Is GFR decline induced by SGLT2 inhibitor of clinical importance?

BACKGROUND: Use of sodium-glucose-cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors often causes an initial decline in glomerular filtration rate (GFR). This study addresses the question whether the initial decline of renal function with SGLT2 inhibitor treatment is related to vascular changes in the systemic circulation. METHODS: We measured GFR (mGFR) and estimated GFR (eGFR) in 65 patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) at baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment randomized either to a combination of empagliflozin and linagliptin (SGLT2 inhibitor based treatment group) (n = 34) or metformin and insulin (non-SGLT2 inhibitor based treatment group) (n = 31). mGFR was measured using the gold standard clearance technique by constant infusion of inulin. In addition to blood pressure (BP), we measured pulse wave velocity (PWV) under standardized conditions reflecting vascular compliance of large arteries, as PWV is considered to be one of the most reliable vascular parameter of cardiovascular (CV) prognosis. RESULTS: Both mGFR and eGFR decreased significantly after initiating treatment, but no correlation was found between change in mGFR and change in eGFR in either treatment group (SGLT2 inhibitor based treatment group: r=-0.148, p = 0.404; non-SGLT2 inhibitor based treatment group: r = 0.138, p = 0.460). Noticeably, change in mGFR correlated with change in PWV (r = 0.476, p = 0.005) in the SGLT2 inhibitor based treatment group only and remained significant after adjustment for the change in systolic BP and the change in heart rate (r = 0.422, p = 0.018). No such correlation was observed between the change in eGFR and the change in PWV in either treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Our main finding is that after initiating a SGLT2 inhibitor based therapy an exaggerated decline in mGFR was related with improved vascular compliance of large arteries reflecting the pharmacologic effects of SGLT2 inhibitor in the renal and systemic vascular bed. Second, in a single patient with T2D, eGFR may not be an appropriate parameter to assess the true change of renal function after receiving SGLT2 inhibitor based therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02752113).

Sodium-glucose co-transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors for people with chronic kidney disease and diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is associated with high risks of premature chronic kidney disease (CKD), cardiovascular diseases, cardiovascular death and impaired quality of life. People with diabetes are more likely to develop kidney impairment, and approximately one in three adults with diabetes have CKD. People with CKD and diabetes experience a substantially higher risk of cardiovascular outcomes. Sodium-glucose co-transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have shown potential effects in preventing kidney and cardiovascular outcomes in people with CKD and diabetes. However, new trials are emerging rapidly, and evidence synthesis is essential to summarising cumulative evidence. OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to assess the benefits and harms of SGLT2 inhibitors for people with CKD and diabetes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 17 November 2023 using a search strategy designed by an Information Specialist. Studies in the Register are continually identified through regular searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled studies were eligible if they evaluated SGLT2 inhibitors versus placebo, standard care or other glucose-lowering agents in people with CKD and diabetes. CKD includes all stages (from 1 to 5), including dialysis patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the study risk of bias. Treatment estimates were summarised using random effects meta-analysis and expressed as a risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The primary review outcomes were all-cause death, 3-point and 4-point major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), fatal or nonfatal stroke, and kidney failure. MAIN RESULTS: Fifty-three studies randomising 65,241 people with CKD and diabetes were included. SGLT2 inhibitors with or without other background treatments were compared to placebo, standard care, sulfonylurea, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, or insulin. In the majority of domains, the risks of bias in the included studies were low or unclear. No studies evaluated the treatment in children or in people treated with dialysis. No studies compared SGLT2 inhibitors with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists or tirzepatide. Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors decreased the risk of all-cause death (20 studies, 44,397 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.94; I2 = 0%; high certainty) and cardiovascular death (16 studies, 43,792 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.93; I2 = 29%; high certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably make little or no difference to the risk of fatal or nonfatal MI (2 studies, 13,726 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.14; I2 = 24%; moderate certainty), and fatal or nonfatal stroke (2 studies, 13,726 participants: RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.30; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably decrease 3-point MACE (7 studies, 38,320 participants: RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98; I2 = 46%; moderate certainty), and 4-point MACE (4 studies, 23,539 participants: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.96; I2 = 77%; moderate certainty), and decrease hospital admission due to heart failure (6 studies, 28,339 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.79; I2 = 17%; high certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors may decrease creatinine clearance (1 study, 132 participants: MD -2.63 mL/min, 95% CI -5.19 to -0.07; low certainty) and probably decrease the doubling of serum creatinine (2 studies, 12,647 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.89; I2 = 53%; moderate certainty). SGLT2 inhibitors decrease the risk of kidney failure (6 studies, 11,232 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.79; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and kidney composite outcomes (generally reported as kidney failure, kidney death with or without ≥ 40% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)) (7 studies, 36,380 participants: RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.78; I2 = 25%; high certainty) compared to placebo. Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors incur less hypoglycaemia (16 studies, 28,322 participants: RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and hypoglycaemia requiring third-party assistance (14 studies, 26,478 participants: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.88; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and probably decrease the withdrawal from treatment due to adverse events (15 studies, 16,622 participants: RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.08; I2 = 16%; moderate certainty). The effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on eGFR, amputation and fracture were uncertain. No studies evaluated the effects of treatment on fatigue, life participation, or lactic acidosis. The effects of SGLT2 inhibitors compared to standard care alone, sulfonylurea, DPP-4 inhibitors, or insulin were uncertain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: SGLT2 inhibitors alone or added to standard care decrease all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and kidney failure and probably decrease major cardiovascular events while incurring less hypoglycaemia compared to placebo in people with CKD and diabetes.

Risk of acute pancreatitis among new users of empagliflozin compared to sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes: A post-authorization safety study.

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the potential risk of acute pancreatitis with empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) newly initiating empagliflozin. METHODS: Data from two large US claims databases were analyzed in an observational study of patients with T2D receiving metformin who were newly prescribed empagliflozin versus sulfonylurea (SU). Because dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists have been associated with the risk of acute pancreatitis in some studies, patients on these agents were excluded. Using pooled analyses of data from the two databases (2014-2021), patients initiating empagliflozin were matched 1:1 within database to patients initiating SU using propensity scores (PS) that incorporated relevant demographic and clinical characteristics. Prespecified sensitivity analyses were performed for design parameters. RESULTS: The analyses identified 72 661 new users of empagliflozin and 422 018 new users of SUs, with both patient groups on concurrent metformin therapy. Baseline characteristics within treatment groups appeared to be similar across the 72 621 matched pairs. After mean follow-up of ~6 months, incidence rates of acute pancreatitis in the pooled matched cohort were 10.30 (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.29-11.39) events per 1000 patient-years (PY) for empagliflozin and 11.65 (95% CI 10.59-12.77) events per 1000 PY for SUs. On a background of metformin, patients newly initiating empagliflozin did not have an increased risk of acute pancreatitis compared with those initiating an SU (pooled PS matched hazard ratio 0.88 [0.76-1.02]) across 75621.42 PY of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this voluntary post-approval safety study provide additional evidence that the use of empagliflozin for the treatment of T2D is not associated with an increased risk of acute pancreatitis.

Evaluating the efficacy and safety of empagliflozin addition to insulin and oral antidiabetic medication (OAD) regimen in poorly controlled type 2 diabetes and obese patients.

Insulin resistance complicates diabetes care. Its effectiveness and tolerability as an addition to metformin, DPP4 inhibitor and insulin treatment in type 2 diabetic patients will be examined in this research. Participants with type 2 diabetes from poor socio-economic backgrounds had HbA1c values ≥8.5% when using Insulin+Metformin+DPP-4 inhibitors. They received 10mg Empagliflozin daily for 12 weeks (n=143). The main outcome was change in HbA1c at 12th week from baseline. Secondary outcomes were baseline weight and week 12 FPG. Adjusted mean (SE) HbA1c increases at week 12 were: Mean ± SD 10.38 (6.8-17.0) vs. Mean±SD 9.05±1.77 (5.60-16.0) with empagliflozin 10mg. When added to the regimen, empagliflozin significantly reduced FPG, systolic and diastolic blood pressure. The mean (SE) BMI increases from baseline were 31.28±5.89 (16.0-66.0) and 29.73±5.47 (3.0-46.0) with 10mg empagliflozin. Two individuals experienced urinary tract infections as AEs, but no genital infections. Adding empagliflozin 10mg daily to metformin+DPP4 inhibitor+insulin improved glycemic control, body weight and blood pressure for 12 weeks. The intervention was well-tolerated, highlighting empagliflozin's therapeutic potential.

Semaglutide combined with empagliflozin vs. monotherapy for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in type 2 diabetes: Study protocol for a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is strongly associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Lifestyle intervention remains a preferred treatment modality for NAFLD. The glucagon-like peptide (GLP-1) receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors have been developed as new glucose-lowering drugs, which can improve fatty liver via an insulin-independent glucose-lowering effect. However, studies exploring the efficacy of GLP-1 receptor agonists combined with SGLT-2 inhibitors in patients with NAFLD and T2DM are scanty. Thus, the present randomised controlled trial aims at comparing the efficacy and safety of semaglutide plus empagliflozin with each treatment alone in patients with NAFLD and T2DM. METHODS: This 52-week double-blinded, randomised, parallel-group, active-controlled trial evaluates the effects of semaglutide, empagliflozin and semaglutide + empagliflozin in 105 eligible overweight/obese subjects with NAFLD and T2DM. The primary outcome will be a change from baseline to week 52 in the controlled attenuation parameter, free fatty acid and glucagon. Secondary endpoints include changes in liver stiffness measurement, liver enzymes, blood glucose, lipid levels, renal function, electrolyte balances, minerals and bone metabolism, cytokines, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, ferritin, anthropometric indicators, nonalcoholic fatty liver fibrosis score, fibrosis 4 score and homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance. In addition, intention-to-treat, interim analysis and safety analysis will be performed. DISCUSSION: This double-blinded, randomised, clinical trial involves a multi-disciplinary approach and aims to explore the synergistic effects of the combination of semaglutide and empagliflozin. The results can provide important insights into mechanisms of GLP-1 receptor agonists and/or SGLT-2 inhibitors in patients with NAFLD and T2DM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2300070674).

Comparative Genitourinary Safety of In-class Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors among Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The American Heart Association recommended sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) for the management of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, little is known about their real-world in-class comparative safety in patients with HFpEF. We aimed to assess the comparative safety of SGLT2i in the risk of urinary tract infection (UTI) or genital infection separately or as a composite outcome among patients with HFpEF. METHODS: This cohort study using MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare supplemental databases (2012-2020) included patients aged ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of HFpEF who initiated SGLT2i therapy. Three pairwise comparison groups were established: cohort 1, dapagliflozin versus canagliflozin; cohort 2, empagliflozin versus canagliflozin; and cohort 3, dapagliflozin versus empagliflozin. After stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting, Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare the risk of UTI or genital infection separately or as a composite outcome in each cohort. RESULTS: The risk of the composite outcome did not significantly differ between canagliflozin and dapagliflozin (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36-1.14) or between empagliflozin and canagliflozin (aHR 1.25; 95% CI 0.77-2.05). Similarly, there was no evidence of difference between dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in this risk (aHR 0.76; 95% CI 0.48-1.21). The results of analyses separately assessing UTI or genital infection were similar. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the risk of UTI or genital infection among patients with HFpEF who initiated canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, or empagliflozin.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are used for the management of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). It is important to assess their comparative risk of urinary tract infection (UTI) or genital infection among patients with HFpEF. We compared patients with HFpEF using SGLT2i in three pairwise groups: cohort 1, dapagliflozin versus canagliflozin; cohort 2, empagliflozin versus canagliflozin; and cohort 3, dapagliflozin versus empagliflozin. We found that there was no significant difference in the risk of genitourinary infections including UTI or genital infections among dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, and canagliflozin.

Dapagliflozin and Empagliflozin in Paediatric Indications: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: In adults, sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors have revolutionised the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to review information on compassionate use, clinical pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in children. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of published clinical trials, case reports, and observational studies in Medline, Excerpta Medica, and Web of Science databases from inception to September 2023. For the two randomised controlled trials on type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), we implemented a meta-analysis on the primary outcome (mean difference in glycosylated haemoglobin [HbA1c] between intervention and placebo groups). Review Manager (RevMan), version 5.4.1, was used for this purpose. RESULTS: Thirty-five articles (nine case reports, ten case series, one prospective non-controlled trial, four controlled randomised trials, two surveys, six pharmacokinetic studies, and three pharmacovigilance studies) were selected, in which 415 children were exposed to either dapagliflozin or empagliflozin: 189 diabetic patients (mean age 14.7 ± 2.9 years), 32 children with glycogen storage disease type Ib (GSD Ib), glucose-6-phosphatase catalytic subunit 3 (G6PC3) deficiency, or severe congenital neutropenia type 4 (8.5 ± 5.1 years), 47 children with kidney disease or heart failure (11.2 ± 6.1 years), 84 patients in pharmacokinetic studies (15.1 ± 2.3 years), and 63 patients in toxicological series. The effect of dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in T2DM was demonstrated by HbA1c reduction in two randomised trials among a total of 177 adolescents, with a mean HbA1c difference of -0.82% (95% confidence interval -1.34 to -0.29) as compared to placebo (no heterogeneity, I2 = 0%). Dosage ranged between 5 and 20 mg (mean 11.4 ± 3.7) once daily for dapagliflozin and between 5 and 25 mg (mean 15.4 ± 7.4) once daily for empagliflozin. Among the paediatric cases of GSD Ib, empagliflozin 0.1-1.3 mg/kg/day improved neutropenia, infections, and gastrointestinal health. Dapagliflozin (mean dosage 6.9 ± 5.2 mg once daily) was well-tolerated in children with chronic kidney disease and heart failure. Side effects were generally mild, the most frequent being hypoglycaemia in children with GSD Ib (33% of patients) or T2DM (14% of patients) on concomitant hypoglycaemic drugs. Diabetic ketoacidosis is rare in children. CONCLUSION: Early evidence suggests that dapagliflozin and empagliflozin are well tolerated in children. A clinical pharmacology rationale currently exists only for adolescents with diabetes mellitus. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023438162.

Empagliflozin after Acute Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Empagliflozin improves cardiovascular outcomes in patients with heart failure, patients with type 2 diabetes who are at high cardiovascular risk, and patients with chronic kidney disease. The safety and efficacy of empagliflozin in patients who have had acute myocardial infarction are unknown. METHODS: In this event-driven, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients who had been hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction and were at risk for heart failure to receive empagliflozin at a dose of 10 mg daily or placebo in addition to standard care within 14 days after admission. The primary end point was a composite of hospitalization for heart failure or death from any cause as assessed in a time-to-first-event analysis. RESULTS: A total of 3260 patients were assigned to receive empagliflozin and 3262 to receive placebo. During a median follow-up of 17.9 months, a first hospitalization for heart failure or death from any cause occurred in 267 patients (8.2%) in the empagliflozin group and in 298 patients (9.1%) in the placebo group, with incidence rates of 5.9 and 6.6 events, respectively, per 100 patient-years (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 1.06; P = 0.21). With respect to the individual components of the primary end point, a first hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 118 patients (3.6%) in the empagliflozin group and in 153 patients (4.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.98), and death from any cause occurred in 169 (5.2%) and 178 (5.5%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.19). Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of empagliflozin and were similar in the two trial groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients at increased risk for heart failure after acute myocardial infarction, treatment with empagliflozin did not lead to a significantly lower risk of a first hospitalization for heart failure or death from any cause than placebo. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly; EMPACT-MI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04509674.).

Effects of empagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease from Japan: exploratory analyses from EMPA-KIDNEY.

BACKGROUND: EMPA-KIDNEY assessed the effects of empagliflozin 10 mg once daily vs. placebo in 6609 patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) at risk of progression, including 612 participants from Japan. METHODS: Eligibility required an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of ≥ 20 < 45; or ≥ 45 < 90 ml/min/1.73m2 with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) of ≥ 200 mg/g. The primary outcome was a composite of kidney disease progression (end-stage kidney disease, a sustained eGFR decline to < 10 ml/min/1.73m2 or ≥ 40% from randomization, or renal death) or cardiovascular death. In post-hoc analyses, we explored the effects of empagliflozin in participants from Japan vs. non-Japan regions, including additional models assessing whether differences in treatment effects between these regions could result from differences in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Japanese participants had higher levels of albuminuria and eGFR than those from non-Japan regions. During a median of 2.0 year follow-up, a primary outcome occurred in 432 patients (13.1%) in the empagliflozin group and in 558 patients (16.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.64-0.82; P < 0.0001). Among the participants from non-Japan regions, there were 399 vs. 494 primary outcomes (0.75, 0.66-0.86), and 33 vs. 64 (0.49, 0.32-0.75; heterogeneity p = 0.06) in Japan. Results were similar when models explicitly considered treatment interactions with diabetes status, categories of eGFR/uACR, and recruitment in Japan (heterogeneity p = 0.08). Safety outcomes were broadly comparable between the two groups, and by Japanese status. CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin safely reduced the risk of "kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death" in patients with CKD, with consistent effects in participants from Japan.

The effect of renal function on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of enavogliflozin, a potent and selective sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor, in type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To explore the effect of renal function on the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profile and safety of enavogliflozin, a selective sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: An open-label, two-part clinical trial was conducted in T2DM patients, stratified by renal function: Group 1, normal renal function; Group 2, mild renal impairment (RI); Group 3, moderate RI; and Group 4, severe RI. In Part A, Groups 2 and 4 received enavogliflozin 0.5 mg once. In Part B, Groups 1 and 3 received enavogliflozin 0.5 mg once daily for 7 days. Serial blood and timed urine samples were collected to analyse the PK and PD characteristics of enavogliflozin. Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated to assess the correlations between PK or PD parameters and creatinine clearance (CrCL). RESULTS: A total of 21 patients completed the study as planned. The area under the curve (AUC) for enavogliflozin was not significantly correlated with CrCL, although the maximum concentration slightly decreased as renal function decreased. By contrast, daily urinary glucose excretion (UGE) was positively correlated with CrCL after both single- (r = 0.7866, p < 0.0001) and multiple-dose administration (r = 0.6606, p = 0.0438). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic exposure to oral enavogliflozin 0.5 mg was similar among the patients with T2DM regardless of their renal function levels. However, the glucosuric effect of enavogliflozin decreased with RI. Considering the UGE observed and approved therapeutic use of other SGLT2 inhibitors, the efficacy of enavogliflozin with regard to glycaemic control could be explored in patients with mild and moderate RI (estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥30 or ≥45 mL/min/1.73 m2) in a subsequent larger study.

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.

A multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel comparison, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pioglitazone add-on therapy in type 2 diabetic patients treated with metformin and dapagliflozin.

AIM: To investigate the efficacy and safety of pioglitazone compared to placebo when added to metformin plus dapagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a multicentre study, with a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design, 249 Korean patients with T2DM suboptimally managed on metformin and dapagliflozin were assigned to receive either pioglitazone (15 mg daily) or placebo for 24 weeks, followed by a 24-week pioglitazone extension. Primary outcomes included changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), with secondary outcomes assessing insulin resistance, adiponectin levels, lipid profiles, liver enzymes, body weight and waist circumference. RESULTS: Pioglitazone administration resulted in a significant reduction in HbA1c levels (from 7.80% ± 0.72% to 7.27% ± 0.82%) compared with placebo (from 7.79% ± 0.76% to 7.69% ± 0.86%, corrected mean difference: -0.42% ± 0.08%; p < 0.01) at 24 weeks. Additional benefits from pioglitazone treatment included enhanced insulin sensitivity, increased adiponectin levels, raised high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and reduced liver enzyme levels, resulting in improvement in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease liver fat score. Despite no serious adverse events in either group, pioglitazone therapy was modestly but significantly associated with weight gain and increased waist circumference. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive pioglitazone treatment in T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin and dapagliflozin demonstrates considerable glycaemic improvement, metabolic benefits, and a low risk of hypoglycaemia. These advantages must be weighed against the potential for weight gain and increased waist circumference.

A 52-week efficacy and safety study of enavogliflozin versus dapagliflozin as an add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: ENHANCE-M extension study.

AIM: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of enavogliflozin 0.3 mg/day added to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After 24 weeks of a randomized, double-blind treatment period with enavogliflozin 0.3 mg/day (n = 101) or dapagliflozin 10 mg/day (n = 99) added to metformin, all patients received enavogliflozin 0.3 mg/day plus metformin for an additional 28 weeks during the open-label extension period. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients continued enavogliflozin (maintenance group), and 77 were switched from dapagliflozin to enavogliflozin (switch group). All adverse drug reactions (ADR) were mild in severity. In the maintenance group, ADRs (cystitis and vaginal infection) were reported in two patients (2.44%) during 52 weeks. In the switch group, ADR (hypoglycaemia) was reported in one patient (1.30%) during a 28-week open-label extension period. At week 52, glycated haemoglobin and fasting plasma glucose were significantly lower than at the baseline, by 0.85% and 29.08 mg/dl, respectively, in the maintenance group (p < .0001 for both), and by 0.81% and 32.77 mg/dl, respectively, in the switch group (p < .0001 for both). At week 52, 68.92% of patients from the maintenance group and 64.29% from the switch group achieved glycated haemoglobin <7%. A significant increase in the urine glucose-creatinine ratio was observed at week 52, by 58.81 g/g and 63.77 g/g in the maintenance and switch groups, respectively (p < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Enavogliflozin added to metformin was tolerated well for up to 52 weeks and provided continual glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus, along with a significant increase in the urine glucose-creatinine ratio.

A Randomized Crossover Trial of Mixed Meal Tolerance Test Response in People with Type 1 Diabetes on Insulin Pump Therapy and YG1699 or Dapagliflozin.

YG1699 is a novel inhibitor of sodium-glucose cotransporter 1 (SGLT1) and SGLT2. This double-blind, 3-way crossover trial compared YG1699 to dapagliflozin as an adjunct to insulin in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) on insulin pump therapy. Treatment periods included four mixed meal tolerance tests (MMTTs) and insulin withdrawal tests per person. Nineteen adults with T1D were randomized to YG1699 10 mg, YG1699 25 mg, and dapagliflozin 10 mg once daily for 1 week in different orders. The primary end point was the difference in area under the curve (AUC) in plasma glucose (AUC0-120min) after an MMTT between treatment groups. Mean change in plasma glucose after an MMTT (AUC0-120min) was lower for YG1699 10 mg vs. dapagliflozin (89.51% of baseline vs. 102.13%, 90% confidence interval (CI) vs. dapagliflozin, -6% to -16%, P = 0.0003) and for YG1699 25 mg (84.83% vs. 102.13%, 90% CI vs. dapagliflozin -13% to -22%, P < 0.0001). At 120 minutes, mean glucose values on no treatment, dapagliflozin, YG1699 10 mg, and YG1699 25 mg were 149 (SE 7.6), 141 (SE 6.1), 128 (SE 6.9), and 115 (SE 7.8) mg/dL, respectively. Insulin dose requirements were lower for YG1699 10 mg and 25 mg vs. dapagliflozin for bolus insulin, and for YG1699 10 mg vs. dapagliflozin for total daily insulin. Safety profiles were similar between treatment groups. YG1699 reduced post-prandial glucose more than dapagliflozin in people with T1D on insulin pump therapy. The results were consistent with dual SGLT1/SGLT2 inhibition by YG1699.

Effects of dapagliflozin on cardiac function and short-term prognosis of patients with both acute myocardial infarction and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Dapagliflozin is a selective SGLT2 inhibitor, which has been widely used in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). By blocking the reabsorption of glucose in renal tubules, daglitazine can promote urinary glucose excretion, reduce blood glucose and blood pressure, and also shows a protective effect on the heart in clinical studies. Accordingly, this study was designed to explore the effects of dapagliflozin on cardiac function and short-term prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated with T2DM. METHODS: The clinical data of 100 patients with both AMI and T2DM treated at Shibei Hospital of Jingan District from January 2021 to January 2023 were analyzed retrospectively. Totally 47 patients treated with hypoglycemic agents other than SGLT-2i inhibitors on the basis of routine treatment were assigned to the control group, and 53 patients treated with dapagliflozin based on treatment of the control group were assigned to the study group. Relevant blood glucose-related indices and cardiac function-associated indices of the two groups before and after treatment were analyzed and compared: The adverse reactions of the two groups were statistically analyzed, including hypotension, hypoglycemia, diarrhea and abdominal pain, anorexia, and nausea and vomiting. The patients were followed-up for six months, on which the major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE) and incidence of readmission for heart failure in the two groups were analyzed and compared. RESULTS: Treatment, the FBG, 2h PG and HbA1c levels in both groups dropped significantly (P<0.05), with significantly lower levels in the study group (P<0.05). After treatment, both groups showed significantly dropped NT-pro BNP, LVEDD and LVESD levels (P<0.05) and a significantly increased LVEF level (P<0.05), with more significant drops/increase in the study group (P<0.05). No significant difference was found between the two groups in the total incidence of adverse reactions (P=0.586). During the follow-up period, there was no significant difference in the incidence of MACE between the two groups (P>0.05), and the study group showed a significantly lower incidence of readmission for heart failure than the control group (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin can substantially improve the blood glucose and cardiac function of patients with both AMI and T2DM. It can lower the rate of readmission for heart failure, and provide various cardiovascular benefits besides hypoglycemic effect.

Protective effect and regulatory mechanism of salidroside on skin inflammation induced by imiquimod in psoriasis mice.

Salidroside (SAL) is a glucoside of tyrosol commonly existing in the roots of Rhodiola rosea. This study unveils the protective effect of SAL on skin inflammation in imiquimod (IMQ)-induced psoriasis. The mouse model of psoriasis was established by local application of IMQ, and SAL efficacy was evaluated through PASI scoring, H&E staining, and skin tissue pathology observation. The HaCaT cell model was established by interferon (IFN)-γ induction, followed by MTT assay detection of cell viability, detection of ROS, SOD, MDA, and CAT levels in skin tissues and cells using reagent kits, ELISA detection of inflammatory factors (TNF-α, IL-6, IL-1ß), and qRT-PCR detection of psoriasis-related genes (S100a9, Cxcl1, Cxcl2) as well as miR-369-3p and SMAD2 expressions. The binding relationship between miR-369-3p and SMAD2 was validated using dual-luciferase reporter assay. SAL treatment reduced PASI scores and alleviated psoriasis symptoms of IMQ-induced mice, and also augmented the viability and subsided the oxidative stress and inflammation of IFN-γ-treated HaCaT cells. SAL treatment restrained miR-369-3p expression but elevated SMAD2 expression. Mechanistically, miR-369-3p targeted SMAD2 expression. miR-369-3p overexpression or SMAD2 inhibition partially offset the alleviating effect of SAL on psoriasis skin inflammation. In conclusion, SAL alleviates skin inflammation in IMQ-induced psoriasis mice via the miR-369-3p/SMAD2 axis.