CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 196

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Multicenter Observational Study of Incretin-based Drugs and Heart Failure

Filion, Kristian B., Azoulay, Laurent, Platt, Robert W., Dahl, Matthew, Dormuth, Colin R., Clemens, Kristin K., Hu, Nianping, Paterson, J. Michael, Targownik, Laura, Turin, Tanvir C., Udell, Jacob A., Ernst, Pierre·2016·New England Journal of Medicine
DOI 10.1056/nejmoa1506115
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background There is concern that antidiabetic incretin-based drugs, including dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) analogues, can increase the risk of heart failure. Ongoing clinical trials may not have large enough samples to effectively address this issue. Methods We applied a common protocol in the analysis of multiple cohorts of patients with diabetes. We used health care data from four Canadian provinces, the United States, and the United Kingdom. With the use of a nested case-control analysis, we matched each patient who was hospitalized for heart failure with up to 20 controls from the same cohort; matching was based on sex, age, cohort-entry date, duration of treated diabetes, and follow-up time. Cohort-specific hazard ratios for hospitalization due to heart failure among patients receiving incretin-based drugs, as compared with those receiving oral antidiabetic-drug combinations, were estimated by means of conditional logistic regression and pooled across cohorts with the use of random-effects models. Results The cohorts included a total of 1,499,650 patients, with 29,741 hospitalized for heart failure (incidence rate, 9.2 events per 1000 persons per year). The rate of hospitalization for heart failure did not increase with the use of incretin-based drugs as compared with oral antidiabetic-drug combinations among patients with a history of heart failure (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 1.19) or among…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa1506115

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Saxagliptin has raised concerns regarding potential increased risks of heart failure.

    “This contrasts with saxagliptin, another dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, which has raised concerns regarding potential increased risks of heart failure, and linagliptin, which is commonly prescribed for patients with kidney impairment, and thus could lead to increased confounding in contrast to our comparator sitagliptin.20-25”

    From Semaglutide and Tirzepatide in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (2025) · cites this paper as [22]

  • Linagliptin is commonly prescribed for patients with kidney impairment, which could lead to increased confounding in contrast to sitagliptin.

    “This contrasts with saxagliptin, another dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, which has raised concerns regarding potential increased risks of heart failure, and linagliptin, which is commonly prescribed for patients with kidney impairment, and thus could lead to increased confounding in contrast to our comparator sitagliptin.20-25”

    From Semaglutide and Tirzepatide in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (2025) · cites this paper as [22]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. 10.1016/S2213-8587(15)00044-3 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1056/NEJMoa1307684 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.2337/dc14-1459 · DOI
  4. 10.1016/j.jchf.2014.04.005 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.09.038 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.cardfail.2014.10.012 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.12.029 · DOI
  8. Suissa S, 2012, Open Med, 6, e134
  9. 10.1002/pds.2313 · DOI
  10. 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62225-X · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.09.003 · DOI
  12. 10.1186/1471-2288-5-5 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Suissa S. Novel approaches to pharmacoepidemiology study design and statistical analysis. In: Strom BL, ed. Pharmacoepidemiology. 4th ed. New York: Wiley, 2005:811-829.
  14. 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1002/sim.1186 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.2337/dc12-0413 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.7326/0003-4819-157-9-201211060-00003 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Filion, K. B., Azoulay, L., Platt, R. W., Dahl, M., Dormuth, C. R., Clemens, K. K., Hu, N., Paterson, J. M., Targownik, L., Turin, T. C., Udell, J. A., & Ernst, P.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Massachusetts Medical Society
Published
2016-03-24
Volume
374
Issue
12
Pages
1145-1154
ISSN
  • 0028-4793
  • 1533-4406
DOI
10.1056/nejmoa1506115
Cited by
196
References
4
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review