Metformin associates with improved myocardial perfusion reserve and survival in patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Participants

Patients aged 18 years or older, with a diagnosis of T2DM, undergoing quantitative stress perfusion CMR, were recruited from four United Kingdom centres (St Bartholomew’s Hospital, Barts Heart Centre, London; Glenfield Hospital, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester; Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Leeds and the Royal Free Hospital, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London) between September 2016 and May 2021. Diagnosis of T2DM was based on a HbA1c >48mmol/l or a known diagnosis of T2DM. Exclusion criteria included contraindications to adenosine, gadolinium-based contrast or MRI.

All participants had received quantitative myocardial perfusion stress CMR for clinical or research indications. Those with sub-optimal image quality, mistriggering or other artefacts were excluded.

Controls

We recruited 52 age- and sex-matched, healthy controls with no past medical history of cardiac disease or major risk factors from two cardiac centres (Leeds Teaching Hospitals and Glenfield Hospital) between September 2016 and May 2021. Exclusion criteria included a known past medical history of hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, diabetes mellitus (DM), smoking, previous CAD or revascularisation or perfusion defect on stress CMR, contraindications to adenosine, gadolinium-based contrast or MRI and subsequent evidence of abnormal late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) on CMR.

Clinical Outcomes

Patient co-morbidities and clinical outcomes were collated from electronic patient records and the National Health Service (NHS) Spine Portal through deterministic linkage using each patient’s unique NHS identification number. Co-morbidities recorded included hypertension, dyslipidaemia, atrial fibrillation, CAD, coronary revascularisation (percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, MI, stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) and cancer. All patients had provided written, informed consent and had more than one year of follow-up data available.

The joint primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and MACCE (a composite of all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, heart failure hospitalisation and coronary revascularisation). Where patients had more than one MACCE, the first event was used for analysis.

Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance imaging

CMR scans were performed on 1.5T (Magnetom Aera, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) or 3T (Prisma, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) scanners with a standard protocol consisting of localisers, short-axis and long-axis cine imaging, perfusion imaging and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging. 169 (30%) patients were scanned on 1.5T and 403 (70%) patients were scanned on 3T. All healthy controls were scanned on 3T. Perfusion imaging on 1.5T scanners used a steady state free precession (SSFP) pulse seqeunce and on 3T scanners a fast single-shot gradient echo (FLASH) pulse sequence. All participants were instructed to abstain from caffeine for 24 hours before the study. For perfusion imaging, adenosine was infused for a minimum of 3 minutes, at a rate of 140 micrograms/kg/min and increased up to a maximum of 210 micrograms/kg/min if there was insufficient haemodynamic response (heart rate increase less than 10bpm) or there was no symptomatic response, in line with standard clinical practice guidelines¹⁸. Images were acquired during free breathing over at least 60 dynamics to allow for any patients with poor ventricular function and consequent slow contrast uptake. A minimum interval duration of ten minutes was kept between stress and subsequent rest perfusion acquisitions. Participants’ blood pressures and heart rates were recorded at regular intervals during adenosine infusion. For each perfusion acquisition, an intravenous bolus of (0.05-0.75mmol/kg) gadobutrol (Gadovist, Leverkusen, Germany) or gadoterate meglumine (Dotarem, Guerbet, Paris, France) was administered at 4-5ml/s. Perfusion mapping was performed in three short axis sections, using a dual sequence technique combining a low-resolution arterial input function acquisition and a higher resolution myocardial perfusion acquisition as previously described by Kellman et. al¹⁹.

Image Analysis

Image analysis was undertaken by experienced operators at the site core lab. Those with poor image quality were excluded. Measurement of cardiac volume parameters and the presence of LGE were made using cvi42 software (Circle Cardiovascular Imaging, Calgary, Canada). Left ventricular systolic and diastolic volume, ejection fraction, and the presence and distribution (ischaemic or non-ischaemic) of LGE were recorded. Non-ischaemic LGE refers to late gadolinium enhancement in a mid-myocardial or subepicardiaI pattern, as opposed to ischaemic LGE, which is subendocardial. Rest and stress perfusion maps were generated inline by an automatic artificial intelligence-supported process whereby myocardial blood flow is quantified for each pixel of the myocardium in ml/g/min. By averaging all pixel values in the 3 slices, global MBF and global MPR (ratio of stress to rest MBF) were derived¹⁹. Automatically derived perfusion maps were reviewed by experienced observers to exclude data affected by gating and motion correction artefact and partial voluming affects.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS (IBM SPSS Statistics, version 27.0). Normality was assessed through the Shaprio-Wilk test and variance was assessed by the Leven’s test for equality of variance. Continuous variables are presented as mean±SD. Categorical variables are presented as absolute values and percentages. Means were compared using the appropriate test, student t test for continuous variables and chi-squared (χ²) test for categorical variables. A P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Multivariable linear regression analysis, adjusting for age, sex, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular mass (LV mass), left ventricular end diastolic volume (LVEDV), hypertension, evidence of previous PCI, CABG surgery, MI, body surface area (BSA) and ethnicity was undertaken to seek association between metformin, stress MBF and MPR. Cox proportional hazard models adjusting for comorbidities and CMR parameters sought associations between stress MBF and MPR with all-cause mortality and MACCE. For the all-cause mortality model, we adjusted for age and LVEF (only two predictors using the 10 events per parameter rule of thumb) and for the MACCE model we adjusted for 8 parameters including age, LVEF, sex, LVEDV, LV mass, stress MBF, MPR and hypertension. Kaplan-Meier curves represented hazard curves. Patient data was categorised depending on whether the patient was prescribed metformin at the time of the CMR scan.

Patient group

A total of 572 patients with T2DM were included with a median follow-up of 851 days (IQR 935-765) days.

Healthy control group

Subjects in the healthy control group were not taking any medication. The mean age was 64±6 years and 65% of them were of male sex.

Patient group

169 (29.5%) of patients were scanned on 1.5T scanners and 403 (70.5%) were scanned on 3T scanners. The mean ejection fraction of diabetic patients was 57±15% (table 3). 164 (29%) had evidence of ischaemic scar on LGE indicating previous MI (table 3). Mean global stress MBF in all patients was 1.70± 0.6 ml/g/min and mean MPR was 2.20± 0.90 (table 3).

Patients precribed metformin had significantly higher ejection fractions (59±14% vs 53±18%, P<0.001), stress MBF (1.74±0.6 ml/g/min vs 1.62±0.5 ml/g/min, P=0.019), MPR (2.29±0.9 vs 1.96±0.9, P<0.001) as well as significantly lower EDV and LV mass. There was no significant difference in the degree of scar burden between the two groups.

Clinical outcomes

There were 82 first MACCE (14.3%) including a total of 27 (4.7%) deaths, 15 (2.6%) MIs, 18 (3.1%) strokes, 20 (3.5%) heart failure hospitalisations and 43 (7.5%) episodes of coronary revascularisation.

Table 4 shows first MACCE events by metformin status. Although there was no significant difference in first MACCE rates between the two groups, there was a significant reduction in number of deaths in the metformin group (9 (2.3%) vs 16 (8.7%), P<0.001). There was also a significantly lower incidence of stroke in the metformin group (8 (2.1%) vs 10 (5.4%), P=0.031).

Metformin was significantly associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (figure 1). After adjusting for age and LVEF, the adjusted hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.29 ([0.12-0.73], P=0.009 (table 5)). However, metformin use was not associated with reduced first MACCE rate after adjusting for age, LVEF, sex, LVEDV, LV mass, stress MBF, MPR and hypertension with an adjusted HR of 0.92 ([0.56-1.50], P=0.73) (table 5).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1:

Kaplan-Meier hazard curves for all-cause mortality by metformin status. P value is considered significant at <0.05. Hazard curves are represented as blue line for no metformin and green line for metformin.

Association between metformin and MPR

To the authors knowledge, this is the first clinical study that has demonstrated an association between metformin use and improved coronary microvascular function in patients with T2DM. Obesity, insulin resistance, and endothelial dysfunction closely co-exist throughout the natural history of T2DM²⁰. Endothelial dysfunction is considered an important event in the development of microvascular complications in diabetes and is well recognised in patients with T2DM. Insulin resistance itself may be central to the pathogenesis of endothelial dysfunction. Patients with T2DM have been shown to have reduced MPR as manifestations of CMD caused by endothelial dysfunction^{16, 17}. Metformin has been shown to improve endothelial function²¹. A previous study conducted in 16 asymptomatic patients recently diagnosed with T2DM using Positron Emission Tomography (PET), looked at the effect of metformin treatment alone or with a combination of glimepiride/metformin on coronary endothelial function²². It showed that at baseline, the response of T2DM patients to cold pressor test was reduced compared to controls, demonstrating endothelial dysfunction. Following treatment with a combination of metformin/glimepiride, myocardial flow reserve (MFR) and response to cold pressor testing MBF (% delta MBF) improved. Another study conducted in patients with T2DM showed an improvement in endothelium-dependent vasodilatation after administering metformin, assessed through forearm plethysmography. This change was also accompanied by a reduction of insulin resistance¹¹. A study in rats who were fed a high fat diet showed an improvement in MPR after administering a 4-week treatment of metformin²³. This study also showed that metformin treatment led to a robust adenosine-induced increase in myocardial perfusion (+81%). The authors postulated that metformin improved cardiac perfusion by restoring balance between vasoconstrictor and vasodilator effects of modest insulin resistance. We postulate that an improvement in endothelial function through the use of metformin in patients with T2DM, improves MPR. We speculate that this effect was not seen with stress MBF on multivariable regression analysis since MPR is a better measure of endothelial dysfunction²⁴.

Metformin and improved survival

Our data confirm previous reports that metformin is associated with improved overall survival. Despite having worse cardiovascular profiles, patients on metformin had higher ejection fractions compared to patients not prescribed metformin. We speculate that this may be secondary to more intense risk factor modification and drug treatment effects, for example with SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists, although we cannot establish the cause from this study alone. The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) showed that metformin use reduced diabetes-related mortality by 42% (P=0.017), all-cause mortality by 36% (P=0.011), MI by 39% (P=0.01) and any diabetes related endpoint by 32% (P=0.002)⁹. In a recent systematic review, looking at 40 studies, metformin was shown to reduce cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events in CAD patients²⁵. However, for MI and CAD patients without T2DM, metformin had no effect of reducing the incidence of cardiovascular events. In our study, metformin was not associated with an improvement in first MACCE rate. This is not surprising since patients prescribed metformin had higher cardiovascular risk compared to patients not prescribed metformin. In patients prescribed metformin there was also an increased prevalence of peripheral vascular disease and hypercholesterolaemia. The association between metformin use and improved survival is unclear; further research needs to be undertaken in this field. Recently, additional benefits of metformin have been reported including potential effects on cancer^{26, 27}, cardiovascular disease¹³, liver disease²⁸, obesity²⁹, neurodegenerative disease³⁰ and renal disease³¹.

Improving mitochondrial function

T2DM is a metabolic disorder characterised by mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress³². By increasing nitric oxide (NO) bioavailability, limiting interstitial fibrosis, reducing the deposition of advanced glycation end products (AGEs), and inhibiting myocardial cell apoptosis, metformin has been shown to reduce cardiac remodelling and hypertrophy, thereby preserving left ventricular systolic and diastolic function^{33, 34}. Although we did not directly measure mitochondrial function in our study, these mechanisms may explain why patients taking metformin had higher ejection fractions, lower LVEDV and LV mass.