Browsing by Author "Wang, Fei"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Adverse effects of incretin-based therapies on major cardiovascular and arrhythmia events: meta-analysis of randomized trials
    (Wiley, 2016-11) Wang, Tiansheng; Wang, Fei; Zhou, Junwen; Tang, Huilin; Giovenale, Sharon; Department of Epidemiology, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health
    Recent cardiovascular outcome trials of incretin-based therapies (IBT) in type 2 diabetes have not demonstrated either benefit or harm in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Earlier meta-analyses showed conflicting results but were limited in methodology. We aimed to perform an updated meta-analysis of all available incretin therapies on the incidence of MACE plus arrhythmia and heart failure. Methods We identified studies published through November 2014 by searching electronic databases and reference lists. We included RCTs in which the intervention group received incretin-based therapies and the control group received placebo or standard treatment; enrolled >100 participants in each group; interventions lasted >24 weeks; and reported data on one or more primary major adverse cardiovascular events endpoints plus terms for arrhythmia and heart failure. We used the Peto method for each CV event for individual IBT treatment. Results In this meta-analysis of 100 RCTs involving 54,758 incretin-based therapies users and 48,175 controls, exenatide was associated with increased risk of arrhythmia (OR 2.83; 95% CI, 1.06–7.57); saxagliptin was associated with an increased risk of heart failure (OR 1.23; 95% CI, 1.03–1.46), and sitagliptin was associated with a significantly decreased risk of all cause death compared to active controls (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18–0.82). Conclusions In type 2 diabetes, exenatide may increase the risk of arrhythmia, and sitagliptin may reduce the risk of all cause death; however, the subgroup of patients most likely to experience harm or benefit is unclear.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Comparisons of diabetic retinopathy events associated with glucose‐lowering drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A network meta‐analysis
    (Wiley, 2018) Tang, Huilin; Li, Guangyao; Zhao, Ying; Wang, Fei; Gower, Emily W.; Shi, Luwen; Wang, Tiansheng; Epidemiology, School of Public Health
    Aim To assess the comparative effects of glucose‐lowering drugs (GLDs) on the risk of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods We systematically searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PUBMED and EMBASE from inception to January 17, 2017 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported DR events among T2DM patients receiving any GLD. Random‐effects pairwise and network meta‐analyses were performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results A total of 37 independent RCTs with 1806 DR events among 100 928 patients with T2DM were included. The mean duration of diabetes was 8.7 years and mean baseline HbA1c was 8.2% (SD, 0.5%). Our network meta‐analysis found that DPP‐4i (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.87‐1.65), GLP‐1RA (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.94‐1.52) and SGLT2 inhibitors (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.49‐1.28) were not associated with a higher risk of DR than placebo; however, a significantly increased risk of DR was associated with DPP‐4i in the pairwise meta‐analysis (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.05‐1.53). Sulfonylureas, on the other hand, were associated with a significantly increased risk of DR compared to placebo (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.01‐2.76). Conclusions Current evidence indicates that the association between DPP‐4i, GLP‐1RA or SGLT2 inhibitors and risk of DR remains uncertain in patients with T2DM. Some evidence suggests that sulfonylureas may be associated with increased risk of DR. However, given that DR events were not systematically assessed, these effects should be explored further in large‐scale, well‐designed studies.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Real-world Effectiveness of BNT162b2 Against Infection and Severe Diseases in Children and Adolescent
    (medRxiv, 2023-11-13) Wu, Qiong; Tong, Jiayi; Zhang, Bingyu; Zhang, Dazheng; Chen, Jiajie; Lei, Yuqing; Lu, Yiwen; Wang, Yudong; Li, Lu; Shen, Yishan; Xu, Jie; Bailey, L. Charles; Bian, Jiang; Christakis, Dimitri A.; Fitzgerald, Megan L.; Hirabayashi, Kathryn; Jhaveri, Ravi; Khaitan, Alka; Lyu, Tianchen; Rao, Suchitra; Razzaghi, Hanieh; Schwenk, Hayden T.; Wang, Fei; Witvliet, Margot I.; Tchetgen Tchetgen, Eric J.; Morris, Jeffrey S.; Forrest, Christopher B.; Chen, Yong; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Background: The efficacy of the BNT162b2 vaccine in pediatrics was assessed by randomized trials before the Omicron variant's emergence. The long-term durability of vaccine protection in this population during the Omicron period remains limited. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of BNT162b2 in preventing infection and severe diseases with various strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in previously uninfected children and adolescents. Design: Comparative effectiveness research accounting for underreported vaccination in three study cohorts: adolescents (12 to 20 years) during the Delta phase, children (5 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 20 years) during the Omicron phase. Setting: A national collaboration of pediatric health systems (PEDSnet). Participants: 77,392 adolescents (45,007 vaccinated) in the Delta phase, 111,539 children (50,398 vaccinated) and 56,080 adolescents (21,180 vaccinated) in the Omicron period. Exposures: First dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine vs. no receipt of COVID-19 vaccine. Measurements: Outcomes of interest include documented infection, COVID-19 illness severity, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), and cardiac complications. The effectiveness was reported as (1-relative risk)*100% with confounders balanced via propensity score stratification. Results: During the Delta period, the estimated effectiveness of BNT162b2 vaccine was 98.4% (95% CI, 98.1 to 98.7) against documented infection among adolescents, with no significant waning after receipt of the first dose. An analysis of cardiac complications did not find an increased risk after vaccination. During the Omicron period, the effectiveness against documented infection among children was estimated to be 74.3% (95% CI, 72.2 to 76.2). Higher levels of effectiveness were observed against moderate or severe COVID-19 (75.5%, 95% CI, 69.0 to 81.0) and ICU admission with COVID-19 (84.9%, 95% CI, 64.8 to 93.5). Among adolescents, the effectiveness against documented Omicron infection was 85.5% (95% CI, 83.8 to 87.1), with 84.8% (95% CI, 77.3 to 89.9) against moderate or severe COVID-19, and 91.5% (95% CI, 69.5 to 97.6)) against ICU admission with COVID-19. The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine against the Omicron variant declined after 4 months following the first dose and then stabilized. The analysis revealed a lower risk of cardiac complications in the vaccinated group during the Omicron variant period. Limitations: Observational study design and potentially undocumented infection. Conclusions: Our study suggests that BNT162b2 was effective for various COVID-19-related outcomes in children and adolescents during the Delta and Omicron periods, and there is some evidence of waning effectiveness over time.