Key result
SGLT2 inhibitors were associated with a decreased risk of incident CVD compared with sulfonylureas (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.45-0.55) and DPP-4 inhibitors (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.52-0.62).
Why the study?
Do SGLT2 inhibitors reduce incident cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes compared to sulfonylureas or DPP-4 inhibitors?
Cohort
Do SGLT2 inhibitors reduce incident cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes compared to sulfonylureas or DPP-4 inhibitors?
Hazard Ratio: 0.5 (95% CI 0.45–0.55)
Real-world data suggests SGLT2 inhibitors are associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events, heart failure hospitalization, and lower extremity amputation compared to sulfonylureas and DPP-4 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes.
May support preferring SGLT2 inhibitors over comparators for CVD risk; hypothesis-generating and requires confirmation in RCTs.
AIMS: To determine the association between cardiovascular diseases (CVD) and SGLT2 inhibitors compared to sulfonylureas and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors and to examine within-class effects of SGLT2 inhibitors. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using Truven Health MarketScan. New users of SGLT2 inhibitors, sulfonylureas or DPP-4 inhibitors were included. Primary outcome was incident CVD, defined as non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke; secondary outcomes were hospitalization because of heart failure and lower extremity amputation. Proportional hazards models, after propensity score matching, were used to obtain hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: In fully adjusted models, use of SGLT2 inhibitors was associated with a decreased risk of developing CVD compared with use of sulfonylureas (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.45, 0.55) and DPP-4 inhibitors (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52, 0.62), respectively. Analyses revealed no evidence of within-class effects: dapagliflozin vs sulfonylureas (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.43, 0.70) or DPP-4 inhibitors (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.46, 0.70); and canagliflozin vs sulfonylureas (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.54, 0.69) or DPP-4 inhibitors (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.54, 0.71). Additionally, SGLT2 inhibitors were associated with lower risk of hospitalization because of heart failure compared to both sulfonylureas and DPP-4 inhibitors, as well as lower risk of lower extremity amputation compared to sulfonylureas. CONCLUSION: Using population-based data, incident use of SGLT-2 inhibitors was associated with a decreased incidence of CVD compared to use of sulfonylureas and DPP-4 inhibitors. These findings were consistent between dapagliflozin and canagliflozin, suggesting that CVD reduction is a class effect for SGLT2 inhibitors. In addition, SGLT2 inhibitors portended lower risk of hospitalization because of heart failure (vs sulfonylureas and DPP-4 inhibitors) and lower risk of lower extremity amputation (vs sulfonylureas).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dawwas et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Type 2 diabetes. SGLT2 inhibitors vs. Sulfonylureas and DPP-4 inhibitors was evaluated on Incident CVD, defined as non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.45-0.55). SGLT2 inhibitors were associated with a decreased risk of incident CVD compared with sulfonylureas (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.45-0.55) and DPP-4 inhibitors (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.52-0.62).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: