Empagliflozin reduces the risk of mortality and hospitalization for heart failure across Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Heart Failure in Diabetes categories: Post hoc analysis of the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial

Novel Medical Treatments and Devices for the Management of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Heart failure (HF) is a growing issue in developed countries; it is often the result of underlying processes such as ischemia, hypertension, infiltrative diseases or even genetic abnormalities. The great majority of the affected patients present a reduced ejection fraction (≤40%), thereby falling under the name of "heart failure with reduced ejection fraction" (HFrEF). This condition represents a major threat for patients: it significantly affects life quality and carries an enormous burden on the whole healthcare system due to its high management costs. In the last decade, new medical treatments and devices have been developed in order to reduce HF hospitalizations and improve prognosis while reducing the overall mortality rate. Pharmacological therapy has significantly changed our perspective of this disease thanks to its ability of restoring ventricular function and reducing symptom severity, even in some dramatic contexts with an extensively diseased myocardium. Notably, medical therapy can sometimes be ineffective, and a tailored integration with device technologies is of pivotal importance. Not by chance, in recent years, cardiac implantable devices witnessed a significant improvement, thereby providing an irreplaceable resource for the management of HF. Some devices have the ability of assessing (CardioMEMS) or treating (ultrafiltration) fluid retention, while others recognize and treat life-threatening arrhythmias, even for a limited time frame (wearable cardioverter defibrillator). The present review article gives a comprehensive overview of the most recent and important findings that need to be considered in patients affected by HFrEF. Both novel medical treatments and devices are presented and discussed.

Treatment effect heterogeneity following type 2 diabetes treatment with GLP1-receptor agonists and SGLT2-inhibitors: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

A precision medicine approach in type 2 diabetes requires the identification of clinical and biological features that are reproducibly associated with differences in clinical outcomes with specific anti-hyperglycaemic therapies. Robust evidence of such treatment effect heterogeneity could support more individualized clinical decisions on optimal type 2 diabetes therapy.

METHODS

We performed a pre-registered systematic review of meta-analysis studies, randomized control trials, and observational studies evaluating clinical and biological features associated with heterogenous treatment effects for SGLT2-inhibitor and GLP1-receptor agonist therapies, considering glycaemic, cardiovascular, and renal outcomes. After screening 5,686 studies, we included 101 studies of SGLT2-inhibitors and 75 studies of GLP1-receptor agonists in the final systematic review.

RESULTS

Here we show that the majority of included papers have methodological limitations precluding robust assessment of treatment effect heterogeneity. For SGLT2-inhibitors, multiple observational studies suggest lower renal function as a predictor of lesser glycaemic response, while markers of reduced insulin secretion predict lesser glycaemic response with GLP1-receptor agonists. For both therapies, multiple post-hoc analyses of randomized control trials (including trial meta-analysis) identify minimal clinically relevant treatment effect heterogeneity for cardiovascular and renal outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence on treatment effect heterogeneity for SGLT2-inhibitor and GLP1-receptor agonist therapies is limited, likely reflecting the methodological limitations of published studies. Robust and appropriately powered studies are required to understand type 2 diabetes treatment effect heterogeneity and evaluate the potential for precision medicine to inform future clinical care.

Generalizability of REDUCE-IT eligibility criteria in a large diabetes cardiovascular outcomes trial: A post hoc subgroup analysis of EMPA-REG outcome: Analysis of EMPA-REG OUTCOME using REDUCE-IT criteria

Objectives

REDUCE-IT showed that icosapent ethyl (IPE) improved cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in participants with established CV disease (CVD) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) and at least one additional risk factor plus mild-moderate hypertriglyceridemia and reasonably controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). As the generalizability of REDUCE-IT has not been investigated in a T2D population with established CVD, this post hoc analysis investigated how many participants from EMPA-REG OUTCOME, which tested the effects of empagliflozin versus placebo on CV outcomes in participants with T2D and CVD, would have been eligible for IPE treatment, and whether CV outcomes differed based on eligibility for IPE treatment.

Methods

Participants from EMPA-REG OUTCOME were screened for inclusion using both REDUCE-IT-like criteria (baseline statin therapy, triglycerides 135-499 mg/dL and LDL-C 41-100 mg/dL) and slightly amended FDA indication criteria (triglycerides ≥150 mg/dL). Analyses were conducted to characterize the study population and CV outcomes in participants eligible for IPE versus those not eligible for IPE.

Results

Of the 7020 participants from EMPA-REG OUTCOME, 1810 (25.8%) fulfilled REDUCE-IT criteria and 3182 (45.3%) fulfilled FDA criteria for IPE treatment. Treatment effects of empagliflozin versus placebo on CV and kidney outcomes and mortality were consistent in participants meeting REDUCE-IT and FDA criteria and those who did not.

Conclusions

These results indicate that a sizable proportion of patients with diabetes and established CVD, such as those in EMPA-REG OUTCOME, may be eligible for IPE treatment to lower residual CV risk. Treatment benefit with empagliflozin was consistent, regardless of REDUCE-IT or FDA eligibility criteria.

Predicting and preventing heart failure in type 2 diabetes

The burden of heart failure among people with type 2 diabetes is increasing globally. People with comorbid type 2 diabetes and heart failure often have worse outcomes than those with only one of these conditions-eg, higher hospitalisation and mortality rates. Therefore, it is essential to implement optimal heart failure prevention strategies for people with type 2 diabetes. A detailed understanding of the pathophysiology underlying the occurrence of heart failure in type 2 diabetes can aid clinicians in identifying relevant risk factors and lead to early interventions that can help prevent heart failure. In this Review, we discuss the pathophysiology and risk factors of heart failure in type 2 diabetes. We also review the risk assessment tools for predicting heart failure incidence in people with type 2 diabetes as well as the data from clinical trials that have assessed the efficacy of lifestyle and pharmacological interventions. Finally, we discuss the potential challenges in implementing new management approaches and offer pragmatic recommendations to help overcome these challenges.

Systematic review of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors: a hopeful prospect in tackling heart failure-related events

In modern cardiology, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are critical components of heart failure (HF) treatment algorithms and exert their effects primarily by preventing glucose reabsorption and facilitating its urinary excretion. The objective was to systematically review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of SGLT2 inhibitors, particularly canagliflozin, empagliflozin, dapagliflozin, ertugliflozin, sotagliflozin (dual SGLT inhibitor), and their use in HF. Systematic searches of PubMed/Medline, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were performed. There were no restrictions imposed on the date and status of publication; however, there were restrictions on language for the searched studies. A total of 1139 records were identified in the bibliographic searches from both databases and the register of choice for this systematic review. Following duplicate removal, screening for titles and abstracts, and thorough assessment of full-text articles, 12 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Altogether, 83 878 patients were included in this review. Among the included studies, two RCTs, with six respective reports, investigated canagliflozin, four RCTs with 13 derived reports investigated dapagliflozin, three RCTs with 12 separate reports studied the effects of empagliflozin, one RCT and its three respective reports assessed ertugliflozin's effects, and two RCTs with one added report investigated the dual inhibitor sotagliflozin. Pooled meta-analytic effects of SGLT2 inhibitors were as follows: on atrial fibrillation odds ratio (OR) = 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68-1.01, prediction interval (PI): 0.57-1.19; on HF hospitalization OR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.60-0.78, PI: 0.60-0.78; on cardiovascular death OR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.58-1.15, PI: 0.42-1.60; and on major adverse cardiovascular events OR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.77-1.06, PI: 0.71-1.15. SGLT2 inhibitors significantly improve the quality of life in HF patients. Their beneficial effects on HF, especially in left ventricular dysfunction, have made their use possible irrespective of diabetes mellitus or atrial fibrillation status.

Effect of Canagliflozin on Heart Failure Hospitalization in Diabetes According to Baseline Heart Failure Risk

BACKGROUND

In the CANVAS (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study) program, canagliflozin reduced the risk of heart failure (HF) hospitalization among individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate heterogeneity in absolute and relative treatment effects of canagliflozin on HF hospitalization according to baseline HF risk as assessed by diabetes-specific HF risk scores (WATCH-DM [Weight (body mass index), Age, hyperTension, Creatinine, HDL-C, Diabetes control (fasting plasma glucose) and QRS Duration, MI and CABG] and TRS-HF_DM [TIMI Risk Score for HF in Diabetes]).

METHODS

Participants in the CANVAS trial were categorized into low, medium, and high risk for HF using the WATCH-DM score (for participants without prevalent HF) and the TRS-HF_DM score (for all participants). The outcome of interest was time to first HF hospitalization. The treatment effect of canagliflozin vs placebo for HF hospitalization was compared across risk strata.

RESULTS

Among 10,137 participants with available HF data, 1,446 (14.3%) had HF at baseline. Among participants without baseline HF, WATCH-DM risk category did not modify the treatment effect of canagliflozin (vs placebo) on HF hospitalization (P interaction = 0.56). However, the absolute and relative risk reduction with canagliflozin was numerically greater in the high-risk group (cumulative incidence, canagliflozin vs placebo: 8.1% vs 12.7%; HR: 0.62 [95% CI: 0.37-0.93]; P = 0.03; number needed to treat: 22) than in the low- and intermediate-risk groups. When overall study participants were categorized according to the TRS-HF_DM score, a statistically significant difference in the treatment effect of canagliflozin across risk strata was observed (P interaction = 0.04). Canagliflozin significantly reduced the risk of HF hospitalization by 39% in the high-risk group (HR: 0.61 [95% CI: 0.48-0.78]; P < 0.001; number needed to treat: 20) but not in the intermediate- or low-risk groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among participants with T2DM, the WATCH-DM and TRS-HF_DM can reliably identify those at high risk for HF hospitalization and most likely to benefit from canagliflozin.

Precision medicine in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review of treatment effect heterogeneity for GLP1-receptor agonists and SGLT2-inhibitors

Background

A precision medicine approach in type 2 diabetes requires identification of clinical and biological features that are reproducibly associated with differences in clinical outcomes with specific anti-hyperglycaemic therapies. Robust evidence of such treatment effect heterogeneity could support more individualized clinical decisions on optimal type 2 diabetes therapy.

Methods

We performed a pre-registered systematic review of meta-analysis studies, randomized control trials, and observational studies evaluating clinical and biological features associated with heterogenous treatment effects for SGLT2-inhibitor and GLP1-receptor agonist therapies, considering glycaemic, cardiovascular, and renal outcomes.

Results

After screening 5,686 studies, we included 101 studies of SGLT2-inhibitors and 75 studies of GLP1-receptor agonists in the final systematic review. The majority of papers had methodological limitations precluding robust assessment of treatment effect heterogeneity. For glycaemic outcomes, most cohorts were observational, with multiple analyses identifying lower renal function as a predictor of lesser glycaemic response with SGLT2-inhibitors and markers of reduced insulin secretion as predictors of lesser response with GLP1-receptor agonists. For cardiovascular and renal outcomes, the majority of included studies were post-hoc analyses of randomized control trials (including meta-analysis studies) which identified limited clinically relevant treatment effect heterogeneity.

Conclusions

Current evidence on treatment effect heterogeneity for SGLT2-inhibitor and GLP1-receptor agonist therapies is limited, likely reflecting the methodological limitations of published studies. Robust and appropriately powered studies are required to understand type 2 diabetes treatment effect heterogeneity and evaluate the potential for precision medicine to inform future clinical care.

Plain language summary

This review identifies research that helps understand which clinical and biological factors that are associated with different outcomes for specific type 2 diabetes treatments. This information could help clinical providers and patients make better informed personalized decisions about type 2 diabetes treatments. We focused on two common type 2 diabetes treatments: SGLT2-inhibitors and GLP1-receptor agonists, and three outcomes: blood glucose control, heart disease, and kidney disease. We identified some potential factors that are likely to lessen blood glucose control including lower kidney function for SGLT2-inhibitors and lower insulin secretion for GLP1-receptor agonists. We did not identify clear factors that alter heart and renal disease outcomes for either treatment. Most of the studies had limitations, meaning more research is needed to fully understand the factors that influence treatment outcomes in type 2 diabetes.

Empagliflozin and Left Ventricular Remodeling in People Without Diabetes: Primary Results of the EMPA-HEART 2 CardioLink-7 Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors have been demonstrated to promote reverse cardiac remodeling in people with diabetes or heart failure. Although it has been theorized that sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors might afford similar benefits in people without diabetes or prevalent heart failure, this has not been evaluated. We sought to determine whether sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibition with empagliflozin leads to a decrease in left ventricular (LV) mass in people without type 2 diabetes or significant heart failure.

METHODS

Between April 2021 and January 2022, 169 individuals, 40 to 80 years of age, without diabetes but with risk factors for adverse cardiac remodeling were randomly assigned to empagliflozin (10 mg/d; n=85) or placebo (n=84) for 6 months. The primary outcome was the 6-month change in LV mass indexed (LVMi) to baseline body surface area as measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Other measures included 6-month changes in LV end-diastolic and LV end-systolic volumes indexed to baseline body surface area and LV ejection fraction.

RESULTS

Among the 169 participants (141 men [83%]; mean age, 59.3±10.5 years), baseline LVMi was 63.2±17.9 g/m² and 63.8±14.0 g/m² for the empagliflozin- and placebo-assigned groups, respectively. The difference (95% CI) in LVMi at 6 months in the empagliflozin group versus placebo group adjusted for baseline LVMi was -0.30 g/m² (-2.1 to 1.5 g/m²; P=0.74). Median baseline (interquartile range) NT-proBNP (N-terminal-pro B-type natriuretic peptide) was 51 pg/mL (20-105 pg/mL) and 55 pg/mL (21-132 pg/mL) for the empagliflozin- and placebo-assigned groups, respectively. The 6-month treatment effect of empagliflozin versus placebo (95% CI) on blood pressure and NT-proBNP (adjusted for baseline values) were -1.3 mm Hg (-5.2 to 2.6 mm Hg; P=0.52), 0.69 mm Hg (-1.9 to 3.3 mm Hg; P=0.60), and -6.1 pg/mL (-37.0 to 24.8 pg/mL; P=0.70) for systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and NT-proBNP, respectively. No clinically meaningful between-group differences in LV volumes (diastolic and systolic indexed to baseline body surface area) or ejection fraction were observed. No difference in adverse events was noted between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among people with neither diabetes nor significant heart failure but with risk factors for adverse cardiac remodeling, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibition with empagliflozin did not result in a meaningful reduction in LVMi after 6 months.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT04461041.

Clinical efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors with different SGLT1/SGLT2 selectivity in cardiovascular outcomes among patients with and without heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Some sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors showed benefits on heart failure (HF), but different SGLT2/SGLT1 selectivity might influence the treatment effect. This study aimed to meta-analyze the treatment effects of SGLT2 inhibitors and the diversity of receptor selectivity for patients with and without HF.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials were searched in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov registry from inception to October 2020. The interest outcomes were analyzed with random-effects models and presented with a risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Subgroup analyses examined the treatment effects among SGLT2 inhibitors with different SGLT2/SGLT1 selectivity.

RESULTS

The final analyses included 10 trials and 52,607 patients. The RR of total cardiovascular (CV) death or hospitalization for HF (HHF) between SGLT2 inhibitors and placebo was 0.79 (95% CI 0.74-0.84, I2 = 31%). With SGLT2 inhibitors, HF patients had reduced mortality risks (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80-0.99, I2 = 0), and non-HF patients had lower risks of major adverse CV events (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85-0.99, I2 = 0). The risk reduction of HHF was consistent in groups of HF (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64-0.80, I2 = 8%) and non-HF (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61-0.89, I2 = 0), but the effect of the low SGLT2/SGLT1 selectivity inhibitor was insignificant in non-HF patients.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors on risk reduction of total CV death or HHF is consistent with the previous studies. The regimen is beneficial for reducing mortality in patients with HF and major adverse CV events in those without HF. Different SGLT2/SGLT1 selectivity may differ in the treatment effects in patients with and without HF.

Clinical Utility of Cardiovascular Risk Scores for Identification of People With Type 2 Diabetes More Likely to Benefit From Either GLP-1 Receptor Agonist or SGLT2 Inhibitor Therapy

OBJECTIVE

Differentiation of risk for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) from heart failure hospitalization (HHF) or kidney disease is important when selecting glucose-lowering therapy. We investigated the ability of separate MACE and HHF risk scores to 1) differentiate MACE from HHF risk; and 2) identify individuals more likely to benefit from either glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We identified three trials in type 2 diabetes that reported cardiovascular outcomes stratified by Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction Risk Scores for MACE and HHF. Pooled placebo-arm rates of HHF, MACE, and their ratio and estimated GLP-1RA- and SGLT2i-mediated reductions in events (MACE and HHF combined) were compared across cardiovascular risk strata in the trial populations.

RESULTS

The HHF rate was less frequent than MACE at all risk levels but increased from 18% of the MACE rate at low-intermediate HHF risk to 61% at highest HHF risk. Similarly, with increasing MACE risk, the incidence of HHF increased from 19% of the MACE incidence in those at low MACE risk to 51% in those with the highest MACE risk. Estimated GLP-1RA- and SGLT2i-mediated reductions in cardiovascular events were similar in those at low-intermediate MACE or HHF risk but tended to favor SGLT2is at higher risk levels of both scores.

CONCLUSIONS

A greater increase in the rate of HHF relative to MACE was observed with progressively higher cardiovascular risk, regardless of the risk score applied. Consequently, SGLT2is may offer greater overall cardiovascular protection in those at highest MACE risk, not just those at highest HHF risk.

Interpreting Absolute and Relative Risk Reduction in the Context of Recent Cardiovascular Outcome Trials in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The cardiovascular benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) have increased the focus of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) care on comprehensive cardiovascular risk reduction. Herein, we review the results of the cardiovascular outcomes trials of SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA, discuss the concepts of relative vs. absolute risk reduction in the context of these trials, and highlight the importance of individualized risk assessment when applying trial results to clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

To enable personalized treatment approaches, multiple clinical risk scores have been developed to assess risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) outcomes and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) in patients with T2DM. In addition, circulating biomarkers of myocardial injury (cardiac troponin) and hemodynamic stress (natriuretic peptides) have been shown to further refine risk prediction of these clinically important cardiovascular complications. When making decisions about whether to initiate SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA, clinicians should consider the anticipated relative and absolute treatment benefits from these antihyperglycemic therapies. Clinicians can use available clinical and biomarker-based risk tools when counseling patients about their individual cardiovascular risk profiles and when estimating absolute treatment benefits from SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA.

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors for people with cardiovascular disease: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of death globally. Recently, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) were approved for treating people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Although metformin remains the first-line pharmacotherapy for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus, a body of evidence has recently emerged indicating that DPP4i, GLP-1RA and SGLT2i may exert positive effects on patients with known CVD.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the available evidence on the benefits and harms of DPP4i, GLP-1RA, and SGLT2i in people with established CVD, using network meta-analysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index on 16 July 2020. We also searched clinical trials registers on 22 August 2020. We did not restrict by language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating DPP4i, GLP-1RA, or SGLT2i that included participants with established CVD. Outcome measures of interest were CVD mortality, fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction, fatal and non-fatal stroke, all-cause mortality, hospitalisation for heart failure (HF), and safety outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently screened the results of searches to identify eligible studies and extracted study data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. We conducted standard pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses by pooling studies that we assessed to be of substantial homogeneity; subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also pursued to explore how study characteristics and potential effect modifiers could affect the robustness of our review findings. We analysed study data using the odds ratios (ORs) and log odds ratios (LORs) with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and credible intervals (Crls), where appropriate. We also performed narrative synthesis for included studies that were of substantial heterogeneity and that did not report quantitative data in a usable format, in order to discuss their individual findings and relevance to our review scope.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 31 studies (287 records), of which we pooled data from 20 studies (129,465 participants) for our meta-analysis. The majority of the included studies were at low risk of bias, using Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias. Among the 20 pooled studies, six investigated DPP4i, seven studied GLP-1RA, and the remaining seven trials evaluated SGLT2i. All outcome data described below were reported at the longest follow-up duration. 1. DPP4i versus placebo Our review suggests that DPP4i do not reduce any risk of efficacy outcomes: CVD mortality (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09; high-certainty evidence), myocardial infarction (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.08; high-certainty evidence), stroke (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.14; high-certainty evidence), and all-cause mortality (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.11; high-certainty evidence). DPP4i probably do not reduce hospitalisation for HF (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.23; moderate-certainty evidence). DPP4i may not increase the likelihood of worsening renal function (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.33; low-certainty evidence) and probably do not increase the risk of bone fracture (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.19; moderate-certainty evidence) or hypoglycaemia (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.29; moderate-certainty evidence). They are likely to increase the risk of pancreatitis (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.37; moderate-certainty evidence). 2. GLP-1RA versus placebo Our findings indicate that GLP-1RA reduce the risk of CV mortality (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.95; high-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.95; high-certainty evidence), and stroke (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98; high-certainty evidence). GLP-1RA probably do not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01; moderate-certainty evidence), and hospitalisation for HF (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.06; high-certainty evidence). GLP-1RA may reduce the risk of worsening renal function (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.84; low-certainty evidence), but may have no impact on pancreatitis (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.35; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of GLP-1RA on hypoglycaemia and bone fractures. 3. SGLT2i versus placebo This review shows that SGLT2i probably reduce the risk of CV mortality (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.95; moderate-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.96; moderate-certainty evidence), and reduce the risk of HF hospitalisation (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.71; high-certainty evidence); they do not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.12; high-certainty evidence) and probably do not reduce the risk of stroke (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.36; moderate-certainty evidence). In terms of treatment safety, SGLT2i probably reduce the incidence of worsening renal function (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably have no effect on hypoglycaemia (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.07; moderate-certainty evidence) or bone fracture (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.18; high-certainty evidence), and may have no impact on pancreatitis (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.86; low-certainty evidence). 4. Network meta-analysis Because we failed to identify direct comparisons between each class of the agents, findings from our network meta-analysis provided limited novel insights. Almost all findings from our network meta-analysis agree with those from the standard meta-analysis. GLP-1RA may not reduce the risk of stroke compared with placebo (OR 0.87, 95% CrI 0.75 to 1.0; moderate-certainty evidence), which showed similar odds estimates and wider 95% Crl compared with standard pairwise meta-analysis. Indirect estimates also supported comparison across all three classes. SGLT2i was ranked the best for CVD and all-cause mortality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Findings from both standard and network meta-analyses of moderate- to high-certainty evidence suggest that GLP-1RA and SGLT2i are likely to reduce the risk of CVD mortality and all-cause mortality in people with established CVD; high-certainty evidence demonstrates that treatment with SGLT2i reduce the risk of hospitalisation for HF, while moderate-certainty evidence likely supports the use of GLP-1RA to reduce fatal and non-fatal stroke. Future studies conducted in the non-diabetic CVD population will reveal the mechanisms behind how these agents improve clinical outcomes irrespective of their glucose-lowering effects.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor effects on heart failure hospitalization and cardiac function: systematic review

AIMS

To systematically review randomized controlled trials assessing effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) on hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) and cardiac structure/function and explore randomized controlled trial (RCT)-derived evidence for SGLT2i efficacy mechanisms in heart failure (HF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Systematic searches of Medline and Embase were performed. In seven trials [3730-17 160 patients; low risk of bias (RoB)], SGLT2is significantly reduced the relative risk of HHF by 27-39% vs. placebo, including in two studies in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction with or without type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Improvements in conventional cardiovascular risk factors, including glycaemic levels, cannot account for these effects. Five trials (56-105 patients; low RoB) assessed the effects of 6-12 months of SGLT2i treatment on left ventricular structure/function; four reported significant improvements vs. placebo, and one did not. Five trials (low RoB) assessed SGLT2i treatment effects on serum N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide levels; significant reductions vs. placebo were reported after 8-12 months (two studies; 3730-4744 patients) but not ≤12 weeks (three studies; 80-263 patients). Limited available RCT-derived evidence suggests various possible cardioprotective SGLT2i mechanisms, including improved haemodynamics (natriuresis and reduced interstitial fluid without blood volume contraction/neurohormonal activation) and vascular function, enhanced erythropoiesis, reduced tissue sodium and epicardial fat/inflammation, decreased sympathetic tone, and beneficial changes in cellular energetics.

CONCLUSIONS

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors reduce HHF regardless of T2DM status, and reversal of adverse left ventricular remodelling likely contributes to this efficacy. Hypothesis-driven mechanistic trials remain sparse, although numerous trials are planned or ongoing.

Prediction of heart failure outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Validation of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Heart Failure in Diabetes (TRS-HFDM ) in patients in the ACCORD trial

AIM

To investigate the ability of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Heart Failure in Diabetes (TRS-HF_DM ) to stratify patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and high cardiovascular risk for heart failure (HF) hospitalization.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used data from the control group of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Study Group (ACCORD) trial (n = 5123; mean follow-up 4.8 years). The TRS-HF_DM includes: prior HF (2 points), atrial fibrillation (1 point), coronary artery disease (1 point), estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m² (1 point), and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (>300 mg/g: 2 points; 30-300 mg/g: 1 point). We evaluated the discrimination (Harrell's C-index) and calibration (Nam-D'Agostino calibration statistic) of the TRS-HF_DM with regard to time to HF hospitalization or death due to HF.

RESULTS

The mean age of the participants was 62.8 ± 6.6 years, and 38% were women. The prevalences of TRS-HF_DM 0, 1, 2, 3 and ≥4 were 42.1%, 34.9%, 14.6%, 6.0% and 2.5%, respectively. Increasing TRS-HF_DM corresponded to an increasing HF risk: 1.3 per 1000 person-years for a TRS-HF_DM of 0 to 64.7 per 1000 person-years for TRS-HF_DM of ≥4. The TRS-HF_DM demonstrated robust discrimination of HF outcomes (C-index 0.78). Furthermore, the score was well calibrated for HF outcomes (calibration statistic P = 0.13). Similar results were seen in participants without baseline HF (C-index 0.75).

CONCLUSION

The TRS-HF_DM discriminates HF-specific risk among people with T2DM. The use of TRS-HF_DM to identify those who would maximally benefit from therapies that reduce HF risk warrants evaluation.

Combination of Linagliptin and Empagliflozin Preserves Cardiac Systolic Function in an Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury Mice With Diabetes Mellitus

Background

Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor (DPP4i) are oral hypoglycemic agents. Although SGLT2i has been shown having the beneficial effects on heart failure in basic and clinical studies, the combined effects of SGLT2i and DPP4i have not been established well. We investigated the effects of SGLT2i and DPP4i against diabetes mice model of myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury.

Methods

Streptozotocin-induced diabetic C57BL/6J mice were divided into control (vehicle), empagliflozin (30 mg/kg/day), linagliptin (3 mg/kg/day) and combination (30 mg/kg/day and 3 mg/kg/day, respectively) groups. After 7 days of drug administration, 30 min of myocardial ischemia was performed. We investigated body weight, heart weight, blood glucose, and cardiac functions by pressure-volume Millar catheter followed by 28 days of additional drug administration.

Results

Blood glucose levels, body weight, and heart weight were not significantly different between the groups. In Millar catheter analysis, left ventricular volume at the peak left ventricular ejection rate which is one of the cardiac systolic parameters in combination group was significantly preserved than that in control (P = 0.036). The cardiac index in the combination group tended to be preserved compared to that in the control (P = 0.06). The pathological fibrotic area in the left ventricle in the combination group also tended to be smaller (P = 0.08).

Conclusions

Combination therapy with linagliptin and empagliflozin preserved cardiac systolic function on the diabetes mice model of myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury independent of blood glucose levels.

The SGLT2 inhibitor Empagliflozin attenuates interleukin-17A-induced human aortic smooth muscle cell proliferation and migration by targeting TRAF3IP2/ROS/NLRP3/Caspase-1-dependent IL-1β and IL-18 secretion

Chronic inflammation and persistent oxidative stress contribute to the development and progression of vascular proliferative diseases. We hypothesized that the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin (IL)-17A induces oxidative stress and amplifies inflammatory signaling in human aortic smooth muscle cells (SMC) via TRAF3IP2-mediated NLRP3/caspase-1-dependent mitogenic and migratory proinflammatory cytokines IL-1β and IL-18. Further, we hypothesized that these maladaptive changes are prevented by empagliflozin (EMPA), an SGLT2 (Sodium/Glucose Cotransporter 2) inhibitor. Supporting our hypotheses, exposure of cultured SMC to IL-17A promoted proliferation and migration via TRAF3IP2, TRAF3IP2-dependent superoxide and hydrogen peroxide production, NLRP3 expression, caspase-1 activation, and IL-1β and IL-18 secretion. Furthermore, NLRP3 knockdown, caspase-1 inhibition, and pretreatment with IL-1β and IL-18 neutralizing antibodies and IL-18BP, each attenuated IL-17A-induced SMC migration and proliferation. Importantly, SMC express SGLT2, and pre-treatment with EMPA attenuated IL-17A/TRAF3IP2-dependent oxidative stress, NLRP3 expression, caspase-1 activation, IL-1β and IL-18 secretion, and SMC proliferation and migration. Importantly, silencing SGLT2 attenuated EMPA-mediated inhibition of IL-17A-induced cytokine secretion and SMC proliferation and migration. EMPA exerted these beneficial antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-mitogenic and anti-migratory effects under normal glucose conditions and without inducing cell death. These results suggest the therapeutic potential of EMPA in vascular proliferative diseases.

Effects and safety of SGLT2 inhibitors compared to placebo in patients with heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Heart failure (HF) prognosis without therapy is poor, however introduction of a range of drugs has improved it. We aimed to perform a systematic review on the effects and safety of sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in HF patients.

Methods

We carried out a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on SGLT2i compared to placebo for HF patients. We searched in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and EMBASE, with no language restriction, from inception to 31 August 2020. We included nine RCTs comprising three arms (empagliflozin, dapagliflozin and placebo). Effects sizes for continuous variables were expressed as mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Effects sizes for dichotomous variables were expresses as risk ratio (RR) and 95% CIs. We used random-effect models with the inverse variance method. We performed subgroup meta-analyses by intervention drug and follow-up period.

Results

SGLT2i significantly reduced all-cause mortality (RR: 0.88, 95%CI 0.79-0.98, I2 = 0%), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.87, 95%CI 0.77-0.99, I2 = 0%), HF hospitalization (RR: 0.73, 95%CI 0.66-0.81, I2 = 0%) and emergency room visits due to HF (RR: 0.40, 95%CI 0.21-0.76, I2 = 0%), as well as composite outcomes including the previous ones. Besides, it significantly improved the score of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ, MD: 1.70, 95%CI 1.67-1.73, I2 = 54%). SGLT2i reduced any serious adverse events, blood pressure and weight. However, it increased hematocrit and creatinine. The meta-analysis of RCTs of > 12 weeks of follow-up showed that SGTL2i significantly reduced NT-proBNP.

Conclusions

SGLT2i showed to improve critical outcomes in HF patients, and it is apparently safe.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors: Understanding the mechanisms for therapeutic promise and persisting risks

In a healthy person, the kidney filters nearly 200 g of glucose per day, almost all of which is reabsorbed. The primary transporter responsible for renal glucose reabsorption is sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2). Based on the impact of SGLT2 to prevent renal glucose wasting, SGLT2 inhibitors have been developed to treat diabetes and are the newest class of glucose-lowering agents approved in the United States. By inhibiting glucose reabsorption in the proximal tubule, these agents promote glycosuria, thereby reducing blood glucose concentrations and often resulting in modest weight loss. Recent work in humans and rodents has demonstrated that the clinical utility of these agents may not be limited to diabetes management: SGLT2 inhibitors have also shown therapeutic promise in improving outcomes in heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and, in preclinical studies, certain cancers. Unfortunately, these benefits are not without risk: SGLT2 inhibitors predispose to euglycemic ketoacidosis in those with type 2 diabetes and, largely for this reason, are not approved to treat type 1 diabetes. The mechanism for each of the beneficial and harmful effects of SGLT2 inhibitors-with the exception of their effect to lower plasma glucose concentrations-is an area of active investigation. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms by which these drugs cause euglycemic ketoacidosis and hyperglucagonemia and stimulate hepatic gluconeogenesis as well as their beneficial effects in cardiovascular disease and cancer. In so doing, we aim to highlight the crucial role for selecting patients for SGLT2 inhibitor therapy and highlight several crucial questions that remain unanswered.

Empagliflozin reduces the risk of mortality and hospitalization for heart failure across Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Heart Failure in Diabetes categories: Post hoc analysis of the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial

AIM

To investigate the association of the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) Risk Score for Heart Failure in Diabetes (TRS-HF_DM ) with mortality using data from the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In EMPA-REG OUTCOME, patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) disease (N = 7020) received the sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor, empagliflozin, 10 or 25 mg or placebo. Post hoc, patients were stratified into risk categories (low-intermediate, high, very-high risk scores) using baseline TRS-HF_DM . Cox regression analyses evaluated the association of TRS-HF_DM categories with all-cause mortality (ACM), CV death, hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) and CV death (excluding fatal stroke) or HHF, and whether empagliflozin reduced the risk of CV outcomes across these risk categories.

RESULTS

In placebo patients, increasing risk category was associated with a higher risk of ACM, CV death, and HHF. Empagliflozin reduced the risk of ACM (low-intermediate HR 0.68 [95% CI 0.48, 0.97] and very-high 0.69 [0.52, 0.91]), CV death (0.75 [0.48, 1.18] and 0.56 [0.41, 0.78]), HHF (0.53 [0.28, 1.01] and 0.67 [0.48, 0.96]), and CV death or HHF (0.69 [0.46, 1.03]) and (0.64 [0.49, 0.82]) across all risk categories versus placebo. Higher absolute risk reductions (ARRs) were observed for CV death in the very-high versus low-intermediate category (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Applied to EMPA-REG OUTCOME, higher TRS-HF_DM was associated with increased HHF and mortality risk. Empagliflozin reduced CV outcomes across TRS-HF_DM categories. Higher ARRs were associated with higher risk scores.