Evidence Hub

Comparative risk of genital infections associated with SGLT2 inhibitors: A real-world retrospective cohort study

Chintan V. Dave, S. Schneeweiss, E. Patorno

Diabetes, obesity and metabolism, 2018

156 participants · 137 citations

Abstract

The extent to which sodium‐glucose co‐transporter‐2 (SGLT2) inhibitors increase the risk of genital infections in routine clinical care, compared with other antidiabetic medications, is not clear, or whether the increased risk is consistent across gender or age subgroups, within individual SGLT2 agents, or if it is more pronounced at a particular time after treatment initiation. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using two US commercial claims databases (2013‐2017). In the primary analysis, 1:1 propensity score‐matched cohorts of female and male subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus initiating SGLT2 versus dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitors were created. The outcome was a composite of genital candidal infections, vaginitis or vulvovaginitis in women, and genital candidal infections, balanitis, balanoposthitis, phimosis or paraphimosis in men. Among propensity score‐matched cohorts of 129 994 women and 156 074 men, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) and excess risk per 1000 person‐years for SGLT2 versus DPP‐4 inhibitors was 2.81 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.64, 2.99) and 87.4 (95% CI, 79.1, 96.2) respectively for women, and was 2.68 (95% CI, 2.31, 3.11) and 11.9 (95% CI, 9.3‐15.0) for men. Findings were similar in the SGLT2 inhibitor versus GLP‐1 agonist comparison, more pronounced in the subgroup of patients aged ≥60 (HR, 4.45 [95% CI, 3.83‐5.17] in women and 3.30 [95% CI, 2.56‐4.25] in men), and no meaningful difference across individual SGLT2 inhibitors was…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, 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: 156 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