Cardiovascular Benefit of Empagliflozin Across the Spectrum of Cardiovascular Risk Factor Control in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME Trial.

Section of Endocrinology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK. Division of Cardiology, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Division of Nephrology, Würzburg University Clinic, Würzburg, Germany. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co.KG, Ingelheim, Germany. Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim, Germany. Boehringer Ingelheim Norway KS, Asker, Norway. Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism. 2020;(9):3025-35

Abstract

CONTEXT Control of multiple cardiovascular (CV) risk factors reduces CV events in individuals with type 2 diabetes. OBJECTIVE To investigate this association in a contemporary clinical trial population, including how CV risk factor control affects the CV benefits of empagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor. DESIGN Post hoc analysis. SETTING Randomized CV outcome trial (EMPA-REG OUTCOME). PARTICIPANTS Type 2 diabetes patients with established CV disease. INTERVENTION Empagliflozin or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Risk of CV outcomes-including the treatment effect of empagliflozin-by achieving 7 goals for CV risk factor control at baseline: (1) glycated hemoglobin <7.5%, (2) low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL or statin use, (3) systolic blood pressure <140 mmHg and diastolic blood pressure <90 mmHg, (4) pharmacological renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade, (5) normoalbuminuria, (6) aspirin use, (7) nonsmoking. RESULTS In the placebo group, the hazard ratio (HR) for CV death was 4.00 (95% CI, 2.26-7.11) and 2.48 (95% CI, 1.52-4.06) for patients achieving only 0-3 or 4-5 risk factor goals at baseline, respectively, compared with those achieving 6-7 goals. Participants achieving 0-3 or 4-5 goals also had increased risk for the composite outcome of hospitalization for heart failure or CV death (excluding fatal stroke) (HR 2.89 [1.82-4.57] and 1.90 [1.31-2.78], respectively) and 3-point major adverse CV events (HR 2.21 [1.53-3.19] and 1.42 [1.06-1.89]). Empagliflozin significantly reduced these outcomes across all risk factor control categories (P > 0.05 for treatment-by-subgroup interactions). CONCLUSIONS Cardiovascular risk in EMPA-REG OUTCOME was inversely associated with baseline CV risk factor control. Empagliflozin's cardioprotective effect was consistent regardless of multiple baseline risk factor control.

Methodological quality

Metadata