Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety of empagliflozin for treating neutropenia and neutrophil dysfunction in paediatric patients with glycogen storage disease type Ib: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Elizabeth Iwasyk, Ryan Jin, F. Tuzzolino, G. Ranucci, Donatella Madonia, A. Provenzani

British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2025

177 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

AIMS

Glycogen storage disease type Ib (GSD-Ib) is a rare genetic disorder causing neutropenia and neutrophil dysfunction in children. G-CSF has been the primary treatment, but emerging data support the potential of empagliflozin, an SGLT2 inhibitor, as a promising investigational option. This systematic review and meta-analysis assess its feasibility, efficacy and safety in paediatric GSD-Ib patients.

METHODS

Following the 2020 PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science (2015-2025). The last search was performed on 16 May 2025. The inclusion criteria were patients <18 years with GSD-Ib and neutropenia treated with empagliflozin. Eligible study types included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies and case series. Non-English, pre-2015 and non-primary research were excluded. Bias was assessed using ROBINS-I V2, and certainty via GRADE. Meta-analyses used fixed or random effects depending on heterogeneity. The primary efficacy outcome was defined as resolution of neutropenia, and safety outcome included overall adverse events.

RESULTS

Six non-randomized studies (n = 177; 52% male; mean age 6.7) met the inclusion criteria. Two studies showed low risk of bias; three were critically biased. All reported improved neutrophil counts (ANC > 1.5) after empagliflozin treatment. Four studies had >80% resolution of neutropenia; all showed G-CSF reduction or discontinuation. Adverse events were minimal; lactic acidosis was…

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: 177 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