Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes: A SMART-C Collaborative Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) consistently improve heart failure and kidney-related outcomes; however, effects on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) across different patient populations are less clear. METHODS: This was a collaborative trial-level meta-analysis from the SGLT2i Meta-analysis Cardio-Renal Trialists Consortium, which includes all phase 3, placebo-controlled, outcomes trials of SGLT2i across 3 patient populations (patients with diabetes at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure [HF], or chronic kidney disease). The outcomes of interest were MACE (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction , or stroke), individual components of MACE (inclusive of fatal and nonfatal events), all-cause mortality, and death subtypes. Effect estimates for SGLT2i versus placebo were meta-analyzed across trials and examined across key subgroups (established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, previous myocardial infarction, diabetes, previous HF, albuminuria, chronic kidney disease stages, and risk groups). RESULTS: A total of 78 607 patients across 11 trials were included: 42 568 (54.2%), 20 725 (26.4%), and 15 314 (19.5%) were included from trials of patients with diabetes at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, HF, or chronic kidney disease, respectively. SGLT2i reduced the rate of MACE by 9% (hazard ration [HR], 0.91 [95% CI, 0.87-0.96], P<0.0001) with a consistent effect across all 3 patient populations (I2=0%) and across all key subgroups. This effect was primarily driven by a reduction in cardiovascular death (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.81-0.92], P<0.0001), with no significant effect for myocardial infarction in the overall population (HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.87-1.04], P=0.29), and no effect on stroke (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.91-1.07], P=0.77). The benefit for cardiovascular death was driven primarily by reductions in HF death and sudden cardiac death (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.46-1.02] and HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.78-0.95], respectively) and was generally consistent across subgroups, with the possible exception of being more apparent in those with albuminuria (Pinteraction=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: SGLT2i reduce the risk of MACE across a broad range of patients irrespective of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, diabetes, kidney function, or other major clinical characteristics at baseline. This effect is driven primarily by a reduction of cardiovascular death, particularly HF death and sudden cardiac death, without a significant effect on myocardial infarction in the overall population, and no effect on stroke. These data may help inform selection for SGLT2i therapies across the spectrum of cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic disease.

Office measurement vs. ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: associations with mortality in patients with or without diabetes.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Guidelines suggest similar blood pressure (BP) targets in patients with and without diabetes and recommend ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) to diagnose and classify hypertension. It was explored whether different levels of ambulatory and office BP and different hypertension phenotypes associate with differences of risk in diabetes and no diabetes. METHODS: This analysis assessed outcome data from the Spanish ABPM Registry in 59 124 patients with complete available data. The associations between office, mean, daytime, and nighttime ambulatory BP with the risk in patients with or without diabetes were explored. The effects of diabetes on mortality in different hypertension phenotypes, i.e. sustained hypertension, white-coat hypertension, and masked hypertension, compared with normotension were studied. Analyses were done with Cox regression analyses and adjusted for demographic and clinical confounders. RESULTS: A total of 59 124 patients were recruited from 223 primary care centres in Spain. The majority had an office systolic BP >140 mmHg (36 700 patients), and 23 128 (40.6%) patients were untreated. Diabetes was diagnosed in 11 391 patients (19.2%). Concomitant cardiovascular (CV) disease was present in 2521 patients (23.1%) with diabetes and 4616 (10.0%) without diabetes. Twenty-four-hour mean, daytime, and nighttime ambulatory BP were associated with increased risk in diabetes and no diabetes, while in office BP, there was no clear association with no differences with and without diabetes. While the relative association of BP to CV death risk was similar in diabetes compared with no diabetes (mean interaction P = .80, daytime interaction P = .97, and nighttime interaction P = .32), increased event rates occurred in diabetes for all ABPM parameters for CV death and all-cause death. White-coat hypertension was not associated with risk for CV death (hazard ratio 0.86; 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.03) and slightly reduced risk for all-cause death in no diabetes (hazard ratio 0.89; confidence interval 0.81-0.98) but without significant interaction between diabetes and no diabetes. Sustained hypertension and masked hypertension in diabetes and no diabetes were associated with even higher risk. There were no significant interactions in hypertensive phenotypes between diabetes and no diabetes and CV death risk (interaction P = .26), while some interaction was present for all-cause death (interaction P = .043) and non-CV death (interaction P = .053). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes increased the risk for all-cause death, CV, and non-CV death at every level of office and ambulatory BP. Masked and sustained hypertension confer to the highest risk, while white-coat hypertension appears grossly neutral without interaction of relative risk between diabetes and no diabetes. These results support recommendations of international guidelines for strict BP control and using ABPM for classification and assessment of risk and control of hypertension, particularly in patients with diabetes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

A blunted nocturnal blood pressure decline is associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality.

OBJECTIVE: It has been suggested that a blunted nocturnal blood pressure (BP) decline is associated with a poor prognosis. Nevertheless, it remains unclear if an abnormal dipping is deleterious per se or it merely reflects an elevated BP during sleep. We aimed to assess the prognostic value of nocturnal BP decline, with or without concomitant elevated nocturnal BP. METHODS: Vital status and cause of death were obtained from death certificates in 59 124 patients, enrolled in the Spanish ABPM Registry between 2004 and 2014 (median follow-up: 10 years). The association between night-to-day ratio (NDR) and dipping patterns (extreme dippers, dippers, reduced dippers, and risers) with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were evaluated by Cox-proportional models adjusted for clinical confounders and 24 h blood pressure. RESULTS: NDR was associated with all-cause mortality [hazard ratio for 1SD change: 1.15; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-1.17]. Reduced dippers (1.13; 1.06-1.20) and risers (1.41; 1.32-1.51) were associated with an increased risk of all-cause death, whereas extreme dippers (0.90; 0.79-1.02) were not. Elevated NDR (≥0.9) in the absence of elevated night SBP (<120 mmHg) was associated with an increased risk of death (1.13; 1.04-1.22), as well as elevated night SBP but normal NDR (1.38; 1.26-1.50), and the combination of both abnormalities (1.56; 1.46-1.66). Similar results were obtained for cardiovascular mortality. CONCLUSION: Abnormalities in the circadian pattern are associated with an increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. This is maintained even in the absence of nocturnal BP elevation.

Artificial Intelligence-Derived Risk Prediction: A Novel Risk Calculator Using Office and Ambulatory Blood Pressure.

BACKGROUND: Quantification of total cardiovascular risk is essential for individualizing hypertension treatment. This study aimed to develop and validate a novel, machine-learning-derived model to predict cardiovascular mortality risk using office blood pressure (OBP) and ambulatory blood pressure (ABP). METHODS: The performance of the novel risk score was compared with existing risk scores, and the possibility of predicting ABP phenotypes utilizing clinical variables was assessed. Using data from 59 124 patients enrolled in the Spanish ABP Monitoring registry, machine-learning approaches (logistic regression, gradient-boosted decision trees, and deep neural networks) and stepwise forward feature selection were used. RESULTS: For the prediction of cardiovascular mortality, deep neural networks yielded the highest clinical performance. The novel mortality prediction models using OBP and ABP outperformed other risk scores. The area under the curve achieved by the novel approach, already when using OBP variables, was significantly higher when compared with the area under the curve of the Framingham risk score, Systemic Coronary Risk Estimation 2, and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease score. However, the prediction of cardiovascular mortality with ABP instead of OBP data significantly increased the area under the curve (0.870 versus 0.865; P=3.61×10-28), accuracy, and specificity, respectively. The prediction of ABP phenotypes (ie, white-coat, ambulatory, and masked hypertension) using clinical characteristics was limited. CONCLUSIONS: The receiver operating characteristic curves for cardiovascular mortality using ABP and OBP with deep neural network models outperformed all other risk metrics, indicating the potential for improving current risk scores by applying state-of-the-art machine learning approaches. The prediction of cardiovascular mortality using ABP data led to a significant increase in area under the curve and performance metrics.

Effects of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors on Cause-Specific Cardiovascular Death in Patients with CKD: A Meta-Analysis of CKD Progression Trials.

Clinical Trial registry name and registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02065791 (CREDENCE), NCT03036150 (DAPA-CKD), NCT03594110 (EMPA-KIDNEY).

Frailty, multimorbidity and polypharmacy: exploratory analyses of the effects of empagliflozin from the EMPA-KIDNEY trial.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are recommended treatment for adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD), but uncertainty exists regarding their use in patients with frailty and/or multimorbidity, among whom polypharmacy is common. We derived a multivariable logistic regression model to predict hospitalization (reflecting frailty) and assessed empagliflozin's risk-benefit profile in a post-hoc analysis of the double-blind, placebo-controlled EMPA-KIDNEY trial. METHODS: The EMPA-KIDNEY trial randomized 6609 patients with CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] ≥20<45 mL/min/1.73m2, or ≥45<90 mL/min/1.73m2 with urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio ≥200 mg/g) to receive either empagliflozin 10 mg daily or matching placebo and followed for two years (median). Additional characteristics analysed in subgroups were multimorbidity, polypharmacy and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at baseline. Cox regression analyses were performed with subgroups defined by approximate thirds of each variable. RESULTS: The strongest predictors of hospitalization were N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide, poor mobility and diabetes; then eGFR and other comorbidities. Empagliflozin was generally well-tolerated independent of predicted risk of hospitalization. In relative terms, allocation to empagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary outcome of kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death by 28% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-0.82); and all-cause hospitalization by 14% (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78-0.95); with broadly consistent effects across subgroups of predicted risk of hospitalization, multimorbidity, polypharmacy or HRQoL. In absolute terms, the estimated benefits of empagliflozin were greater in those at highest predicted risk of hospitalization (reflecting frailty) and outweighed potential serious harms. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the use of SGLT2 inhibitors in CKD, irrespective of frailty, multimorbidity or polypharmacy.

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial.

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome.

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.

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 [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·63-1·03 vs 0·90, 0·86-0·94; p-heterogeneity=0·31). Effects on hospitalisation for heart failure or cardiovascular death (0·76, 0·57-1·01 vs 0·78, 0·74-0·82; p-heterogeneity=0·90) and chronic kidney disease progression (0·65, 0·46-0·94 vs 0·67, 0·62-0·72; p-heterogeneity=0·81) were also consistent regardless of GLP-1 receptor agonist use, as was the effect on the chronic rate of change in eGFR over time (heterogeneity=0·92). Fewer serious adverse events occurred with SGLT2 inhibitors compared with placebo, irrespective of GLP-1 receptor agonist use (relative risk 0·87, 95% CI 0·79-0·96 vs 0·91, 0·89-0·93; p-heterogeneity=0·41). INTERPRETATION: The effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes are consistent regardless of the background use of GLP-1 receptor agonists. These findings suggest independent effects of these evidence-based therapies and support clinical practice guidelines recommending the use of these agents in combination to improve cardiovascular and kidney metabolic outcomes. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the Ramaciotti Foundation.