. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2008; 17(8): 753–759.
  49. Smooke S, Horwich TB, Fonarow GC. Insulin-treated diabetes is associated with a marked increase in mortality in patients with advanced heart failure. Am Heart J. 2005; 149(1): 168–174.
  50. Bruno G, Merletti F, Boffetta P, et al. Impact of glycaemic control, hypertension and insulin treatment on general and cause-specific mortality: an Italian population-based cohort of type II (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia. 1999; 42(3): 297–301.
  51. Kleinman JC, Donahue RP, Harris MI, et al. Mortality among diabetics in a national sample. Am J Epidemiol. 1988; 128(2): 389–401.
  52. Liu QZ, Knowler WC, Nelson RG, et al. Insulin treatment, endogenous insulin concentration, and ECG abnormalities in diabetic Pima Indians. Cross-sectional and prospective analyses. Diabetes. 1992; 41(9): 1141–1150.
  53. Mogensen UM, Andersson C, Fosbøl EL, et al. Cardiovascular safety of combination therapies with incretin-based drugs and metformin compared with a combination of metformin and sulphonylurea in type 2 diabetes mellitus--a retrospective nationwide study. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2014; 16(10): 1001–1008.
  54. Roumie CL, Greevy RA, Grijalva CG, et al. Association between intensification of metformin treatment with insulin vs sulfonylureas and cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality among patients with diabetes. JAMA. 2014; 311(22): 2288–2296.
  55. Rensing KL, Reuwer AQ, Arsenault BJ, et al. Reducing cardiovascular disease risk in patients with type 2 diabetes and concomitant macrovascular disease: can insulin be too much of a good thing? Diabetes Obes Metab. 2011; 13(12): 1073–1087.
  56. Ghosal S. Cardio Vascular Outcomes Trials (CVOTs) with Anti-Hyperglycemic Agents: Demystifying Statistical Complexities. Journal of Diabetes, Metabolic Disorders & Control. 2017; 4(4): 104–108.
  57. Geiger MJ, Mehta C, Turner JR, et al. Clinical Development Approaches and Statistical Methodologies to Prospectively Assess the Cardiovascular Risk of New Antidiabetic Therapies for Type 2 Diabetes. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2015; 49(1): 50–64.
  58. Spruance SL, Reid JE, Grace M, et al. Hazard ratio in clinical trials. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004; 48(8): 2787–2792.
  59. Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Pocock SJ, et al. CONSORT Group. Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement. JAMA. 2012; 308(24): 2594–2604.
  60. Rich JT, Neely JG, Paniello RC, et al. A practical guide to understanding Kaplan-Meier curves. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010; 143(3): 331–336.
  61. Barraclough H, Simms L, Govindan R. Biostatistics primer: what a clinician ought to know: hazard ratios. J Thorac Oncol. 2011; 6(6): 978–982.
  62. Stout RW. Insulin and atheroma. 20-Yr perspective. Diabetes Care. 1990; 13(6): 631–654.
  63. Schneider DJ, Nordt TK, Sobel BE. Attenuated fibrinolysis and accelerated atherogenesis in type II diabetic patients. Diabetes. 1993; 42(1): 1–7.
  64. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial, Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Research Group. Intensive diabetes therapy and carotid intima-media thickness in type 1 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 2003; 348(23): 2294–2303.
  65. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial, Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Research Group. Intensive Diabetes Treatment and Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2005; 353(25): 2643–2653.
  66. Feinglos MN, Bethel MA. Therapy of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular death, and the UGDP. Am Heart J. 1999; 138(5 Pt 1): S346–S352.
  67. Holman RR, Paul SK, Bethel MA, et al. 10-year follow-up of intensive glucose control in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008; 359(15): 1577–1589.
  68. Gerstein HC, Bosch J, Dagenais GR, et al. ORIGIN Trial Investigators. Basal insulin and cardiovascular and other outcomes in dysglycemia. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367(4): 319–328.
  69. Kalra S. Auxiliendo, Primum Non Nocere: A Preliminary View of the DEVOTE Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine in Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes Ther. 2017; 8(2): 213–217.
  70. Buse JB. Glycemic Targets in Diabetes Care: Emerging Clarity after Accord. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 2015; 126: 62–76.
  71. Schnell O, Standl E, Catrinoiu D, et al. Report from the 1st Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit of the Diabetes & Cardiovascular Disease (D&CVD) EASD Study Group. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2016; 15: 33.
  72. Johnson JA, Simpson SH, Eurich DT, et al. Comment on: Evans JM, Ogston SA, Emslie-Smith A, Morris A (2006) Risk of mortality and adverse cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a comparison of patients treated with sulfonylureas and metformin. Diabetologia 49:930–936. Diabetologia. 2006; 49(11): 2805–2806.
  73. Rao AD, Kuhadiya N, Reynolds K, et al. Is the combination of sulfonylureas and metformin associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease or all-cause mortality?: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Diabetes Care. 2008; 31(8): 1672–1678.
  74. ORIGIN Trial Investigators. Cardiovascular and Other Outcomes Postintervention With Insulin Glargine and Omega-3 Fatty Acids (ORIGINALE). Diabetes Care. 2016; 39(5): 709–716.
  75. Lenzen M, Ryden L, Ohrvik J, et al. Euro Heart Survey Investigators. Diabetes known or newly detected, but not impaired glucose regulation, has a negative influence on 1-year outcome in patients with coronary artery disease: a report from the Euro Heart Survey on diabetes and the heart. Eur Heart J. 2006; 27(24): 2969–2974.
  76. Malmberg K, Rydén L, Wedel H, et al. DIGAMI 2 Investigators. Intense metabolic control by means of insulin in patients with diabetes mellitus and acute myocardial infarction (DIGAMI 2): effects on mortality and morbidity. Eur Heart J. 2005; 26(7): 650–661.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

 

Wydawcą serwisu jest  "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail:  viamedica@viamedica.pl