Silvio E Inzucchi1, David Fitchett2, Dubravka Jurišić-Eržen3, Vincent Woo4, Stefan Hantel5, Christina Janista5, Stefan Kaspers5, Jyothis T George5, Bernard Zinman6. 1. Section of Endocrinology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, United States. 2. St. Michael's Hospital, Division of Cardiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Department of Endocrinology and Diabetology, University Hospital Centre, Faculty of Medicine, University of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia. 4. Section of Endocrinology and Metabolism, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. 5. Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim, Germany. 6. Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
AIMS: In the EMPA-REG OUTCOME® trial, the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin when given in addition to standard care improved cardiovascular (CV) and renal outcomes, and reduced mortality. Trial participants were on a variety of glucose-lowering therapies at baseline, some of which could potentially affect CV risk. This analysis investigated whether the use of background diabetes therapy affected the risk of CV death, hospitalizations for heart failure, and progression of chronic kidney disease, among patients treated with empagliflozin. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria were randomized to placebo, empagliflozin 10 mg or empagliflozin 25 mg; glucose-lowering therapy was to remain unchanged for 12 weeks and then adjusted to achieve glycaemic control according to local guidelines. Differences in risk of cardio-renal outcomes between empagliflozin and placebo by baseline use of metformin, sulphonylurea (SU) and insulin were assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Of 7020 eligible patients, 74% were receivingmetformin, 43% SU and 48% insulin at baseline (each alone or in combination); the most common regimens were metformin plus SU (20%) and metformin plus insulin (20%). Empagliflozin reduced the risk of CV death irrespective of the use of: metformin [with: hazard ratio (HR) 0.71 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.54-0.94); without: 0.46 (0.32-0.68); Pinteraction = 0.07]; SU [with: HR 0.64 (0.44-0.92); without: 0.61 (0.46-0.81); Pinteraction = 0.85]; or insulin [with: HR 0.63 (0.46-0.85); without: 0.61 (0.44-0.85); Pinteraction = 0.92]. Reductions in three-point major adverse CV events, hospitalizations for heart failure, and all-cause mortality were consistent across subgroups of baseline therapies. Empagliflozin reduced the risks of incident or worsening nephropathy versus placebo irrespective of the use of SU or insulin at baseline (Pinteraction > 0.05), but there was a greater reduction in this risk for patients not using metformin [HR 0.47 (95% CI 0.37-0.59)] versus those using metformin [HR 0.68 (95% CI 0.58-0.79)] at baseline (Pinteraction = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of empagliflozin to antihyperglycaemic regimens of patients with type 2 diabetes and CV disease consistently reduced their risks of adverse CV outcomes and mortality irrespective of baseline use of metformin, SU or insulin. For chronic kidney disease progression, there may be a larger benefit from empagliflozin in those patients who are not using metformin.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: In the EMPA-REG OUTCOME® trial, the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin when given in addition to standard care improved cardiovascular (CV) and renal outcomes, and reduced mortality. Trial participants were on a variety of glucose-lowering therapies at baseline, some of which could potentially affect CV risk. This analysis investigated whether the use of background diabetes therapy affected the risk of CV death, hospitalizations for heart failure, and progression of chronic kidney disease, among patients treated with empagliflozin. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria were randomized to placebo, empagliflozin 10 mg or empagliflozin 25 mg; glucose-lowering therapy was to remain unchanged for 12 weeks and then adjusted to achieve glycaemic control according to local guidelines. Differences in risk of cardio-renal outcomes between empagliflozin and placebo by baseline use of metformin, sulphonylurea (SU) and insulin were assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Of 7020 eligible patients, 74% were receiving metformin, 43% SU and 48% insulin at baseline (each alone or in combination); the most common regimens were metformin plus SU (20%) and metformin plus insulin (20%). Empagliflozin reduced the risk of CV death irrespective of the use of: metformin [with: hazard ratio (HR) 0.71 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.54-0.94); without: 0.46 (0.32-0.68); Pinteraction = 0.07]; SU [with: HR 0.64 (0.44-0.92); without: 0.61 (0.46-0.81); Pinteraction = 0.85]; or insulin [with: HR 0.63 (0.46-0.85); without: 0.61 (0.44-0.85); Pinteraction = 0.92]. Reductions in three-point major adverse CV events, hospitalizations for heart failure, and all-cause mortality were consistent across subgroups of baseline therapies. Empagliflozin reduced the risks of incident or worsening nephropathy versus placebo irrespective of the use of SU or insulin at baseline (Pinteraction > 0.05), but there was a greater reduction in this risk for patients not using metformin [HR 0.47 (95% CI 0.37-0.59)] versus those using metformin [HR 0.68 (95% CI 0.58-0.79)] at baseline (Pinteraction = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of empagliflozin to antihyperglycaemic regimens of patients with type 2 diabetes and CV disease consistently reduced their risks of adverse CV outcomes and mortality irrespective of baseline use of metformin, SU or insulin. For chronic kidney disease progression, there may be a larger benefit from empagliflozin in those patients who are not using metformin.
Authors: Muthiah Vaduganathan; Silvio E Inzucchi; Naveed Sattar; David H Fitchett; Anne Pernille Ofstad; Martina Brueckmann; Jyothis T George; Subodh Verma; Michaela Mattheus; Christoph Wanner; Bernard Zinman; Javed Butler Journal: Diabetes Obes Metab Date: 2021-10-07 Impact factor: 6.408
Authors: Kieran F Docherty; Pardeep S Jhund; Olof Bengtsson; David L DeMets; Silvio E Inzucchi; Lars Køber; Mikhail N Kosiborod; Anna Maria Langkilde; Felipe A Martinez; Marc S Sabatine; Mikaela Sjöstrand; Scott D Solomon; John J V McMurray Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2020-09-02 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Muthiah Vaduganathan; Stephen J Greene; Shuaiqi Zhang; Maria Grau-Sepulveda; Adam D DeVore; Javed Butler; Paul A Heidenreich; Joanna C Huang; Michelle M Kittleson; Karen E Joynt Maddox; James J McDermott; Anjali Tiku Owens; Pamela N Peterson; Scott D Solomon; Orly Vardeny; Clyde W Yancy; Gregg C Fonarow Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2020-11-13 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Matthew J Crowley; Darren K McGuire; Anastasia-Stefania Alexopoulos; Thomas Jon Jensen; Søren Rasmussen; Hans A Saevereid; Subodh Verma; John B Buse Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2020-07-09 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Darren K McGuire; Weichung J Shih; Francesco Cosentino; Bernard Charbonnel; David Z I Cherney; Samuel Dagogo-Jack; Richard Pratley; Michelle Greenberg; Shuai Wang; Susan Huyck; Ira Gantz; Steven G Terra; Urszula Masiukiewicz; Christopher P Cannon Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 14.676