Empagliflozin cardiovascular and renal effectiveness and safety compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors across 11 countries in Europe and Asia: Results from the EMPagliflozin compaRative effectIveness and SafEty (EMPRISE) study

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Dokumenter

  • Fulltext

    Forlagets udgivne version, 4,46 MB, PDF-dokument

  • Avraham Karasik
  • Stefanie Lanzinger
  • Elise Chia-Hui Tan
  • Daisuke Yabe
  • Dae Jung Kim
  • Wayne H.H. Sheu
  • Cheli Melzer-Cohen
  • Reinhard W. Holl
  • Kyoung Hwa Ha
  • Kamlesh Khunti
  • Francesco Zaccardi
  • Anuradhaa Subramanian
  • Krishnarajah Nirantharakumar
  • Thomas Nyström
  • Leo Niskanen
  • Majken Linnemann Jensen
  • Fabian Hoti
  • Riho Klement
  • Anouk Déruaz-Luyet
  • Moe H. Kyaw
  • Lisette Koeneman
  • Dorte Vistisen
  • Carstensen, Bendix
  • Sigrun Halvorsen
  • Gisle Langslet
  • Soulmaz Fazeli Farsani
  • Elisabetta Patorno
  • Júlio Núñez
  • EMPRISE Europe and Asia Study Group
Background
Continued expansion of indications for sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors increases importance of evaluating cardiovascular and kidney efficacy and safety of empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes compared to similar therapies.

Methods
The EMPRISE Europe and Asia study is a non-interventional cohort study using data from 2014–2019 in seven European (Denmark, Finland, Germany, Norway, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom) and four Asian (Israel, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan) countries. Patients with type 2 diabetes initiating empagliflozin were 1:1 propensity score matched to patients initiating dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Primary endpoints included hospitalization for heart failure, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction and stroke. Other cardiovascular, renal, and safety outcomes were examined.

Findings
Among 83,946 matched patient pairs, (0·7 years overall mean follow-up time), initiation of empagliflozin was associated with lower risk of hospitalization for heart failure compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (Hazard Ratio 0·70; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.83). Risks of all-cause mortality (0·55; 0·48 to 0·63), stroke (0·82; 0·71 to 0·96), and end-stage renal disease (0·43; 0·30 to 0·63) were lower and risk for myocardial infarction, bone fracture, severe hypoglycemia, and lower-limb amputation were similar between initiators of empagliflozin and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Initiation of empagliflozin was associated with higher risk for diabetic ketoacidosis (1·97; 1·28 to 3·03) compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Results were consistent across continents and regions.

Interpretation
Results from this EMPRISE Europe and Asia study complements previous clinical trials and real-world studies by providing further evidence of the beneficial cardiorenal effects and overall safety of empagliflozin compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
Artikelnummer101418
TidsskriftDiabetes and Metabolism
Vol/bind49
Udgave nummer2
Antal sider17
ISSN1262-3636
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2023

Bibliografisk note

Funding Information:
This study was funded by Boehringer Ingelheim -Lilly Diabetes Alliance. We acknowledge and thank Hanna Rinta-Kokko and Pia Vattulainen (IQVIA, Espoo, Finland) for the meta-analyses; Ilkka Tamminen (IQVIA, Espoo, Finland) for project management and scientific contributions; Niklas Schmedt and Christina Shay (BI) for critical review of the manuscript and editorial support; Dr. Nicola Jaime Adderley (Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham) for writing the THIN data specific protocol and interpretation of data; Paula Casajust, Neus Valveny and Alina Gavrus Ion (TFS HealthScience) and Emilie Toresson Grip and Joel Gunnarsson (Quantify) for support conducting EMPRISE studies in Sweden, Finland, and Norway. All authors are guarantors of this report. Kamlesh Khunti and Francesco Zaccardi are supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration East Midlands (ARC EM) and the NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research centre (BRC).

Funding Information:
This study was funded by the Boehringer Ingelheim and Lilly Diabetes Alliance. Boehringer Ingelheim and & Lilly Diabetes Alliance was involved in study design, data interpretation, data collection, data analysis, and writing of the report.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors

ID: 339547886