Evidence Hub

A comparison of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor kidney outcome trial participants with a real-world chronic kidney disease primary care population

Forbes AK, Hinton W, Feher MD, Elson W, Ordóñez-Mena JM, Joy M, Fan X, Banerjee D et al.

Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association, 2024

6 participants · 11 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Observational studies suggest sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor kidney outcome trials are not representative of the broader population of people with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, there are limited data on the generalizability to those without co-existing type 2 diabetes (T2D), and the representativeness of the Study of Heart and Kidney Protection with Empagliflozin (EMPA-KIDNEY) trial has not been adequately explored. We hypothesized that SGLT2 inhibitor kidney outcome trials are more representative of people with co-existing T2D than those without, and that EMPA-KIDNEY is more representative than previous trials. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of adults with CKD in English primary care was conducted using the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Clinical Informatics Digital Hub. The proportions that met the eligibility criteria of SGLT2 inhibitor kidney outcome trials were determined, and their characteristics described. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with trial eligibility. Results Of 6 670 829 adults, 516 491 (7.7%) with CKD were identified. In the real-world CKD population, 0.9%, 2.2% and 8.0% met the Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes with Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation (CREDENCE), Dapagliflozin and Renal Outcomes and Cardiovascular Mortality in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease (DAPA-CKD) and EMPA-KIDNEY eligibility criteria, respectively. All…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 6 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