Objective: The aim of this study was is to investigate the proposed beneficial cardiovascular effects of a novel class of antidiabetic drugs named; dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors. In this study, we compared the effect of using add-on therapy of vildagliptin (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor; DPP-4i) and gliclazide (sulphonylurea; SU) to that when using gliclazide monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) on different cardiovascular outcomes.Methods: A total of 60 patients diagnosed with T2DM, and ACS were randomly recruited into two treatment groups each of 30 patients to receive either gliclazide monotherapy (SU) or vildagliptin (DPP4i)+gliclazide (SU) add-on therapy, administered in a double-blind fashion. Outpatient visits were scheduled at 3, 6, and 12 mo where patient was reevaluated for cardiovascular (CV) outcomes and followed up for any arising cardiovascular complication. Results:The vildagliptin (DPP4i) plus gliclazide (SU) add-on therapy group have significantly shown more improved glycemic control, lipid profile and ventricular performance compared to gliclazide (SU) monotherapy group with p values<0.05. Conclusion:Vildagliptin as a DPP4i provides favourable cardiovascular effects beyond glucose control. Yet, its long-term safety and efficacy data still needs further investigations.

Background: Pharmacovigilance is the practice of discovering and reducing risks associated with pharmaceutical products, as well as improving patient safety by evaluating the risk-benefit ratio of medications. The current study looked at pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding ADR reporting, as well as the factors that may influence reporting. Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey was conducted to collect data from 258 pharmacists from May 2020 to September 2021. A pre-designed questionnaires evaluating knowledge, attitude and practice were distributed and filled questionnaires were collected and analyzed. Results: More than third of pharmacists were unsure to whom ADRs reports should be reported , and about 26.36% said ADRs should be reported to the national ADR monitoring center. More than third group of pharmacists (34.11%) said that pharmacists are responsible for reporting ADRs, while (65.89%) said that all healthcare providers should report ADRs. Conclusions: Most pharmacists had sufficient knowledge of pharmacovigilance and maintained a positive attitude towards ADRs reporting. Education and training of ADRs reporting can be used as one of the planning strategies to improve the reporting rate. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrial.gov, number NCT05224804.