Comparing major and mild cognitive impairment risks in older type-2 diabetic patients: a Danish register-based study on dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors vs. glucagon-like peptide-1 analogues.

Abstract

The prevalence of major and mild cognitive impairment (CI) in type-2 diabetes older patients is 15-25% and 30-60%, respectively, thus affecting quality of life and health outcomes. There is, therefore, the need of head-to-head studies aiming at identifying the optimal treatment for individuals with type-2 diabetes at increased risk of mild and major CI. This study focuses on the risk of developing mild and major CI in Danish patients treated with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 analogues (GLP-1a) using administrative and healthcare registers. An active comparator design with a 3-year follow-up period was used. The main outcome was the hospital admission with a diagnosis of mild CI or major CI. Multivariate Cox Regression analysis was performed using the high-dimensional propensity score to obtain adjusted Hazard Ratio (HR) estimates. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and marginal structured model were used to calculate risk differences while accounting for the variations of confounders throughout the follow-up period. Our results show a significant higher risk of major CI between DPP-4i and GLP-1a in unadjusted [HR (95% CI) = 3.13 (2.45-4.00), p < 0.001] and adjusted analyses [HR (95% CI) = 1.58 (1.22-2.06), p = 0.001]. No statistically significant differences were observed for mild CI. IPTW resulted stable throughout the follow-up period. Marginal structure modeling (β (95% CI) = 0.022 (0.020-0.024), p < 0.001) resulted in a higher risk of major CI for DPP-4i when compared to GLP-1a. DPP-4i was associated with an increased risk of developing major CI when compared to GLP-1a among older individuals with type-2 diabetes.