Effects of canagliflozin compared with placebo on major adverse cardiovascular and kidney events in patient groups with different baseline levels of HbA1c, disease duration and treatment intensity: results from the CANVAS Program.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Type 2 diabetes mellitus can manifest over a broad clinical range, although there is no clear consensus on the categorisation of disease complexity. We assessed the effects of canagliflozin, compared with placebo, on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program over a range of type 2 diabetes mellitus complexity, defined separately by baseline intensity of treatment, duration of diabetes and glycaemic control. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the effects of canagliflozin on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) according to baseline glucose-lowering treatments (0 or 1, 2 or 3+ non-insulin glucose-lowering treatments, or insulin-based treatment), duration of diabetes (<10, 10 to 16, >16 years) and HbA1c (≤53.0 mmol/mol [<7.0%], >53.0 to 58.5 mmol/mol [>7.0% to 7.5%], >58.5 to 63.9 mmol/mol [>7.5 to 8.0%], >63.9 to 69.4 mmol/mol [8.0% to 8.5%], >69.4 to 74.9 mmol/mol [>8.5 to 9.0%] or >74.9 mmol/mol [>9.0%]). We analysed additional secondary endpoints for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes, including a combined kidney outcome of sustained 40% decline in eGFR, end-stage kidney disease or death due to kidney disease. We used Cox regression analyses and compared the constancy of HRs across subgroups by fitting an interaction term (p value for significance <0.05). RESULTS: At study initiation, 5095 (50%) CANVAS Program participants were treated with insulin, 2100 (21%) had an HbA1c > 74.9 mmol/mol (9.0%) and the median duration of diabetes was 12.6 years (interquartile interval 8.0-18 years). Canagliflozin reduced MACE (HR 0.86 [95% CI 0.75, 0.97]) with no evidence that the benefit differed between subgroups defined by the number of glucose-lowering treatments, the duration of diabetes or baseline HbA1c (all p-heterogeneity >0.17). Canagliflozin reduced MACE in participants receiving insulin with no evidence that the benefit differed from other participants in the trial (HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.72, 1.00]). Similar results were observed for other cardiovascular outcomes and for the combined kidney outcome (HR for combined kidney outcome 0.60 [95% CI 0.47, 0.77]), with all p-heterogeneity >0.37. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In people with type 2 diabetes mellitus at high cardiovascular risk, there was no evidence that cardiovascular and renal protection with canagliflozin differed across subgroups defined by baseline treatment intensity, duration of diabetes or HbA1c.

Relative and Absolute Risk Reductions in Cardiovascular and Kidney Outcomes With Canagliflozin Across KDIGO Risk Categories: Findings From the CANVAS Program.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Canagliflozin reduces the risk for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in type 2 diabetes. This study aimed to assess the relative and absolute effects of canagliflozin on clinical outcomes across different KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) risk categories based on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio. STUDY DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS: The CANVAS Program randomly assigned 10,142 participants with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk and with eGFR≥30mL/min/1.73m2 to treatment with canagliflozin or placebo. INTERVENTION(S): Canagliflozin or matching placebo. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, with a set of other cardiovascular and kidney prespecified outcomes. RESULTS: Of 10,142 participants, 10,031 (98.9%) had available baseline eGFR and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio data. The proportion of participants in low-, moderate-, high-, and very high-risk KDIGO categories was 58.6%, 25.8%, 10.6%, and 5.0%, respectively. The relative effect of canagliflozin on the primary outcome (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.97) was consistent across KDIGO risk categories (P trend=0.2), with similar results for other cardiovascular and kidney outcomes. Absolute reductions in the primary outcome were greater within higher KDIGO risk categories (P trend=0.03) with a similar pattern of effect for the composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (P trend=0.06) and for chronic eGFR slope (P trend = 0.04). LIMITATIONS: Predominantly a low kidney risk population, relatively few participants in higher KDIGO risk categories, and exclusion of individuals with eGFR<30mL/min/1.73m2. CONCLUSIONS: Although the relative effects of canagliflozin are similar across KDIGO risk categories, absolute risk reductions are likely greater for individuals at higher KDIGO risk. The KDIGO classification system may be able to identify individuals who might derive greater benefits for end-organ protection from treatment with canagliflozin. FUNDING: This post hoc analysis was not specifically funded. The original CANVAS Program trials were funded by Janssen Research & Development, LLC and were conducted as a collaboration between the funder, an academic steering committee, and an academic research organization, George Clinical. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The original trials of the CANVAS Program were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with study numbers NCT01032629 and NCT01989754.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors with and without metformin: A meta-analysis of cardiovascular, kidney and mortality outcomes.

AIM: To assess whether the effects of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors on cardiovascular, kidney and mortality outcomes are consistent with and without concomitant metformin use. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis of event-driven, randomized, placebo-controlled SGLT2 inhibitor trials that reported cardiovascular, kidney or mortality outcomes by baseline metformin use. Treatment effects, reported as hazards ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. The main outcomes in this analysis were (i) major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and (ii) hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: We included six trials of four SGLT2 inhibitors that enrolled a total of 51 743 participants. Baseline metformin use varied from 21% in DAPA-HF to 82% in DECLARE-TIMI 58. SGLT2 inhibitors reduced the risk of MACE, with and without concomitant metformin use (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-1.00 and HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71-0.86, respectively; P-heterogeneity = 0.14). There were also clear and separate reductions in HHF or cardiovascular death with SGLT2 inhibitors, irrespective of metformin use (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.73-0.86 and HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.87, respectively; P-heterogeneity = 0.48), as well as for major kidney outcomes and all-cause mortality (all P-heterogeneity > 0.40). CONCLUSION: Treatment with SGLT2 inhibitors results in clear and consistent reductions in cardiovascular, kidney and mortality outcomes regardless of whether patients are receiving or not receiving metformin.

Reasons for hospitalizations in patients with type 2 diabetes in the CANVAS programme: A secondary analysis.

AIM: To determine the reasons for hospitalizations in the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) programme and the effects of the sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor canagliflozin on hospitalization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A secondary analysis was performed on the CANVAS programme that included 10 142 participants with type 2 diabetes randomized to canagliflozin or placebo. The primary outcome was the rate of total (first plus all recurrent) all-cause hospitalizations (ACH). Secondary outcomes were total hospitalizations categorized by the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities hierarchy at the system organ class level, reported by investigators at each centre. Outcomes were assessed using negative binomial models. RESULTS: Of the 7115 hospitalizations reported, the most common reasons were cardiac disorders (23.7%), infections and infestations (15.0%), and nervous system disorders (9.0%). The rate of total ACH was lower in the canagliflozin group (n = 5795) compared with the placebo group (n = 4347): 197.9 versus 215.8 participants per 1000 patient-years, respectively (rate ratio [RR] 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86, 0.98). Canagliflozin reduced the rate of total hospitalizations because of cardiac disorders (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.75, 0.88). There was no significant difference between the canagliflozin and placebo groups in the rates of total hospitalizations because of infections and infestations (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.86, 1.02) or nervous system disorders (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.88, 1.05). CONCLUSIONS: In the CANVAS programme, the most common reasons for hospitalization were cardiac disorders, infections and infestations, and nervous system disorders. Canagliflozin, compared with placebo, reduced the rate of total ACH.

Canagliflozin and Cardiovascular and Renal Events in Type 2 Diabetes.

Background Canagliflozin is a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor that reduces glycemia as well as blood pressure, body weight, and albuminuria in people with diabetes. We report the effects of treatment with canagliflozin on cardiovascular, renal, and safety outcomes. Methods The CANVAS Program integrated data from two trials involving a total of 10,142 participants with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk. Participants in each trial were randomly assigned to receive canagliflozin or placebo and were followed for a mean of 188.2 weeks. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Results The mean age of the participants was 63.3 years, 35.8% were women, the mean duration of diabetes was 13.5 years, and 65.6% had a history of cardiovascular disease. The rate of the primary outcome was lower with canagliflozin than with placebo (occurring in 26.9 vs. 31.5 participants per 1000 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.97; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.02 for superiority). Although on the basis of the prespecified hypothesis testing sequence the renal outcomes are not viewed as statistically significant, the results showed a possible benefit of canagliflozin with respect to the progression of albuminuria (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.79) and the composite outcome of a sustained 40% reduction in the estimated glomerular filtration rate, the need for renal-replacement therapy, or death from renal causes (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.77). Adverse reactions were consistent with the previously reported risks associated with canagliflozin except for an increased risk of amputation (6.3 vs. 3.4 participants per 1000 patient-years; hazard ratio, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.75); amputations were primarily at the level of the toe or metatarsal. Conclusions In two trials involving patients with type 2 diabetes and an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, patients treated with canagliflozin had a lower risk of cardiovascular events than those who received placebo but a greater risk of amputation, primarily at the level of the toe or metatarsal. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; CANVAS and CANVAS-R ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01032629 and NCT01989754 , respectively.).

Effect of Canagliflozin on Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes across Different Levels of Albuminuria: Data from the CANVAS Program.

BACKGROUND: If SGLT2 inhibitors protect the kidneys by reducing albuminuria as hypothesized, people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with higher albuminuria should benefit more. METHODS: We conducted a post-hoc analysis of data from the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program, which randomized 10,142 participants with T2DM and high cardiovascular risk to canagliflozin or placebo. We assessed effects of canagliflozin on renal, cardiovascular, and safety outcomes by baseline albuminuria. The trial included 2266 participants (22.3%) with moderately increased albuminuria (urinary albumin/creatinine ratio [UACR] 30-300 mg/g) and 760 (7.5%) with severely increased albuminuria (UACR >300 mg/g) at baseline. RESULTS: Canagliflozin lowered albuminuria with greater proportional reductions in those with moderately and severely increased albuminuria (P heterogeneity<0.001). After week 13, canagliflozin slowed the annual loss of kidney function across albuminuria subgroups, with greater absolute reductions in participants with severely increased albuminuria (placebo-subtracted difference 3.01 ml/min per 1.73 m2 per year; P heterogeneity<0.001). Heterogeneity for the renal composite outcome of 40% reduction in eGFR, ESKD, or renal-related death was driven by lesser effects in participants with moderately increased albuminuria (P heterogeneity=0.03), but no effect modification was observed when albuminuria was fitted as a continuous variable (P heterogeneity=0.94). Cardiovascular and safety outcomes were mostly consistent across albuminuria levels including increased risks for amputation across albuminuria subgroups (P heterogeneity=0.66). Greater absolute risk reductions in the renal composite outcome were observed in participants with severely increased albuminuria (P heterogeneity=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: The proportional effects of canagliflozin on renal and cardiovascular outcomes are mostly consistent across patients with different levels of albuminuria, but absolute benefits are greatest among those with severely increased albuminuria.

Canagliflozin and fracture risk in individuals with type 2 diabetes: results from the CANVAS Program.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: An increased risk of fracture with canagliflozin vs placebo was reported from the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program, with heterogeneity of findings identified between the two trials that comprise the CANVAS Program, CANVAS and CANVAS-R. The objective of these analyses was to identify reasons for the possibly different effects on fracture observed between CANVAS and CANVAS-R. METHODS: This study was an analysis of two highly similar trials, CANVAS and CANVAS-R, conducted in 10,142 individuals with type 2 diabetes and history or high risk of cardiovascular disease who received canagliflozin (pooled 100/300 mg once daily) or placebo. Outcomes assessed in this analysis were effects on adjudicated fractures overall and by type, location, association with a fall, dose and follow-up time. RESULTS: A total of 496 participants recorded ≥1 fracture event during follow-up (15.40 vs 11.93 per 1000 patient-years with canagliflozin vs placebo; HR 1.26 [95% CI 1.04, 1.52]). There was significant heterogeneity in the effects on fracture (p = 0.005) between CANVAS (n = 4330: HR 1.55 [95% CI 1.21, 1.97]) and CANVAS-R (n = 5812: HR 0.86 [95% CI 0.62, 1.19]). The between-study heterogeneity in fracture risk was not clearly explained by differences in baseline characteristics, interactions of randomised treatment with participant characteristics, dose effects, duration of follow-up, metabolic effects, adverse events related to falls or adverse events possibly causing falls. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: There was no evidence to explain clearly the fracture risk observed in the CANVAS Program or the heterogeneity in fracture risk between the two studies. The recently reported null result for fracture in the Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes with Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation (CREDENCE) trial suggests that the observed association in CANVAS is likely to be a chance finding, although an unidentified fall-related mechanism remains a possibility. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01032629, NCT01989754.

Effects of canagliflozin on amputation risk in type 2 diabetes: the CANVAS Program.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The primary analysis of the Canagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program showed canagliflozin to have a beneficial effect on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, but also an unexpected increased risk of major or minor lower extremity amputation. These secondary analyses explore this finding in more detail. METHODS: The effect of canagliflozin on amputation risk in the CANVAS Program was calculated for amputations of different types and proximate aetiologies and different canagliflozin doses. Univariate and multivariate associations of baseline characteristics with amputation risk were determined and proportional and absolute effects of canagliflozin were compared across subgroups. RESULTS: There were 187 (1.8%) participants with atraumatic lower extremity amputations (minor 71%, major 29%); as previously published, rates were 6.30 vs 3.37 per 1000 participant-years with canagliflozin vs placebo (HR 1.97 [95% CI 1.41, 2.75]). Risk was similar for ischaemic and infective aetiologies and for 100 mg and 300 mg doses. Overall amputation risk was strongly associated with baseline history of prior amputation (major or minor) (HR 21.31 [95% CI 15.40, 29.49]) and other established risk factors. No interactions between randomised treatment and participant characteristics explained the effect of canagliflozin on amputation risk. For every clinical subgroup studied, numbers of amputation events projected were smaller than numbers of major adverse cardiovascular events averted. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The CANVAS Program demonstrated that canagliflozin increased the risk of amputation (mainly minor) in this study population. Anticipated risk factors for amputation were identified, such as prior history of amputation, peripheral vascular disease and neuropathy, but no specific aetiological mechanism or at-risk subgroup for canagliflozin was identified.

Canagliflozin and Heart Failure in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Results From the CANVAS Program.

BACKGROUND: Canagliflozin is a sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor that reduces the risk of cardiovascular events. We report the effects on heart failure (HF) and cardiovascular death overall, in those with and without a baseline history of HF, and in other participant subgroups. METHODS: The CANVAS Program (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study) enrolled 10 142 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus and high cardiovascular risk. Participants were randomly assigned to canagliflozin or placebo and followed for a mean of 188 weeks. The primary end point for these analyses was adjudicated cardiovascular death or hospitalized HF. RESULTS: Participants with a history of HF at baseline (14.4%) were more frequently women, white, and hypertensive and had a history of prior cardiovascular disease (all P<0.001). Greater proportions of these patients were using therapies such as blockers of the renin angiotensin aldosterone system, diuretics, and ß-blockers at baseline (all P<0.001). Overall, cardiovascular death or hospitalized HF was reduced in those treated with canagliflozin compared with placebo (16.3 versus 20.8 per 1000 patient-years; hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.91), as was fatal or hospitalized HF (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55-0.89) and hospitalized HF alone (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.87). The benefit on cardiovascular death or hospitalized HF may be greater in patients with a prior history of HF (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46-0.80) compared with those without HF at baseline (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72-1.06; P interaction =0.021). The effects of canagliflozin compared with placebo on other cardiovascular outcomes and key safety outcomes were similar in participants with and without HF at baseline (all interaction P values >0.130), except for a possibly reduced absolute rate of events attributable to osmotic diuresis among those with a prior history of HF ( P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, canagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalized HF across a broad range of different patient subgroups. Benefits may be greater in those with a history of HF at baseline. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifiers: NCT01032629 and NCT01989754.

Canagliflozin for Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events: Results From the CANVAS Program (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study).

BACKGROUND: Canagliflozin is a sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor that significantly reduces the composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and elevated cardiovascular risk. The comparative effects among participants with and without a history of cardiovascular disease (secondary versus primary prevention) were prespecified for evaluation. METHODS: The CANVAS Program (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study) randomly assigned 10 142 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus to canagliflozin or placebo. The primary prevention cohort comprised individuals ≥50 years of age with ≥2 risk factors for cardiovascular events but with no prior cardiovascular event, and the secondary prevention cohort comprised individuals ≥30 years of age with a prior cardiovascular event. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Secondary outcomes included heart failure hospitalization and a renal composite (40% reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate, renal replacement therapy, or renal death). RESULTS: Primary prevention participants (N=3486; 34%) were younger (63 versus 64 years of age), were more often female (45% versus 31%), and had a longer duration of diabetes mellitus (14 versus 13 years) compared with secondary prevention participants (N=6656; 66%). The primary end point event rate was higher in the secondary prevention group compared with the primary prevention group (36.9 versus 15.7/1000 patient-years, P<0.001). In the total cohort, the primary end point was reduced with canagliflozin compared with placebo (26.9 versus 31.5/1000 patient-years; hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-0.97; P<0.001 for noninferiority, P=0.02 for superiority) with no statistical evidence of heterogeneity (interaction P value=0.18) between the primary (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.74-1.30) and secondary prevention (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.95) cohorts. Renal outcomes (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.79 versus HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39-1.02; interaction P value=0.73) and heart failure hospitalization (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51-0.90 versus HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.35-1.15; interaction P value=0.91) were similarly reduced in the secondary and primary prevention cohorts, respectively. Lower extremity amputations were similarly increased in the secondary and primary prevention cohorts (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.43-3.00 versus HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.70-3.29; interaction P value=0.63). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and prior cardiovascular events had higher rates of cardiovascular outcomes compared with the primary prevention patients. Canagliflozin reduced cardiovascular and renal outcomes with no statistical evidence of heterogeneity of the treatment effect across the primary and secondary prevention groups. Additional studies will provide further insights into the effects of canagliflozin in these patient populations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01032629 and NCT01989754.

Cardiovascular and Renal Outcomes With Canagliflozin According to Baseline Kidney Function.

BACKGROUND: Canagliflozin is approved for glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes and confers cardiovascular and renal benefits. We sought to assess whether it had benefits in people with chronic kidney disease, including those with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between 30 and 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 in whom the drug is not currently approved for use. METHODS: The CANVAS Program randomized 10 142 participants with type 2 diabetes and eGFR >30 mL/min/1.73 m2 to canagliflozin or placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, with other cardiovascular, renal, and safety outcomes. This secondary analysis describes outcomes in participants with and without chronic kidney disease, defined as eGFR <60 and ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2, and according to baseline kidney function (eGFR <45, 45 to <60, 60 to <90, and ≥90 mL/min/1.73 m2). RESULTS: At baseline, 2039 (20.1%) participants had an eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2, 71.6% of whom had a history of cardiovascular disease. The effect of canagliflozin on the primary outcome was similar in people with chronic kidney disease (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55-0.90) and those with preserved kidney function (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.79-1.07; P heterogeneity = 0.08). Relative effects on most cardiovascular and renal outcomes were similar across eGFR subgroups, with possible heterogeneity suggested only for the outcome of fatal/nonfatal stroke ( P heterogeneity = 0.01), as were results for almost all safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The effects of canagliflozin on cardiovascular and renal outcomes were not modified by baseline level of kidney function in people with type 2 diabetes and a history or high risk of cardiovascular disease down to eGFR levels of 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Reassessing current limitations on the use of canagliflozin in chronic kidney disease may allow additional individuals to benefit from this therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifiers: NCT01032629, NCT01989754.

Canagliflozin and Stroke in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

Background and Purpose- This study reports the detailed effects of canagliflozin on stroke, stroke subtypes, and vascular outcomes in participants with and without cerebrovascular disease (stroke or transient ischemic attack) at baseline from the CANVAS (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study) Program. Methods- The CANVAS Program, comprising 2 similarly designed and conducted clinical trials, randomly assigned 10 142 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus and high cardiovascular risk to canagliflozin or placebo. Its primary outcome was a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events. The main outcome of interest for this report was fatal or nonfatal stroke. Additional exploratory outcomes were stroke subtypes and other vascular outcomes defined according to standard criteria. Results- There were 1 958 (19%) participants with prior stroke or transient ischemic attack at baseline. These individuals were older, more frequently women, and had higher rates of heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and microvascular disease (all P<0.001) compared with those without such a history. There were 309 participants with stroke events during follow-up (123 had prior stroke or transient ischemic attack at baseline and 186 did not), at a rate of 7.93/1000 patient-years among those assigned canagliflozin and 9.62/1000 patient-years among placebo (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.69-1.09). Analysis of stroke subtypes found no effect on ischemic stroke (n=253, hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.74-1.22), a significant reduction for hemorrhagic stroke (n=30, hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.20-0.89) and no effect on undetermined stroke (n=29, hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.48-2.22). Effects on other cardiovascular outcomes were comparable among participants with and without stroke or transient ischemic attack at baseline. Conclusions- There were too few events in the CANVAS Program to separately define the effects of canagliflozin on stroke, but benefit is more likely than harm. The observed possible protective effect for hemorrhagic stroke was based on small numbers but warrants further investigation. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifiers: NCT01032629 and NCT01989754.

The co-formulation of insulin degludec and insulin aspart lowers fasting plasma glucose and rates of confirmed and nocturnal hypoglycaemia, independent of baseline glycated haemoglobin levels, disease duration or body mass index: A pooled meta-analysis of phase III studies in patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To investigate whether the proven benefits of insulin degludec (IDeg) combined with insulin aspart (IAsp), known as IDegAsp, given twice daily, extend across a wide spectrum of patients with diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a post hoc pooled analysis of 5 phase III randomized, 26-week, open-label, treat-to-target trials comparing IDegAsp twice daily (n = 1111) with one of two comparators: premixed insulin (biphasic insulin aspart 30 [BIAsp 30]) twice daily (n = 561) or IDeg once daily + IAsp (n = 136). Patient data were stratified according to baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) or fasting plasma glucose (FPG) categories, as well as by baseline duration of diabetes or body mass index (BMI) categories. RESULTS: We conducted a meta-analysis of 5 clinical trials: NCT01513590, NCT01009580, NCT01059812, NCT01680341 and NCT01713530. End-of-trial results were broadly consistent, with differences between IDegAsp and comparators observed in phase III trials. HbA1c results were similar for IDegAsp and the comparators in all baseline characteristic (HbA1c, duration of diabetes or BMI) and category groups (number ranges). Significantly lower FPG level was observed with IDegAsp vs comparators in all baseline characteristic and most category groups (excluding FPG <5.5 mmol/L). Significantly lower insulin doses were observed with IDegAsp vs comparators in all baseline characteristic and half of the category groups, and significantly lower rates of confirmed and nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia were observed with IDegAsp vs comparators in all baseline variable and category groups. CONCLUSIONS: IDegAsp retains a consistent safety and efficacy profile in patients with different baseline characteristics.

Models of care for co-morbid diabetes and chronic kidney disease.

Diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are two of the most prevalent co-morbid chronic diseases in Australia. The increasing complexity of multi-morbidity, and current gaps in health-care delivery for people with co-morbid diabetes and CKD, emphasize the need for better models of care for this population. Previously, proposed published models of care for co-morbid diabetes and CKD have not been co-designed with stake-holders or formally evaluated. Particular components of health-care shown to be effective in this population are interventions that: are structured, intensive and multifaceted (treating diabetes and multiple cardiovascular risk factors); involve multiple medical disciplines; improve self-management by the patient; and upskill primary health-care. Here we present an integrated patient-centred model of health-care delivery incorporating these components and co-designed with key stake-holders including specialist health professionals, general practitioners and Diabetes and Kidney Health Australia. The development of the model of care was informed by focus groups of patients and health-professionals; and semi-structured interviews of care-givers and health professionals. Other distinctives of this model of care are routine screening for psychological morbidity; patient-support through a phone advice line; and focused primary health-care support in the management of diabetes and CKD. Additionally, the model of care integrates with the patient-centred health-care home currently being rolled out by the Australian Department of Health. This model of care will be evaluated after implementation across two tertiary health services and their primary care catchment areas.

Optimizing the analysis strategy for the CANVAS Program: A prespecified plan for the integrated analyses of the CANVAS and CANVAS-R trials.

Two large cardiovascular outcome trials of canagliflozin, comprising the CANVAS Program, will complete in early 2017: the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) and the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study-Renal (CANVAS-R). Accruing data for the sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor class has identified questions and opportunities that were not apparent when the trials were designed. Accordingly, a series of modifications have been made to the planned analyses. These updates will ensure that the data from the CANVAS Program will maximize advances in scientific knowledge and patient care. The specification of the analysis strategy prior to knowledge of the trial results, their design by the independent scientific trial Steering Committee, the detailed a priori definition of the analysis plans, and the external review provided by the US Food and Drug Administration all provide maximally efficient and robust utilization of the data. The CANVAS Program should significantly advance our understanding of the effects of canagliflozin, and the broader SGLT2 inhibitor class, on a range of important efficacy and safety outcomes.

Rationale, design and baseline characteristics of the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study-Renal (CANVAS-R): A randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

AIMS: The primary aim of the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study-Renal (CANVAS-R) is to determine whether the favourable effects of inhibition of the sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) on blood glucose, blood pressure and body weight are accompanied by protection against adverse renal outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CANVAS-R is a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with type 2 diabetes with a history or high risk of cardiovascular events. Patients were randomly assigned to once-daily placebo or canagliflozin 100 mg (with optional uptitration to 300 mg) for a planned average of 2.5 years of follow-up. The primary outcome is kidney disease progression, defined by class change in albuminuria. The two secondary outcomes are the composite of hospitalized heart failure or cardiovascular death, and cardiovascular death alone. Effects on end-stage renal disease and a range of other outcomes will also be explored. RESULTS: A total of 5812 participants were recruited at 422 sites in 24 countries between January 2014 and May 2015. The mean baseline age was 64 years, mean duration of diabetes was 14 years, mean glycated haemoglobin level was 8.3% and mean body mass index was 32 kg/m2 . Of these participants, 37% were women, 71% had a history of cardiovascular disease, 22.3% had microalbuminuria and 8.7% had macroalbuminuria. The mean baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate was 76 mL/min/1.73 m2 . The study will have at least 90% power ( P = .05) to detect a 22% or greater reduction in the risk of progression of albuminuria. CONCLUSIONS: The trial should define the potential renoprotective effect of canagliflozin and will provide additional important new data about its effects on vascular outcomes, death and kidney failure.

The Effect of Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea on Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes.

RATIONALE: There is uncertainty about the effects of treating obstructive sleep apnea on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether treatment of obstructive sleep apnea in patients with type 2 diabetes improves glycemic control. METHODS: In this trial, we randomized patients with type 2 diabetes and no previous diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea, with a glycated hemoglobin level of 6.5-8.5%, and an oxygen desaturation index of 15 or more events per hour to positive airway pressure therapy or to usual care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 416 patients met the entry criteria as determined by each site and were randomized. Of the 298 participants who met centrally adjudicated entry criteria, no differences between the study groups were seen for change in glycated hemoglobin. Furthermore, there were no between-group differences when analyses were restricted to those with poorer baseline glycemic control, those with more severe sleep apnea, or those who were adherent to therapy. A greater fall in diastolic blood pressure occurred in the positive airway pressure group than in the usual care group (-3.5 mm Hg vs. -1.5 mm Hg; P = 0.07). This difference was significant in those who were adherent to positive airway pressure therapy (-4.4 mm Hg vs. -1.6 mm Hg; P = 0.02). There was a significant reduction in sleepiness in the positive airway pressure therapy group (P < 0.0001). Quality of life assessment revealed improvements in vitality, mental health, and mental component summary scores in the positive airway pressure therapy group. CONCLUSIONS: This trial showed no effect of positive airway pressure therapy on glycemic control in patients with relatively well-controlled type 2 diabetes and obstructive sleep apnea. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00509223).

The association between patient activation and self-care practices: A cross-sectional study of an Australian population with comorbid diabetes and chronic kidney disease.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the association between performance of self-care activities and patient or disease factors as well as patient activation levels in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD) in Australia. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among adults with diabetes and CKD (eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73m2 ) who were recruited from renal and diabetes clinics of four tertiary hospitals in Australia. Demographic and clinical data were collected, as well as responses to the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) and the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA) scale. Regression analyses were performed to determine the relationship between activation and performance of self-care activities. RESULTS: A total of 317 patients (70% men) with a mean age of 66.9 (SD=11.0) years participated. The mean (SD) PAM and composite SDSCA scores were 57.6 (15.5) % (range 0-100) and 37.3 (11.2) (range 0-70), respectively. Younger age, being male, advanced stages of CKD and shorter duration of diabetes were associated with lower scores in one or more self-care components. Patient activation was positively associated with the composite SDSCA score, and in particular the domains of general diet and blood sugar checking (P<.05), but not specific diet, exercising and foot checking. CONCLUSION: In people with diabetes and CKD, a high level of patient activation was positively associated with a higher overall level of self-care. Our results identify subgroups of people who may benefit from tailored interventions to further improve their health outcomes. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm present findings.

Impact of obesity and epicardial fat on early left atrial dysfunction assessed by cardiac MRI strain analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diastolic dysfunction is a major cause of morbidity in obese individuals. We aimed to assess the ability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) derived left atrial (LA) strain to detect early diastolic dysfunction in individuals with obesity and type 2 diabetes, and to explore the association between cardiac adipose tissue and LA function. METHODS: Twenty patients with obesity and T2D (55 ± 8 years) and nineteen healthy controls (48 ± 13 years) were imaged using cine steady state free precession and 2-point Dixon cardiovascular magnetic resonance. LA function was quantified using a feature tracking technique with definition of phasic longitudinal strain and strain rates, as well as radial motion fraction and radial velocities. RESULTS: Systolic left ventricular size and function were similar between the obesity and type 2 diabetes and control groups by MRI. All patients except four had normal diastolic assessment by echocardiography. In contrast, measures of LA function using magnetic resonance feature tracking were uniformly altered in the obesity and type 2 diabetes group only. Although there was no significant difference in intra-myocardial fat fraction, Dixon 3D epicardial fat volume(EFV) was significantly elevated in the obesity and type 2 diabetes versus control group (135 ± 31 vs. 90 ± 30 mL/m2, p < 0.001). There were significant correlations between LA functional indices and both BMI and EFV (p ≤ 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: LA MRI-strain may be a sensitive tool for the detection of early diastolic dysfunction in individuals with obesity and type 2 diabetes and correlated with BMI and epicardial fat supporting a possible association between adiposity and LA strain. Trials Registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry No. ACTRN12613001069741.

Primary and tertiary health professionals' views on the health-care of patients with co-morbid diabetes and chronic kidney disease - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Health-care for co-morbid diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD) is often sub-optimal. To improve health-care, we explored the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) and tertiary health-care professionals concerning key factors influencing health-care of diabetes and CKD. METHODS: A total of 65 health professionals were purposively sampled from Australia's 2 largest cities to participate in focus groups and semi-structured interviews. Four focus groups were conducted with GPs who referred to 4 tertiary health services in Australia's 2 largest cities, with 6 focus groups conducted with tertiary health-care professionals from the 4 tertiary health services. An additional 8 semi-structured interviews were performed with specialist physicians who were heads of diabetes and renal units. All discussions were facilitated by the same researcher, with discussions digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. All qualitative data was thematically analysed independently by 2 researchers. RESULTS: Both GPs and tertiary health-care professionals emphasised the importance of primary care and that optimal health-care was an inter-play between patient self-management and primary health-care, with specialist tertiary health-care support. Patient self-management, access to specialty care, coordination of care and a preventive approach were identified as key factors that influence healthcare and require improvement. Both groups suggested that an integrated specialist diabetes-kidney service could improve care. Unit heads emphasised the importance of quality improvement activities. CONCLUSIONS: GPs and tertiary health-care professionals emphasised the importance of patient self-management and primary care involvement in the health-care of diabetes and CKD. Supporting GPs with an accessible, multidisciplinary diabetes-renal health service underpinned by strong communication pathways, a preventive approach and quality improvement activities, may improve health-care and patient outcomes in co-morbid diabetes and CKD.