Review
Meta-Analysis of Effects of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors on Cardiovascular Outcomes and All-Cause Mortality Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.08.061Get rights and content

The benefit or risk of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus has not been established. We aimed to assess the comparative CV safety and mortality risk associated with the use of SGLT2 inhibitors. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched up to January 27, 2016, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with the use of SGLT2 inhibitors of at least 24 weeks of duration. The primary outcomes included all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events. A random-effects network meta-analysis was performed to calculate the odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI. We identified 37 eligible trials involving 29,859 patients that compared 3 SGLT2 inhibitors (canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, and empagliflozin) to placebo and other active antidiabetic treatments. Of all direct and indirect comparisons, only empagliflozin compared with placebo was significantly associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.81) and major adverse cardiovascular events (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.93). However, the significant effect of empagliflozin was largely driven by one large randomized trial (EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial). Neither dapagliflozin nor canagliflozin was significantly associated with any harm. In conclusion, current RCT evidence suggests that 3 common SGLT2 inhibitors are not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality and CV outcomes when used to treat patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Although empagliflozin may have a protective effect, further confirmative data from rigorous RCTs are needed.

Section snippets

Methods

This review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions7 and was registered with international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) (number, CRD42015026853).

An electronic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) through January 27, 2016,

Results

A total of 1,268 citations were retrieved through electronic search, from which 172 potentially eligible reports were identified by reviewing study titles and abstracts. Finally, 37 eligible RCTs involving 28,859 patients were included in this meta-analysis (Figure 1). These patients were randomly assigned to a SGLT2 inhibitor (canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, or empagliflozin) or control groups (placebo or other active antidiabetic treatments). Sample sizes of individual trials ranged between 180

Discussion

Our network meta-analysis of all eligible RCTs involving 30,250 patients showed that none of the 3 SGLT2 inhibitors was harmful for CV outcomes or all-cause mortality. For the primary outcomes, only empagliflozin appeared associated with a lower risk of MACE and all-cause mortality compared to placebo, whereas neither dapagliflozin nor canagliflozin was significantly associated with any harm. With respect to secondary outcomes, only empagliflozin had lower risk of heart failure or heart failure

Disclosures

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

References (30)

  • B. Hutton et al.

    The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations

    Ann Intern Med

    (2015)
  • J.P.T. Higgins et al.

    Chapter 8: assessing risk of bias in included studies

  • M.J. Bradburn et al.

    Much ado about nothing: a comparison of the performance of meta-analytical methods with rare events

    Stat Med

    (2007)
  • F. Keus et al.

    Robustness assessments are needed to reduce bias in meta-analyses that include zero-event randomized trials

    Am J Gastroenterol

    (2009)
  • I.R. White et al.

    Consistency and inconsistency in network meta-analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression

    Res Synth Methods

    (2012)
  • Cited by (57)

    • Comparative efficacy of five Chinese medicine injections for treating dilated cardiomyopathy with heart failure: A Bayesian network meta-analysis

      2022, Journal of Ethnopharmacology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Besides, the network graph showed an indirect comparative relationship between different interventions was described by using Stata software. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probability values were applied to rank the interventions, and SUCRA values of 100% and 0% were assigned to the best and worst treatments (Tang et al., 2016). Provided that the closed loop of interventions was available, a loop-specific approach was explored to examine the inconsistency of evidence (Cai et al., 2018).

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Drs. Tang and Song were supported by the Indiana University Health–Indiana University School of Medicine Strategic Research Initiative.

    See page 1779 for disclosure information.

    View full text