Is glucose lowering efficient for CV events prevention in D2 patients?

Table 1. Major CVOTs With Glucose Lowering Medications in Patients With T2DM at High Risk of a CV Event

Trial Name	Agent/ comparator	N	Primary Endpoint	Follow-Up	End of Trial HbA1c (%)	Primary Outcome HR (95% CI)
ORIGIN	Insulin glargine/ conventional	12,537	3-point MACE	6.2 years	Insulin 6.2 Control 6.5	Neutral HR 1.02 (0.94 to 1.11)
SAVOR- TIMI 53	Saxa ts?gliptin/ placebo	16,492	3-point MACE	24 months	Saxagliptin 7.7 Placebo 7.9	Neutral HR 1.00 (0.89 to 1.12)
EXAMINE	Alogliptin/ placebo	5380	3-point MACE	18 months	Alogliptin 7.7 Placebo 8.0	Neutral HR 0.96 (-1.16)
TECOS	Sitagliptin/ placebo	14,671	4-point MACE	36 months	Sitagliptin 7.1 Placebo 7.4	Neutral HR 0.98 (0.99 to 1.08)
ELIXA	Lixisenatide/ placebo	6068	4-point MACE	25 months	Lixisenatide 7.4 Placebo 7.6	Neutral HR 1.02 (0.89 to 1.17)
EMPA-REG OUTCOME	Empagliflozin/ placebo	7020	3-point MACE	37 months	Empagliflozin 7.8 Placebo 8.2	Superior to placebo HR 0.86 (0.74 to 0.99)
LEADER	Liraglutide/ placebo	9340	3-point MACE	46 months	Liraglutide 7.7 Placebo 8.1	Superior to placebo HR 0.87 (0.78 to 0.97)

3-point MACE = composite of CV death and nonfatal MI or stroke; 4-point MACE = composite of CV death, nonfatal MI or stroke and hospitalization for unstable angina; CI = confidence interval; CVOT = cardiovascular outcomes trial; CV = cardiovascular; HbA1c = glycated hemoglobin; HR = hazard ratio; MI = myocardial infarction; T2DM = type 2 diabetes mellitus

Sources: Ryden L et al^[3]; Sattar N, et al^[4]; and Marso SP, et al.^[15]

http://www.medscape.org/sites/conference/easd-2016?src=mkmcmr_conf_easd16_mscpedu_slides