Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine

Cardiovascular outcomes of oral incretin-based drugs in type 2 diabetes: a GRADE-assessed meta-analysis of 67,679 patients

Figure 1. Forest plot of all-cause mortality.
Open the figure at full size
Figure 1. Forest plot of all-cause mortality.Forest plot of all-cause mortality.Ali et al.
Meta-analysis of randomised trialsInterventions

Preregistered CRD420251113835

Follow

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While injectable GLP-1 receptor agonists like semaglutide have demonstrated clear cardiovascular benefits in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), the role of oral incretin-based therapies, including oral semaglutide and DPP-4 inhibitors-remains less well defined. Comprehensive evaluation of their cardiovascular efficacy is warranted. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the cardiovascular outcomes associated with oral incretin-based therapies, specifically oral semaglutide and DPP-4 inhibitors, in patients with T2DM compared to placebo or standard care. METHODS: We searched electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Meta-analysis was conducted in R version 4.4.3 using the "meta" and "metasens" packages. Statistical analysis was performed using R software and RStudio (version 4.4.2). We calculated pooled estimates using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 9 studies comprising 67,679 patients were included, of which two evaluated oral semaglutide and the remaining seven assessed DPP-4 inhibitors. There was no significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90-1.04, p = 0.35) or cardiovascular death (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91-1.05, p = 0.48). Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) showed a non-significant reduction overall (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-1.00, p = 0.06), with oral semaglutide demonstrating a significant benefit (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78-0.95, p = 0.003). Non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88-1.09) and non-fatal stroke (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.83-1.03) were not significantly affected. Hospitalizations due to heart failure (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.84-1.13) and unstable angina (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87-1.15) remained unchanged. Coronary revascularization was slightly reduced with oral semaglutide (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.91). Adverse events leading to discontinuation were higher with oral semaglutide (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.15-1.98), while serious adverse events were significantly reduced (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.99, p = 0.003). Sensitivity analyses were conducted due to significant heterogeneity in key outcomes. While omitting certain studies reduced heterogeneity, the overall results remained consistent. CONCLUSION: Oral incretin-based therapies were not associated with significant reductions in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, or MACE overall, though oral semaglutide showed a significant MACE benefit and reduced coronary revascularization on subgroup analysis. Non-fatal MI, fatal or non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, fatal or non-fatal stroke and hospitalization due to heart failure or unstable angina were unaffected, and oral semaglutide carried a higher risk of treatment discontinuation. These findings suggest no clear class-wide cardiovascular benefit of oral incretins, with signals specific to oral semaglutide warranting confirmation in dedicated trials. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD420251113835.

From the paper

Participants

Our meta-analysis included 9 studies comprising a total of 67,679 patients, to evaluate the cardiovascular efficacy and safety of oral GLP-1 receptor agonists (oral semaglutide) and DPP-4 inhibitors in patients with T2DM.

Results, 3.1 Study characteristics

Result

The pooled analysis showed no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality between the intervention and control groups (RR = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.90,1.04; p = 0.35).

Results, 3.4 All-cause mortality

Harms

Certainty was high for serious adverse events, reflecting a large combined sample (66,580 patients across 8 RCTs) and a precise, statistically significant effect estimate.

Results, 3.3 Risk of bias and certainty of evidence

Limitation

First, and most importantly, only two of the nine included trials evaluated oral semaglutide, versus seven for DPP-4 inhibitors; this substantial imbalance in trial numbers and patient-years limits the precision and generalizability of every oral-semaglutide subgroup estimate in this review …

4 Discussion

Quoted word for word from the full text on frontiersin.org.