endpoint. The only difference here is that there are more events. Instead of a total of 11
events, there are now 40 events. So generally the confidence limits are tighter for the
individual study odds ratios and the overall odds ratio. Again we see that study 13
produces an estimate greater than one. Now because of all the discussion around the
TZDs and CV events, we thought we should look at those events by background TZD.
This table shows you the custom events by treatment group for both doses studied and by
background TZD and you can see there is nothing here that differentiates the TZDs for
these few events.
the one we get when we do an exact test which is 0.2 and this is not surprising, because
when you use a continuity correction the estimates tends to shift towards the not. Notice
there is only one study that produces an estimate greater than one. That's study 13.
Study 13 is the study where patients treated at time of enrolment with TZD, either
Pioglitazone or Rosiglitazone, are randomized to add-on therapy of Saxagliptin or
placebo. So overall we see the plot suggests no significant heterogeneity across the trails
and test for heterogeneity support that.
MACE endpoint for the short-term plus long-term data. We did these analyses because
we wanted some reassurance that the results seeing in an overall population of rather low
Scribes, LLC Toll Free 1-800-675-8846 www.scribesllc.com
Now let's look at the short-term plus long-term data for the custom MACE
Lastly, I would like to show you some subgroup results using the custom
used. There is only one study with events in both treatment arms, and that study is 39,
it has the largest symbol here, which is the study of initial combination of Saxagliptin
with Metformin. There are five events in this one study, and there are only a total of 11
events in all eight studies.
Now the estimate using the continuity correction is 0.3 which differs from