Effect of sitagliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the long-term effect on cardiovascular events of adding sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, we assigned 14,671 patients to add either sitagliptin or placebo to their existing therapy. Open-label use of antihyperglycemic therapy was encouraged as required, aimed at reaching individually appropriate glycemic targets in all patients. To determine whether sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo, we used a relative risk of 1.3 as the marginal upper boundary. The primary cardiovascular outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 3.0 years, there was a small difference in glycated hemoglobin levels (least-squares mean difference for sitagliptin vs. placebo, -0.29 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.32 to -0.27). Overall, the primary outcome occurred in 839 patients in the sitagliptin group (11.4%; 4.06 per 100 person-years) and 851 patients in the placebo group (11.6%; 4.17 per 100 person-years). Sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.09; P<0.001). Rates of hospitalization for heart failure did not differ between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.20; P = 0.98). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of acute pancreatitis (P = 0.07) or pancreatic cancer (P = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease, adding sitagliptin to usual care did not appear to increase the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, hospitalization for heart failure, or other adverse events

Cost effects of hospital mergers in Portugal

The Portuguese hospital sector has been restructured by wide-ranging hospital mergers, following a conviction among policy makers that bigger hospitals lead to lower average costs. Since the effects of mergers have not been systematically evaluated, the purpose of this article is to contribute to this area of knowledge by assessing potential economies of scale to explore and compare these results with realized cost savings after mergers. Considering the period 2003-2009, we estimate the translog cost function to examine economies of scale in the years preceding restructuring. Additionally, we use the difference-in-differences approach to evaluate hospital centres (HC) that occurred between 2004 and 2007, comparing the years after and before mergers. Our findings suggest that economies of scale are present in the pre-merger configuration with an optimum hospital size of around 230 beds. However, the mergers between two or more hospitals led to statistically significant post-merger cost increases, of about 8 %. This result indicates that some HC become too large to explore economies of scale and suggests the difficulty of achieving efficiencies through combining operations and service specialization