Influence of receptor selectivity on benefits from SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure: a systematic review and head-to-head comparative efficacy network meta-analysis.
Diabetes mellitus
Heart failure
Outcome
Receptor selectivity
Sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor
Journal
Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society
ISSN: 1861-0692
Titre abrégé: Clin Res Cardiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101264123
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2022
Apr 2022
Historique:
received:
28
04
2021
accepted:
19
07
2021
pubmed:
10
9
2021
medline:
5
4
2022
entrez:
9
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Receptor selectivity of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) varies greatly between agents. The overall improvement of cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in heart failure (HF) patients varies between trials. We, therefore, evaluated the comparative efficacy of individual SGLT2i and the influence of their respective receptor selectivity thereon. We identified randomized controlled trials investigating the use of SGLT2i in patients with HF-either as the target cohort or as a subgroup of it. Comparators included placebo or any other active treatment. The primary endpoint was the composite of hospitalization for HF or CV death. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, CV mortality, hospitalization for HF, worsening renal function (RF), and the composite of worsening RF or CV death. Evidence was synthesized using network meta-analysis. In addition, the impact of receptor selectivity on outcomes was analysed using meta-regression. We identified 18,265 patients included in 22 trials. Compared to placebo, selective and non-selective SGLT2i improved fatal and non-fatal HF events. Head-to-head comparisons suggest superior efficacy with sotagliflozin as compared to dapagliflozin, empagliflozin or ertugliflozin. No significant difference was found between canagliflozin and sotagliflozin. Meta-regression analyses show a decreasing benefit on HF events with increasing receptor selectivity of SGLT2i. In contrast, receptor selectivity did not affect mortality and renal endpoints and no significant difference between individual SGLT2i was noted. Our data point towards a class-effect of SGLT2i on mortality and renal outcomes. However, non-selective SGLT2i such as sotagliflozin may be superior to highly selective SGLT2i in terms of HF outcomes.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Receptor selectivity of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) varies greatly between agents. The overall improvement of cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in heart failure (HF) patients varies between trials. We, therefore, evaluated the comparative efficacy of individual SGLT2i and the influence of their respective receptor selectivity thereon.
METHODS
METHODS
We identified randomized controlled trials investigating the use of SGLT2i in patients with HF-either as the target cohort or as a subgroup of it. Comparators included placebo or any other active treatment. The primary endpoint was the composite of hospitalization for HF or CV death. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, CV mortality, hospitalization for HF, worsening renal function (RF), and the composite of worsening RF or CV death. Evidence was synthesized using network meta-analysis. In addition, the impact of receptor selectivity on outcomes was analysed using meta-regression.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We identified 18,265 patients included in 22 trials. Compared to placebo, selective and non-selective SGLT2i improved fatal and non-fatal HF events. Head-to-head comparisons suggest superior efficacy with sotagliflozin as compared to dapagliflozin, empagliflozin or ertugliflozin. No significant difference was found between canagliflozin and sotagliflozin. Meta-regression analyses show a decreasing benefit on HF events with increasing receptor selectivity of SGLT2i. In contrast, receptor selectivity did not affect mortality and renal endpoints and no significant difference between individual SGLT2i was noted.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Our data point towards a class-effect of SGLT2i on mortality and renal outcomes. However, non-selective SGLT2i such as sotagliflozin may be superior to highly selective SGLT2i in terms of HF outcomes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34498169
doi: 10.1007/s00392-021-01913-z
pii: 10.1007/s00392-021-01913-z
pmc: PMC8971161
doi:
Substances chimiques
Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
428-439Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020 Nov;36(8):e3335
pubmed: 32415802
Lancet. 2019 Jan 5;393(10166):31-39
pubmed: 30424892
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Mar 20;156(6):405-15
pubmed: 22431673
J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Feb;64(2):163-71
pubmed: 20688472
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 01;4:1
pubmed: 25554246
Eur Heart J. 2018 Feb 1;39(5):363-370
pubmed: 29020355
PLoS One. 2014 Jul 03;9(7):e99682
pubmed: 24992266
J Cell Biochem. 2003 Oct 1;90(2):339-46
pubmed: 14505350
N Engl J Med. 2019 Jan 24;380(4):347-357
pubmed: 30415602
Am Heart J. 2020 Oct;228:47-56
pubmed: 32798787
Int J Cardiol. 2017 Sep 15;243:86-90
pubmed: 28526540
Diabetes Care. 2015 Jul;38(7):1218-27
pubmed: 25852208
Circulation. 2019 Aug 6;140(6):443-445
pubmed: 31381418
Circulation. 2017 Oct 24;136(17):1643-1658
pubmed: 29061576
N Engl J Med. 2020 Oct 8;383(15):1413-1424
pubmed: 32865377
BMJ. 2015 Jan 02;350:g7647
pubmed: 25555855
JAMA. 2020 Apr 14;323(14):1353-1368
pubmed: 32219386
Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2017 Mar;19(3):23
pubmed: 28299616
Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2020 Sep 30;19(1):159
pubmed: 32998746
Circulation. 2021 Jan 26;143(4):337-349
pubmed: 33175585
Circ Heart Fail. 2019 Jun;12(6):e005875
pubmed: 31163986
N Engl J Med. 2017 Aug 17;377(7):644-657
pubmed: 28605608
JAMA Cardiol. 2017 Sep 1;2(9):1025-1029
pubmed: 28768320
Circulation. 2018 Jul 31;138(5):458-468
pubmed: 29526832
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2011 Oct;13(10):928-38
pubmed: 21672123
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018 Nov;20(11):2585-2597
pubmed: 29938883
N Engl J Med. 2019 Jun 13;380(24):2295-2306
pubmed: 30990260
N Engl J Med. 2015 Nov 26;373(22):2117-28
pubmed: 26378978
Res Synth Methods. 2012 Jun;3(2):80-97
pubmed: 26062083
Eur J Heart Fail. 2019 Nov;21(11):1402-1411
pubmed: 31309699
Eur J Heart Fail. 2010 Feb;12(2):106-13
pubmed: 20083620
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Aug;62(8):857-64
pubmed: 19157778
Syst Rev. 2016 Jan 28;5:15
pubmed: 26822481
Med Clin (Barc). 2016 Sep 16;147(6):262-6
pubmed: 27040178
Circulation. 2021 Feb 9;143(6):516-525
pubmed: 33186500
Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 12;6(1):79
pubmed: 28403893
N Engl J Med. 2021 Jan 14;384(2):117-128
pubmed: 33200892
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2020 Jul;86(7):1346-1356
pubmed: 32068914
Am J Med. 2020 Nov;133(11):e625-e630
pubmed: 32389659
BMJ. 2014 Sep 24;349:g5630
pubmed: 25252733
N Engl J Med. 2020 Oct 8;383(15):1425-1435
pubmed: 32966714
Circulation. 2020 Dec 8;142(23):2205-2215
pubmed: 33026243
N Engl J Med. 2019 Nov 21;381(21):1995-2008
pubmed: 31535829
ESC Heart Fail. 2020 Dec;7(6):3298-3309
pubmed: 33586910
Diabetes Care. 2020 Jun;43(6):1356-1359
pubmed: 32245746
Res Synth Methods. 2012 Jun;3(2):98-110
pubmed: 26062084
J Diabetes Complications. 2017 Jul;31(7):1215-1221
pubmed: 28284707
Kidney Int. 2014 Apr;85(4):962-71
pubmed: 24067431
Circulation. 2019 May 28;139(22):2528-2536
pubmed: 30882238
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021 Jan 26;77(3):243-255
pubmed: 33197559
J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 May;61(5):455-63
pubmed: 18394538
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2019 Jun;21(6):1311-1321
pubmed: 30724002
PLoS One. 2013 Oct 03;8(10):e76654
pubmed: 24098547
Circulation. 2019 Oct 29;140(18):1463-1476
pubmed: 31524498
Eur Heart J. 2016 May 14;37(19):1526-34
pubmed: 26819227