SGLT2i‑treated heart failure patients with a reduced ejection fraction: A meta‑analysis
- Authors:
- Published online on: October 10, 2023 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12248
- Article Number: 548
-
Copyright: © Ye et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.
Abstract
Introduction
Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are a type of medication developed to control diabetic hyperglycemia that works by reducing renal glucose reabsorption and inducing glycosuria (1,2). Recent clinical trials have shown that SGLT2i is effective in reducing mortality and hospitalization due to heart failure (HF) in patients with type 2 diabetes, regardless of whether they have HF (3,4). In patients with diabetes, SGLT2i reduced the risk of all-cause death and hospitalization for HF by 23% (5).
Studies have also shown that SGLT2i has a positive effect on renal function, urinary sodium excretion, myocardial metabolism, and vascular function, making it beneficial for patients with heart disease (6,7). Preliminary randomized clinical trials (RCTs) authorized by the US Food and Drug Administration have also demonstrated the cardiovascular safety of SGLT2i. Empagliflozin, a commonly used SGLT2i, has been shown to reduce hospitalization rates, cardiovascular death, and biomarkers in patients with HF (8). RCTs have evaluated the effects of SGLT2i in patients with HF for improving symptoms, mortality, hospitalization, and the levels of relevant biomarkers (9,10). Based on data from mechanistic studies and preliminary clinical trials, larger clinical trials with SGLT2i are currently investigating the potential use of SGLT2i in patients with HF with and without diabetes mellitus type 2 (T2D) (11). In previous large sample trials, empagliflozin also showed different outcomes in combination with cardiovascular endpoints (cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke); it was found that the incidence of primary composite cardiovascular outcomes and of death from any cause was lower after empagliflozin treatment (12). Subjects with diabetes and atherosclerosis were at greater risk of hospitalization for HF and vascular disease (13). Therefore, there is a need for more effective and safer drug treatments. According to the existing RCT studies, the present meta-analysis aimed to further elucidate the role of SGLT2i in patients with preexisting HF with a reduced ejection fraction with or without diabetes.
Methods
Search strategy. The present meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the established Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines (14). The relevant literature published from conception of a database to July 2021 was comprehensively and systematically searched across multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and other databases without language limitations. A range of relevant keywords were used, including ‘Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors’ or ‘SGLT2i’ or ‘canagliflozin’ or ‘dapagliflozin’ or ‘empagliflozin’ or ‘ertugliflozin’ and ‘HF’ or ‘HF with reduced ejection fraction’ and ‘randomized clinical trials’ or ‘RCTs’.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
The following were the criteria for inclusion of studies: i) RCTs; ii) study population consisted of patients with HF and a low ejection fraction with or without diabetes [left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <40%]; iii) treatment measures had to be SGLT2i and placebo-controlled; iv) the primary outcome indicators were hospitalization for HF/cardiovascular death, cardiovascular death, hospitalization for HF and all causes mortality. The exclusion criteria were: i) Duplicate articles; ii) conference abstracts, comments, letters, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis; iii) non-RCTs; and iv) studies where major research indicators were not reported.
Data extraction
The researchers independently searched the studies and extracted the data, including trial design, patient baseline data statistics, and clinical results.
Quality assessment
The literature included underwent a risk bias assessment using the RCT bias risk assessment tool provided by the Cochrane Collaboration (15). The bias assessment included various domains, such as random sequence generation and allocation concealment, blinding of patients and investigators, blinding of outcome assessors, flawed outcome data, and selective reporting.
Statistical analysis
Statistical analyses were undertaken using Stata statistical software (version 15.0; StataCorp, LLC). Review Manager version 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration) was used to assess the risk of bias. The combined effect was estimated using the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Based on the heterogeneity test, random or fixed effects models were selected to estimate the pooled effects. The Q test and I2 test were used to estimate inter-study heterogeneity. When P>0.1 and I2≤50%, the fixed effects model was adopted, whereas when P<0.1 and I2≥0%, the random effects model was adopted. Each study was gradually removed for sensitivity analysis, which evaluated the stability of the results. Due to the small number of studies included in the present study, funnel plots and Egger's test were not used for publication bias analysis. P<0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference.
Results
Search results
A total of 181 studies were retrieved and identified, and 11 duplicate studies were eliminated. The titles and abstracts were read, after which 145 irrelevant studies were excluded, and 25 full papers were read. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 20 studies were excluded, and 5 studies were included in the present meta-analysis. The flow chart of the study selection process is shown in Fig. 1. Information on the included studies is presented in Table I. The mean age of patients was >60 years. The types of SGLT2i used in the included studies were empagliflozin and dapagliflozin, with the same intervention dose of 10 mg. The mean LVEF% was <40%. The intervention time was >12 months.
Study characteristics and risk of bias
The results of the risk bias evaluation in studies are shown in Fig. 2. The 5 studies included were all RCTs performed with a clear randomization method. Stratified seclusion, implementation of blinding, data integrity without loss, and other risks were unknown. The included studies were all low-risk and of high quality.
Pooled effect estimation of the risk of hospitalization for HF/cardiovascular death
The pooled effect estimation of the risk of hospitalization for HF/cardiovascular death is shown in Fig. 3A. The fixed-effect model showed that the risk of hospitalization for HF/cardiovascular death in the SGLT2i group was lower than that in the placebo control group and the differences were statistically significant [OR=0.72, 95% CI (0.67-0.78), P<0.0001; I2=0.0%, P=0.966]. There was no heterogeneity among the studies. A subgroup analysis of the patients with or without diabetes found that the risk of hospitalization for HF/cardiovascular death was lower than that of the placebo control group and the difference was statistically significant [OR=0.73, 95% CI (0.67-0.80), P<0.0001; I2=0.0%, P=0.937; and OR=0.70, 95% CI (0.61-0.80), P<0.0001; I2=0.0%, P=0.729]. Analysis of sensitivity results is shown in Fig. 3B. Each study was gradually removed, and the pooled effect value was within the range of the 95% CI (0.67-0.78) and the results of the study were stable.
Pooled effect estimation of the risk of cardiovascular death
The pooled effect estimation of the risk of cardiovascular death is shown in Fig. 4A. The fixed-effect model showed that the risk of cardiovascular death in the SGLT2i group was lower than that in the placebo control group and the difference was statistically significant [OR=0.84, 95% CI (0.77-0.93), P<0.0001; I2=0.0%, P=0.633]. There was no heterogeneity among the studies. A subgroup analysis of patients with or without diabetes found that the risk of cardiovascular death was lower than that of placebo control and the difference was statistically significant [OR=0.86, 95% CI (0.77-0.97), P=0.013; I2=0.0%, P=0.804; and OR=0.80, 95% CI (0.67-0.95), P<0.0001; I2=28.7%, P=0.013]. The results of the sensitivity analysis are shown in Fig. 4B. Each study was gradually removed, and the pooled effect value was within the range of the 95% CI (0.77-0.93), and the results of the study were stable.
Pooled effect estimation of the risk of hospitalization for HF
The pooled effect estimation of the risk of hospitalization for HF is shown in Fig. 5A. The fixed-effect model showed that the risk of hospitalization for HF in the SGLT2i group was lower than that in the placebo control group and the differences were statistically significant [OR=0.69, 95% CI (0.63-0.75), P<0.0001; I2=0.0%, P=0.933]. There was no heterogeneity among the studies. A subgroup analysis of patients with or without diabetes found that the risk of hospitalization for HF was lower than that of the placebo controls and the differences were statistically significant [OR=0.68, 95% CI (0.61-0.76), P<0.0001; I2=0.0%, P=0.850; and OR=0.70, 95% CI (0.60-0.82), P<0.0001; I2=0.0%, P=0.613]. The results of the sensitivity analysis are shown in Fig. 5B. Each study was gradually removed, and the pooled effect value was within the range of the 95% CI (0.63-0.75), and the results of the study were stable.
Pooled effect estimation of all-cause mortality
The pooled effect estimate of all-cause mortality is shown in Fig. 6A. The fixed-effect model showed that the risk of all-cause mortality in the SGLT2i group was lower than that in the placebo control group and the difference was statistically significant [OR=0.79, 95% CI (0.71-0.89), P<0.0001; I2=3.3%, P=0.376]. There was no heterogeneity among the studies. A subgroup analysis of patients with or without diabetes found that all-cause mortality was lower than that of placebo controls and the difference was statistically significant [OR=0.71, 95% CI (0.58-0.88), P<0.0001; I2=27.6%, P=0.240; and OR=0.84, 95% CI (0.73-0.96), P=0.012; I2=0.0%, P=0.659]. The results of the sensitivity analysis are shown in Fig. 6B. Each study was gradually removed, and the pooled effect value was within the range of the 95% CI (0.71-0.89) and the results of the study were stable.
Discussion
Studies have shown that SGLT2 is present in early proximal brush like margin tubules and functions by reabsorbing almost all filtered glucose (16,17). SGLT2i blocks glucose reabsorption of proximal convoluted tubules, further leading to secondary osmosis and then sodium diuretic and diuretic effects (16). The SGLT2i dagliflozin not only lowers blood glucose but has also shown a positive effect on patients with HF in recent studies (18). Blood sugar levels drop due to the increased glucose excretion. In the case of hypoglycemia, a reduction in mortality from HF was observed in cohort studies (19). Given the low levels of SGLT2 in cardiomyocytes, there is evidence that SGLT2-independent effects are likely to be achieved by the off-target effect of SGLT2 in the myocardium (20). It is well established that individuals with diabetes have a higher risk of cardiovascular complications, and appropriate diabetes control helps to minimize these complications. SGLT2i has been shown to be an effective treatment for diabetes with favorable renal side effects and improved cardiovascular outcomes (5,21,22). The present meta-analysis focused on treating patients with known HF and showed a significant reduction in cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF compared with placebo groups.
The role of cardiologists and HF specialists in diabetes management is changing with the introduction of SGLT2i and its improvement in cardiovascular outcomes in both diabetic and non-diabetic patients. Studies have shown equivalent efficacy with SGLT2i therapy in patients without diabetes or with glycated hemoglobin levels ≥5.7% and <5.7% (23,24). Consistent with the above research results, the results of the present meta-analysis showed that for patients with a reduced ejection fraction, regardless of whether they had diabetes or not, SGLT2i had a better effect on the treatment of HF. Salah et al (25) showed that the use of SGLT2i in AHF patients reduced the risk of HF readmission by 48% and improved Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) scale scores. Spertus et al (26) showed that SGLT2i in HF patients could alleviate HF symptoms regardless of whether patients had diabetes as was observed based on the increased KCCQ Total Symptom Score. The present meta-analysis included patients with HF with or without diabetes mellitus and an ejection fraction of <40%, and it was concluded that cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF was significantly lower in patients treated with SGLT2i. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, 5 RCTs with a total of 34,108 participants were included. The fixed-effect model showed that hospitalization/cardiovascular death, cardiovascular death, hospitalization for HF, and death from all causes in patients treated with SGLT2i were significantly lower than those treated with placebo. That is, the SGLT2i group exhibited significantly better outcomes compared with the placebo group. In addition, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of death and worsening of HF and alleviated the symptoms of the disease in patients of different ages (27).
Treatment with SGLT2i in patients with T2D has been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization for HF and slow the progression of kidney diseases (5). There is a link between diabetes and HF. However, no approved drugs reduce the risk of HF in diabetics. Similar to the findings of the present analysis, a systematic review and meta-analysis in 2021 showed that patients in the empagliflozin group had lower rates of cardiovascular mortality and hospitalization for worsening HF than those in the placebo group (28). The present study more comprehensively included the SGLT2i studies and incorporated the latest research. The present study excluded the effect of diabetes and found that SGLT2i could improve the risk of HF in terms of HF hospitalization, cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality. One study found that compared with placebo, SGLT2i primarily improved mortality, HF hospitalization rate, HF emergency department visits, and reduced serious adverse events (29). A recent study found that SGLT2i reduced the risk of cardiovascular death and hospitalization for HF in patients with diabetes (30). Gager et al (31) found that empagliflozin did not achieve statistical significance in reducing cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. The studies included in the present analysis found that empagliflozin significantly reduced all-cause mortality in patients with a reduced ejection fraction and HF. One explanation for the difference may be due to differences in the range of patients included. Studies have shown that SGLT2i significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular mortality or HF in patients with a lower ejection fraction (32). Therefore, all patients with HF included in the present study had an ejection fraction <40%.
The present analysis has several limitations. Although there are several SGLT2i, studies using only two SGLT2i (dapagliflozin and empagliflozin) were included to compare with placebo. The number of RCTs included in the present analysis was too small; thus, subgroup analysis of two different SGLT2icould not be performed. Additional high-quality articles are required to improve our understanding of the benefits of SGLT2i for the management of patients with HF with a reduced ejection fraction.
In conclusion, SGLT2i can reduce the risk of HF hospitalization, cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality in patients with HF and a reduced ejection fraction, regardless of the presence or absence of diabetes.
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Funding
Funding: This study was supported by the Medical Research Project of Sichuan Province (grant no. S22091) and the Medical Research Project of Sichuan Province (grant no. S21111).
Availability of data and materials
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the present study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Authors' contributions
KZ and QY contributed to the conception and design of the study, preparation of the material, collection of the data, and analysis of the data. QY wrote the first draft. KZ and QY both contributed to the revision of the manuscript. KZ and QY have read and approved the final manuscript. KZ and QY confirm the authenticity of all the raw data.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Patient consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
References
Wright EM, Loo DD and Hirayama BA: Biology of human sodium glucose transporters. Physiol Rev. 91:733–794. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Nauck MA: Update on developments with SGLT2 inhibitors in the management of type 2 diabetes. Drug Des Devel Ther. 8:1335–1380. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Täger T, Atar D, Agewall S, Katus HA, Grundtvig M, Cleland JGF, Clark AL, Fröhlich H and Frankenstein L: Comparative efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) for cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Heart Fail Rev. 26:1421–1435. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Fernandes GC, Fernandes A, Cardoso R, Penalver J, Knijnik L, Mitrani RD, Myerburg RJ and Goldberger JJ: Association of SGLT2 inhibitors with arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in patients with type 2 diabetes or heart failure: A meta-analysis of 34 randomized controlled trials. Heart Rhythm. 18:1098–1105. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Zelniker TA, Wiviott SD, Raz I, Im K, Goodrich EL, Bonaca MP, Mosenzon O, Kato ET, Cahn A, Furtado RHM, et al: SGLT2 inhibitors for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcome trials. Lancet. 393:31–39. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Ujjawal A, Schreiber B and Verma A: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in kidney transplant recipients: What is the evidence? Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab. 13(20420188221090001)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Chen S, Coronel R, Hollmann MW, Weber NC and Zuurbier CJ: Direct cardiac effects of SGLT2 inhibitors. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 21(45)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Packer M, Anker SD, Butler J, Filippatos G, Pocock SJ, Carson P, Januzzi J, Verma S, Tsutsui H, Brueckmann M, et al: Cardiovascular and renal outcomes with empagliflozin in heart failure. N Engl J Med. 383:1413–1424. 2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
De Marzo V, Savarese G, Porto I, Metra M and Ameri P: Efficacy of SGLT2-inhibitors across different definitions of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 24:537–543. 2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Younes AM, Salem M, Maraey A, Nomigolzar S, Sewell K, Khalil M, Elzanaty A, Saeyeldin A and Dar M: Safety outcomes of SGLT2i in the heart failure trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 366:51–56. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Li X, Wu H, Peng H and Jiang H: Comparison the effects of finerenone and SGLT2i on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A network meta-analysis. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 13(1078686)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Wiviott SD, Raz I, Bonaca MP, Mosenzon O, Kato ET, Cahn A, Silverman MG, Zelniker TA, Kuder JF, Murphy SA, et al: Dapagliflozin and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 380:347–357. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Zinman B, Wanner C, Lachin JM, Fitchett D, Bluhmki E, Hantel S, Mattheus M, Devins T, Johansen OE, Woerle HJ, et al: Empagliflozin, cardiovascular outcomes, and mortality in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 373:2117–2128. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J and Altman DG: Prisma group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 151:264–269. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Tromp J, Ouwerkerk W, van Veldhuisen DJ, Hillege HL, Richards AM, van der Meer P, Anand IS, Lam CS and Voors AAJHF: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of pharmacological treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. JACC Heart Fail. 10:73–84. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Shentu Y, Li Y, Xie S, Jiang H, Sun S, Lin R, Chen C, Bai Y, Zhang Y, Zheng C and Zhou Y: Empagliflozin, a sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor, ameliorates peritoneal fibrosis via suppressing TGF-β/Smad signaling. Int Immunopharmacol. 93(107374)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Dharmalingam M, Aravind SR, Thacker H, Paramesh S, Mohan B, Chawla M, Asirvatham A, Goyal R, Shembalkar J, Balamurugan R, et al: Efficacy and safety of remogliflozin etabonate, a new sodium glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A 24-week, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial. Drugs. 80:587–600. 2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Cao Y, Li P, Li Y and Han Y: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in heart failure: An updated meta-analysis. ESC Heart Fail. 9:1942–1953. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Kaze AD, Zhuo M, Kim SC, Patorno E and Paik JM: Association of SGLT2 inhibitors with cardiovascular, kidney, and safety outcomes among patients with diabetic kidney disease: A meta-analysis. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 21(47)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Koyani CN, Plastira I, Sourij H, Hallström S, Schmidt A, Rainer PP, Bugger H, Frank S, Malle E and von Lewinski D: Empagliflozin protects heart from inflammation and energy depletion via AMPK activation. Pharmacol Res. 158(104870)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Usman MS, Siddiqi TJ, Memon MM, Khan MS, Rawasia WF, Ayub MT, Sreenivasan J and Golzar Y: Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors and cardiovascular outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 25:495–502. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Zelniker TA, Wiviott SD, Raz I, Im K, Goodrich EL, Furtado RHM, Bonaca MP, Mosenzon O, Kato ET, Cahn A, et al: Comparison of the effects of glucagon-like peptide receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors for prevention of major adverse cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Circulation. 139:2022–2031. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
American Diabetes Association. 2. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes: standards of medical care in diabetes-2019. Diabetes Care. 42:S13–S28. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Chatterton H, Younger T, Fischer A and Khunti K: Programme Development Group. Risk identification and interventions to prevent type 2 diabetes in adults at high risk: Summary of NICE guidance. BMJ. 345(e4624)2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Salah HM and Fudim M: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Heart Fail Clin. 18:625–634. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Spertus JA, Birmingham MC, Nassif M, Damaraju C, Abbate A, Butler J, Lanfear DE, Lingvay I, Kosiborod MN and Januzzi JL: The SGLT2 inhibitor canagliflozin in heart failure: The CHIEF-HF remote, patient-centered randomized trial. Nat Med. 28:809–813. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Martinez FA, Serenelli M, Nicolau JC, Petrie MC, Chiang CE, Tereshchenko S, Solomon SD, Inzucchi SE, Køber L, Kosiborod MN, et al: Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction according to age: Insights from DAPA-HF. Circulation. 141:100–111. 2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Pan D, Xu L, Chen P, Jiang H, Shi D and Guo M: Empagliflozin in patients with heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Front Cardiovasc Med. 8(683281)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Chambergo-Michilot D, Tauma-Arrué A and Loli-Guevara SJIH: Effects and safety of SGLT2 inhibitors compared to placebo in patients with heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 32(100690)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Yan Y, Liu B, Du J, Wang J, Jing X, Liu Y, Deng S, Du J and She Q: SGLT2i versus ARNI in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. ESC Heart Fail. 8:2210–2219. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Gager GM, von Lewinski D, Sourij H, Jilma B, Eyileten C, Filipiak K, Huelsmann M, Kubica J, Postula M and Siller-Matula JM: Effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on ion homeostasis and oxidative stress associated mechanisms in heart failure. Biomed Pharmacother. 143(112169)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Kato ET, Silverman MG, Mosenzon O, Zelniker TA, Cahn A, Furtado RHM, Kuder J, Murphy SA, Bhatt DL, Leiter LA, et al: Effect of Dapagliflozin on heart failure and mortality in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Circulation. 139:2528–2536. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Petrie MC, Verma S, Docherty KF, Inzucchi SE, Anand I, Bělohlávek J, Böhm M, Chiang CE, Chopra VK, de Boer RA, et al: Effect of dapagliflozin on worsening heart failure and cardiovascular death in patients with heart failure with and without diabetes. JAMA. 323:1353–1368. 2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
Anker SD, Butler J, Filippatos G, Khan MS, Marx N, Lam CS, Schnaidt S, Ofstad AP, Brueckmann M, Jamal W, et al: Effect of empagliflozin on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with heart failure by baseline diabetes status: Results from the EMPEROR-reduced trial. Circulation. 143:337–349. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
McMurray JJ, Solomon SD, Inzucchi SE, Køber L, Kosiborod MN, Martinez FA, Ponikowski P, Sabatine MS, Anand IS, Bělohlávek J, et al: Dapagliflozin in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 381:1995–2008. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar |