Incident heart failure and myocardial infarction in sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor users

Objectives To compare the rates of major cardiovascular adverse events in sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2I) and dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4I) users in a Chinese population. Background SGLT2I and DPP4I are increasingly prescribed for type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. However, few population-based studies are comparing their effects on incident heart failure or myocardial infarction. Methods This was a population-based retrospective cohort study using the electronic health record database in Hong Kong, including type 2 diabetes mellitus patients receiving either SGLT2I or DPP4I between January 1st, 2015, to December 31st, 2020. Propensity-score matching was performed in a 1:1 ratio based on demographics, past comorbidities, non-SGLT2I/DPP4I medications with nearest-neighbor matching (caliper=0.1). Univariable and multivariable Cox models were used to identify significant predictors for new onset heart failure, new onset myocardial infarction, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality. Sensitivity analyses with competing risk models and multiple propensity score matching approaches were conducted. Subgroup age and gender analyses were presented. Results A total of 41994 patients (58.89% males, median admission age at 58 years old, interquartile rage [IQR]: 51.2-65.3) were included in the study cohorts with a median follow-up duration of 5.6 years (IQR: 5.32-5.82). After adjusting for significant demographics, past comorbidities, medication prescriptions and biochemical results, SGLT2I users have a significantly lower risk for myocardial infarction (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.28, 0.41], P < 0.0001), cardiovascular mortality (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: [0.38, 0.74], P = 0.0002) and all-cause mortality (HR: 0.21, 95% CI: [0.18, 0.25], P= 0.0001) under multivariable Cox regression. However, the risk for heart failure is comparable (HR: 0.87, 95% CI: [0.73, 1.04], P= 0.1343). Conclusions SGLT2 inhibitors are protective against adverse cardiovascular events compared to DPP4I. The prescription of SGLT2I is preferred especially for males and patients aged 65 or older to prevent cardiovascular risks

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field