Saeed Shoar1, Ahmed Ali Shah2, Waleed Ikram3, Najam Farooq2, Agnes Udoh4, Elsa Tabibzadeh5, Soheila Khavandi6, Siamak Khavandi7. 1. Department of Clinical Research, ScientificWriting Corp Houston, TX, USA. 2. School of Medicine, Quaid-e-Azam Medical College Bahawalpur, Pakistan. 3. School of Medicine, Lahore Medical and Dental College Lahore, Pakistan. 4. School of Medicine, Madonna University Okija, Nigeria. 5. Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences Tabriz, Iran. 6. Department of Cardiology, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences Tabriz, Iran. 7. Department of Ophthalmology, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences Tabriz, Iran.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have shown promise in improving cardiovascular outcome in patients with heart failure (HF) and diabetes mellitus (DM). Although these benefits have been confirmed by several meta-analyses, small studies have not been included into these pooled analyses. AIM: Publication of recent RCTs prompted us to perform this updated meta-analysis to examine the consistency of favorable cardiovascular outcomes of SGLT2 inhibitors in HF patients by inclusion of clinical trials with small sample size. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature in PubMed/Medline and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify all RCTs investigating the benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with HF. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was to compare the cardiovascular death (CVD) and hospitalization for HF (HHF) between patients who received an SGLT2 inhibitor and those who received a placebo or a non-SGLT2 inhibitor. We used a risk difference (RD) and log hazard ratio (HR) to pool the reported difference across the included RCTs. RESULTS: A total of 12 RCTs encompassing 59,825 patients at different stages of HF and DM were included, 32,448 patients in the SGLT2 inhibitor group and 27,377 patients in the control group. A pooled analysis of RCTs, regardless of HF severity or DM status, showed a significantly reduced RD for CVD (RD =-0.01, 95% CI [-0.01, 0.00], P=0.01) and HHF (RD =-0.02, 95% CI [-0.03, -0.01], P=0.0005) in patients who received a SGLT2 inhibitor compared to those who did not. A sub-group analysis showed a significantly reduced RD for CVD (RD =-0.01, 95% CI [-0.02, 0.00], P=0.03) and HHF (RD =-0.02, 95% CI [-0.03, 0.00], P=0.01) in patients with DM who received SGLT2 inhibitors regardless of the severity of HF. Also, regardless of DM status, RD for HHF favored the use of SGLT2 inhibitor than the control medication (RD =-0.05, 95% CI [-0.06, -0.03], P<0.00001). CONCLUSION: SGLT2 inhibitors have shown a promise in reducing CVD and HHF in patients with HF, regardless of ejection fraction or diabetes status. AJCD
BACKGROUND:Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have shown promise in improving cardiovascular outcome in patients with heart failure (HF) and diabetes mellitus (DM). Although these benefits have been confirmed by several meta-analyses, small studies have not been included into these pooled analyses. AIM: Publication of recent RCTs prompted us to perform this updated meta-analysis to examine the consistency of favorable cardiovascular outcomes of SGLT2 inhibitors in HF patients by inclusion of clinical trials with small sample size. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature in PubMed/Medline and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify all RCTs investigating the benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with HF. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was to compare the cardiovascular death (CVD) and hospitalization for HF (HHF) between patients who received an SGLT2 inhibitor and those who received a placebo or a non-SGLT2 inhibitor. We used a risk difference (RD) and log hazard ratio (HR) to pool the reported difference across the included RCTs. RESULTS: A total of 12 RCTs encompassing 59,825 patients at different stages of HF and DM were included, 32,448 patients in the SGLT2 inhibitor group and 27,377 patients in the control group. A pooled analysis of RCTs, regardless of HF severity or DM status, showed a significantly reduced RD for CVD (RD =-0.01, 95% CI [-0.01, 0.00], P=0.01) and HHF (RD =-0.02, 95% CI [-0.03, -0.01], P=0.0005) in patients who received a SGLT2 inhibitor compared to those who did not. A sub-group analysis showed a significantly reduced RD for CVD (RD =-0.01, 95% CI [-0.02, 0.00], P=0.03) and HHF (RD =-0.02, 95% CI [-0.03, 0.00], P=0.01) in patients with DM who received SGLT2 inhibitors regardless of the severity of HF. Also, regardless of DM status, RD for HHF favored the use of SGLT2 inhibitor than the control medication (RD =-0.05, 95% CI [-0.06, -0.03], P<0.00001). CONCLUSION:SGLT2 inhibitors have shown a promise in reducing CVD and HHF in patients with HF, regardless of ejection fraction or diabetes status. AJCD
Authors: Thomas A Zelniker; Stephen D Wiviott; Itamar Raz; Kyungah Im; Erica L Goodrich; Marc P Bonaca; Ofri Mosenzon; Eri T Kato; Avivit Cahn; Remo H M Furtado; Deepak L Bhatt; Lawrence A Leiter; Darren K McGuire; John P H Wilding; Marc S Sabatine Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-11-10 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Bernard Zinman; Christoph Wanner; John M Lachin; David Fitchett; Erich Bluhmki; Stefan Hantel; Michaela Mattheus; Theresa Devins; Odd Erik Johansen; Hans J Woerle; Uli C Broedl; Silvio E Inzucchi Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-09-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bruce Neal; Vlado Perkovic; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Dick de Zeeuw; Greg Fulcher; Ngozi Erondu; Wayne Shaw; Gordon Law; Mehul Desai; David R Matthews Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-06-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Thomas A Zelniker; Stephen D Wiviott; Itamar Raz; KyungAh Im; Erica L Goodrich; Remo H M Furtado; Marc P Bonaca; Ofri Mosenzon; Eri T Kato; Avivit Cahn; Deepak L Bhatt; Lawrence A Leiter; Darren K McGuire; John P H Wilding; Marc S Sabatine Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-04-23 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Mark C Petrie; Subodh Verma; Kieran F Docherty; Silvio E Inzucchi; Inder Anand; Jan Belohlávek; Michael Böhm; Chern-En Chiang; Vijay K Chopra; Rudolf A de Boer; Akshay S Desai; Mirta Diez; Jaroslaw Drozdz; Andre Dukát; Junbo Ge; Jonathan Howlett; Tzvetana Katova; Masafumi Kitakaze; Charlotta E A Ljungman; Béla Merkely; Jose C Nicolau; Eileen O'Meara; Pham Nguyen Vinh; Morten Schou; Sergey Tereshchenko; Lars Køber; Mikhail N Kosiborod; Anna Maria Langkilde; Felipe A Martinez; Piotr Ponikowski; Marc S Sabatine; Mikaela Sjöstrand; Scott D Solomon; Per Johanson; Peter J Greasley; David Boulton; Olof Bengtsson; Pardeep S Jhund; John J V McMurray Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-04-14 Impact factor: 56.272
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
Authors: Milton Packer; Stefan D Anker; Javed Butler; Gerasimos Filippatos; João Pedro Ferreira; Stuart J Pocock; Peter Carson; Inder Anand; Wolfram Doehner; Markus Haass; Michel Komajda; Alan Miller; Steen Pehrson; John R Teerlink; Martina Brueckmann; Waheed Jamal; Cordula Zeller; Sven Schnaidt; Faiez Zannad Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Hubert Kolb; Kerstin Kempf; Martin Röhling; Martina Lenzen-Schulte; Nanette C Schloot; Stephan Martin Journal: BMC Med Date: 2021-12-09 Impact factor: 8.775