Evidence Hub

Use of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors and risk of serious renal events: Scandinavian cohort study

B. Pasternak, V. Wintzell, M. Melbye, B. Eliasson, A. Svensson, S. Franzén, S. Gudbjörnsdottir, K. Hveem et al.

British medical journal, 2020

88 citations

Abstract

Abstract Objective To assess the association between use of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and risk of serious renal events in data from routine clinical practice. Design Cohort study using an active comparator, new user design and nationwide register data. Setting Sweden, Denmark, and Norway, 2013-18. Participants Cohort of 29 887 new users of SGLT2 inhibitors (follow-up time: dapagliflozin 66.1%; empagliflozin 32.6%; canagliflozin 1.3%) and 29 887 new users of an active comparator, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, matched 1:1 on the basis of a propensity score with 57 variables. Mean follow-up time was 1.7 (SD 1.0) years. Exposures SGLT2 inhibitors versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, defined by filled prescriptions and analysed according to intention to treat. Main outcome measures The main outcome was serious renal events, a composite including renal replacement therapy, death from renal causes, and hospital admission for renal events. Secondary outcomes were the individual components of the main outcome. Results The mean age of the study population was 61.3 (SD 10.5) years; 11 108 (19%) had cardiovascular disease, and 1974 (3%) had chronic kidney disease. Use of SGLT2 inhibitors, compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, was associated with a reduced risk of serious renal events (2.6 events per 1000 person years versus 6.2 events per 1000 person years; hazard ratio 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.34 to 0.53); absolute difference −3.6…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case-control, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause.

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