Evidence Hub

Comparative cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes patients taking dapagliflozin versus empagliflozin: a nationwide population-based cohort study

Jae-kyu Lim, You-jung Choi, Bongseong Kim, Tae-Min Rhee, Hyun-Jung Lee, K. Han, Jun‐Bean Park, J. Na et al.

Cardiovascular Diabetology, 2023

72,752 participants · 27 citations

Abstract

Background Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors displayed cardiovascular benefits in type 2 diabetes mellitus in previous studies; however, there were some heterogeneities regarding respective cardiovascular outcomes within the class. Furthermore, their efficacies in Asians, females, and those with low cardiovascular risks were under-represented. Thus, we compared the cardiovascular outcomes between new users of dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in a broad range of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus using a nationwide population-based real-world cohort from Korea. Methods Korean National Health Insurance registry data between May 2016 and December 2018 were extracted, and an active-comparator new-user design was applied. The primary outcome was a composite of heart failure (HF)-related events (i.e., hospitalization for HF and HF-related death), myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and cardiovascular death. The secondary outcomes were individual components of the primary outcome. Results A total of 366,031 new users of dapagliflozin or empagliflozin were identified. After 1:1 nearest-neighbor propensity score matching, 72,752 individuals (mean age approximately 56 years, 42% women) from each group were included in the final analysis, with a follow-up of 150,000 ~ person-years. Approximately 40% of the patients included in the study had type 2 diabetes mellitus as their sole cardiovascular risk factor, with no other risk factors. The risk of the primary outcome 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: 72,752 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