PurposeTo explore the risk of stroke (including ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke) in type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) medication according to data from the Cardiovascular Outcome Trials(CVOT).MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCT) on GLP-1RA therapy and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetics published in full-text journal databases such as Medline (via PubMed), Embase, Clinical Trials.gov, and the Cochrane Library from establishment to May 1, 2022 were searched. We assess the quality of individual studies by using the Cochrane risk of bias algorithm. RevMan 5.4.1 software was use for calculating meta- analysis.ResultsA total of 60,081 randomized participants were included in the data of these 8 GLP-1RA cardiovascular outcomes trials. Pooled analysis reported statistically significant effect on total stroke risk[RR=0.83, 95%CI(0.73, 0.95), p=0.005], and its subtypes such as ischemic Stroke [RR=0.83, 95%CI(0.73, 0.95), p=0.008] from treatment with GLP-1RA versus placebo, and have no significant effect on the risk of hemorrhagic stroke[RR=0.83, 95%CI(0.57, 1.20), p=0.31] and retinopathy [RR=1.54, 95%CI(0.74, 3.23), p=0.25]ConclusionGLP-1RA significantly reduces the risk of ischemic stroke in type 2 diabetics with cardiovascular risk factors.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundIslet β cells dysfunction (IBCD) is a cortical component in pathogenesis of type 2 diabetic mellitus (T2DM). However, the relationship of ferroptosis and IBCD remains unknown. This study was aimed to screen potential ferroptosis key genes to reveal latent physiological and pathological process of IBCD in T2DM.MethodsFirstly, T2DM key genes were screened by combining with differentially expressed genes (DEGs) analysis and WGCNA. Then, ferroptosis-related genes (FRGs) in IBCD of T2DM were identified by taking the intersection between T2DM key genes and FRGs. Finally, T2DM-FRGs were validated in another T2DM dataset as well as islet single-cell RNA sequencing dataset and the miRNA regulated T2DM-FRG was predicted by using four miRNA databases.Results89 T2DM key genes were identified between DEGs and WGCNA. Then, 3 T2DM-FRGs were screened by taking the intersection of T2DM key genes and FRGs, namely ITGA6, MGST1 and ENO2. At last, MGST1 were validated as the T2DM-FRG in another T2DM islet issues dataset and islet single-cell RNA sequencing dataset.ConclusionMGST1 may be the potential ferroptosis key gene of IBCD in T2DM.

Background and ObjectiveRelevant data of PARADIGM-HF reveals sacubitril/valsartan (SV) therapy led to a greater reduction in the risks of arrhythmia, and sudden cardiac death than angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin receptor inhibitor (ARB) therapy in HFrEF, however, inconsistent results were reported in subsequent studies. Here, we conduct a meta-analysis of related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the protective effect of SV on reducing the risk of arrhythmias.Methods and ResultsRCTs focused on the difference in therapeutic outcomes between SV and ACEI/ARB were searched from PUBMED, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library. The results were extracted from each individual study, expressed as binary risk, 95% confidence interval (CI) and relative risk (RR). Sixteen RCTs including 22, 563 patients met the study criteria. Compared with ACEI/ARB therapy, SV therapy did significantly reduce in the risks of severe arrhythmias among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73–0.95, p = 0.006), ventricular tachycardia (VT) among patients with HFrEF (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.51–0.92, p = 0.01), cardiac arrest among patients with heart failure (HF) (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.37–0.73, p = 0.0002), cardiac arrest among patients with HFrEF (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.32–0.76, p = 0.001), cardiac arrest or ventricular fibrillation (VF) among patients with HF (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.48–0.83, p = 0.001), and cardiac arrest or VF among patients with HFrEF (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47–0.89, p = 0.008), but reduced the risks of arrhythmias (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.74–1.01, p = 0.07), atrial arrhythmias (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.83–1.16, p = 0.85), and atrial fibrillation (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.82–1.17, p = 0.82) among all patients with no significant between-group difference. The merged result was robust after sensitivity analysis, and there was no publication bias.ConclusionOur meta-analysis provides evidence that, compared with ACEI/ARB, SV can additionally reduce the risks of most arrhythmias, just the significant differences are revealed in reducing the risks of VT, severe arrhythmias, and cardiac arrest in patients with HFrEF. Besides, the positive effect of SV on VF according to statistical result of combining VF with cardiac arrest in patients with HFrEF is credibility.