Improvement in Cardiovascular Outcomes With Empagliflozin Is Independent of Glycemic Control
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Key Words: blood glucose ◼ sodiumglucose transporter 2 ◼ treatment outcome ◼ type 2 diabetes mellitus C ardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). 1 However, control of the major metabolic derangement of T2DM, hyperglycemia, as denoted by hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), does not substantively impact its cardiovascular complications. 2 In the EMPA-REG OUT-COME trial (Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients) involving 7020 patients with T2DM and established CVD, the SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin reduced the risk of 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events (composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and cardiovascular death) by 14%. 3 This effect was driven by a 38% reduction in cardiovascular death. 3Empagliflozin also reduced heart failure (HF) hospitalization by 35%. 3 Until EMPA-REG OUTCOME, such cardiovascular benefits had not been demonstrated by any glucose-lowering agent, and the data led to a label indication for empagliflozin to reduce cardiovascular mortality.We have previously reported no heterogeneity in the cardiovascular effects of empagliflozin in subgroups by HbA1c < versus ≥8.5% at baseline. 3,4Building on this, we analyzed the risks of cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, and the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death (1) in subgroups stratified by baseline HbA1c (<7%; 7% to <8%; 8% to <9%; ≥9%) and (2) after adjustment for HbA1c control (defined as <7.5%; yes/no) during the trial as a time-dependent factor.In the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial, background glucose-lowering therapy was to remain unchanged for the first 12 weeks.We therefore also analyzed the risks of cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, and HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death after week 12 in subgroups stratified by reduction in HbA1c from baseline to week 12 using 3 thresholds: (1) 0.5% (used by the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes to categorize glucose-lowering efficacy as low versus intermediate); (2) 0.3% (the U.S. Food and Drug Administration definition for a minimal clinically meaningful reduction), and (3) the median reduction across all patients (0.4%).In subgroup analyses, P values were derived from tests of heterogeneity of treatment group differences without adjustment for multiple testing.An independent ethics committee or institutional review board approved the clinical protocol at each participating center.All patients provided written informed consent.The reductions in risks of cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, and HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death with empagliflozin versus placebo were consistent across categories of baseline HbA1c (Figure).In analyses adjusted for HbA1c control at baseline and during the trial, the relative reductions were similar to those in the main analyses (Figure).At week 12, the median HbA1c reduction was 0.4% (placebo, 0.1%; empagliflozin, 0.6%).The benefits of empagliflozin on these outcomes were evident regardless of whether the reduction in HbA1c reached thresholds of 0.5%, 0.3%, or the median (Figure).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».