Key result
SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists show comparable ~1.5-point reductions in incident AF vs conventional therapy.
Why the study?
AF is a frequent cardiovascular complication of T2DM, prompting evaluation of the comparative 10-year effectiveness of SGLT2i versus GLP-1 RA for preventing incident AF.
Does initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors versus GLP-1 receptor agonists reduce 10-year incident atrial fibrillation in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus?
Cohort (n=82,554)
Yes
Does initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors versus GLP-1 receptor agonists reduce 10-year incident atrial fibrillation in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus?
Both SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists significantly reduce the 10-year risk of incident atrial fibrillation in patients with type 2 diabetes compared with conventional therapy, with no significant difference between the two classes.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports AF risk reduction with either class in type 2 diabetes; leaves open randomized confirmation before practice change.
Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a frequent cardiovascular complication of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We evaluated the comparative 10-year effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) versus GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) for incident AF using a nationwide target trial emulation. Methods We emulated a target trial using electronic health records from a national health maintenance organisation (more than 4.8 million members, 2015 to 2025). Eligible adults had T2DM, no prior AF, valvular heart disease, or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and initiated an SGLT2i (dapagliflozin or empagliflozin) or a GLP-1 RA (dulaglutide, semaglutide, liraglutide, exenatide, or lixisenatide) with no exposure to the other class in the prior 6 months. A directed acyclic graph, constructed by two cardiologists, prespecified confounders: age, sex, body mass index, HbA1c, estimated glomerular filtration rate, diabetes duration, year of drug purchase, and comorbidities (heart failure, hypertension, coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, obstructive sleep apnoea, malignancy, rheumatologic disease). Exact 1:1 matching on all prespecified covariates produced 24,309 patients per arm. For the absolute risk context, we assembled a matched conventional-therapy cohort (33,936 patients) excluding SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA, using a synthetic index date defined as the sum of the median time to treatment initiation in the active groups and each patient’s diabetes diagnosis date. Incident AF was identified from inpatient and outpatient records. Ten-year risks were estimated using Kaplan-Meier; risk differences (RD) and risk ratios (RR) were reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results The 10-year AF risk in the matched conventional-therapy cohort was 9.97% (95% CI 9.58 to 10.36). Compared with reference therapy, AF risk was lower with SGLT2i (8.52%, 95% CI 7.77 to 9.25; RD -1.46%, 95% CI -2.29 to -0.62; RR 0.854, 95% CI 0.776 to 0.940) and with GLP-1 RA (8.29%, 95% CI 7.60 to 8.97; RD -1.68%, 95% CI -2.47 to -0.90; RR 0.831, 95% CI 0.759 to 0.911). Direct comparison showed no significant difference between drug classes (RD 0.23%, 95% CI -0.78 to 1.24; RR 1.028, 95% CI 0.911 to 1.159). Conclusions Initiation of either SGLT2i or GLP-1 RA was associated with a significant reduction in 10-year incident AF compared with matched conventional therapy. AF risk did not differ between SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA, supporting class selection based on other clinical priorities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ostrovsky et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Type 2 diabetes mellitus (n=82,554). SGLT2 inhibitors (dapagliflozin or empagliflozin) vs. GLP-1 receptor agonists (dulaglutide, semaglutide, liraglutide, exenatide, or lixisenatide) and matched conventional therapy was evaluated on 10-year incident atrial fibrillation (RR 1.028, 95% CI 0.911-1.159). SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists both reduced 10-year incident AF vs conventional therapy (8.52% and 8.29% vs 9.97%), with no significant difference between classes (RR 1.028; 95% CI 0.911-1.159).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: