Cited by 171Heart Failure Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Treatment and ManagementHeart rate and cardiovascular health

Effects of metoprolol and carvedilol on pre-existing and new onset diabetes in patients with chronic heart failure: data from the Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET)

Open access
Torp-Pedersen, Christian, Metra, Marco, Charlesworth, Andrew, Spark, Phillip, Lukas, Mary Ann, Poole-Wilson, Philip A, Swedberg, Karl, Cleland, John G F +3 more·2007·Heart

Abstract

Background: β Blocker treatment may worsen glucose metabolism. Objective: To study the development of new onset diabetes in a large cohort of patients with heart failure treated with either metoprolol or carvedilol. Design: Prospective and retrospective analysis of a controlled clinical trial. Setting: Multinational multicentre study. Patients: 3029 patients with chronic heart failure. Interventions: Randomly assigned treatment with carvedilol (n = 1511, target dose 50 mg daily) or metoprolol tartrate (n = 1518, target dose 100 mg daily). Results: Diabetic events (diabetic coma, peripheral gangrene, diabetic foot, decreased glucose tolerance or hyperglycaemia) and new onset diabetes (clinical diagnosis, repeated high random glucose level or glucose lowering drugs) were assessed in 2298 patients without diabetes at baseline. Diabetic events occurred in 122/1151 (10.6%) patients in the carvedilol group and 149/1147 (13.0%) patients in the metoprolol group (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 0.99; p = 0.039). New onset diabetes was diagnosed in 119/1151 (10.3%) v 145/1147 (12.6%) cases in the carvedilol and metoprolol treatment groups (HR = 0.78, CI 0.61 to 0.997; p = 0.048), respectively. Patients with diabetes at baseline had an increased mortality compared with non-diabetic subjects (45.3% v 33.9%; HR = 1.45, CI 1.28 to 1.65). Both diabetic and non-diabetic subjects at baseline had a similar reduction in mortality with carvedilol compared with metoprolol (RR = 0.85; CI 0.69 to 1.06 and RR = 0.82; CI 0.71 to 0.94, respectively). Conclusion: A high prevalence and incidence of diabetes is found in patients with heart failure over a course of 5 years. New onset diabetes is more likely to occur during treatment with metoprolol than during treatment with carvedilol.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/hrt.2006.092379

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In head-to-head trials, patients with type 2 diabetes treated with vasodilating versus nonvasodilating β-blockers had small but significant decreases in HbA1c levels (0.1%-0.2%), improved insulin sensitivity, lower cholesterol levels, less weight gain, and less progression to microalbuminuria.

    “In head-to-head trials, patients with T2DM who were treated with vasodilating (versus nonvasodilating) β-blockers had small but significant decreases in HbA1c levels (0.1%–0.2%), improved insulin sensitivity, lower cholesterol levels, less weight gain, and less progression to microalbuminuria.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. Solang L, Malmberg K, Ryden L. Diabetes mellitus and congestive heart failure. Further knowledge needed. Eur Heart J 1999;20:789-95.
  2. Gustafsson I, Brendorp B, Seibaek M, et al. Influence of diabetes and diabetes- gender interaction on the risk of death in patients hospitalized with congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:771-7.
  3. Lopez-Sendon J, Swedberg K, McMurray J, et al. Expert consensus document on beta-adrenergic receptor blockers. Eur Heart J 2004;25:1341-62.
  4. Dornhorst A, Powell SH, Pensky J. Aggravation by propranolol of hyperglycaemic effect of hydrochlorothiazide in type II diabetics without alteration of insulin secretion. Lancet 1985;1:123-6.
  5. Bakris GL, Fonseca V, Katholi RE, et al. Metabolic effects of carvedilol vs metoprolol in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004;292:2227-36.
  6. Poole-Wilson PA, Swedberg K, Cleland JG, et al. Comparison of carvedilol and metoprolol on clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure in the Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET): randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2003;362:7-13.
  7. Poole-Wilson PA, Cleland JG, Di Lenarda A, et al. Rationale and design of the Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial in patients with chronic heart failure: COMET. Eur J Heart Fail 2002;4:321-9.
  8. Swedberg K, Cleland J, Dargie H, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure: executive summary (update 2005): The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Chronic Heart Failure of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2005;26:1115-40.
  9. Jacob S, Rett K, Wicklmayr M, et al. Differential effect of chronic treatment with two beta-blocking agents on insulin sensitivity: the carvedilol-metoprolol study. J Hypertens 1996;14:489-94.
  10. Kannel WB, McGee DL. Diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The Framingham study. JAMA 1979;241:2035-8.
  11. Foody JM, Farrell MH, Krumholz HM. b-Blocker therapy in heart failure: scientific review. JAMA 2002;287:883-9.
  12. Ceriello A, Motz E. Is oxidative stress the pathogenic mechanism underlying insulin resistance, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease? The common soil hypothesis revisited. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2004;24:816-23.
  13. Malmberg K, Herlitz J, Hjalmarson A, et al. Effects of metoprolol on mortality and late infarction in diabetics with suspected acute myocardial infarction. Retrospective data from two large studies. Eur Heart J 1989;10:423-8.
  14. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Efficacy of atenolol and captopril in reducing risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 39. BMJ 1998;317:713-20.
  15. Abuissa H, Jones PG, Marso SP, et al. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers for prevention of type 2 diabetes a meta- analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:821-6.
  16. Anonymous. Effect of metoprolol CR/XL in chronic heart failure: Metoprolol CR/ XL Randomised Intervention Trial in Congestive Heart Failure (MERIT-HF). Lancet 1999;353:2001-7.
  17. Hjalmarson A, Waagstein F. COMET: a proposed mechanism of action to explain the results and concerns about dose. Lancet. 2003;362: 1077; author reply 1077-8).
  18. Metra M, Torp-Pedersen C, Swedberg K, et al. Influence of heart rate, blood pressure, and beta-blocker dose on outcome and the differences in outcome between carvedilol and metoprolol tartrate in patients with chronic heart failure: results from the COMET trial. Eur Heart J 2005;26:2259-68.
  19. Torp-Pedersen C, Poole-Wilson P, Swedberg K, et al. Effects of metoprolol and carvedilol on cause-specific mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic heart failure -COMET. Am Heart J 2005;149:370-6.
  20. Seibaek M, Sloth C, Vallebo L, et al. Glucose tolerance status and severity of coronary artery disease in men referred to coronary arteriography. Am Heart J 1997;133:622-9.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Torp-Pedersen, C., Metra, M., Charlesworth, A., Spark, P., Lukas, M. A., Poole-Wilson, P. A., Swedberg, K., Cleland, J. G. F., Di Lenarda, A., Remme, W. J., & Scherhag, A.
Affiliations
  • Bispebjerg Hospital (DK)
  • University of Brescia (IT)
  • Nottingham Clinical Research Group (NCRG), Nottingham, UK
  • GlaxoSmithKline (United States) (US)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
  • University of Hull (GB)
  • Department of Cardiology, Ospedale di Cattinara, Trieste, Italy
  • Sticares Cardiovascular Research Foundation, Rhoon, Netherlands
  • F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG (CH)
Venue
Heart
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2007-01-19
Volume
93
Issue
8
Pages
968-973
ISSN
  • 1355-6037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-201X
OpenAlex
W2139561039
Cited by
171
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 13
FWCI
11.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Heart (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System (Università degli Studi di Brescia) (submittedVersion)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca - Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • GlaxoSmithKline
  • F. Hoffmann-La Roche
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart rate and cardiovascular health
Keywords
carvedilol, metoprolol, chronic heart failure, new-onset diabetes, pregestational diabetes, beta-blockers, glucose metabolism, diabetes complications, mortality, glucose tolerance, hyperglycemia, diabetic foot, diabetic coma, peripheral gangrene, antidiabetic drugs
MeSH terms
Carvedilol, Adrenergic beta-Antagonists, Aged, Blood Glucose, Carbazoles, Diabetes Mellitus, Double-Blind Method, Europe, Female, Heart Failure, Humans, Male, Metoprolol, Middle Aged, Propanolamines, Prospective Studies, Retrospective Studies, Incidence, Prevalence, Chi-Square Distribution

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