Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety of SGLT2 inhibitors with and without glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists: a SMART-C collaborative meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

E. Apperloo, B. Neuen, R. Fletcher, N. Jongs, Stefan D. Anker, Deepak L. Bhatt, Javed Butler, D. Cherney et al.

The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology, 2024

73 participants · 114 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists both improve cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. We sought to evaluate whether the benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors are consistent in patients receiving and not receiving GLP-1 receptor agonists.

METHODS

We conducted a collaborative meta-analysis of trials included in the SGLT2 Inhibitor Meta-Analysis Cardio-Renal Trialists' Consortium, restricted to participants with diabetes. Treatment effects from individual trials were obtained from Cox regression models and pooled using inverse variance weighted meta-analysis. The two main cardiovascular outcomes assessed included major adverse cardiovascular events (nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death), and hospitalisation for heart failure or cardiovascular death. The main kidney outcomes assessed were chronic kidney disease progression (≥40% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR], kidney failure [eGFR <15 mL/min/1·73 m2, chronic dialysis, or kidney transplantation], or death due to kidney failure), and the rate of change in eGFR over time. Safety outcomes were also assessed.

FINDINGS

Across 12 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, 3065 (4·2%) of 73 238 participants with diabetes were using GLP-1 receptor agonists at baseline. SGLT2 inhibitors reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in participants both receiving and not receiving GLP-1 receptor agonists (hazard ratio…

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: 73 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