ObjectiveTo assess whether adding or switching to sulfonylureas is associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular death, all cause mortality, and severe hypoglycaemia, compared with remaining on metformin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes.DesignPopulation based cohort study.SettingGeneral practices contributing data to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.ParticipantsPatients with type 2 diabetes initiating metformin monotherapy between 1998 and 2013.Main outcome measuresUsing the prevalent new-user cohort design we matched 1:1 patients adding or switching to sulfonylureas with those remaining on metformin monotherapy on high-dimensional propensity score, haemoglobin A1c, and number of previous metformin prescriptions. The two groups were compared using Cox proportional hazards models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the study outcomes.ResultsAmong 77 138 metformin initiators, 25 699 added or switched to sulfonylureas during the study period. During a mean follow-up of 1.1 years, sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (incidence rate 7.8 v 6.2 per 1000 person years, hazard ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.56), all cause mortality (27.3 v 21.5, 1.28, 1.15 to 1.44), and severe hypoglycaemia (5.5 v 0.7, 7.60, 4.64 to 12.44) compared with continuing metformin monotherapy. There was a trend towards increased risks of ischaemic stroke (6.7 v 5.5, 1.24, 0.99 to 1.56) and cardiovascular death (9.4 v 8.1, 1.18, 0.98 to 1.43). Compared with adding sulfonylureas, switching to sulfonylureas was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (hazard ratio 1.51, 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 2.24) and all-cause mortality (1.23, 1.00 to 1.50). No differences were observed for ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular death, or severe hypoglycaemia.ConclusionsSulfonylureas as second line drugs are associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, all cause mortality, and severe hypoglycaemia, compared with remaining on metformin monotherapy. Continuing metformin when introducing sulfonylureas appears to be safer than switching.

No abstract

ObjectiveTo assess whether the use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors is associated with the incidence of inflammatory bowel disease in patients with type 2 diabetes.DesignPopulation based cohort study.SettingMore than 700 general practices contributing data to the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink.ParticipantsA cohort of 141 170 patients, at least 18 years of age, starting antidiabetic drugs between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2016, with follow-up until 30 June 2017.Main outcome measuresAdjusted hazard ratios for incident inflammatory bowel disease associated with use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors overall, by cumulative duration of use, and by time since initiation, estimated using time dependent Cox proportional hazards models. Use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors was modelled as a time varying variable and compared with use of other antidiabetic drugs, with exposures lagged by six months to account for latency and diagnostic delays.ResultsDuring 552 413 person years of follow-up, 208 incident inflammatory bowel disease events occurred (crude incidence rate of 37.7 (95% confidence interval 32.7 to 43.1) per 100 000 person years). Overall, use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors was associated with an increased risk of inflammatory bowel disease (53.4 v 34.5 per 100 000 person years; hazard ratio 1.75, 95% confidence interval 1.22 to 2.49). Hazard ratios gradually increased with longer durations of use, reaching a peak after three to four years of use (hazard ratio 2.90, 1.31 to 6.41) and decreasing after more than four years of use (1.45, 0.44 to 4.76). A similar pattern was observed with time since starting dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. These findings remained consistent in several sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsIn this first population based study, the use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors was associated with an increased risk of inflammatory bowel disease. Although these findings need to be replicated, physicians should be aware of this possible association.

Objective To compare the risk of cardiovascular events between sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors among people with type 2 diabetes in a real world context of clinical practice. Design Multi-database retrospective cohort study using a prevalent new user design with subsequent meta-analysis. Setting Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies (CNODES), with administrative healthcare databases from seven Canadian provinces and the United Kingdom, 2013-18. Population 209 867 new users of a SGLT2 inhibitor matched to 209 867 users of a DPP-4 inhibitor on time conditional propensity score and followed for a mean of 0.9 years. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, a composite of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, or cardiovascular death). Secondary outcomes were the individual components of MACE, heart failure, and all cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate site specific adjusted hazards ratios and 95% confidence intervals, comparing use of SGLT2 inhibitors with use of DPP-4 inhibitors in an as treated approach. Site specific results were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. Results Compared with DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT2 inhibitors were associated with decreased risks of MACE (incidence rate per 1000 person years: 11.4 v 16.5; hazard ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 0.84), myocardial infarction (5.1 v 6.4; 0.82, 0.70 to 0.96), cardiovascular death (3.9 v 7.7; 0.60, 0.54 to 0.67), heart failure (3.1 v 7.7; 0.43, 0.37 to 0.51), and all cause mortality (8.7 v 17.3; 0.60, 0.54 to 0.67). SGLT2 inhibitors had more modest benefits for ischaemic stroke (2.6 v 3.5; 0.85, 0.72 to 1.01). Similar benefits for MACE were observed with canagliflozin (0.79, 0.66 to 0.94), dapagliflozin (0.73, 0.63 to 0.85), and empagliflozin (0.77, 0.68 to 0.87). Conclusions In this large observational study conducted in a real world clinical practice context, the short term use of SGLT2 inhibitors was associated with a decreased risk of cardiovascular events compared with the use of DPP-4 inhibitors. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03939624 .

The nonspecific, long-acting sulfonylureas glyburide and glimepiride do not have an increased risk of cardiovascular adverse events compared with the specific, short-acting sulfonylureas gliclazide, glipizide, and tolbutamide. However, nonspecific, long-acting sulfonylureas glyburide and glimepiride have an increased risk of severe hypoglycemia.

AIMDrug-induced liver injury (DILI) is often responsible for acute liver failure, drug withdrawal, boxed warnings or drug non-approval. Therefore, we conducted a case-control study to determine the hepatotoxic risk of a wide range of drugs. METHODSThe Berlin Case-Control Surveillance Study FAKOS included all 51 Berlin hospitals in a hospital network. Between 2002 and 2011, 198 patients with acute idiopathic hepatitis, 377 inpatient controls and 708 outpatient controls were ascertained. Case patients were thoroughly validated using anamnestic, clinical, laboratory and histological data. Drug exposure was obtained in a face-to-face interview. A possible drug aetiology was assessed in individual patients by applying the updated Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) scale. Drug risks were further quantified [odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI)] in a case-control design with unconditional logistic regression analysis. Drug intake in the last 28 days before index date was considered for the analysis. RESULTSThe study corroborated hepatotoxic risks for a number of drugs, including phenprocoumon (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.5, 6.7), amiodarone (OR 5.5, 95% CI 1.3, 21.2), clozapine (OR 34.6, 95% CI 2.8, 824.9) and flupirtine (OR 40.2, 95% CI 5.5, 856.9). Increased risks were also suggested for less commonly reported substances such as angiotensin II receptor blockers, atypical antipsychotics and for biperiden, a drug never before reported to be hepatotoxic. CONCLUSIONSOur study identified a large number of drugs as possible causes of hepatotoxicity. The observed risk for seldom reported substances highlights the need for further post-authorization safety studies not exclusively focusing on drugs already labelled as potentially hepatotoxic. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT• Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) accounts for almost every second acute liver failure and often leads to drug withdrawal, boxed warnings or drug non-approval.• Dose-related and thus predictable DILI is a rarity, making a quantification of the hepatotoxic risk of drugs necessary. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS• This study is the first to quantify the hepatotoxic risk of flupirtine, irbesartan, clozapine and olanzapine, drugs previously associated with DILI in case reports.• A novel hepatotoxic risk is suggested for biperiden, highlighting the need for post-authorization safety studies considering also older drugs not labelled as hepatotoxic.

There are uncertainties regarding the association between dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and bullous pemphigoid (BP), a potentially severe autoimmune skin disease. Thus, we conducted a population-based study to determine whether use of DPP-4 inhibitors, when compared with other second-to third-line antidiabetic drugs, is associated with an increased risk of BP in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Using the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we conducted a cohort study among 168,774 patients initiating antidiabetic drugs between January 2007 and March 2018. Using time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models, we estimated adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs of incident BP associated with current use of DPP-4 inhibitors, compared with current use of other second-to third-line antidiabetic drugs. We also conducted a propensity score-matched analysis to assess the impact of residual confounding. RESULTS During 711,311 person-years of follow-up, 150 patients were newly diagnosed with BP (crude incidence rate, 21.1 per 100,000 person-years). Current use of DPP-4 inhibitors was associated with an increased risk of BP (47.3 vs. 20.0 per 100,000 person-years; HR 2.21 [95% CI 1.45-3.38]). HRs gradually increased with longer durations of use, reaching a peak after 20 months (HR 3.60 [95% CI 2.11-6.16]). Similar results were obtained in the propensity score-matched analysis (HR 2.40 [95% CI 1.13-4.66]). CONCLUSIONS In this large population-based study, use of DPP-4 inhibitors was associated with an at least doubling of the risk of BP in patients with type 2 diabetes, albeit the absolute risk was low. Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors are recommended as second-to third-line drugs in the management of type 2 diabetes (1). By inhibiting the DPP-4 enzyme, these drugs increase insulin production, while also lowering the risk of hypoglycemia and having neutral effects on body weight, when compared with other antidiabetic drugs such as sulfonylureas or insulin (1). However, there are concerns that inhibition of the DPP-4 enzyme may also lead to autoimmune-related adverse events such as bullous pemphigoid (BP) (2), a subepidermal blistering disease that has been associated with a doubling of the risk of mortality (3).

No abstract