Interplay of Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists and Empagliflozin in Heart Failure: EMPEROR-Reduced.
Aged
Benzhydryl Compounds
/ administration & dosage
Drug Interactions
Drug Monitoring
/ methods
Drug Therapy, Combination
/ methods
Female
Glucosides
/ administration & dosage
Heart Failure
/ drug therapy
Humans
Hyperkalemia
/ chemically induced
Kidney Function Tests
/ methods
Male
Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists
/ administration & dosage
Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care
Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors
/ administration & dosage
Stroke Volume
/ drug effects
Withholding Treatment
/ statistics & numerical data
empagliflozin
heart failure
mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists
Journal
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
ISSN: 1558-3597
Titre abrégé: J Am Coll Cardiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8301365
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 03 2021
23 03 2021
Historique:
received:
11
01
2021
revised:
26
01
2021
accepted:
28
01
2021
entrez:
19
3
2021
pubmed:
20
3
2021
medline:
7
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors favorably influence the clinical course of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. This study sought to study the mutual influence of empagliflozin and MRAs in EMPEROR-Reduced (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction). Secondary analysis that compared the effects of empagliflozin versus placebo in 3,730 patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, of whom 71% used MRAs at randomization. The effects of empagliflozin on the primary endpoint, on most efficacy endpoints, and on safety were similar in patients receiving or not receiving an MRA (interaction p > 0.20). For cardiovascular death, the hazard ratios for the effect of empagliflozin versus placebo were 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65 to 1.05) in MRA users and 1.19 (95% CI: 0.82 to 1.71) in MRA nonusers (interaction p = 0.10); a similar pattern was seen for all-cause mortality (interaction p = 0.098). Among MRA nonusers at baseline, patients in the empagliflozin group were 35% less likely than those in the placebo group to initiate treatment with an MRA following randomization (hazard ratio: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.85). Among MRA users at baseline, patients in the empagliflozin group were 22% less likely than those in the placebo group to discontinue treatment with an MRA following randomization (hazard ratio: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.96). Severe hyperkalemia was less common in the empagliflozin group. In EMPEROR-Reduced, the use of MRAs did not influence the effect of empagliflozin to reduce adverse heart failure and renal outcomes. Treatment with empagliflozin was associated with less discontinuation of MRAs. (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction [EMPEROR-Reduced]; NCT03057977).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors favorably influence the clinical course of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.
OBJECTIVES
This study sought to study the mutual influence of empagliflozin and MRAs in EMPEROR-Reduced (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction).
METHODS
Secondary analysis that compared the effects of empagliflozin versus placebo in 3,730 patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, of whom 71% used MRAs at randomization.
RESULTS
The effects of empagliflozin on the primary endpoint, on most efficacy endpoints, and on safety were similar in patients receiving or not receiving an MRA (interaction p > 0.20). For cardiovascular death, the hazard ratios for the effect of empagliflozin versus placebo were 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65 to 1.05) in MRA users and 1.19 (95% CI: 0.82 to 1.71) in MRA nonusers (interaction p = 0.10); a similar pattern was seen for all-cause mortality (interaction p = 0.098). Among MRA nonusers at baseline, patients in the empagliflozin group were 35% less likely than those in the placebo group to initiate treatment with an MRA following randomization (hazard ratio: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.85). Among MRA users at baseline, patients in the empagliflozin group were 22% less likely than those in the placebo group to discontinue treatment with an MRA following randomization (hazard ratio: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.96). Severe hyperkalemia was less common in the empagliflozin group.
CONCLUSIONS
In EMPEROR-Reduced, the use of MRAs did not influence the effect of empagliflozin to reduce adverse heart failure and renal outcomes. Treatment with empagliflozin was associated with less discontinuation of MRAs. (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction [EMPEROR-Reduced]; NCT03057977).
Identifiants
pubmed: 33736821
pii: S0735-1097(21)00239-4
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.01.044
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Benzhydryl Compounds
0
Glucosides
0
Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists
0
Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors
0
empagliflozin
HDC1R2M35U
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03057977']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1397-1407Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Funding Support and Author Disclosures EMPEROR-Reduced was funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly. Dr. Ferreira has received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study. Dr. Zannad has received personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study; has received personal fees from Janssen, Novartis, Boston Scientific, Amgen, CVRx, AstraZeneca, Vifor Fresenius, Cardior, Cereno Pharmaceutical, Applied Therapeutics, Merck, Bayer, and Cellprothera outside the submitted work; and has received other support from CardioVascular Clinical Trialists and Cardiorenal, outside the submitted work. Dr. Pocock has received personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study. Dr. Anker has received grants from Vifor; has received personal fees from Vifor, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Servier, Impulse Dynamics, Cardiac Dimensions, and Thermo Fisher Scientific; and has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular, outside the submitted work. Dr. Butler has received consultancy fees from Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study; and has received consultancy fees from Abbott, Adrenomed, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BerlinCures, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardior, CVRx, Foundry, G3 Pharma, Imbria, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Luitpold, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Relypsa, Roche, Sanofi, Sequana Medical, V-Wave, and Vifor, outside the submitted work. Dr. Filippatos has received payment for being a trial committee member from Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study; and has received payment for being a trial committee member from Medtronic, Vifor, Servier, and Novartis, outside the submitted work. Dr. Brueckmann has received personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study; and has received personal fees from AbbVie, Akcea, Amarin, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiorentis, Daiichi-Sankyo, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Relypsa, Sanofi, Synthetic Biologics, Theravance, and Novo Nordisk, outside the submitted work. Drs. Brueckmann, Steubl, Jamal, and Steubl are employees of Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Schueler is an employee of mainanalytics, contracted by Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Packer has reported that he has no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.