Effects of an Intervention to Improve Evidence-Based Care for People With Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease Across Sex, Race, and Ethnicity Subgroups: Insights From the COORDINATE-Diabetes Trial.

BACKGROUND: Results from the COORDINATE-Diabetes trial (Coordinating Cardiology Clinics Randomized Trial of Interventions to Improve Outcomes - Diabetes) demonstrated that a multifaceted, clinic-based intervention increased prescription of evidence-based medical therapies to participants with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. This secondary analysis assessed whether intervention success was consistent across sex, race, and ethnicity. METHODS: COORDINATE-Diabetes, a cluster randomized trial, recruited participants from 43 US cardiology clinics (20 randomized to intervention and 23 randomized to usual care). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of evidence-based therapy (high-intensity statin, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist) at last trial assessment (6 to 12 months). In this prespecified analysis, mixed-effects logistic regression models were used to assess the outcome by self-reported sex, race, and ethnicity in the intervention and usual care groups, with adjustment for baseline characteristics, medications, comorbidities, and site location. RESULTS: Among 1045 participants with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, the median age was 70 years, 32% were female, 16% were Black, and 9% were Hispanic. At the last trial assessment, there was an absolute increase in the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of evidence-based therapy in women (36% versus 15%), Black participants (41% versus 18%), and Hispanic participants (46% versus 18%) with the intervention compared with usual care, with consistent benefit across sex (male versus female; Pinteraction=0.44), race (Black versus White; Pinteraction=0.59), and ethnicity (Hispanic versus Non-Hispanic; Pinteraction= 0.78). CONCLUSIONS: The COORDINATE-Diabetes intervention successfully improved delivery of evidence-based care, regardless of sex, race, or ethnicity. Widespread dissemination of this intervention could improve equitable health care quality, particularly among women and minority communities who are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03936660.

Coordinating Cardiology clinics randomized trial of interventions to improve outcomes (COORDINATE) - Diabetes: rationale and design.

Several medications that are proven to reduce cardiovascular events exist for individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, however they are substantially underused in clinical practice. Clinician, patient, and system-level barriers all contribute to these gaps in care; yet, there is a paucity of high quality, rigorous studies evaluating the role of interventions to increase utilization. The COORDINATE-Diabetes trial randomized 42 cardiology clinics across the United States to either a multifaceted, site-specific intervention focused on evidence-based care for patients with T2DM or standard of care. The multifaceted intervention comprised the development of an interdisciplinary care pathway for each clinic, audit-and-feedback tools and educational outreach, in addition to patient-facing tools. The primary outcome is the proportion of individuals with T2DM prescribed three key classes of evidence-based medications (high-intensity statin, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker, and either a sodium/glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT-2i) inhibitor or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) and will be assessed at least 6 months after participant enrollment. COORDINATE-Diabetes aims to identify strategies that improve the implementation and adoption of evidence-based therapies.

Coordinated Care to Optimize Cardiovascular Preventive Therapies in Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence-based therapies to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk in adults with type 2 diabetes are underused in clinical practice. Objective: To assess the effect of a coordinated, multifaceted intervention of assessment, education, and feedback vs usual care on the proportion of adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prescribed all 3 groups of recommended, evidence-based therapies (high-intensity statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [ACEIs] or angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs], and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 [SGLT2] inhibitors and/or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists [GLP-1RAs]). Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster randomized clinical trial with 43 US cardiology clinics recruiting participants from July 2019 through May 2022 and follow-up through December 2022. The participants were adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease not already taking all 3 groups of evidence-based therapies. Interventions: Assessing local barriers, developing care pathways, coordinating care, educating clinicians, reporting data back to the clinics, and providing tools for participants (n = 459) vs usual care per practice guidelines (n = 590). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of recommended therapies at 6 to 12 months after enrollment. The secondary outcomes included changes in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors and a composite outcome of all-cause death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction, stroke, decompensated heart failure, or urgent revascularization (the trial was not powered to show these differences). Results: Of 1049 participants enrolled (459 at 20 intervention clinics and 590 at 23 usual care clinics), the median age was 70 years and there were 338 women (32.2%), 173 Black participants (16.5%), and 90 Hispanic participants (8.6%). At the last follow-up visit (12 months for 97.3% of participants), those in the intervention group were more likely to be prescribed all 3 therapies (173/457 [37.9%]) vs the usual care group (85/588 [14.5%]), which is a difference of 23.4% (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 4.38 [95% CI, 2.49 to 7.71]; P < .001) and were more likely to be prescribed each of the 3 therapies (change from baseline in high-intensity statins from 66.5% to 70.7% for intervention vs from 58.2% to 56.8% for usual care [adjusted OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.06-2.83]; ACEIs or ARBs: from 75.1% to 81.4% for intervention vs from 69.6% to 68.4% for usual care [adjusted OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.14-2.91]; SGLT2 inhibitors and/or GLP-1RAs: from 12.3% to 60.4% for intervention vs from 14.5% to 35.5% for usual care [adjusted OR, 3.11; 95% CI, 2.08-4.64]). The intervention was not associated with changes in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors. The composite secondary outcome occurred in 23 of 457 participants (5%) in the intervention group vs 40 of 588 participants (6.8%) in the usual care group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.46 to 1.33]). Conclusions and Relevance: A coordinated, multifaceted intervention increased prescription of 3 groups of evidence-based therapies in adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03936660.

Incorporating SGLT2i and GLP-1RA for Cardiovascular and Kidney Disease Risk Reduction: Call for Action to the Cardiology Community.

Multiple sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) have been shown to impart significant cardiovascular and kidney benefits, but are underused in clinical practice. Both SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA were first studied as glucose-lowering drugs, which may have impeded uptake by cardiologists in the wake of proven cardiovascular efficacy. Their significant effect on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes, which are largely independent of glucose-lowering effects, must drive a broader use of these drugs. Cardiologists are 3 times more likely than endocrinologists to see patients with both type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, thus they are ideally positioned to share responsibility for SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA treatment with primary care providers. In order to increase adoption, SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA must be reframed as primarily cardiovascular and kidney disease risk-reducing agents with a side effect of glucose-lowering. Coordinated and multifaceted interventions engaging clinicians, patients, payers, professional societies, and health systems must be implemented to incentivize the adoption of these medications as part of routine cardiovascular and kidney care. Greater use of SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA will improve outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular and kidney disease.

Inhibition of p38 MAP kinase in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction - findings from the LATITUDE-TIMI 60 trial.

BACKGROUND: p38 mitogen activated kinase (MAPK) mediates the response to pro-inflammatory cytokines following myocardial infarction (MI) and is inhibited by losmapimod. METHODS: LATITUDE-TIMI 60 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02145468) randomized patients with MI to losmapimod or placebo for 12 weeks (24 weeks total follow-up). In this pre-specified analysis, we examined outcomes based on MI type [ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) (865, 25%) and non-STEMI (2624, 75%)]. RESULTS: In patients with STEMI, inflammation, measured by hs-CRP, was significantly attenuated with losmapimod at 48 hours (P <0.001) and week 12 (P = 0.01). Losmapimod lowered NT-proBNP in patients with STEMI at 48 hours (P = 0.04) and week 12 (P = 0.02). The effects of losmapimod on CV death (CVD), MI, or severe recurrent ischemia requiring urgent coronary artery revascularization at 24 weeks [MACE] differed in patients with STEMI (7.0% vs 10.8%; HR 0.65, 95%CI 0.41 - 1.03; P= 0.06) and NSTEMI (11.4% vs 8.5%; HR 1.30, 95%CI 1.02 - 1.66; P = 0.04; p[int] = 0.009). CVD or HHF among patients with STEMI were 5.6% (losmapimod) and 8.3% (placebo) (HR 0.66; 95%CI 0.40 - 1.11; P = 0.12) and in NSTEMI were 4.8% (losmapimod) and 4.4% (placebo) (HR 1.09; 95%CI 0.76 - 1.56) in patients with NSTEMI. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with STEMI treated with losmapimod had an attenuated inflammatory response. Our collective findings raise the hypothesis that mitigating the inflammatory response may result in different outcomes in patients with STEMI and NSTEMI. While the difference in outcomes is exploratory, these findings do support separate examination of patients with STEMI and NSTEMI and increased emphasis on heart failure in future investigation of modulators of inflammation in MI.

Role of Primary Care Clinicians in the Management of Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiorenal Diseases.

Individuals with type 2 diabetes are at increased risk of both renal and cardiovascular events. The convergence of type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease, including heart failure, requires management by a multidisciplinary health care team. Primary care clinicians are likely to be the first and most frequent point of contact for individuals with type 2 diabetes who are at high risk of cardiorenal disease and therefore play a pivotal role in early diagnosis, establishment of effective treatment strategies, and coordination of care. This article presents a clinical perspective with multidisciplinary collaboration on a patient case representative of those seen in routine clinical practice. The authors assess reasons why patients may not receive evidence-based care and identify opportunities to initiate therapies that reduce cardiovascular and renal events in the primary care setting.

SGLT2 Inhibition for CKD and Cardiovascular Disease in Type 2 Diabetes: Report of a Scientific Workshop Sponsored by the National Kidney Foundation.

Diabetes is the most frequent cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD), leading to nearly half of all cases of kidney failure requiring replacement therapy. The principal cause of death among patients with diabetes and CKD is cardiovascular disease (CVD). Sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors were developed to lower blood glucose levels by inhibiting glucose reabsorption in the proximal tubule. In clinical trials designed to demonstrate the CVD safety of SGLT2 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), consistent reductions in risks for secondary kidney disease end points (albuminuria and a composite of serum creatinine doubling or 40% estimated glomerular filtration rate decline, kidney failure, or death), along with reductions in CVD events, were observed. In patients with CKD, the kidney and CVD benefits of canagliflozin were established by the CREDENCE (Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes With Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation) trial in patients with T2DM, urinary albumin-creatinine ratio>300mg/g, and estimated glomerular filtration rate of 30 to<90mL/min/1.73m2. To clarify and support the role of SGLT2 inhibitors for treatment of T2DM and CKD, the National Kidney Foundation convened a scientific workshop with an international panel of more than 80 experts. They discussed the current state of knowledge and unanswered questions to propose therapeutic approaches and delineate future research. SGLT2 inhibitors improve glomerular hemodynamic function and are thought to ameliorate other local and systemic mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of CKD and CVD. SGLT2 inhibitors should be used when possible by people with T2DM to reduce risks for CKD and CVD in alignment with the clinical trial entry criteria. Important risks of SGLT2 inhibitors include euglycemic ketoacidosis, genital mycotic infections, and volume depletion. Careful consideration should be given to the balance of benefits and harms of SGLT2 inhibitors and risk mitigation strategies. Effective implementation strategies are needed to achieve widespread use of these life-saving medications.

Cardiovascular outcomes with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors vs other glucose-lowering drugs in 13 countries across three continents: analysis of CVD-REAL data.

BACKGROUND: Randomized, controlled cardiovascular outcome trials may not be fully representative of the management of patients with type 2 diabetes across different geographic regions. We conducted analyses of data from the multinational CVD-REAL consortium to determine the association between initiation of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and cardiovascular outcomes, including subgroup analyses based on patient characteristics. METHODS: De-identified health records from 13 countries across three continents were used to identify patients newly-initiated on SGLT-2i or other glucose-lowering drugs (oGLDs). Propensity scores for SGLT-2i initiation were developed in each country, with 1:1 matching for oGLD initiation. In the matched groups hazard ratios (HRs) for hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), all-cause death (ACD), the composite of HHF or ACD, myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke were estimated by country, and pooled using a weighted meta-analysis. Multiple subgroup analyses were conducted across patient demographic and clinical characteristics to examine any heterogeneity in treatment effects. RESULTS: Following matching, 440,599 new users of SGLT-2i and oGLDs were included in each group. Mean follow-up time was 396 days for SGLT-2i initiation and 406 days for oGLDs initiation. SGLT-2i initiation was associated with a lower risk of HHF (HR: 0.66, 95%CI 0.58-0.75; p < 0.001), ACD (HR: 0.52, 95%CI 0.45-0.60; p < 0.001), the composite of HHF or ACD (HR: 0.60, 95%CI 0.53-0.68; p < 0.001), MI (HR: 0.85, 95%CI 0.78-0.92; p < 0.001), and stroke (HR: 0.78, 95%CI 0.72-0.85; p < 0.001); regardless of patient characteristics, including established cardiovascular disease, or geographic region. CONCLUSIONS: This CVD-REAL study extends the findings from the SGLT-2i clinical trials to the broader setting of an ethnically and geographically diverse population, and across multiple subgroups. Trial registration NCT02993614.

Association of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors with outcomes in type 2 diabetes with reduced and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction: Analysis from the CVD-REAL 2 study.

This study of real-world data from the Maccabi database in Israel compared the risk of heart failure hospitalization (HHF) or death in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiating sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors versus other glucose-lowering drugs (OGLDs) according to baseline left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF). After propensity-matching patients by baseline EF there were 10 614 episodes of treatment initiation; 57% had diabetes for >10 years, the mean glycated haemoglobin level was 66 mmol/mol (8.2%), ∼43% had cardiovascular disease, ∼7% had heart failure and ∼ 20% had chronic kidney disease. A total of 2876 patients (∼9%) had reduced EF (<50%). Over a mean follow-up of 1.5 years there were 371 HHFs or deaths, 88 (23.7%) in patients with reduced EF. Initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors versus OGLDs was associated with lower risk of HHF or death overall (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46-0.70]; P < 0.001) and in patients with both reduced EF (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.93) and preserved EF (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.43-0.70), with no significant heterogeneity (Pinteraction = 0.72). Our findings from real-world clinical practice show that the lower risk of HHF and death associated with use of SGLT2 inhibitors versus OGLDs is consistent in T2D patients with both reduced and preserved EF.

Emerging opportunities to harness real world data: An introduction to data sources, concepts, and applications.

While randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for comparative effectiveness research, they are unable to provide the answers to all pertinent clinical and research questions. Real world evidence (RWE), that is, clinical evidence obtained outside RCTs and often through routine clinical practice, offers the potential to conduct observational studies that accelerate advances in care, improve outcomes for patients, and provide important insights that can answer important questions. Once appropriate information technology is available, real world data can be cost-effective to generate. RWE serves a vital role in the evaluation of treatment strategies for which there are no RCTs and for describing patterns of care. RWE also serves as an important adjunct to RCTs and can be used to determine if benefits seen in RCTs extend to clinical practice, provide insight into the findings of RCTs, generate hypotheses for future RCTs, and inform the design of future RCTs. These potential benefits must be balanced against some of the important limitations of RWE, including variable data quality, lack of granularity for important clinical variables, and the potential for bias and confounding. By using appropriate analytic techniques and study design, these limitations can be minimized but not eliminated. Going forward, RWE studies may be enhanced by using rigorous data quality standards, incorporating randomization, developing more prospective registries, and better leveraging data from electronic health records.

Hypertension Treatment in Diabetes: Focus on Heart Failure Prevention.

Diabetes is strongly associated with development of cardiovascular disease and poor cardiovascular outcomes. Management of hypertension reduces cardiovascular outcomes among patients with diabetes. Many studies have examined the benefits of various classes of antihypertensives among patients with diabetes. Based on these, the American Diabetes Association has advised that all patients (particularly those with microalbuminuria) be treated first with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an aldosterone receptor blocker followed by a calcium channel blocker or diuretic. Recently, sodium glucose transporter 2 inhibitors have been identified for their benefit in blood pressure control and cardiovascular risk reduction in patients with diabetes.

Cardiovascular Actions and Clinical Outcomes With Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors.

Potentiation of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) action through selective GLP-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonism or by prevention of enzymatic degradation by inhibition of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) promotes glycemic reduction for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus by glucose-dependent control of insulin and glucagon secretion. GLP-1R agonists also decelerate gastric emptying, reduce body weight by reduction of food intake and lower circulating lipoproteins, inflammation, and systolic blood pressure. Preclinical studies demonstrate that both GLP-1R agonists and DPP-4 inhibitors exhibit cardioprotective actions in animal models of myocardial ischemia and ventricular dysfunction through incompletely characterized mechanisms. The results of cardiovascular outcome trials in human subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus and increased cardiovascular risk have demonstrated a cardiovascular benefit (significant reduction in time to first major adverse cardiovascular event) with the GLP-1R agonists liraglutide (LEADER trial [Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Ourcome Results], -13%) and semaglutide (SUSTAIN-6 trial [Trial to Evaluate Cardiovascular and Other Long-term Outcomes with Semaglutide], -24%). In contrast, cardiovascular outcome trials examining the safety of the shorter-acting GLP-1R agonist lixisenatide (ELIXA trial [Evaluation of Lixisenatide in Acute Coronary Syndrom]) and the DPP-4 inhibitors saxagliptin (SAVOR-TIMI 53 trial [Saxagliptin Assessment of Vascular Outcomes Recorded in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 53]), alogliptin (EXAMINE trial [Examination of Cardiovascular Outcomes With Alogliptin Versus Standard of Care in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Acute Coronary Syndrome]), and sitagliptin (TECOS [Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes With Sitagliptin]) found that these agents neither increased nor decreased cardiovascular events. Here we review the cardiovascular actions of GLP-1R agonists and DPP-4 inhibitors, with a focus on the translation of mechanisms derived from preclinical studies to complementary findings in clinical studies. We highlight areas of uncertainty requiring more careful scrutiny in ongoing basic science and clinical studies. As newer more potent GLP-1R agonists and coagonists are being developed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, obesity, and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, the delineation of the potential mechanisms that underlie the cardiovascular benefit and safety of these agents have immediate relevance for the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease.

Serial Measurement of High-Sensitivity Troponin I and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the EXAMINE Trial (Examination of Cardiovascular Outcomes With Alogliptin Versus Standard of Care).

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe the relationship between changes in high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hsTnI) and cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: The EXAMINE trial (Examination of Cardiovascular Outcomes With Alogliptin Versus Standard of Care) was a phase IIIb clinical outcomes trial designed to evaluate the cardiovascular safety of alogliptin, a nonselective dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, glycohemoglobin between 6.5% and 11% (or between 7% and 11% if they were on insulin), and a recent acute coronary syndrome (between 15 and 90 days before randomization) were eligible for the trial. hsTnI was measured using the Abbott ARCHITECT assay at baseline and 6 months in patients randomized in the EXAMINE trial. This analysis was restricted to patients randomized ≥30 days after qualifying acute coronary syndrome to mitigate the potential for persistent hsTnI elevation after acute coronary syndrome (n=3808). The primary end point of the trial was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Cardiovascular death or heart failure was a prespecified, adjudicated secondary end point. RESULTS: At baseline, hsTnI was detectable (≥1.9 ng/L) in 93% of patients and >99th percentile upper reference limit in 16%. There was a strong relationship between increasing hsTnI, both at baseline and 6 months, and the incidence of cardiovascular events through 24 months (P<0.001 for each). Patients with undetectable hsTnI at baseline and 6 months were at the lowest risk of future cardiovascular events. Stable patients with hsTnI ≥99th percentile upper reference limit at 6 months were at increased risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke compared with patients with hsTnI <99 percentile upper reference limit irrespective of whether hsTnI was newly elevated (28.1% versus 8.8%; adjusted hazard ratio, 2.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.64-4.28; P<0.001) or persistently so (22.5% versus 8.8%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-2.70; P<0.001). Alogliptin neither increased nor decreased the risk of cardiovascular events compared with placebo in patients with high baseline hsTnI (22.3% versus 23.0%; hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.25; P=0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Serial assessment of hsTnI revealed a substantial proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus without clinically recognized events had dynamic or persistently elevated values and were at high risk of recurrent events. hsTnI may have a role in personalizing preventive strategies in patients with diabetes mellitus based on risk. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00968708.

Lower Risk of Heart Failure and Death in Patients Initiated on Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors Versus Other Glucose-Lowering Drugs: The CVD-REAL Study (Comparative Effectiveness of Cardiovascular Outcomes in New Users of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors).

BACKGROUND: Reduction in cardiovascular death and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) was recently reported with the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT-2i) empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who have atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. We compared HHF and death in patients newly initiated on any SGLT-2i versus other glucose-lowering drugs in 6 countries to determine if these benefits are seen in real-world practice and across SGLT-2i class. METHODS: Data were collected via medical claims, primary care/hospital records, and national registries from the United States, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Propensity score for SGLT-2i initiation was used to match treatment groups. Hazard ratios for HHF, death, and their combination were estimated by country and pooled to determine weighted effect size. Death data were not available for Germany. RESULTS: After propensity matching, there were 309 056 patients newly initiated on either SGLT-2i or other glucose-lowering drugs (154 528 patients in each treatment group). Canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, and empagliflozin accounted for 53%, 42%, and 5% of the total exposure time in the SGLT-2i class, respectively. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the 2 groups. There were 961 HHF cases during 190 164 person-years follow-up (incidence rate, 0.51/100 person-years). Of 215 622 patients in the United States, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, death occurred in 1334 (incidence rate, 0.87/100 person-years), and HHF or death in 1983 (incidence rate, 1.38/100 person-years). Use of SGLT-2i, versus other glucose-lowering drugs, was associated with lower rates of HHF (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.73; P<0.001); death (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.57; P<0.001); and HHF or death (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.60; P<0.001) with no significant heterogeneity by country. CONCLUSIONS: In this large multinational study, treatment with SGLT-2i versus other glucose-lowering drugs was associated with a lower risk of HHF and death, suggesting that the benefits seen with empagliflozin in a randomized trial may be a class effect applicable to a broad population of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in real-world practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02993614.

Meta-analysis of transfemoral TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: In the recently concluded PARTNER 2 trial, TF-TAVR cohort was shown to have lower risks of death or disabling strokes as compared to SAVR, whereas the outcomes with transthoracic TAVR were comparable with SAVR. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for all comparison studies between TAVR and SAVR and mortality as an outcome, irrespective of surgical risk. Randomized controlled trials and propensity-score-matched cohort studies that used a transfemoral approach exclusively or stratified results by route of access and reported data for TF-TAVR patients were eligible for inclusion. Outcomes of interest included 30-day and 1-year mortality, and 30-day complications. If significant heterogeneity was found in the random effects meta-analyses, a sensitivity analysis which individually removed each study was conducted. RESULTS: Seven studies reported results on TF-TAVR. Compared with SAVR, TF-TAVR had comparable 30-day mortality (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.58, 1.06), 1-year mortality (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78, 1.08) and 30-day risk of bleeding (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.31, 1.57). However, TF-TAVR was associated with lower 30-day risks of atrial fibrillation (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.17, 0.45), acute kidney injury (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.20, 0.71), and myocardial infarction (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23, 0.75) at a cost of higher incidences of vascular complications (RR 6.10, 95% CI 2.92, 12.73) and pacemaker implantations (RR 3.29, 95% CI 1.41, 7.65). CONCLUSIONS: TF-TAVR is associated with lower 30-day risks of myocardial infarction compared to SAVR. Further studies are required to investigate the role of myocardial injury on overall TF-TAVR outcomes.

Rates of myocardial infarction and stroke in patients initiating treatment with SGLT2-inhibitors versus other glucose-lowering agents in real-world clinical practice: Results from the CVD-REAL study.

The multinational, observational CVD-REAL study recently showed that initiation of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) was associated with significantly lower rates of death and heart failure vs other glucose-lowering drugs (oGLDs). This sub-analysis of the CVD-REAL study sought to determine the association between initiation of SGLT-2i vs oGLDs and rates of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. Medical records, claims and national registers from the USA, Sweden, Norway and Denmark were used to identify patients with T2D who newly initiated treatment with SGLT-2i (canagliflozin, dapagliflozin or empagliflozin) or oGLDs. A non-parsimonious propensity score was developed within each country to predict initiation of SGLT-2i, and patients were matched 1:1 in the treatment groups. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were generated using Cox regression models. Overall, 205 160 patients were included. In the intent-to-treat analysis, over 188 551 and 188 678 person-years of follow-up (MI and stroke, respectively), there were 1077 MI and 968 stroke events. Initiation of SGLT-2i vs oGLD was associated with a modestly lower risk of MI and stroke (MI: HR, 0.85; 95%CI, 0.72-1.00; P = .05; Stroke: HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.97; P = .02). These findings complement the results of the cardiovascular outcomes trials, and offer additional reassurance with regard to the cardiovascular effects of SGLT-2i, specifically as it relates to ischaemic events.

Consistent Reduction in Periprocedural Myocardial Infarction With Cangrelor as Assessed by Multiple Definitions: Findings From CHAMPION PHOENIX (Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platelet Inhibition).

BACKGROUND: Cangrelor is an intravenous P2Y12 inhibitor approved to reduce periprocedural ischemic events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention not pretreated with a P2Y12 inhibitor. METHODS: A total of 11 145 patients were randomized to cangrelor or clopidogrel in the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial (Cangrelor versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platelet Inhibition). We explored the effects of cangrelor on myocardial infarction (MI) using different definitions and performed sensitivity analyses on the primary end point of the trial. RESULTS: A total of 462 patients (4.2%) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention had an MI as defined by the second universal definition. The majority of these MIs (n=433, 93.7%) were type 4a. Treatment with cangrelor reduced the incidence of MI at 48 hours (3.8% versus 4.7%; odds ratio [OR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.97; P=0.02). When the Society of Coronary Angiography and Intervention definition of periprocedural MI was applied to potential ischemic events, there were fewer total MIs (n=134); however, the effects of cangrelor on MI remained significant (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46-0.92; P=0.01). Similar effects were seen in the evaluation of the effects of cangrelor on MIs with peak creatinine kinase-MB ≥10 times the upper limit of normal (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45-0.91) and those with peak creatinine kinase-MB ≥10 times the upper limit of normal, ischemic symptoms, or ECG changes (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48-0.84). MIs defined by any of these definitions were associated with increased risk of death at 30 days. Treatment with cangrelor reduced the composite end point of death, MI (Society of Coronary Angiography and Intervention definition), ischemia-driven revascularization, or Academic Research Consortium definite stent thrombosis (1.4% versus 2.1%; OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.51-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: MI in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, regardless of definition, remains associated with increased risk of death in the current era. Cangrelor compared with clopidogrel significantly reduces MI regardless of the definition. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01156571.