Premium
Cardiovascular outcomes trials with glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists: A comparison of study designs, populations and results
Author(s) -
Pantalone Kevin M.,
Munir Kashif,
Hasenour Clinton M.,
Atisso Charles M.,
Varnado Oralee J.,
Maldonado Juan M.,
Konig Manige
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
diabetes, obesity and metabolism
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.445
H-Index - 128
eISSN - 1463-1326
pISSN - 1462-8902
DOI - 10.1111/dom.14165
Subject(s) - medicine , metformin , type 2 diabetes , glucagon like peptide 1 , diabetes mellitus , weight loss , glucagon like peptide 1 receptor , disease , clinical trial , pharmacology , intensive care medicine , endocrinology , obesity , receptor , agonist
Despite treatment advances leading to improved outcomes over the past 2 decades, cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in people with diabetes. People with type 2 diabetes (T2D) have a 2‐ to 4‐fold increased risk of CVD and CV death. Individuals with T2D have not seen the same improvements in CV morbidity and mortality as those without T2D. Given this, it is important to understand the CV impact of drugs used to treat T2D. In patients with T2D, glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists (GLP‐1 RAs) have shown a reduction in HbA1c and body weight regardless of their differences in chemical structure and pharmacokinetic variables. Glycaemic efficacy, accompanied by the potential for weight reduction and a low risk of hypoglycaemia, has moved GLP‐1 RAs to the first treatment of choice following metformin monotherapy in the latest American Diabetes Association treatment guidelines. Additionally, all GLP‐1 RAs have shown CV safety and several have proven CV benefit. GLP‐1 RAs have been evaluated in cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs) of varying sizes, designs and patient populations with differing reported effects on CV outcomes. The purpose of this article is to review the completed GLP‐1 RA CVOTs with special attention to how their design, size, patient populations and conduct may influence the interpretation of results.