Evidence Hub

Comparison of Effectiveness Among Different Sodium-Glucose Cotransoporter-2 Inhibitors According to Underlying Conditions: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Kani R, Watanabe A, Miyamoto Y, Ejiri K, Iwagami M, Takagi H, Slipczuk L, Tsugawa Y et al.

Journal of the American Heart Association, 2024

96 participants · 38 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To investigate the individual profile of each SGLT2 (sodium-glucose cotransoporter-2) inhibitor in patients with different backgrounds.

METHODS AND RESULTS: This study included 21 placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials with a total of 96 196 participants, investigating empagliflozin, ertugliflozin, dapagliflozin, canagliflozin, and sotagliflozin. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of cardiovascular death and hospitalizations for heart failure. The secondary efficacy end points were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, hospitalizations for heart failure, kidney disease progression, and acute kidney injury. We conducted subgroup analyses based on the underlying comorbidities, including diabetes and chronic kidney disease. Safety end points were also assessed among SGLT2 inhibitors in the overall cohort. In the overall cohort, there were no significant differences in the primary efficacy outcome among the SGLT2 inhibitors, while empagliflozin (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70 [95% CI, 0.53-0.92]) and dapagliflozin (HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.56-0.96]) were associated with lower risk of acute kidney injury than sotagliflozin. The presence or absence of diabetes did not alter the results. In patients with chronic kidney disease, there were no differences in the efficacy outcomes among SGLT2 inhibitors, while in patients without chronic kidney disease, empagliflozin was associated with lower risk of the primary outcome compared with ertugliflozin (HR, 0.77…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 96 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