Effectiveness and safety of empagliflozin: final results from the EMPRISE study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Limited evidence exists on the comparative safety and effectiveness of empagliflozin against alternative glucose-lowering medications in individuals with type 2 diabetes with the broad spectrum of cardiovascular risk. The EMPagliflozin compaRative effectIveness and SafEty (EMPRISE) cohort study was designed to monitor the safety and effectiveness of empagliflozin periodically for a period of 5 years with data collection from electronic healthcare databases. METHODS: We identified individuals ≥18 years old with type 2 diabetes who initiated empagliflozin or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) from 2014 to 2019 using US Medicare and commercial claims databases. After 1:1 propensity score matching using 143 baseline characteristics, we identified four a priori-defined effectiveness outcomes: (1) myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke; (2) hospitalisation for heart failure (HHF); (3) major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE); and (4) cardiovascular mortality or HHF. Safety outcomes included lower-limb amputations, non-vertebral fractures, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), acute kidney injury (AKI), severe hypoglycaemia, retinopathy progression, and short-term kidney and bladder cancers. We estimated HRs and rate differences (RDs) per 1000 person-years, overall and stratified by age, sex, baseline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and heart failure. RESULTS: We identified 115,116 matched pairs. Compared with DPP-4i, empagliflozin was associated with lower risks of MI/stroke (HR 0.88 [95% CI 0.81, 0.96]; RD -2.08 [95% CI (-3.26, -0.90]), HHF (HR 0.50 [0.44, 0.56]; RD -5.35 [-6.22, -4.49]), MACE (HR 0.73 [0.62, 0.86]; RD -6.37 [-8.98, -3.77]) and cardiovascular mortality/HHF (HR 0.57 [0.47, 0.69]; RD -10.36 [-12.63, -8.12]). Absolute benefits were larger in older individuals and in those with ASCVD/heart failure. Empagliflozin was associated with an increased risk of DKA (HR 1.78 [1.44, 2.19]; RD 1.59 [1.08, 2.09]); decreased risks of AKI (HR 0.62 [0.54, 0.72]; RD -2.39 [-3.08, -1.71]), hypoglycaemia (HR 0.75 [0.67, 0.84]; RD -2.46 [-3.32, -1.60]) and retinopathy progression (HR 0.78 [0.63, 0.96)]; RD -9.49 [-16.97, -2.10]); and similar risks of other safety events. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Empagliflozin relative to DPP-4i was associated with risk reductions of MI or stroke, HHF, MACE and the composite of cardiovascular mortality or HHF. Absolute risk reductions were larger in older individuals and in those who had history of ASCVD or heart failure. Regarding the safety outcomes, empagliflozin was associated with an increased risk of DKA and lower risks of AKI, hypoglycaemia and progression to proliferative retinopathy, with no difference in the short-term risks of lower-extremity amputation, non-vertebral fractures, kidney and renal pelvis cancer, and bladder cancer.

Cardiorenal effectiveness of empagliflozin vs. glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: final-year results from the EMPRISE study.

BACKGROUND: No randomized clinical trials have directly compared the cardiorenal effectiveness of empagliflozin and GLP-1RA agents with demonstrated cardioprotective effects in patients with a broad spectrum of cardiovascular risk. We reported the final-year results of the EMPRISE study, a monitoring program designed to evaluate the cardiorenal effectiveness of empagliflozin across broad patient subgroups. METHODS: We identified patients ≥ 18 years old with type 2 diabetes who initiated empagliflozin or GLP-1RA from 2014 to 2019 using US Medicare and commercial claims databases. After 1:1 propensity score matching using 143 baseline characteristics, we evaluated risks of outcomes including myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke, hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE - MI, stroke, or cardiovascular mortality), a composite of HHF or cardiovascular mortality, and progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) (in patients with chronic kidney disease stages 3-4). We estimated hazard ratios (HR) and rate differences (RD) per 1,000 person-years, overall and within subgroups of age, sex, baseline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), and heart failure (HF). RESULTS: We identified 141,541 matched pairs. Compared with GLP-1RA, empagliflozin was associated with similar risks of MI or stroke [HR: 0.99 (0.92, 1.07); RD: -0.23 (-1.25, 0.79)], and lower risks of HHF [HR: 0.50 (0.44, 0.56); RD: -2.28 (-2.98, -1.59)], MACE [HR: 0.90 (0.82, 0.99); RD: -2.54 (-4.76, -0.32)], cardiovascular mortality or HHF [HR: 0.77 (0.69, 0.86); RD: -4.11 (-5.95, -2.29)], and ESKD [0.75 (0.60, 0.94); RD: -6.77 (-11.97, -1.61)]. Absolute risk reductions were larger in older patients and in those with baseline ASCVD/HF. They did not differ by sex. CONCLUSIONS: The cardiovascular benefits of empagliflozin vs. cardioprotective GLP-1RA agents were larger in older patients and in patients with history of ASCVD or HF, while they did not differ by sex. In patients with advanced CKD, empagliflozin was associated with risk reductions of progression to ESKD.

Empagliflozin and Risk of Incident Gout: Analysis from the EMPagliflozin Comparative Effectiveness and SafEty (EMPRISE) Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Hyperuricemia is frequently observed in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and is associated with increased risk of gout and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Empagliflozin lowers serum urate levels by enhancing its urinary excretion. OBJECTIVE: To compare initiators of empagliflozin vs dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4i) and initiators of empagliflozin vs glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) with respect to the risk of incident gout events. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Using three claims-based datasets from 08/2014 to 09/2019, we generated two cohorts (cohort 1: empagliflozin vs DPP4i; cohort 2: empagliflozin vs GLP-1RA) of adult patients with T2D and without prior history of gout or gout-specific medication dispensing separately in each dataset. To assess the risk of incident gout, we estimated hazard ratios (HR) and rate differences (RD) per 1000 person-years (PY) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) before and after 1:1 propensity score (PS) matching adjusting for 141 baseline covariates. KEY RESULTS: We identified 102,262 pairs of 1:1 propensity score-matched adults in cohort 1 and 131,216 pairs in cohort 2. Over a mean follow-up period of 8 months on treatment, the risk of gout was lower in patients initiating empagliflozin compared to DPP4i (HR = 0.69: 95% CI (0.60-0.79); RD = - 2.27: 95% CI (- 3.08, 1.46)) or GLP-1RA (HR = 0.83: 95% CI (0.73-0.94); RD = - 0.99: 95% CI (- 1.66, - 0.32)). Results were consistent across subgroups (sex, age, body mass index, chronic kidney disease, heart failure, cardiovascular disease, and concurrent diuretic use) and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with T2D, the initiation of empagliflozin vs a DPP4i or GLP-1RA was associated with lower risk of incident gout, complementing results from a post hoc analysis of the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial and previously published observational research focusing on the sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor class in more narrowly defined study populations.

Empagliflozin is associated with lower cardiovascular risk compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in adults with and without cardiovascular disease: EMPagliflozin compaRative effectIveness and SafEty (EMPRISE) study results from Europe and Asia.

BACKGROUND: Studies that have reported lower risk for cardiovascular outcomes in users of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors (SGLT-2i) are limited by residual cofounding and lack of information on prior cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study compared risk of cardiovascular events in patients within routine care settings in Europe and Asia with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiating empagliflozin compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) stratified by pre-existing CVD and history of heart failure (HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Adults initiating empagliflozin and DPP-4i in 2014-2018/19 from 11 countries in Europe and Asia were compared using propensity score matching and Cox proportional hazards regression to assess differences in rates of primary outcomes: hospitalisation for heart failure (HHF), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke; and secondary outcomes: cardiovascular mortality (CVM), coronary revascularisation procedure, composite outcome including HHF or CVM, and 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: MI, stroke and CVM). Country-specific results were meta-analysed and pooled hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) from random-effects models are presented. In total, 85,244 empagliflozin/DPP4i PS-matched patient pairs were included with overall mean follow-up of 0.7 years. Among those with pre-existing CVD, lower risk was observed for HHF (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.64-0.86), CVM (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.38-0.80), HHF or CVM (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.48-0.67) and stroke (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.67-0.94) in patients initiating empagliflozin vs DPP-4i. Similar patterns were observed among patients without pre-existing CVD and those with and without pre-existing HF. CONCLUSION: These results from diverse patient populations in routine care settings across Europe and Asia demonstrate that initiation of empagliflozin compared to DPP-4i results in favourable cardioprotective effects regardless of pre-existing CVD or HF status.

Health Care Utilization and Costs Associated With Empagliflozin in Older Adults With Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: We compared health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs for inpatient and outpatient services and dispensed medications in older adults with type 2 diabetes initiating empagliflozin versus dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4is). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The study population included U.S. Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with diabetes (age ≥65 years) initiating empagliflozin or DPP-4is (August 2014 to September 2018). We estimated rate ratios (RRs) for HCRU outcomes using zero-inflated negative binomial regression and per-member per-year (PMPY) cost differences using generalized linear model with gamma distributions, overall and stratified by baseline cardiovascular disease (CVD), after adjusting for 143 baseline covariates using 1:1 propensity score matching. RESULTS: We identified 23,335 matched pairs (mean age 72 years, 51% with baseline CVD). HCRU rates were lower in empagliflozin versus DPP-4i initiators (number of inpatient days, RR 0.89 [95% CI 0.82, 0.97]; number of emergency department [ED] visits, 0.86 [0.82, 0.91]; number of hospitalizations, 0.86 [0.79, 0.93]; number of office visits, 0.96 [0.95, 0.98]). Inpatient cost (-$713 PMPY [95% CI -847, -579), outpatient cost (-$198 PMPY[-272, -124]), and total cost of care (-$1,109 PMPY [-1,478, -739]) were lower for empagliflozin versus DPP-4is, although diabetes medication cost was higher in empagliflozin initiators ($454 PMPY [95% CI 284, 567]). In the CVD subgroup, total cost was lower for empagliflozin initiators (-$2,005 PMPY [-2,451, -1,337]), while the difference was attenuated in the non-CVD subgroup (-$296 PMPY[-740, 148]). CONCLUSIONS: Among older adults with diabetes, empagliflozin was associated with a lower number of inpatient days, hospitalizations, ED visits, and office visits and with lower costs of care compared with DPP-4is, especially in those with history of CVD.

Empagliflozin cardiovascular and renal effectiveness and safety compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors across 11 countries in Europe and Asia: Results from the EMPagliflozin compaRative effectIveness and SafEty (EMPRISE) study.

BACKGROUND: Continued expansion of indications for sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors increases importance of evaluating cardiovascular and kidney efficacy and safety of empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes compared to similar therapies. METHODS: The EMPRISE Europe and Asia study is a non-interventional cohort study using data from 2014-2019 in seven European (Denmark, Finland, Germany, Norway, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom) and four Asian (Israel, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan) countries. Patients with type 2 diabetes initiating empagliflozin were 1:1 propensity score matched to patients initiating dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Primary endpoints included hospitalization for heart failure, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction and stroke. Other cardiovascular, renal, and safety outcomes were examined. FINDINGS: Among 83,946 matched patient pairs, (0·7 years overall mean follow-up time), initiation of empagliflozin was associated with lower risk of hospitalization for heart failure compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (Hazard Ratio 0·70; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.83). Risks of all-cause mortality (0·55; 0·48 to 0·63), stroke (0·82; 0·71 to 0·96), and end-stage renal disease (0·43; 0·30 to 0·63) were lower and risk for myocardial infarction, bone fracture, severe hypoglycemia, and lower-limb amputation were similar between initiators of empagliflozin and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Initiation of empagliflozin was associated with higher risk for diabetic ketoacidosis (1·97; 1·28 to 3·03) compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Results were consistent across continents and regions. INTERPRETATION: Results from this EMPRISE Europe and Asia study complements previous clinical trials and real-world studies by providing further evidence of the beneficial cardiorenal effects and overall safety of empagliflozin compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors.

Comparative Effectiveness of Empagliflozin vs Liraglutide or Sitagliptin in Older Adults With Diverse Patient Characteristics.

Importance: Limited evidence is available on the comparative effectiveness of empagliflozin vs alternative second-line glucose-lowering agents in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) receiving routine care who have a broad spectrum of cardiorenal risk. Objective: To evaluate the association of empagliflozin with cardiovascular outcomes relative to liraglutide and sitagliptin, stratified by age, sex, baseline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), heart failure (HF), and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective comparative effectiveness cohort study used deidentified Medicare claims data from August 1, 2014, to September 30, 2018, with follow-up from drug initiation until treatment changes, death, or gap in Medicare enrollment (>30 days). Data analysis was performed from October 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022. Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries older than 65 years with T2D were included. A total of 45 788 patients (22 894 propensity score-matched pairs initiating treatment with either empagliflozin or liraglutide) were included in cohort 1, and 45 624 patients (22 812 propensity score-matched pairs initiating treatment with either empagliflozin or sitagliptin) were included in cohort 2. Exposures: Empagliflozin vs liraglutide (cohort 1) or empagliflozin vs sitagliptin (cohort 2). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were (1) modified major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), including a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, and all-cause mortality, and (2) hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). Hazard ratios (HRs) and rate differences (RDs) per 1000 person-years were estimated, adjusting for 143 baseline covariates using 1:1 propensity score matching. Results: Among 45 788 patients in cohort 1, the mean (SD) age was 71.9 (5.1) years; 23 396 patients (51.1%) were female, 22 392 (48.9%) were male, and 38 049 (83.1%) were White. Among 45 624 patients in cohort 2, the mean (SD) age was 72.1 (5.1) years; 21 418 patients (46.9%) were female, 24 206 (53.1%) were male, and 37 814 (82.9%) were White. Relative to patients initiating liraglutide, those initiating empagliflozin had a similar risk of the modified MACE outcome (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.79-1.03) and a reduced risk of HHF (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.52-0.82). Across subgroups, empagliflozin was associated with a lower risk of the modified MACE outcome in patients with a history of ASCVD (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98) and HF (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60-1.00) compared with liraglutide, and potential heterogeneity in estimates was observed by sex (male: HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.71-1.01]; female: HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.94-1.42]; P = .02 for homogeneity). However, reductions in the risk of HHF were observed across most subgroups (eg, ASCVD: HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.51-0.85]; HF: HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.49-0.88]). Compared with sitagliptin, empagliflozin was associated with reduced risks of the modified MACE outcome (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.60-0.77) and HHF (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.36-0.56), which were consistent across all subgroups. Absolute benefits of empagliflozin vs sitagliptin were larger in patients with a history of ASCVD (modified MACE: RD, -17.6 [95% CI, -24.9 to -10.4]; HHF: RD, -16.7 [95% CI, -21.7 to -11.9]), HF (modified MACE: RD, -41.1 [95% CI, -59.9 to -22.6]; HHF: RD, -50.4 [95% CI, -67.5 to -33.9]), or CKD (modified MACE: RD, -26.7 [95% CI, -41.3 to -12.3]; HHF: RD, -31.9 [95% CI, -43.5 to -20.8]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness study of older adults, empagliflozin was associated with a lower risk of HHF (relative to both liraglutide and sitagliptin) and the modified MACE outcome (relative to sitagliptin), with larger absolute benefits in patients with established cardiorenal diseases. These findings suggest that older adults with T2D might benefit more from empagliflozin vs liraglutide or sitagliptin with respect to the risk of HHF; with respect to the risk of MACEs, empagliflozin might be preferable to liraglutide only in patients with cardiovascular disease history and to sitagliptin across all patient subgroups.

Precision Dosing of Rapid-Acting Insulin Matters.

Despite several molecular and technological advances in insulin therapy and insulin delivery, global evidence highlights inadequate glycemic control in populations with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). In this review, we discuss the importance of more precise dosing of insulin as one of the approaches to improve glycemic control while reducing hypoglycemic events. This report is based on the expert opinion of authors and literature search of articles relevant to the past and present insulin delivery devices in diabetes management, especially half-unit insulin pens. We describe the various factors that facilitate better glycemic control, focusing on the impact of appropriate insulin delivery device selection on diabetes management. Precision dosing of insulin is a lesser-studied factor that contributes toward better glycemic control. Insulin pens have consistently outperformed syringes as delivery devices due to their greater accuracy and precision of dosing, ease-of-use, and patient preference. These advantages make them better suited to administer insulin in hypoglycemia-prone insulin-sensitive people with T1D, particularly younger children and geriatric patients. Half-unit insulin pens further extend this benefit by delivering half-unit doses of insulin accurately. They may contribute to better management of diabetes by allowing flexible dosing for mealtimes and physical activities even in erratic diet situations or illnesses by offering corrective doses in small increments. They are ideal delivery devices for insulin-sensitive people with T1D who require greater accuracy and precision in insulin delivery to achieve more stringent glycemic control.