Effect of empagliflozin on total myocardial infarction events by type and additional coronary outcomes: insights from the randomized EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial.

BACKGROUND: The effect of empagliflozin, a sodium-glucose-co-transporter-2 inhibitor, on risk for myocardial infarction has not been fully characterized. METHODS: This study comprised prespecified and post-hoc analyses of the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial in which 7020 people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and cardiovascular disease [mostly atherosclerotic (ASCVD)] were randomized to empagliflozin or placebo and followed for a median 3.1 years. We assessed the effect of empagliflozin on total (first plus recurrent) events of centrally adjudicated fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) using a negative binomial model with robust confidence intervals (CI) that preserves randomization and accounts for the within-patient correlation of multiple events. Post hoc, we analyzed types of MI: type 1 (related to plaque-rupture/thrombus), type 2 (myocardial supply-demand imbalance), type 3 (sudden-death related, i.e. fatal MI), type 4 (percutaneous coronary intervention-related), and type 5 (coronary artery bypass graft-related). MIs could be assigned to > 1 type. RESULTS: There were 421 total MIs (including recurrent); 299, 86, 26, 19, and 1 were classified as type 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 events, respectively. Overall, empagliflozin reduced the risk of total MI events by 21% [rate ratio for empagliflozin vs. placebo, 0.79 (95% CI, 0.620-0.998), P = 0.0486], largely driven by its effect on type 1 [rate ratio, 0.79 (95% CI, 0.61-1.04)] and type 2 MIs [rate ratio, 0.67 (95% CI, 0.41-1.10)]. CONCLUSIONS: In T2D patients with ASCVD, empagliflozin reduced the risk of MIs, with consistent effects across the two most common etiologies, i.e. type 1 and 2. TRAIL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01131676.

Euglycemic Ketoacidosis in a Patient without Diabetes Taking Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors for Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are used to improve the prognosis of patients with diabetes, heart failure, or chronic kidney disease. The use of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients without diabetes is expected to increase. Diabetic ketoacidosis is a severe complication of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with diabetes. People without diabetes are thought to be less likely to develop ketoacidosis, and reports of SGLT2 inhibitor-induced ketoacidosis are uncommon in people without diabetes. CASE REPORT Herein, we describe a case of ketoacidosis in an 83-year-old Japanese woman without diabetes who was administered SGLT2 inhibitors for heart failure (ejection fraction: approximately 30%). Two weeks prior to admission, she had suffered a vertebral fracture and rib fracture due to a fall, which was followed by anorexia, but she continued to take SGLT2 inhibitors. On admission, blood test results revealed a blood glucose level of 124 mg/dL, hemoglobin A1C level of 5.9%, pH of 7.329, HCO3⁻ concentration of 14.3 mmol/L, and a ß-hydroxybutyrate concentration of 5150 µmol/L, leading to a diagnosis of euglycemic ketoacidosis. The patient's C-peptide level was consistent with the blood glucose levels on admission, indicating that she had adequate insulin secretion. The patient was treated only with glucose administration without insulin and was discharged after discontinuation of the SGLT2 inhibitor. CONCLUSIONS This case illustrates that patients with or without diabetes may develop SGLT2 inhibitor-related ketoacidosis after several days of inadequate food intake; therefore, patients should be informed of this risk.

Unique Presentation of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria, Vertebral Osteomyelitis, and Iliopsoas Abscess Due to Klebsiella pneumonia in a 73-Year-Old Man with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus on Empagliflozin.

BACKGROUND Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2), such as empagliflozin, used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), can increase the risk of infections, including urinary tract infections and osteomyelitis, especially in elderly patients. The use of SGLT2 inhibitors has been increasing dramatically in the last few years. Therefore, their adverse effects and complications have also been increasing. Herein, this report describes a 73-year-old man with type 2 DM treated with empagliflozin presenting with asymptomatic bacteriuria, vertebral osteomyelitis and iliopsoas abscess due to Klebsiella pneumoniae. CASE REPORT We report a 73-year-old man with DM on empagliflozin who presented with back pain of 1-month duration with elevated inflammatory markers. On lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), he was found to have lumbar vertebral osteomyelitis and left iliopsoas abscess. His symptoms were improved with abscess drainage and antimicrobial therapy. The source of infection was most likely asymptomatic bacteriuria, which may have been secondary to empagliflozin treatment, as evidenced by the urine, the blood, the bone and abscess cultures revealing growth of Klebsiella pneumoniae with the same susceptibility profile. CONCLUSIONS This particular case reinforces the significance of potential complications of DM and SGLT2 inhibitors' adverse effects, especially the increased risk of infections, and can aid clinicians in expanding the differential and enabling them to reach an accurate diagnosis and appropriate management. Although vertebral osteomyelitis is a less common cause of back pain, physicians should keep it in the differential diagnosis whenever a patient's back pain is chronic and associated with motor weakness.

Effect of empagliflozin on ventricular arrhythmias in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: the EMPA-ICD trial.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure and cardiovascular death with type 2 diabetes; however, their effect on arrhythmias is unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of empagliflozin on ventricular arrhythmias in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A total of 150 patients with type 2 diabetes who were treated with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator or cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (ICD/CRT-D) were randomized to once-daily empagliflozin or placebo for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in the number of ventricular arrhythmias from the 24 weeks before to the 24 weeks during treatment. Secondary endpoints included the change in the number of appropriate device discharges and other values. RESULTS: In the empagliflozin group, the number of ventricular arrhythmias recorded by ICD/CRT-D decreased by 1.69 during treatment compared to before treatment, while in the placebo group, the number increased by 1.79. The coefficient for the between-group difference was - 1.07 (95% confidence interval [CI] - 1.29 to - 0.86; P < 0.001). The change in the number of appropriate device discharges during and before treatment was 0.06 in the empagliflozin group and 0.27 in the placebo group, with no significant difference between the groups (P = 0.204). Empagliflozin was associated with an increase in blood ketones and hematocrit and a decrease in blood brain natriuretic peptide and body weight. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes treated with ICD/CRT-D, empagliflozin reduces the number of ventricular arrhythmias compared with placebo. Trial registration jRCTs031180120.

Dapagliflozin reduces systemic inflammation in patients with type 2 diabetes without known heart failure.

OBJECTIVE: Sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors significantly improve cardiovascular outcomes in diabetic patients; however, the mechanism is unclear. We hypothesized that dapagliflozin improves cardiac outcomes via beneficial effects on systemic and cardiac inflammation and cardiac fibrosis. RESEARCH AND DESIGN METHODS: This randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial enrolled 62 adult patients (mean age 62, 17% female) with type 2 diabetes (T2D) without known heart failure. Subjects were randomized to 12 months of daily 10 mg dapagliflozin or placebo. For all patients, blood/plasma samples and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) were obtained at time of randomization and at the end of 12 months. Systemic inflammation was assessed by plasma IL-1B, TNFα, IL-6 and ketone levels and PBMC mitochondrial respiration, an emerging marker of sterile inflammation. Global myocardial strain was assessed by feature tracking; cardiac fibrosis was assessed by T1 mapping to calculate extracellular volume fraction (ECV); and cardiac tissue inflammation was assessed by T2 mapping. RESULTS: Between the baseline and 12-month time point, plasma IL-1B was reduced (- 1.8 pg/mL, P = 0.003) while ketones were increased (0.26 mM, P = 0.0001) in patients randomized to dapagliflozin. PBMC maximal oxygen consumption rate (OCR) decreased over the 12-month period in the placebo group but did not change in patients receiving dapagliflozin (- 158.9 pmole/min/106 cells, P = 0.0497 vs. - 5.2 pmole/min/106 cells, P = 0.41), a finding consistent with an anti-inflammatory effect of SGLT2i. Global myocardial strain, ECV and T2 relaxation time did not change in both study groups. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT03782259.

Empagliflozin's role in reducing ventricular repolarization heterogeneity: insights into cardiovascular mortality decline from the EMPATHY-HEART trial.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) and sudden cardiac death (SCD) is significantly higher in individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) than in the general population. Strategies for the prevention of fatal arrhythmias are often insufficient, highlighting the need for additional non-invasive diagnostic tools. The T-wave heterogeneity (TWH) index measures variations in ventricular repolarization and has emerged as a promising predictor for severe ventricular arrhythmias. Although the EMPA-REG trial reported reduced cardiovascular mortality with empagliflozin, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. This study investigates the potential of empagliflozin in mitigating cardiac electrical instability in patients with T2DM and coronary heart disease (CHD) by examining changes in TWH. METHODS: Participants were adult outpatients with T2DM and CHD who exhibited TWH > 80 µV at baseline. They received a 25 mg daily dose of empagliflozin and were evaluated clinically including electrocardiogram (ECG) measurements at baseline and after 4 weeks. TWH was computed from leads V4, V5, and V6 using a validated technique. The primary study outcome was a significant (p < 0.05) change in TWH following empagliflozin administration. RESULTS: An initial review of 6,000 medical records pinpointed 800 patients for TWH evaluation. Of these, 412 exhibited TWH above 80 µV, with 97 completing clinical assessments and 90 meeting the criteria for high cardiovascular risk enrollment. Empagliflozin adherence exceeded 80%, resulting in notable reductions in blood pressure without affecting heart rate. Side effects were generally mild, with 13.3% experiencing Level 1 hypoglycemia, alongside infrequent urinary and genital infections. The treatment consistently reduced mean TWH from 116 to 103 µV (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The EMPATHY-HEART trial preliminarily suggests that empagliflozin decreases heterogeneity in ventricular repolarization among patients with T2DM and CHD. This reduction in TWH may provide insight into the mechanism behind the decreased cardiovascular mortality observed in previous trials, potentially offering a therapeutic pathway to mitigate the risk of severe arrhythmias in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT: 04117763.

Efficacy and safety of total glucosides of paeony in treating primary Sjögren's syndrome: a propensity-matched study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of total glucosides of paeony (TGP) in patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study included 236 patients with pSS, including 118 TGP users and 118 non-users. Propensity score matching and Binary logistic regression analyses were used to minimize confounding factors and determine the association between TGP treatment and clinical variables. RESULTS: The baseline indexes of TGP users and non-users were basically the same. The median time of follow-up in the two groups was also similar (p < 0.05). Compared with non-users, TGP users showed higher rates of improvement in dry mouth and eyes and musculoskeletal involvement, as well as more significant reductions in serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and direct bilirubin (DBIL) levels after treatment. Logistic regression confirmed that the use of TGP was negatively correlated with the increase of ALT and DBIL in pSS patients, and the reduction in these variables was more pronounced after 2 years of treatment. The incidence of adverse reactions in the TGP users was 11.9%, which was compatible with those in non-users. CONCLUSIONS: TGP is often a safe option for treating pSS patients with musculoskeletal features and abnormal ALT levels. Besides, it can help improve dry mouth and dry eyes and decrease DBIL levels.

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.

Safety of Empagliflozin: An Individual Participant-Level Data Meta-Analysis from Four Large Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Empagliflozin is a sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor used to treat type 2 diabetes (T2D) to improve glycemic control, reduce risk of cardiovascular death in patients with T2D, and treat patients with symptomatic chronic heart failure (HF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). The safety profile of empagliflozin is well documented, although adverse events (AEs) remain of interest to clinicians. This study provides an up-to-date safety evaluation of empagliflozin. METHODS: Data were pooled from four long-term trials which included: patients with T2D and established cardiovascular disease (EMPA-REG OUTCOME), patients with HF, with/without diabetes (EMPEROR-Reduced and EMPEROR-Preserved), and patients with CKD, with/without diabetes (EMPA-KIDNEY). Since three of the four trials evaluated empagliflozin 10 mg, the meta-analysis was restricted to this dose. RESULTS: Total trial medication exposure was 19,727 patient-years for patients who received empagliflozin (n = 10,472) and 19,447 patient-years for placebo (n = 10,461). The percentages of patients with serious AEs, fatal AEs, and AEs leading to discontinuation were similar for both groups. The incidences of serious urinary tract infection and serious pyelonephritis or urosepsis were similar for both groups but higher for women taking empagliflozin versus placebo. Serious genital infections were not increased with empagliflozin versus placebo. There was a slight increase in ketoacidosis and serious volume depletion in patients who received empagliflozin versus placebo. The occurrence of serious acute kidney injury was lower with empagliflozin versus placebo. Empagliflozin was not associated with an increased incidence of severe hypoglycemia, bone fractures, or lower limb amputations. Empagliflozin is therefore considered safe in people without diabetes, the elderly, patients with very low estimated glomerular filtration rate, low body mass index, and HF. Safety is unaltered by blood pressure, concomitant medication for hypertension, HF, and immunosuppression. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis of long-term safety data extends current knowledge and confirms the safety and tolerability of empagliflozin.

Empagliflozin is used in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) to improve blood glucose control and in people with T2D and established cardiovascular disease to reduce the risk of death from cardiovascular disease. Also, it is used to treat people with chronic heart failure or chronic kidney disease. Although many clinical trials have shown the effectiveness and safety of empagliflozin, the evaluation of adverse events (AEs) remains of interest. This study further examined the safety of empagliflozin by analyzing four large, long-term clinical trials. These trials included over 20,900 patients with T2D and established cardiovascular disease, patients with heart failure, and patients with chronic kidney disease. Adverse events of interest were pooled and analyzed. Results show the risk of the investigated AEs was similar whether patients had received empagliflozin or placebo. The risk of urinary tract infections, including those that spread to the kidneys, was higher for women taking empagliflozin versus placebo. Ketoacidosis was rare but more frequent in patients taking empagliflozin. A reduction in blood volume was slightly more frequent in people taking empagliflozin versus placebo. The risk of kidney injury was reduced in patients taking empagliflozin versus placebo. The risk of genital infections, hypoglycemia, bone fractures, or lower limb amputations was not increased with empagliflozin. No new safety concerns were raised, including in people who were elderly, had kidney disease, low body weight, T2D, or heart failure. This analysis is consistent with current knowledge of empagliflozin safety in a broad range of patients.

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).

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).

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.

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.

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.).

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.