Comparative effectiveness and safety of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors versus metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: An observational study using data from routine care

Effectiveness and safety of empagliflozin: final results from the EMPRISE study

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Limited evidence exists on the comparative safety and effectiveness of empagliflozin against alternative glucose-lowering medications in individuals with type 2 diabetes with the broad spectrum of cardiovascular risk. The EMPagliflozin compaRative effectIveness and SafEty (EMPRISE) cohort study was designed to monitor the safety and effectiveness of empagliflozin periodically for a period of 5 years with data collection from electronic healthcare databases.

METHODS

We identified individuals ≥18 years old with type 2 diabetes who initiated empagliflozin or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) from 2014 to 2019 using US Medicare and commercial claims databases. After 1:1 propensity score matching using 143 baseline characteristics, we identified four a priori-defined effectiveness outcomes: (1) myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke; (2) hospitalisation for heart failure (HHF); (3) major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE); and (4) cardiovascular mortality or HHF. Safety outcomes included lower-limb amputations, non-vertebral fractures, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), acute kidney injury (AKI), severe hypoglycaemia, retinopathy progression, and short-term kidney and bladder cancers. We estimated HRs and rate differences (RDs) per 1000 person-years, overall and stratified by age, sex, baseline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and heart failure.

RESULTS

We identified 115,116 matched pairs. Compared with DPP-4i, empagliflozin was associated with lower risks of MI/stroke (HR 0.88 [95% CI 0.81, 0.96]; RD -2.08 [95% CI (-3.26, -0.90]), HHF (HR 0.50 [0.44, 0.56]; RD -5.35 [-6.22, -4.49]), MACE (HR 0.73 [0.62, 0.86]; RD -6.37 [-8.98, -3.77]) and cardiovascular mortality/HHF (HR 0.57 [0.47, 0.69]; RD -10.36 [-12.63, -8.12]). Absolute benefits were larger in older individuals and in those with ASCVD/heart failure. Empagliflozin was associated with an increased risk of DKA (HR 1.78 [1.44, 2.19]; RD 1.59 [1.08, 2.09]); decreased risks of AKI (HR 0.62 [0.54, 0.72]; RD -2.39 [-3.08, -1.71]), hypoglycaemia (HR 0.75 [0.67, 0.84]; RD -2.46 [-3.32, -1.60]) and retinopathy progression (HR 0.78 [0.63, 0.96)]; RD -9.49 [-16.97, -2.10]); and similar risks of other safety events.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Empagliflozin relative to DPP-4i was associated with risk reductions of MI or stroke, HHF, MACE and the composite of cardiovascular mortality or HHF. Absolute risk reductions were larger in older individuals and in those who had history of ASCVD or heart failure. Regarding the safety outcomes, empagliflozin was associated with an increased risk of DKA and lower risks of AKI, hypoglycaemia and progression to proliferative retinopathy, with no difference in the short-term risks of lower-extremity amputation, non-vertebral fractures, kidney and renal pelvis cancer, and bladder cancer.

Key results from observational studies and real-world evidence of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor effectiveness and safety in reducing cardio-renal risk

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, originally designed to manage blood sugar levels in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D), have emerged as a crucial class of drugs for managing cardio-renal diseases. These drugs work by targeting the SGLT2 protein in the kidneys, promoting the excretion of glucose and influencing metabolic pathways beyond glucose control. The relationship between cardio-renal diseases and SGLT2 inhibitors has been explored through landmark trials and real-world evidence (RWE) studies, demonstrating significant reductions in cardio-renal complications. This review discusses the importance of RWE studies alongside randomized controlled trials in understanding the real-world effectiveness and safety of SGLT2 inhibitors. It outlines the advantages and disadvantages of RWE compared to RCTs, highlighting their complementary roles in providing comprehensive insights into treatment outcomes. By examining a range of RWE studies, the review underscores the cardio-renal benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors across various patient populations. Safety assessments indicate that SGLT2 inhibitors are generally well tolerated, with severe adverse events being rare. Common issues, such as genital mycotic infections and urinary tract infections, are acknowledged, alongside less frequent but significant adverse events including diabetic ketoacidosis, lower-limb amputations, and bone fractures. In summary, SGLT2 inhibitors show promising cardio-renal protective effects in real-world scenarios across diverse populations in T2D, indicating their potential as early intervention measures. Continued research is essential for gaining a thorough understanding of their long-term effects and safety profiles.

Prevalence of sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitor-associated diabetic ketoacidosis in real-world data: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revised the labels of sodium-glucose transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in December 2015 to inform users regarding the risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). As more drugs of this class are approved and their indications are expanded, this serious adverse effect has been increasingly reported.

OBJECTIVE

This review evaluated observational studies to inform the prevalence of SGLT2-inhibitor-associated DKA compared with other antihyperglycemic agents.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in PubMed and EMBASE until 19 July 2022 (PROSPERO: CRD42022385425). We included published retrospective cohort active comparator/new user (ACNU) and prevalent new user studies assessing SGLT2-inhibitor-associated DKA prevalence in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) against active comparators. We excluded studies which lacked 1:1 propensity score matching. The JBI Checklist for Cohort Studies guided the risk-of-bias assessments. Meta-analysis was conducted based on the inverse variance method in R software.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies with a sample of 2,956,100 nonunique patients met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were conducted in North America (n = 9) and adopted the ACNU design (n = 15). Meta-analysis of 14 studies identified 33% higher DKA risk associated with SGLT2 inhibitors (HR = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.14-1.55, P < 0.01). Meta-regression analysis identified the study location (P = 0.02), analysis principle (P < 0.001), exclusion of chronic comorbidities (P = 0.007), and canagliflozin (P = 0.04) as significant moderator variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite limitations related to heterogeneity, generalizability, and misclassification, the results of this study show that SGLT2 inhibitors increase the prevalence of DKA among adult T2DM patients in the real world. The findings supplement evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and call for continued vigilance.

Comparative Cardiovascular Effectiveness and Safety of SGLT-2 Inhibitors, GLP-1 Receptor Agonists, and DPP-4 Inhibitors According to Frailty in Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the comparative cardiovascular effectiveness and safety of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is), glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4is) in older adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) across different frailty strata.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We performed three 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort studies, each stratified by three frailty strata, using data from Medicare beneficiaries (2013-2019) with T2D who initiated SGLT-2is, GLP-1RAs, or DPP-4is. In time-to-event analyses, we assessed the primary cardiovascular effectiveness composite outcome of acute myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, and all-cause mortality. The primary safety outcome was a composite of severe adverse events that have been linked to SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA use.

RESULTS

Compared with DPP-4is, the overall hazard ratio (HR) for the primary effectiveness outcome associated with SGLT-2is (n = 120,202 matched pairs) was 0.72 (95% CI 0.69-0.75), corresponding to an incidence rate difference (IRD) of -13.35 (95% CI -15.06 to -11.64). IRD ranged from -6.74 (95% CI -8.61 to -4.87) in nonfrail to -27.24 (95% CI -41.64 to -12.84) in frail people (P for interaction < 0.01). Consistent benefits were observed for GLP-1RAs compared with DPP-4is (n = 113,864), with an overall HR of 0.74 (95% CI 0.71-0.77) and an IRD of -15.49 (95% CI -17.46 to -13.52). IRD in the lowest frailty stratum was -7.02 (95% CI -9.23 to -4.81) and -25.88 (95% CI -38.30 to -13.46) in the highest (P for interaction < 0.01). Results for SGLT-2is versus GLP-1RAs (n = 89,865) were comparable. Severe adverse events were not more frequent with SGLT-2is or GLP-1RAs than DPP-4is.

CONCLUSIONS

SGLT-2is and GLP-1RAs safely improved cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality, with the largest absolute benefits among frail people.

Safety of sodium-glucose transporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of cohort studies

Aims: This study aimed to investigate the association between the use of sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and the risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), lower limb amputation (LLA), urinary tract infections (UTI), genital tract infections (GTI), bone fracture, and hypoglycemia in cohort studies. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed and Embase databases to identify cohort studies comparing the safety of SGLT-2i versus other glucose-lowering drugs (oGLD) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Primary endpoints were DKA and LLA, while secondary endpoints included UTI, GTI, bone fracture, and hypoglycemia. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Results: A total of 9,911,454 patients from 40 cohort studies were included in the analysis. SGLT-2i use was associated with a higher risk of DKA (HR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.07-1.38, p = 0.003) and GTI (HR: 2.72, 95% CI: 2.48-2.98, p < 0.01). However, it was not associated with an increased risk of LLA (HR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.92-1.23, p = 0.42), UTI (HR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.89-1.10, p = 0.83), or bone fracture (HR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.94-1.04, p = 0.66). Furthermore, SGLT-2i was associated with a reduced risk of hypoglycemia. Furthermore, compared to dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, SGLT-2i as a class and individually was associated with an increased risk of DKA. Canagliflozin specifically increased the risk of LLA (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.04-1.36, p = 0.01). The subgroup analysis suggested that SGLT-2i increased the risk of LLA among patients with a history of cardiovascular disease. Conclusion: SGLT-2i versus oGLD was associated with a similar occurrence of LLA, UTI, and bone fracture. However, SGLT-2i was associated with a higher risk of DKA and GTI than oGLD. These findings provide valuable information on the safety profile of SGLT-2i in patients with T2DM and can help inform clinical decision-making.

Cardiometabolic Care: Assessing Patients with Diabetes Mellitus with No Overt Cardiovascular Disease in the Light of Heart Failure Development Risk

The mechanisms leading to the development of heart failure (HF) in diabetes mellitus (DM) patients are multifactorial. Assessing the risk of HF development in patients with DM is valuable not only for the identification of a high-risk subgroup, but also equally important for defining low-risk subpopulations. Nowadays, DM and HF have been recognized as sharing similar metabolic pathways. Moreover, the clinical manifestation of HF can be independent of LVEF classification. Consequently, approaching HF should be through structural, hemodynamic and functional evaluation. Thus, both imaging parameters and biomarkers are important tools for the recognition of diabetic patients at risk of HF manifestation and HF phenotypes, and arrhythmogenic risk, and eventually for prognosis, aiming to improve patients' outcomes utilizing drugs and non-pharmaceutical cardioprotective tools such as diet modification.

A Novel Chronic Kidney Disease Phenotyping Algorithm Using Combined Electronic Health Record and Claims Data

Purpose

Because chronic kidney disease (CKD) is often under-coded as a diagnosis in claims data, we aimed to develop claims-based prediction models for CKD phenotypes determined by laboratory results in electronic health records (EHRs).

Patients and Methods

We linked EHR from two networks (used as training and validation cohorts, respectively) with Medicare claims data. The study cohort included individuals ≥65 years with a valid serum creatinine result in the EHR from 2007 to 2017, excluding those with end-stage kidney disease or on dialysis. We used LASSO regression to select among 134 predictors for predicting continuous estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). We assessed the model performance when predicting eGFR categories of <60, <45, <30 mL/min/1.73m2 in terms of area under the receiver operating curves (AUC).

Results

The model training cohort included 117,476 patients (mean age 74.8 years, female 58.2%) and the validation cohort included 56,744 patients (mean age 73.8 years, female 59.6%). In the validation cohort, the AUC of the primary model (with 113 predictors and an adjusted R2 of 0.35) for predicting eGFR <60, eGFR<45, and eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73m2 categories was 0.81, 0.88, and 0.92, respectively, and the corresponding positive predictive values for these 3 phenotypes were 0.80 (95% confidence interval: 0.79, 0.81), 0.79 (0.75, 0.84), and 0.38 (0.30, 0.45), respectively.

Conclusion

We developed a claims-based model to determine clinical phenotypes of CKD stages defined by eGFR values. Researchers without access to laboratory results can use the model-predicted phenotypes as a proxy clinical endpoint or confounder and to enhance subgroup effect assessment.

Sulphonylureas versus metformin and the risk of ventricular arrhythmias among people with type 2 diabetes: A population-based cohort study

AIM

To determine whether the use of sulphonylurea monotherapy, compared with metformin monotherapy, is associated with an increased risk of ventricular arrhythmia (VA) among patients initiating pharmacotherapy for type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study using electronic health data extracted from the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum. Using the active comparator, new-user cohort design, we compared rates of VA among patients aged 18 years or older using sulphonylurea monotherapy with those using metformin monotherapy as their initial pharmacological treatment for type 2 diabetes from April 1998 to December 2019. We used a Cox proportional hazards model with inverse probability of treatment weighting by propensity score to estimate the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and a corresponding bootstrap 95% confidence interval (CI) for VA with sulphonylurea monotherapy versus metformin monotherapy.

RESULTS

The cohort included 92 638 new users of sulphonylurea and 506 882 new users of metformin. A total of 279 VA events occurred among sulphonylurea users (rate per 10 000 person-years: 25.5, 95% CI: 22.7 to 28.7) and 1537 VA events occurred among metformin users (rate per 10 000 person-years: 18.5, 95% CI: 17.6 to 19.5). Compared with metformin, sulphonylureas were associated with an increased risk of VA (aHR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Sulphonylureas are associated with an increased risk of VA when used as first-line therapy for type 2 diabetes relative to metformin use. This increased risk should be considered when prescribing sulphonylureas as an initial treatment for type 2 diabetes.

Registry-based randomised clinical trials: a remedy for evidence-based diabetes care?

This narrative review describes a new approach to navigation in a challenging landscape of clinical drug development in diabetes. Successful outcome studies in recent years have led to new indications and guidelines in type 2 diabetes, yet the number of clinical trials in diabetes is now declining. This is due to many environmental factors acting in concert, including the prioritisation of funding for other diseases, high costs of large randomised clinical trials, increase in regulatory requirements and limited entry of novel candidate drugs. There is a need for novel and cost-effective paradigms of clinical development to meet these and other challenges. The concept of registry-based randomised clinical trials (RRCTs) is an attractive option. In this review we focus on type 2 diabetes and the prevention of cardiovascular and microvascular comorbidities and mortality, using the Swedish SMARTEST trial as an example of an RRCT. We also give some examples from other disease areas. The RRCT concept is a novel, cost-effective and scientifically sound approach for conducting large-scale diabetes trials in a real-world setting.

Effect of metformin on adverse outcomes in T2DM patients: Systemic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Background

The cardiovascular protection effect of metformin on patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remains inconclusive. This systemic review and meta-analysis were to estimate the effect of metformin on mortality and cardiovascular events among patients with T2DM.

Methods

A search of the Pubmed and EMBASE databases up to December 2021 was performed. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by a random-effects model with an inverse variance method.

Results

A total of 39 studies involving 2473009 T2DM patients were adopted. Compared to non-metformin therapy, the use of metformin was not significantly associated with a reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (HR = 1.06, 95%CI 0.91–1.22; I² = 82%), hospitalization (HR = 0.85, 95%CI 0.64–1.13; I² = 98%), heart failure (HR = 0.86, 95%CI 0.60–1.25; I² = 99%), stroke (HR = 1.16, 95%CI 0.88–1.53; I² = 84%), and risk of AMI (HR = 0.88, 95%CI 0.69–1.14; I² = 88%) in T2DM patients. Metformin was also not associated with significantly lowered risk of MACE compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) in T2DM patients (HR = 0.95, 95%CI 0.73–1.23; I² = 84%).

Conclusions

The effect of metformin on some cardiovascular outcomes was not significantly better than the non-metformin therapy or DPP-4i in T2DM patients based on observational studies.

Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients Initiating First-Line Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes With Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors Versus Metformin : A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the risk for cardiovascular events associated with use of first-line sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) compared with metformin is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess cardiovascular outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who initiated first-line treatment with SGLT-2i versus metformin.

DESIGN

Population-based cohort study.

SETTING

Claims data from 2 large U.S. commercial and Medicare databases (April 2013 to March 2020).

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with T2D aged 18 years and older (>65 years in Medicare) initiating treatment with SGLT-2i or metformin during April 2013 to March 2020, without any use of antidiabetic medications before cohort entry, were identified. After 1:2 propensity score matching in each database, pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were reported.

INTERVENTION

First-line SGLT-2i (canagliflozin, empagliflozin, or dapagliflozin) or metformin.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were a composite of hospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI), hospitalization for ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke or all-cause mortality (MI/stroke/mortality), and a composite of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) or all-cause mortality (HHF/mortality). Safety outcomes including genital infections were assessed.

RESULTS

Among 8613 first-line SGLT-2i initiators matched to 17 226 metformin initiators, SGLT-2i initiators had a similar risk for MI/stroke/mortality (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.19) and a lower risk for HHF/mortality (HR, 0.80; CI, 0.66 to 0.97) during a mean follow-up of 12 months. Initiators receiving SGLT-2i showed a lower risk for HHF (HR, 0.78; CI, 0.63 to 0.97), a numerically lower risk for MI (HR, 0.70; CI, 0.48 to 1.00), and similar risk for stroke, mortality, and MI/stroke/HHF/mortality compared with metformin. Initiators receiving SGLT-2i had a higher risk for genital infections (HR, 2.19; CI, 1.91 to 2.51) and otherwise similar safety as those receiving metformin.

LIMITATION

Treatment selection was not randomized.

CONCLUSION

As first-line T2D treatment, initiators receiving SGLT-2i showed a similar risk for MI/stroke/mortality, lower risk for HHF/mortality and HHF, and a similar safety profile except for an increased risk for genital infections compared with those receiving metformin.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School.

Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular and Heart Failure Events With SGLT2 Inhibitors, GLP-1 Receptor Agonists, and Their Combination in Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To assess associations between current use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), and their combination and risk for major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and heart failure (HF) in people with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In three nested case-control studies involving patients with type 2 diabetes in England and Wales (primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank with linkage to hospital and mortality records), we matched each patient experiencing an event with up to 20 control subjects. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for MACCE and HF among patients receiving SGLT2i or GLP-1RA regimens versus other combinations were estimated using conditional logistic regression and pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Among 336,334 people with type 2 diabetes and without cardiovascular disease, 18,531 (5.5%) experienced a MACCE. In a cohort of 411,206 with type 2 diabetes and without HF, 17,451 (4.2%) experienced an HF event. Compared with other combination regimens, the adjusted pooled OR and 95% CI for MACCE associated with SGLT2i regimens was 0.82 (0.73, 0.92), with GLP-1RA regimens 0.93 (0.81, 1.06), and with the SGLT2i/GLP-1RA combination 0.70 (0.50, 0.98). Corresponding data for HF were SGLT2i 0.49 (0.42, 0.58), GLP-1RA 0.82 (0.71, 0.95), and SGLT2i/GLP-1RA combination 0.43 (0.28, 0.64).

CONCLUSIONS

SGLT2i and SGLT2i/GLP-1RA combination regimens may be beneficial in primary prevention of MACCE and HF and GLP-1RA for HF. These data call for primary prevention trials using these agents and their combination.

Effects of Metformin in Heart Failure: From Pathophysiological Rationale to Clinical Evidence

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a worldwide major health burden and heart failure (HF) is the most common cardiovascular (CV) complication in affected patients. Therefore, identifying the best pharmacological approach for glycemic control, which is also useful to prevent and ameliorate the prognosis of HF, represents a crucial issue. Currently, the choice is between the new drugs sodium/glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors that have consistently shown in large CV outcome trials (CVOTs) to reduce the risk of HF-related outcomes in T2DM, and metformin, an old medicament that might end up relegated to the background while exerting interesting protective effects on multiple organs among which include heart failure. When compared with other antihyperglycemic medications, metformin has been demonstrated to be safe and to lower morbidity and mortality for HF, even if these results are difficult to interpret as they emerged mainly from observational studies. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled clinical trials have not produced positive results on the risk or clinical course of HF and sadly, large CV outcome trials are lacking. The point of force of metformin with respect to new diabetic drugs is the amount of data from experimental investigations that, for more than twenty years, still continues to provide mechanistic explanations of the several favorable actions in heart failure such as, the improvement of the myocardial energy metabolic status by modulation of glucose and lipid metabolism, the attenuation of oxidative stress and inflammation, and the inhibition of myocardial cell apoptosis, leading to reduced cardiac remodeling and preserved left ventricular function. In the hope that specific large-scale trials will be carried out to definitively establish the metformin benefit in terms of HF failure outcomes, we reviewed the literature in this field, summarizing the available evidence from experimental and clinical studies reporting on effects in heart metabolism, function, and structure, and the prominent pathophysiological mechanisms involved.