Enrollment strategies in the era of digital revolution: Experience from a remote health management program.

We share our experience on the strategies implemented for identifying and enrolling participants in a randomized remote implementation trial. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of various digital and traditional screening and outreach methods in participant enrollment. This study focuses on understanding the success and challenges associated with different approaches to patient engagement.

Effects of Sotagliflozin on Health Status in Patients With Worsening Heart Failure: Results From SOLOIST-WHF.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors improve health status in heart failure (HF) across the left ejection fraction ejection spectrum. However, the effects of SGLT1 and SGLT2 inhibition on health status are unknown. OBJECTIVES: These prespecified analyses of the SOLOIST-WHF (Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Post Worsening Heart Failure) trial examined the effects of sotagliflozin vs placebo on HF-related health status. METHODS: SOLOIST-WHF randomized patients hospitalized or recently discharged after a worsening HF episode to receive sotagliflozin or placebo. The primary endpoint was total number of HF hospitalizations, urgent HF visits, and cardiovascular death. Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 (KCCQ-12) score was a prespecified secondary endpoint. This analysis evaluated change in the KCCQ-12 score from baseline to month 4. RESULTS: Of 1,222 patients randomized, 1,113 (91%) had complete KCCQ-12 data at baseline and 4 months. The baseline KCCQ-12 score was low overall (median: 41.7; Q1-Q3: 27.1-58.3) and improved by 4 months in both groups. Sotagliflozin vs placebo reduced the risk of the primary endpoint consistently across KCCQ-12 tertiles (Ptrend = 0.54). Sotagliflozin-treated patients vs those receiving placebo experienced modest improvement in KCCQ-12 at 4 months (adjusted mean change: 4.1 points; 95% CI: 1.3-7.0 points; P = 0.005). KCCQ-12 improvements were consistent across prespecified subgroups, including left ventricular ejection fraction <50% or ≥50%. More patients receiving sotagliflozin vs those receiving placebo had at least small (≥5 points) improvements in KCCQ-12 at 4 months (OR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.06-1.80; P = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Sotagliflozin improved symptoms, physical limitations, and quality of life within 4 months after worsening HF, with consistent benefits across baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. (Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular Events in Participants With Type 2 Diabetes Post Worsening Heart Failure [SOLOIST-WHF]; NCT03521934).

Effects of canagliflozin on total heart failure events across the kidney function spectrum: Participant-level pooled analysis from the CANVAS Program and CREDENCE trial.

AIMS: People with type 2 diabetes (T2D) face high risks of heart failure (HF) hospitalizations that are often recurrent, especially as kidney function declines. We examined the effects of canagliflozin on total HF events by baseline kidney function in patients with T2D at high cardiovascular risk and/or with chronic kidney disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: Leveraging pooled participant-level data from the CANVAS programme (n = 10 142) and CREDENCE trial (n = 4401), first and total HF hospitalizations were examined. Cox proportional hazards models were built for the time to first HF hospitalization, and proportional means models based on cumulative mean functions were used for recurrent HF hospitalizations. Treatment effects were evaluated overall as well as within baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) strata (<45, 45-60, and >60 ml/min/1.73 m2). HF hospitalizations were independently and blindly adjudicated. Among 14 540 participants with available baseline eGFR values, 672 HF hospitalizations occurred over a median follow-up of 2.5 years. Among participants who experienced a HF hospitalization, 357 had a single event (201 in placebo-treated patients and 156 in canagliflozin-treated patients), 77 had 2 events, and 39 had >2 events. Canagliflozin reduced risk of first HF hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.70) consistently across baseline eGFR strata (pinteraction = 0.84). Canagliflozin reduced total HF hospitalizations overall (mean event ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.54-0.73) and across eGFR subgroups (pinteraction = 0.51). Canagliflozin also reduced cardiovascular death and total HF hospitalizations (mean event ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.65-0.80) and across eGFR subgroups (pinteraction = 0.82). The absolute risk reductions were numerically larger, and numbers needed to treat were smaller when evaluating total events versus first events alone. These observed HF benefits were highly consistent across the range of eGFR, with larger absolute benefits in participants who had worse kidney function at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with T2D at high cardiovascular risk and/or with chronic kidney disease, canagliflozin reduced the total burden of HF hospitalizations, with consistent benefits observed across the kidney function spectrum. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: CANVAS (NCT01032629), CANVAS-R (NCT01989754), CREDENCE (NCT02065791).

Randomized Trial of a Vascular Care Team vs Education for Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: Underutilization of therapies to reduce ischemic risk in peripheral artery disease (PAD) persists. OBJECTIVES: The purpose was to conduct an implementation trial of lipid management in vascular disease. METHODS: The OPTIMIZE PAD-1 (Implementation of Vascular Care Team to Improve Medical Management of PAD Patients) trial randomized patients with peripheral artery disease with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥70 mg/dL to management via a vascular care team including a clinical pharmacist and an algorithm of intensive lipid management to achieve goal LDL-C in 1 step vs usual care plus provider education. Medications were obtained using commercial insurance. The primary endpoint was percent change in LDL-C at 12 months. RESULTS: Of 166 enrolled patients, 74.2% did not have an LDL-C level at goal. Among 114 randomized patients (mean age 66 years, 36.0% women, and 15.8% Black), 50.9% received high-intensity statin, and 7.9% received ezetimibe at baseline. The mean 12-month LDL-C change was -49.1% (95% CI: -58.7% to -39.5%) with vascular care team management and -5.4% (95% CI: -15.3% to 4.6%) with usual care; the between-group least-squares mean difference was -43.7% (95% CI: -57.6% to -29.9%; P < 0.0001). Mean LDL-C was reduced in vascular care team patients from 100.6 mg/dL at baseline to 54.8 and 50.1 mg/dL by week 4 and month 12, respectively. At 12 months, vascular care team patients were >3 times as likely to achieve LDL-C <70 mg/dL and 8 times as likely to achieve LDL-C <55 mg/dL (P < 0.0001) than usual care. CONCLUSIONS: OPTIMIZE PAD-1 showed that an interprofessional, algorithm-based program can achieve rapid LDL-C lowering in vascular patients using available insurance and therapies, and LDL-C targets can be met in most patients if enabled by optimized systems of care.

Geographic and racial variability in kidney, cardiovascular and safety outcomes with canagliflozin: A secondary analysis of the CREDENCE randomized trial.

AIM: To explore the effect of canagliflozin on kidney and cardiovascular events and safety outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease across geographic regions and racial groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A stratified Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess efficacy and safety outcomes by geographic region and racial group. The primary composite outcome was a composite of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), doubling of the serum creatinine (SCr) level, or death from kidney or cardiovascular causes. Secondary outcomes included: (i) cardiovascular death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization; (ii) cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke; (iii) HF hospitalization; (iv) doubling of the SCr level, ESKD or kidney death; (v) cardiovascular death; (vi) all-cause death; and (vii) cardiovascular death, MI, stroke, or hospitalization for HF or for unstable angina. RESULTS: The 4401 patients were divided into six geographic region subgroups: North America (n = 1182, 27%), Central and South America (n = 941, 21%), Eastern Europe (n = 947, 21%), Western Europe (n = 421, 10%), Asia (n = 749, 17%) and Other (n = 161, 4%). The analyses included four racial groups: White (n = 2931, 67%), Black or African American (n = 224, 5%), Asian (n = 877, 20%) and Other (n = 369, 8%). Canagliflozin reduced the relative risk of the primary composite outcome in the overall trial by 30% (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.59-0.82; P = 0.00001). Across geographic regions and racial groups, canagliflozin consistently reduced the primary composite endpoint without evidence of heterogeneity (interaction P values of 0.39 and 0.91, respectively) or significant safety outcome differences. CONCLUSIONS: Canagliflozin reduces the risk of kidney and cardiovascular events similarly across geographic regions and racial groups.

Randomized Evaluation of a Remote Management Program to Improve Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy: The DRIVE Trial.

BACKGROUND: Several SGLT2i (sodium-glucose transport protein 2 inhibitors) and GLP1-RA (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists) reduce cardiovascular events and improve kidney outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes; however, utilization remains low despite guideline recommendations. METHODS: A randomized, remote implementation trial in the Mass General Brigham network enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes with increased cardiovascular or kidney risk. Patients eligible for, but not prescribed, SGLT2i or GLP1-RA were randomly assigned to simultaneous virtual patient education with concurrent prescription of SGLT2i or GLP1-RA (ie, Simultaneous) or 2 months of virtual education followed by medication prescription (ie, Education-First) delivered by a multidisciplinary team driven by nonlicensed navigators and clinical pharmacists who prescribed SGLT2i or GLP1-RA using a standardized treatment algorithm. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with prescriptions for either SGLT2i or GLP1-RA by 6 months. RESULTS: Between March 2021 and December 2022, 200 patients were randomized. The mean age was 66.5 years; 36.5% were female, and 22.0% were non-White. Overall, 30.0% had cardiovascular disease, 5.0% had cerebrovascular disease, and 1.5% had both. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate was 77.9 mL/(min‧1.73 m2), and mean urine/albumin creatinine ratio was 88.6 mg/g. After 2 months, 69 of 200 (34.5%) patients received a new prescription for either SGLT2i or GLP1-RA: 53.4% of patients in the Simultaneous arm and 8.3% of patients in the Education-First arm (P<0.001). After 6 months, 128 of 200 (64.0%) received a new prescription: 69.8% of patients in the Simultaneous arm and 56.0% of patients in Education-First (P<0.001). Patient self-report of taking SGLT2i or GLP1-RA within 6 months of trial entry was similarly greater in the Simultaneous versus Education-First arm (69 of 116 [59.5%] versus 37 of 84 [44.0%]; P<0.001) Median time to first prescription was 24 (interquartile range [IQR], 13-50) versus 85 days (IQR, 65-106), respectively (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, a remote, team-based program identifies patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular or kidney risk, provides virtual education, prescribes SGLT2i or GLP1-RA, and improves guideline-directed medical therapy. These findings support greater utilization of virtual team-based approaches to optimize chronic disease management. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT06046560.

Lipoprotein(a) and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients With or Without Baseline Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is associated with an increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, whether the optimal Lp(a) threshold for risk assessment should differ based on baseline ASCVD status is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the association between Lp(a) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) among patients with and without baseline ASCVD. METHODS: We studied a retrospective cohort of patients with Lp(a) measured at 2 medical centers in Boston, Massachusetts, from 2000 to 2019. To assess the association of Lp(a) with incident MACE (nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI], nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or cardiovascular mortality), Lp(a) percentile groups were generated with the reference group set at the first to 50th Lp(a) percentiles. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to assess the association of Lp(a) percentile group with MACE. RESULTS: Overall, 16,419 individuals were analyzed with a median follow-up of 11.9 years. Among the 10,181 (62%) patients with baseline ASCVD, individuals in the 71st to 90th percentile group had a 21% increased hazard of MACE (adjusted HR: 1.21; P < 0.001), which was similar to that of individuals in the 91st to 100th group (adjusted HR: 1.26; P < 0.001). Among the 6,238 individuals without established ASCVD, there was a continuously higher hazard of MACE with increasing Lp(a), and individuals in the 91st to 100th Lp(a) percentile group had the highest relative risk with an adjusted HR of 1.93 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a large, contemporary U.S. cohort, elevated Lp(a) is independently associated with long-term MACE among individuals with and without baseline ASCVD. Our results suggest that the threshold for risk assessment may be different in primary vs secondary prevention cohorts.

Methods, rationale, and design for a remote pharmacist and navigator-driven disease management program to improve guideline-directed medical therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes at elevated cardiovascular and/or kidney risk.

AIM: Describe the rationale for and design of Diabetes Remote Intervention to improVe use of Evidence-based medications (DRIVE), a remote medication management program designed to initiate and titrate guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) at elevated cardiovascular (CV) and/or kidney risk by leveraging non-physician providers. METHODS: An electronic health record based algorithm is used to identify patients with T2D and either established atherosclerotic CV disease (ASCVD), high risk for ASCVD, chronic kidney disease, and/or heart failure within our health system. Patients are invited to participate and randomly assigned to either simultaneous education and medication management, or a period of education prior to medication management. Patient navigators (trained, non-licensed staff) are the primary points of contact while a pharmacist or nurse practitioner reviews and authorizes each medication initiation and titration under an institution-approved collaborative drug therapy management protocol with supervision from a cardiologist and/or endocrinologist. Patient engagement is managed through software to support communication, automation, workflow, and standardization. CONCLUSION: We are testing a remote, navigator-driven, pharmacist-led, and physician-overseen management strategy to optimize GDMT for T2D as a population-level strategy to close the gap between guidelines and clinical practice for patients with T2D at elevated CV and/or kidney risk.

Efficacy of Sotagliflozin in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes in Relation to Baseline Hemoglobin A1c.

BACKGROUND: The SCORED (Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular and Renal Events in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Moderate Renal Impairment Who Are at Cardiovascular Risk) and SOLOIST-WHF (Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Post Worsening Heart Failure) trials demonstrated that sotagliflozin, an SGLT1 and SGLT2 inhibitor, improves outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes who have heart failure (HF) or kidney disease. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the efficacy of sotagliflozin on HF clinical outcomes in individuals with differing baseline glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels. METHODS: We included all adults from SCORED and SOLOIST-WHF. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, hospitalizations for HF, and urgent visits for HF. The efficacy of sotagliflozin compared with placebo was evaluated by baseline HbA1c using competing-risk marginal proportional hazards models. RESULTS: We identified 11,744 adults. Individuals with HbA1c ≤7.5% experienced the primary outcome at a lower rate in the sotagliflozin group (11.2 per 100 person-years) than the placebo group (15.5 per 100 person-years) (HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.57-0.93). Similarly, individuals with HbA1c of 7.6% to 9.0% experienced the primary outcome at a lower rate in the sotagliflozin group (7.3 per 100 person-years) than the placebo group (9.4 per 100 person-years) (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.63-0.96). These findings were also consistent among individuals with HbA1c >9.0%, with a primary outcome rate in the sotagliflozin group (7.8 per 100 person-years) that was lower than the placebo group (11.6 per 100 person-years) (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.50-0.84). The efficacy of sotagliflozin was consistent by baseline HbA1c level (P for interaction = 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with type 2 diabetes and either HF or kidney disease, sotagliflozin reduced HF outcomes irrespective of baseline HbA1c.

Effect of Sotagliflozin on Early Mortality and Heart Failure-Related Events: A Post Hoc Analysis of SOLOIST-WHF.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 25% of patients admitted to hospitals for worsening heart failure (WHF) are readmitted within 30 days. OBJECTIVES: The authors conducted a post hoc analysis of the SOLOIST-WHF (Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Post-WHF) trial to evaluate the efficacy of sotagliflozin versus placebo to decrease mortality and HF-related events among patients who began study treatment on or before discharge from their index hospitalization. METHODS: The main endpoint of interest was cardiovascular death or HF-related event (HF hospitalization or urgent care visit) occurring within 90 and 30 days after discharge for the index WHF hospitalization. Treatment comparisons were by proportional hazards models, generating HRs, 95% CIs, and P values. RESULTS: Of 1,222 randomized patients, 596 received study drug on or before their date of discharge. Sotagliflozin reduced the main endpoint at 90 days after discharge (HR: 0.54 [95% CI: 0.35-0.82]; P = 0.004) and at 30 days (HR: 0.49 [95% CI: 0.27-0.91]; P = 0.023) and all-cause mortality at 90 days (HR: 0.39 [95% CI: 0.17-0.88]; P = 0.024). In subgroup analyses, sotagliflozin reduced the 90-day main endpoint regardless of sex, age, estimated glomerular filtration rate, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, left ventricular ejection fraction, or mineralocorticoid receptor agonist use. Sotagliflozin was well-tolerated but with slightly higher rates of diarrhea and volume-related events than placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Starting sotagliflozin before discharge in patients with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for WHF significantly decreased cardiovascular deaths and HF events through 30 and 90 days after discharge, emphasizing the importance of beginning sodium glucose cotransporter treatment before discharge.

Cardiorenal protective effects of canagliflozin in CREDENCE according to glucose lowering.

INTRODUCTION: Relationships between glycemic-lowering effects of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors and impact on kidney and cardiovascular outcomes are uncertain. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed 4395 individuals with prebaseline and postbaseline hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) randomized to canagliflozin (n=2193) or placebo (n=2202) in The Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes with Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation trial. Effects on HbA1c were assessed using mixed models. Mediation of treatment effects by achieved glycemic control was analyzed using proportional hazards regression with and without adjustment for achieved HbA1c. End points included combined kidney or cardiovascular death, end-stage kidney disease or doubling of serum creatinine (primary trial outcome), and individual end point components. RESULTS: HbA1c lowering was modified by baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). For baseline eGFR 60-90, 45-59, and 30-44 mL/min/1.73 m2, overall HbA1c (canagliflozin vs placebo) decreased by -0.24%, -0.14%, and -0.08% respectively and likelihood of >0.5% decrease in HbA1c decreased with ORs of 1.47 (95% CI 1.27 to 1.67), 1.12 (0.94 to 1.33) and 0.99 (0.83 to 1.18), respectively. Adjustment for postbaseline HbA1c marginally attenuated canagliflozin effects on primary and kidney composite outcomes: unadjusted HR 0.67 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.80) and 0.66 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.81); adjusted for week 13 HbA1c, HR 0.71 (95% CI 0.060 to 0.84) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.83). Results adjusted for time-varying HbA1c or HbA1c as a cubic spline were similar and consistent with preserved clinical benefits across a range of excellent and poor glycemic control. CONCLUSIONS: The glycemic effects of canagliflozin are attenuated at lower eGFR but effects on kidney and cardiac end points are preserved. Non-glycemic effects may be primarily responsible for the kidney and cardioprotective benefits of canagliflozin.22.

In-Hospital Use of PCSK9 Inhibitors in the Post ACS Patient: What Does the Evidence Show?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to analyze and discuss the most recent data on in hospital prescription of Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). RECENT FINDINGS: Recent randomized clinical trials (RTCs) have demonstrated a beneficial effect of monoclonal antibodies (mAb) PCSK9i prescription in patients with ACS on rapid reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and on coronary atherosclerosis assessed by intracoronary imaging. Additionally, the safety profile of mAb PCSK9i was confirmed in all RTCs. Available RCTs show the effectiveness and rapid achievement of LDL-C levels according to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and European Society of Cardiology guidelines for ACS patients. However, RCTs addressing cardiovascular outcomes of PCSK9i in-hospital initiation in ACS patients are currently ongoing.

Patients and Their Physician's Perspectives About Oral Anticoagulation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Not Receiving an Anticoagulant.

Importance: The underuse of oral anticoagulation in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major issue that is not well understood. Objective: To understand the lack of anticoagulation by assessing the perceptions of patients with AF who are not receiving anticoagulation and their physician's about the risk of stroke and the benefits and risks of anticoagulation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included patients with nonvalvular AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2 or more (calculated as congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 years and older, diabetes, stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, age 65 to 74 years, and sex category) who were not receiving anticoagulation and were enrolled from 19 sites within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence Registry (PINNACLE Registry) between January 18, 2017, and May 7, 2018. Data were collected from January 18, 2017, to September 30, 2019, and analyzed from April 2022 to March 2023. Exposure: Each patient enrolled in the study completed a survey, and their treating physician then conducted a clinical review of their care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Assessment of willingness for anticoagulation treatment and its appropriateness after central review by a panel of 4 cardiologists. Use of anticoagulation at 1 year follow-up was compared vs similar patients at other centers in the PINNACLE Registry. Results: Of the 817 patients enrolled, the median (IQR) age was 76.0 (69.0-83.0) years, 369 (45.2%) were women, and the median (IQR) CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.0 (3.0-6.0). The top 5 reasons physicians cited for no anticoagulation were low AF burden or successful rhythm control (278 [34.0%]), patient refusal (272 [33.3%]), perceived low risk of stroke (206 [25.2%]), fall risk (175 [21.4%]), and high bleeding risk (167 [20.4%]). After rereview, 221 physicians (27.1%) would reconsider prescribing oral anticoagulation as compared with 311 patients (38.1%), including 67 (24.6%) whose physician cited patient refusal. Of 647 patients (79.2%) adjudicated as appropriate or may be appropriate for anticoagulation, physicians would reconsider anticoagulation for only 177 patients (21.2%), while 527 patients (64.5%) would either agree to starting anticoagulation (311 [38.1%]) or were neutral (216 [27.3%]) to starting anticoagulation. Upon follow-up, 119 patients (14.6%) in the BOAT-AF study were prescribed anticoagulation, as compared with 55 879 of 387 975 similar patients (14.4%) at other centers in the PINNACLE Registry. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that patients with AF who are not receiving anticoagulation are more willing to consider anticoagulation than their physicians. These data emphasize the need to revisit any prior decision against anticoagulation in a shared decision-making manner.

Effects of Ertugliflozin on Kidney Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure at Baseline in the Evaluation of Ertugliflozin Efficacy and Safety Cardiovascular Outcomes (VERTIS CV) Trial.

Introduction: In the eValuation of ERTugliflozin effIcacy and Safety CardioVascular outcomes (VERTIS CV) trial (NCT01986881), patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) were randomized (1:1:1) to placebo, ertugliflozin 5 mg or 15 mg (doses pooled for analyses as prospectively planned). In this post hoc analysis, the effects of ertugliflozin on kidney outcomes were assessed in analyses stratified by baseline heart failure (HF). Methods: Baseline HF was defined as a history of HF or prerandomization left ventricular ejection fraction ≤45%. Outcomes included estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) over time, total 5-year eGFR slopes and time to first event of a prespecified exploratory kidney composite outcome of sustained ≥40% decrease from baseline eGFR, chronic kidney replacement therapy, or kidney death. All analyses were stratified by baseline HF status. Results: Compared with no-HF at baseline (n = 5807; 70.4%), patients with HF (n = 2439; 29.6%) had a notably faster rate of eGFR decline, which is unlikely to be explained by the slightly lower baseline eGFR in that group. Ertugliflozin treatment resulted in a slower rate of eGFR decline in both subgroups; total placebo-adjusted 5-year eGFR slopes (ml/min per 1.73 m2 per year [95% confidence intervals; CI]) were 0.96 (0.67-1.24) and 0.95 (0.76-1.14) for HF and no-HF subgroups, respectively. The placebo HF (vs. placebo no-HF) subgroup had a higher incidence of the composite kidney outcome (35/834 [4.20%] vs. 50/1913 [2.61%]). Hazard ratios (95% CI) for the effect of ertugliflozin on the composite kidney outcome did not differ significantly between HF and no-HF subgroups: 0.53 (0.33-0.84) and 0.76 (0.53-1.08), respectively (P interaction  = 0.22). Conclusion: Although patients with HF at baseline had a faster rate of eGFR decline in VERTIS CV, the beneficial effects of ertugliflozin on kidney outcomes did not differ when stratified by baseline HF.

Cardiorenal outcomes, kidney function, and other safety outcomes with ertugliflozin in older adults with type 2 diabetes (VERTIS CV): secondary analyses from a randomised, double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: VERTIS CV was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre cardiovascular outcomes trial that evaluated the cardiovascular efficacy and safety of ertugliflozin in adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The primary objective of VERTIS CV was to show non-inferiority of ertugliflozin to placebo with respect to the primary outcome, major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke). The analyses reported here aimed to assess cardiorenal outcomes, kidney function, and other safety outcomes with ertugliflozin in older adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease compared with younger participants. METHODS: VERTIS CV was done at 567 centres in 34 countries. Participants (aged ≥40 years) with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to once-daily ertugliflozin 5 mg, ertugliflozin 15 mg, or placebo in addition to background standard-of-care treatment. Random assignment was done with the use of an interactive voice-response system. The study outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events, hospitalisation for heart failure or cardiovascular death, cardiovascular death, hospitalisation for heart failure, prespecified kidney composite outcomes, kidney function, and other assessments of safety. Cardiorenal outcomes, kidney function, and safety outcomes were evaluated by baseline age (≥65 years and <65 years [prespecified] and ≥75 years and <75 years [post hoc]). The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01986881. FINDINGS: Between Dec 13, 2013, and July 31, 2015, and between June 1, 2016, and April 14, 2017, 8246 adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were recruited to the study and randomly assigned. 2752 patients were assigned to ertugliflozin 5 mg, 2747 patients to ertugliflozin 15 mg, and 2747 patients to placebo. 8238 participants received at least one dose of ertugliflozin 5 mg, ertugliflozin 15 mg, or placebo. 4145 (50·3%) of 8238 participants were aged 65 years and older, including 903 (11·0%) participants aged 75 years and older. 5764 (70·0%) of 8238 participants were male and 2474 (30·0%) were female, and 7233 (87·8%) of 8238 participants were White, 497 (6·0%) were Asian, 235 (2·9%) were Black, and 273 (3·3%) were classified as other. The mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was lower and the type 2 diabetes duration longer for those aged 65 years and older versus those younger than 65 years, and for those aged 75 years and older versus those younger than 75 years. Cardiovascular outcomes were more common in the older age subgroups than in the younger age subgroups. Similar to the overall VERTIS CV cohort, ertugliflozin did not increase the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure, cardiovascular death alone, or the kidney composite outcome (using doubling of serum creatinine, dialysis or transplantation, or kidney death), and reduced the risk of hospitalisation for heart failure and the exploratory kidney composite outcome (using a 40% sustained eGFR decrease, dialysis or transplantation, or kidney death) in the older age subgroups (pinteraction>0·05 for outcomes assessed). A slower decline in eGFR and a smaller increase in the urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio were observed over time in all age subgroups taking ertugliflozin compared with placebo. Across age subgroups, safety outcomes were consistent with the known profile of ertugliflozin. INTERPRETATION: The effects of ertugliflozin on cardiorenal outcomes, kidney function, and safety outcomes were generally similar across age subgroups. These results have the potential to help clinical decision making by providing a longer-term evaluation of the cardiorenal safety and overall tolerability of ertugliflozin in a large population of older adults. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Rahway, NJ, USA in collaboration with Pfizer Inc, New York, NY, USA.