Abstract:Aims: Several insulin secretagogues are widely used to treat diabetes; however, few outcome-based comparative studies have clarified which one of these should be used when indicated. We investigated mortality and cardiovascular event risk associated with optimal forms of insulin secretagogues. Methods: In this cohort study using real-world data from the diabetes database of Taiwan's National Health Insurance program, patients with diabetes were enrolled if their initial treatment was glimepiride, gliclazide, glipizide, glyburide, or repaglinide from 1999 to 2013. Each group was propensity score-matched to the glimepiride group before comparison. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and the combined cardiovascular event risk of acute myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. Hazard ratios were calculated by Cox proportional hazard regression models. Results: There were 66,790, 97,426, 38,806, 92,970, and 11,468 participants in the glimepiride, gliclazide, glipizide, glyburide, and repaglinide groups, respectively. The median follow-up time was 8 years. Glimepiride was associated with the best clinical outcome, showing the lowest mortality and lowest cardiovascular event risk of the five insulin secretagogues. Using patients on glimepiride as the reference group, the adjusted hazard ratios of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular event risk were 1.52 (p < 0.001) and 1.22 (p = 0.005) for gliclazide, 1.42 (p < 0.001) and 1.19 (p = 0.073) for glipizide, 1.43 (p < 0.001) and 1.32 (p < 0.001) for glyburide, and 1.88 (p < 0.001) and 1.69 (p = 0.001) for repaglinide. Conclusions: For patients with diabetes taking an insulin secretagogue, glimepiride was associated with the best clinical outcome, showing the lowest mortality and cardiovascular event risk.

Comparison of mortality and cardiovascular event risk associated with various insulin secretagogues: A nationwide real-world analysis