MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417153475 · doi:10.1186/s40842-025-00248-2

Effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors, incretin-based therapies, and finerenone on cardiorenal outcomes: a meta-analysis and network meta-analysis

2025· article· en· W4417153475 on OpenAlexaff
Arveen Shokravi, Jayant Seth, Nelson Lu, G.B. John Mancini

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiovascular Diabetology – Endocrinology Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeart failureEjection fractionKidney diseaseMyocardial infarctionHazard ratioType 2 diabetesCardiorenal syndromeDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Several societies recommend sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA), and finerenone for cardiorenal risk reduction in select populations. This updated meta-analysis assessed the impact of SGLT2i, incretin-based therapies (i.e. GLP-1RAs and tirzepatide), and finerenone on cardiorenal outcomes in established and emerging populations. Additionally, a network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the relative efficacy between treatment classes. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE and CENTRAL from January 2023 to April 2025, supplemented by studies evaluated in our prior meta-analyses, identified 33 randomized controlled trials. Random-effects models were used to generate hazard ratios for outcomes including cardiovascular (CV) mortality, all-cause mortality, heart failure (HF) hospitalization/event, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), non-fatal stroke, and kidney composite outcomes in various subpopulations including patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or high CV risk, chronic kidney disease (CKD), HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), HFpEF with obesity, post-MI, acute HF, and ASCVD with overweight/obesity without T2D. NMA was performed when two or more treatment classes were reported for a given outcome within a subpopulation. RESULTS: Incretin-based therapies decreased CV mortality, all-cause mortality, non-fatal MI, and kidney composite outcomes in CKD, and reduced these outcomes as well as HF hospitalization/events and non-fatal stroke in T2D with ASCVD/high CV risk. In HFpEF with obesity, incretin-based therapies reduced HF hospitalization/events. SGLT2i reduced CV mortality, all-cause mortality, HF hospitalization/events, and kidney composite outcomes in HFrEF, and reduced these outcomes as well as non-fatal MI in CKD and T2D with ASCVD/high CV risk. SGLT2i decreased HF hospitalization/events in HFpEF, and lowered HF hospitalizations in post-MI and acute HF populations. Finerenone reduced HF hospitalizations and kidney composite outcomes in diabetic CKD and reduced HF hospitalizations in HFpEF. Using placebo as the common comparator in the NMA, SGLT2i conferred significantly greater reductions in HF hospitalization/events and kidney composite outcomes compared to incretin-based therapies in T2D with ASCVD/high CV risk and CKD. CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm the role of SGLT2i, incretin-based therapies, and finerenone in cardiorenal risk reduction across established high-risk groups, including T2D and CKD, and extend benefits to newer populations, including acute HF and post-MI for SGLT2i, and HFpEF with obesity for incretin-based therapies. Indirect NMA evidence further suggests SGLT2i may reduce HF hospitalization/events and kidney composite outcomes more than incretin-based therapies in T2D with ASCVD/high CV risk and CKD populations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.067
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiovascular Diabetology – Endocrinology Reports→Same topicDiabetes Treatment and Management→French-language works237,207→