Comparative Efficacy of Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists for Cardiovascular Outcomes in Asian Versus White Populations: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials of Populations With or Without Type 2 Diabetes and/or Overweight or Obesity
Matthew M.Y. Lee, Nazim Ghouri, Anoop Misra, Yu Mi Kang, Martin K. Rutter, Hertzel C. Gerstein, Darren K. McGuire, Naveed Sattar
{"title":"Comparative Efficacy of Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists for Cardiovascular Outcomes in Asian Versus White Populations: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials of Populations With or Without Type 2 Diabetes and/or Overweight or Obesity","authors":"Matthew M.Y. Lee, Nazim Ghouri, Anoop Misra, Yu Mi Kang, Martin K. Rutter, Hertzel C. Gerstein, Darren K. McGuire, Naveed Sattar","doi":"10.2337/dc24-1533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND Cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) suggest glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) provide greater cardiovascular (CV) benefits in Asian compared with White individuals. PURPOSE Compare CV efficacy of GLP-1RAs between Asian and White individuals. DATA SOURCES Systematic review of PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 January 2015 to 1 November 2024). STUDY SELECTION Randomized placebo-controlled CVOTs of GLP-1RAs. Risk of bias was assessed (RoB 2). DATA EXTRACTION Ethnicity-specific hazard ratios (HRs) for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). DATA SYNTHESIS Random-effects meta-analyses per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines included eight trials (5,909 Asian individuals, 55,855 White individuals). GLP-1RA–associated MACE HR was 0.69 (95% CI 0.58, 0.83) in Asian people and 0.85 (95% CI 0.79, 0.91) in White people (Pinteraction = 0.045). Absolute MACE risk reduction was 2.9% (95% CI 1.5, 4.2) in Asian people versus 1.4% (0.9, 1.9) in White people. LIMITATIONS Lack of individual patient-level data precluded detailed subclassification of the Asian group. CONCLUSIONS GLP-1RAs may offer greater MACE reductions in Asian compared with White individuals.","PeriodicalId":11140,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes Care","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":14.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2337/dc24-1533","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) suggest glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) provide greater cardiovascular (CV) benefits in Asian compared with White individuals. PURPOSE Compare CV efficacy of GLP-1RAs between Asian and White individuals. DATA SOURCES Systematic review of PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 January 2015 to 1 November 2024). STUDY SELECTION Randomized placebo-controlled CVOTs of GLP-1RAs. Risk of bias was assessed (RoB 2). DATA EXTRACTION Ethnicity-specific hazard ratios (HRs) for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). DATA SYNTHESIS Random-effects meta-analyses per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines included eight trials (5,909 Asian individuals, 55,855 White individuals). GLP-1RA–associated MACE HR was 0.69 (95% CI 0.58, 0.83) in Asian people and 0.85 (95% CI 0.79, 0.91) in White people (Pinteraction = 0.045). Absolute MACE risk reduction was 2.9% (95% CI 1.5, 4.2) in Asian people versus 1.4% (0.9, 1.9) in White people. LIMITATIONS Lack of individual patient-level data precluded detailed subclassification of the Asian group. CONCLUSIONS GLP-1RAs may offer greater MACE reductions in Asian compared with White individuals.
期刊介绍:
The journal's overarching mission can be captured by the simple word "Care," reflecting its commitment to enhancing patient well-being. Diabetes Care aims to support better patient care by addressing the comprehensive needs of healthcare professionals dedicated to managing diabetes.
Diabetes Care serves as a valuable resource for healthcare practitioners, aiming to advance knowledge, foster research, and improve diabetes management. The journal publishes original research across various categories, including Clinical Care, Education, Nutrition, Psychosocial Research, Epidemiology, Health Services Research, Emerging Treatments and Technologies, Pathophysiology, Complications, and Cardiovascular and Metabolic Risk. Additionally, Diabetes Care features ADA statements, consensus reports, review articles, letters to the editor, and health/medical news, appealing to a diverse audience of physicians, researchers, psychologists, educators, and other healthcare professionals.