Kasper Bonnesen, Uffe Heide-Jørgensen, Diana H Christensen, Timothy L Lash, Sean Hennessy, Anthony Matthews, Lars Pedersen, Reimar W Thomsen, Morten Schmidt
{"title":"Empagliflozin与Dapagliflozin对成人2型糖尿病患者心血管疗效的比较:目标试验模拟。","authors":"Kasper Bonnesen, Uffe Heide-Jørgensen, Diana H Christensen, Timothy L Lash, Sean Hennessy, Anthony Matthews, Lars Pedersen, Reimar W Thomsen, Morten Schmidt","doi":"10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.068613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Empagliflozin and dapagliflozin have proven cardiovascular benefits in people with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, but their comparative effectiveness is unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used nationwide, population-based Danish health registries to emulate a hypothetical target trial comparing empagliflozin versus dapagliflozin initiation, in addition to standard care, among people with treated type 2 diabetes from 2014 through 2020. The outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, heart failure (HF), or cardiovascular death (major adverse cardiovascular event). Participants were followed until an outcome, emigration, or death occurred; 6 years after initiation; or December 31, 2021, whichever occurred first. Logistic regression was used to compute inverse probability of treatment and censoring weights, controlling for 57 potential confounders. In intention-to-treat analyses, 6-year adjusted risks, risk differences, and risk ratios, considering noncardiovascular death competing events, were estimated. Analyses were stratified by coexisting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and HF. A per-protocol design was performed as a secondary analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 36 670 eligible empagliflozin and 20 606 eligible dapagliflozin initiators. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the adjusted 6-year absolute risk of major adverse cardiovascular event was not different between empagliflozin and dapagliflozin initiators (10.0% versus 10.0%; risk difference, 0.0% [95% CI, -0.9% to 1.0%]; risk ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.11]). The findings were consistent in people with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (risk difference, -2.3% [95% CI, -8.2% to 3.5%]; risk ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.74 to 1.14]) and without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (risk difference, 0.3% [95% CI, -0.6% to 1.2%]; risk ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.16]) and in people with HF (risk difference, 1.1% [95% CI, -6.5% to 8.6%]; risk ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.37]) and without HF (risk difference, -0.1% [95% CI, -1.0% to 0.8%]; risk ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.09]). The 6-year risks of major adverse cardiovascular event were also not different in the per-protocol analysis (9.1% versus 8.8%; risk difference, 0.2% [95% CI, -2.1% to 2.5%]; risk ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.80 to 1.32]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Empagliflozin and dapagliflozin initiators had no differences in 6-year cardiovascular outcomes in adults with treated type 2 diabetes with or without coexisting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or HF.</p>","PeriodicalId":35,"journal":{"name":"Energy & Fuels","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Cardiovascular Effectiveness of Empagliflozin Versus Dapagliflozin in Adults With Treated Type 2 Diabetes: A Target Trial Emulation.\",\"authors\":\"Kasper Bonnesen, Uffe Heide-Jørgensen, Diana H Christensen, Timothy L Lash, Sean Hennessy, Anthony Matthews, Lars Pedersen, Reimar W Thomsen, Morten Schmidt\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.068613\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Empagliflozin and dapagliflozin have proven cardiovascular benefits in people with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, but their comparative effectiveness is unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used nationwide, population-based Danish health registries to emulate a hypothetical target trial comparing empagliflozin versus dapagliflozin initiation, in addition to standard care, among people with treated type 2 diabetes from 2014 through 2020. The outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, heart failure (HF), or cardiovascular death (major adverse cardiovascular event). Participants were followed until an outcome, emigration, or death occurred; 6 years after initiation; or December 31, 2021, whichever occurred first. Logistic regression was used to compute inverse probability of treatment and censoring weights, controlling for 57 potential confounders. In intention-to-treat analyses, 6-year adjusted risks, risk differences, and risk ratios, considering noncardiovascular death competing events, were estimated. Analyses were stratified by coexisting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and HF. A per-protocol design was performed as a secondary analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 36 670 eligible empagliflozin and 20 606 eligible dapagliflozin initiators. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the adjusted 6-year absolute risk of major adverse cardiovascular event was not different between empagliflozin and dapagliflozin initiators (10.0% versus 10.0%; risk difference, 0.0% [95% CI, -0.9% to 1.0%]; risk ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.11]). The findings were consistent in people with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (risk difference, -2.3% [95% CI, -8.2% to 3.5%]; risk ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.74 to 1.14]) and without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (risk difference, 0.3% [95% CI, -0.6% to 1.2%]; risk ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.16]) and in people with HF (risk difference, 1.1% [95% CI, -6.5% to 8.6%]; risk ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.37]) and without HF (risk difference, -0.1% [95% CI, -1.0% to 0.8%]; risk ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.09]). The 6-year risks of major adverse cardiovascular event were also not different in the per-protocol analysis (9.1% versus 8.8%; risk difference, 0.2% [95% CI, -2.1% to 2.5%]; risk ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.80 to 1.32]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Empagliflozin and dapagliflozin initiators had no differences in 6-year cardiovascular outcomes in adults with treated type 2 diabetes with or without coexisting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or HF.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy & Fuels\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy & Fuels\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.068613\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENERGY & FUELS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy & Fuels","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.068613","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景经证实,恩格列净和达帕格列净对心血管风险较高的2型糖尿病患者有益,但它们的比较效果尚不清楚:本研究利用丹麦全国范围内的人群健康登记来模拟一项假定目标试验,在 2014 年至 2020 年期间,在接受治疗的 2 型糖尿病患者中,除了标准治疗外,还比较安格列酮与达帕格列酮的起始疗效。研究结果是心肌梗死、缺血性中风、心力衰竭(HF)或心血管死亡(主要不良心血管事件)的综合结果。对参与者进行随访,直至出现结果、移民或死亡;启动后 6 年;或 2021 年 12 月 31 日(以先发生者为准)。在控制 57 个潜在混杂因素的情况下,使用逻辑回归计算治疗的逆概率和删减权重。在意向治疗分析中,估算了6年调整风险、风险差异和考虑非心血管死亡竞争风险的风险比。根据并存的动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病和心房颤动进行了分层分析。作为辅助分析,还进行了一项按方案设计的分析:符合条件的恩格列净和达帕格列净患者分别为36 670人和20 606人。在意向治疗分析中,调整后的6年主要不良心血管事件绝对风险在恩格列净和达帕格列净的初始患者之间没有差异(10.0%对10.0%;风险差异为0.0% [95% CI, -0.9% to 1.0%];风险比为1.00 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.11])。在患有动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病(风险差异为-2.3% [95% CI, -8.2% to 3.5%];风险比为 0.92 [95% CI, 0.74 to 1.14])和未患有动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病(风险差异为 0.3% [95% CI, -0.6% to 1.2%];风险比为1.04[95% CI,0.93至1.16]),以及患有心房颤动的患者(风险差为1.1%[95% CI,-6.5%至8.6%];风险比为1.04[95% CI,0.79至1.37])和未患有心房颤动的患者(风险差为-0.1%[95% CI,-1.0%至0.8%];风险比为0.99[95% CI,0.90至1.09])。在每方案分析中,主要不良心血管事件的6年风险也没有差异(9.1%对8.8%;风险差异为0.2% [95% CI, -2.1% to 2.5%];风险比为1.03 [95% CI, 0.80 to 1.32]):对于合并或不合并动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病或心房颤动的成人2型糖尿病患者,Empagliflozin和dapagliflozin起始治疗者的6年心血管预后没有差异。
Comparative Cardiovascular Effectiveness of Empagliflozin Versus Dapagliflozin in Adults With Treated Type 2 Diabetes: A Target Trial Emulation.
Background: Empagliflozin and dapagliflozin have proven cardiovascular benefits in people with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, but their comparative effectiveness is unknown.
Methods: This study used nationwide, population-based Danish health registries to emulate a hypothetical target trial comparing empagliflozin versus dapagliflozin initiation, in addition to standard care, among people with treated type 2 diabetes from 2014 through 2020. The outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, heart failure (HF), or cardiovascular death (major adverse cardiovascular event). Participants were followed until an outcome, emigration, or death occurred; 6 years after initiation; or December 31, 2021, whichever occurred first. Logistic regression was used to compute inverse probability of treatment and censoring weights, controlling for 57 potential confounders. In intention-to-treat analyses, 6-year adjusted risks, risk differences, and risk ratios, considering noncardiovascular death competing events, were estimated. Analyses were stratified by coexisting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and HF. A per-protocol design was performed as a secondary analysis.
Results: There were 36 670 eligible empagliflozin and 20 606 eligible dapagliflozin initiators. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the adjusted 6-year absolute risk of major adverse cardiovascular event was not different between empagliflozin and dapagliflozin initiators (10.0% versus 10.0%; risk difference, 0.0% [95% CI, -0.9% to 1.0%]; risk ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.11]). The findings were consistent in people with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (risk difference, -2.3% [95% CI, -8.2% to 3.5%]; risk ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.74 to 1.14]) and without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (risk difference, 0.3% [95% CI, -0.6% to 1.2%]; risk ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.16]) and in people with HF (risk difference, 1.1% [95% CI, -6.5% to 8.6%]; risk ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.37]) and without HF (risk difference, -0.1% [95% CI, -1.0% to 0.8%]; risk ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.09]). The 6-year risks of major adverse cardiovascular event were also not different in the per-protocol analysis (9.1% versus 8.8%; risk difference, 0.2% [95% CI, -2.1% to 2.5%]; risk ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.80 to 1.32]).
Conclusions: Empagliflozin and dapagliflozin initiators had no differences in 6-year cardiovascular outcomes in adults with treated type 2 diabetes with or without coexisting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or HF.
期刊介绍:
Energy & Fuels publishes reports of research in the technical area defined by the intersection of the disciplines of chemistry and chemical engineering and the application domain of non-nuclear energy and fuels. This includes research directed at the formation of, exploration for, and production of fossil fuels and biomass; the properties and structure or molecular composition of both raw fuels and refined products; the chemistry involved in the processing and utilization of fuels; fuel cells and their applications; and the analytical and instrumental techniques used in investigations of the foregoing areas.