Evidence Hub

Copeptin Response to Empagliflozin in Patients with Recent Acute Coronary Syndrome and Newly Detected Dysglycaemia: a post-hoc analysis of the SOCOGAMI randomized controlled trial

Fortin E, Melander O, Ferrannini G, Näsman P, Norhammar A, Rydén L, Smetana S, Svensson M et al.

2026

42 participants

Abstract

Abstract Background: Copeptin, a surrogate marker for vasopressin activity, is associated with cardiovascular disease, insulin resistance and glucose metabolism dysregulation. The cardioprotective effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) may involve vasopressin modulation through fluid redistribution, but whether this effect persists long-term in high-cardiovascular-risk patients with newly detected dysglycaemia remains unknown. Methods: In this post-hoc analysis of the SOCOGAMI double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 42 patients (mean age 67.5 years, 19% female) with impaired glucose tolerance or newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes following an ACS and no heart failure were randomized to empagliflozin 25 mg/day (n=20) or placebo (n=22) for 7 months. Copeptin was serially measured during oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT) at baseline, after 7 months on-treatment, and 3 months after treatment withdrawal. Treatment effects were assessed by repeated-measures ANOVA with treatment×time interaction and linear mixed-effects models. Results: Baseline copeptin did not differ between groups and correlated positively with arterial pulse wave velocity (r s =0.40, p=0.03), linking vasopressin activity to subclinical vascular stiffness. During treatment, a non-significant trend toward higher copeptin at 7 months in the empagliflozin group reversed to baseline after treatment discontinuation (treatment×time interaction p=0.64), with haematocrit showing a parallel…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 42 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free