Boehringer Ingelheim (Norway)

BACKGROUND: The effects of empagliflozin, an inhibitor of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2, in addition to standard care, on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk are not known. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients to receive 10 mg or 25 mg of empagliflozin or placebo once daily. The primary composite outcome was death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, as analyzed in the pooled empagliflozin group versus the placebo group. The key secondary composite outcome was the primary outcome plus hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: A total of 7020 patients were treated (median observation time, 3.1 years). The primary outcome occurred in 490 of 4687 patients (10.5%) in the pooled empagliflozin group and in 282 of 2333 patients (12.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the empagliflozin group, 0.86; 95.02% confidence interval, 0.74 to 0.99; P=0.04 for superiority). There were no significant between-group differences in the rates of myocardial infarction or stroke, but in the empagliflozin group there were significantly lower rates of death from cardiovascular causes (3.7%, vs. 5.9% in the placebo group; 38% relative risk reduction), hospitalization for heart failure (2.7% and 4.1%, respectively; 35% relative risk reduction), and death from any cause (5.7% and 8.3%, respectively; 32% relative risk reduction). There was no significant between-group difference in the key secondary outcome (P=0.08 for superiority). Among patients receiving empagliflozin, there was an increased rate of genital infection but no increase in other adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events who received empagliflozin, as compared with placebo, had a lower rate of the primary composite cardiovascular outcome and of death from any cause when the study drug was added to standard care. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly; EMPA-REG OUTCOME ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01131676.).

BACKGROUND: Diabetes confers an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular and renal events. In the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial, empagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events. We wanted to determine the long-term renal effects of empagliflozin, an analysis that was a prespecified component of the secondary microvascular outcome of that trial. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes and an estimated glomerular filtration rate of at least 30 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area to receive either empagliflozin (at a dose of 10 mg or 25 mg) or placebo once daily. Prespecified renal outcomes included incident or worsening nephropathy (progression to macroalbuminuria, doubling of the serum creatinine level, initiation of renal-replacement therapy, or death from renal disease) and incident albuminuria. RESULTS: Incident or worsening nephropathy occurred in 525 of 4124 patients (12.7%) in the empagliflozin group and in 388 of 2061 (18.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the empagliflozin group, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 0.70; P<0.001). Doubling of the serum creatinine level occurred in 70 of 4645 patients (1.5%) in the empagliflozin group and in 60 of 2323 (2.6%) in the placebo group, a significant relative risk reduction of 44%. Renal-replacement therapy was initiated in 13 of 4687 patients (0.3%) in the empagliflozin group and in 14 of 2333 patients (0.6%) in the placebo group, representing a 55% lower relative risk in the empagliflozin group. There was no significant between-group difference in the rate of incident albuminuria. The adverse-event profile of empagliflozin in patients with impaired kidney function at baseline was similar to that reported in the overall trial population. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, empagliflozin was associated with slower progression of kidney disease and lower rates of clinically relevant renal events than was placebo when added to standard care. (Funded by the Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly and Company Diabetes Alliance; EMPA-REG OUTCOME ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01131676.).

Importance: Type 2 diabetes is associated with increased cardiovascular (CV) risk. Prior trials have demonstrated CV safety of 3 dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors but have included limited numbers of patients with high CV risk and chronic kidney disease. Objective: To evaluate the effect of linagliptin, a selective DPP-4 inhibitor, on CV outcomes and kidney outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk of CV and kidney events. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter noninferiority trial conducted from August 2013 to August 2016 at 605 clinic sites in 27 countries among adults with type 2 diabetes, hemoglobin A1c of 6.5% to 10.0%, high CV risk (history of vascular disease and urine-albumin creatinine ratio [UACR] >200 mg/g), and high renal risk (reduced eGFR and micro- or macroalbuminuria). Participants with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) were excluded. Final follow-up occurred on January 18, 2018. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive linagliptin, 5 mg once daily (n = 3494), or placebo once daily (n = 3485) added to usual care. Other glucose-lowering medications or insulin could be added based on clinical need and local clinical guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was time to first occurrence of the composite of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Criteria for noninferiority of linagliptin vs placebo was defined by the upper limit of the 2-sided 95% CI for the hazard ratio (HR) of linagliptin relative to placebo being less than 1.3. Secondary outcome was time to first occurrence of adjudicated death due to renal failure, ESRD, or sustained 40% or higher decrease in eGFR from baseline. Results: Of 6991 enrollees, 6979 (mean age, 65.9 years; eGFR, 54.6 mL/min/1.73 m2; 80.1% with UACR >30 mg/g) received at least 1 dose of study medication and 98.7% completed the study. During a median follow-up of 2.2 years, the primary outcome occurred in 434 of 3494 (12.4%) and 420 of 3485 (12.1%) in the linagliptin and placebo groups, respectively, (absolute incidence rate difference, 0.13 [95% CI, -0.63 to 0.90] per 100 person-years) (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89-1.17; P < .001 for noninferiority). The kidney outcome occurred in 327 of 3494 (9.4%) and 306 of 3485 (8.8%), respectively (absolute incidence rate difference, 0.22 [95% CI, -0.52 to 0.97] per 100 person-years) (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.89-1.22; P = .62). Adverse events occurred in 2697 (77.2%) and 2723 (78.1%) patients in the linagliptin and placebo groups; 1036 (29.7%) and 1024 (29.4%) had 1 or more episodes of hypoglycemia; and there were 9 (0.3%) vs 5 (0.1%) events of adjudication-confirmed acute pancreatitis. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with type 2 diabetes and high CV and renal risk, linagliptin added to usual care compared with placebo added to usual care resulted in a noninferior risk of a composite CV outcome over a median 2.2 years. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01897532.

BACKGROUND: Dabigatran, which is administered in a fixed dose and does not require laboratory monitoring, may be suitable for extended treatment of venous thromboembolism. METHODS: In two double-blind, randomized trials, we compared dabigatran at a dose of 150 mg twice daily with warfarin (active-control study) or with placebo (placebo-control study) in patients with venous thromboembolism who had completed at least 3 initial months of therapy. RESULTS: In the active-control study, recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 26 of 1430 patients in the dabigatran group (1.8%) and 18 of 1426 patients in the warfarin group (1.3%) (hazard ratio with dabigatran, 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 2.64; P=0.01 for noninferiority). Major bleeding occurred in 13 patients in the dabigatran group (0.9%) and 25 patients in the warfarin group (1.8%) (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27 to 1.02). Major or clinically relevant bleeding was less frequent with dabigatran (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.71). Acute coronary syndromes occurred in 13 patients in the dabigatran group (0.9%) and 3 patients in the warfarin group (0.2%) (P=0.02). In the placebo-control study, recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 3 of 681 patients in the dabigatran group (0.4%) and 37 of 662 patients in the placebo group (5.6%) (hazard ratio, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.25; P<0.001). Major bleeding occurred in 2 patients in the dabigatran group (0.3%) and 0 patients in the placebo group. Major or clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 36 patients in the dabigatran group (5.3%) and 12 patients in the placebo group (1.8%) (hazard ratio, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.52 to 5.60). Acute coronary syndromes occurred in 1 patient each in the dabigatran and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dabigatran was effective in the extended treatment of venous thromboembolism and carried a lower risk of major or clinically relevant bleeding than warfarin but a higher risk than placebo. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; RE-MEDY and RE-SONATE ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00329238 and NCT00558259, respectively.).

AIMS: We previously reported that in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME(®) trial, empagliflozin added to standard of care reduced the risk of 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiovascular and all-cause death, and hospitalization for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk. We have now further investigated heart failure outcomes in all patients and in subgroups, including patients with or without baseline heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were randomized to receive empagliflozin 10 mg, empagliflozin 25 mg, or placebo. Seven thousand and twenty patients were treated; 706 (10.1%) had heart failure at baseline. Heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death occurred in a significantly lower percentage of patients treated with empagliflozin [265/4687 patients (5.7%)] than with placebo [198/2333 patients (8.5%)] [hazard ratio, HR: 0.66 (95% confidence interval: 0.55-0.79); P < 0.001], corresponding to a number needed to treat to prevent one heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death of 35 over 3 years. Consistent effects of empagliflozin were observed across subgroups defined by baseline characteristics, including patients with vs. without heart failure, and across categories of medications to treat diabetes and/or heart failure. Empagliflozin improved other heart failure outcomes, including hospitalization for or death from heart failure [2.8 vs. 4.5%; HR: 0.61 (0.47-0.79); P < 0.001] and was associated with a reduction in all-cause hospitalization [36.8 vs. 39.6%; HR: 0.89 (0.82-0.96); P = 0.003]. Serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported by a higher proportion of patients with vs. without heart failure at baseline in both treatment groups, but were no more common with empagliflozin than with placebo. CONCLUSION: In patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk, empagliflozin reduced heart failure hospitalization and cardiovascular death, with a consistent benefit in patients with and without baseline heart failure.

OBJECTIVE In the BI 10773 (Empagliflozin) Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) trial involving 7,020 patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular (CV) disease, empagliflozin given in addition to standard of care reduced the risk of CV death by 38% versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62 [95% CI 0.49, 0.77]). This exploratory mediation analysis assesses the extent to which treatment group differences in covariates during the trial contributed to CV death risk reduction with empagliflozin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Effects of potential mediators, identified post hoc, on the HR for CV death with empagliflozin versus placebo were analyzed by Cox regression models, with treatment group adjusted for the baseline value of the variable and its change from baseline or updated mean (i.e., considering all prior values), each as a time-dependent covariate. HRs were compared with a model without adjustment for covariates. Multivariable analyses also were performed. RESULTS Changes in hematocrit and hemoglobin mediated 51.8% and 48.9%, respectively, of the effect of empagliflozin versus placebo on the risk of CV death on the basis of changes from baseline, with similar results in analyses on the basis of updated means. Smaller mediation effects (maximum 29.3%) were observed for uric acid, fasting plasma glucose, and HbA1c. In multivariable models, which incorporated effects of empagliflozin on hematocrit, fasting glucose, uric acid, and urine albumin:creatinine ratio, the combined changes from baseline provided 85.2% mediation, whereas updated mean analyses provided 94.6% mediation of the effect of empagliflozin on CV death. CONCLUSIONS In this exploratory analysis from the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial, changes in markers of plasma volume were the most important mediators of the reduction in risk of CV death with empagliflozin versus placebo.

IMPORTANCE: Type 2 diabetes is associated with increased cardiovascular risk. In placebo-controlled cardiovascular safety trials, the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor linagliptin demonstrated noninferiority, but it has not been tested against an active comparator. OBJECTIVE: This trial assessed cardiovascular outcomes of linagliptin vs glimepiride (sulfonylurea) in patients with relatively early type 2 diabetes and risk factors for or established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, noninferiority trial, with participant screening from November 2010 to December 2012, conducted at 607 hospital and primary care sites in 43 countries involving 6042 participants. Adults with type 2 diabetes, glycated hemoglobin of 6.5% to 8.5%, and elevated cardiovascular risk were eligible for inclusion. Elevated cardiovascular risk was defined as documented atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, multiple cardiovascular risk factors, aged at least 70 years, and evidence of microvascular complications. Follow-up ended in August 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive 5 mg of linagliptin once daily (n = 3023) or 1 to 4 mg of glimepiride once daily (n = 3010) in addition to usual care. Investigators were encouraged to intensify glycemic treatment, primarily by adding or adjusting metformin, α-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, or insulin, according to clinical need. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was time to first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke with the aim to establish noninferiority of linagliptin vs glimepiride, defined by the upper limit of the 2-sided 95.47% CI for the hazard ratio (HR) of linagliptin relative to glimepiride of less than 1.3. RESULTS: Of 6042 participants randomized, 6033 (mean age, 64.0 years; 2414 [39.9%] women; mean glycated hemoglobin, 7.2%; median duration of diabetes, 6.3 years; 42% with macrovascular disease; 59% had undergone metformin monotherapy) were treated and analyzed. The median duration of follow-up was 6.3 years. The primary outcome occurred in 356 of 3023 participants (11.8%) in the linagliptin group and 362 of 3010 (12.0%) in the glimepiride group (HR, 0.98 [95.47% CI, 0.84-1.14]; P < .001 for noninferiority), meeting the noninferiority criterion but not superiority (P = .76). Adverse events occurred in 2822 participants (93.4%) in the linagliptin group and 2856 (94.9%) in the glimepiride group, with 15 participants (0.5%) in the linagliptin group vs 16 (0.5%) in the glimepiride group with adjudicated-confirmed acute pancreatitis. At least 1 episode of hypoglycemic adverse events occurred in 320 (10.6%) participants in the linagliptin group and 1132 (37.7%) in the glimepiride group (HR, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.21-0.26]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among adults with relatively early type 2 diabetes and elevated cardiovascular risk, the use of linagliptin compared with glimepiride over a median 6.3 years resulted in a noninferior risk of a composite cardiovascular outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01243424.

AIMS: To determine the effects of empagliflozin on blood pressure (BP) and markers of arterial stiffness and vascular resistance in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of data from a phase III trial in patients with T2DM and hypertension receiving 12 weeks' empagliflozin and four phase III trials in patients with T2DM receiving 24 weeks' empagliflozin (cohort 1, n = 823; cohort 2, n = 2477). BP was measured using 24-h BP monitoring (cohort 1) or seated office measurements (cohort 2). RESULTS: Empagliflozin reduced systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP in both cohorts (p < 0.001 vs placebo), without increasing heart rate. Empagliflozin reduced pulse pressure (PP; adjusted mean difference vs placebo cohort 1: -2.3 mmHg; cohort 2: -2.3 mmHg), mean arterial pressure (MAP; cohort 1, -2.3 mmHg; cohort 2, -2.1 mmHg) and double product (cohort 1, -385 mmHg × bpm; cohort 2, -369 mmHg × bpm) all p < 0.001 vs placebo. There was a trend towards a reduction in the ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI) with empagliflozin in cohort 1 (p = 0.059 vs placebo). AASI was not measured in cohort 2. Subgroup analyses showed that there were greater reductions in PP with increasing baseline SBP in cohort 1 (p = 0.092). In cohort 2, greater reductions in MAP were achieved in patients with higher baseline SBP (p = 0.027) and greater reductions in PP were observed in older patients (p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin reduced BP and had favourable effects on markers of arterial stiffness and vascular resistance.

Given the multi-faceted pathogenesis of atherosclerosis in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), it is likely that interventions to mitigate this risk must address cardiovascular (CV) risk factors beyond glucose itself. Sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors are newer antihyperglycaemic agents with apparent multiple effects. Inherent in their mode of action to decrease glucose reabsorption by the kidneys by increasing urinary glucose excretion, these agents improve glycaemic control independent of insulin secretion with a low risk of hypoglycaemia. In this review, we outline those CV risk factors that this class appears to influence and provide the design features and trial characteristics of six ongoing outcome trials involving more than 41,000 individuals with T2DM. Those risk factors beyond glucose that can potentially be modulated positively with SGLT-2 inhibitors include blood pressure, weight, visceral adiposity, hyperinsulinaemia, arterial stiffness, albuminuria, circulating uric acid levels and oxidative stress. On the other hand, small increases in low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol levels have also been observed for the class, which theoretically might offset some of these benefits. The potential translational impact of these effects is being tested with outcome trials, also reviewed in this article, powered to assess both macrovascular as well as certain microvascular outcomes in T2DM. These are expected to begin to report in late 2015.

BACKGROUND: In the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial (BI 10773 [Empagliflozin] Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, in comparison with placebo, empagliflozin reduced the risks of 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events (3-point MACE), cardiovascular and all-cause death, and hospitalization for heart failure. We investigated whether these effects varied across the spectrum of baseline cardiovascular risk. METHODS: Cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, 3-point MACE, and hospitalization for heart failure in the pooled empagliflozin and placebo groups were analyzed in subgroups by prior myocardial infarction and stroke at baseline, and by estimated baseline cardiovascular risk based on the 10-point TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) Risk Score for Secondary Prevention. RESULTS: Of 7020 patients who received the study drug, 65% had a prior myocardial infarction or stroke, and 12%, 40%, 30%, and 18% were at low, intermediate, high, and highest estimated cardiovascular risk according to TIMI Risk Score for Secondary Prevention (≤2, 3, 4, and ≥5 points, respectively). In the placebo group, 3-point MACE occurred during the trial in 7.3%, 9.4%, 12.6%, and 20.6% of patients at low, intermediate, high, and highest estimated baseline risk, respectively. Relative reductions in risk of cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, 3-point MACE and hospitalization for heart failure with empagliflozin versus placebo were consistent in patients with and without prior myocardial infarction and/or stroke and across subgroups by TIMI Risk Score for Secondary Prevention at baseline ( P>0.05 for randomized group-by-subgroup interactions). CONCLUSIONS: Despite all patients having atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, patients in EMPA-REG OUTCOME demonstrated a broad risk spectrum for cardiovascular events. Reductions in key cardiovascular outcomes and mortality with empagliflozin versus placebo were consistent across the range of cardiovascular risk. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01131676.

Background: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors improve outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, but additional information is needed about whether glycemic status influences the magnitude of their benefits on heart failure and renal events. Methods: Patients with Class II–IV heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% were randomized to receive empagliflozin (10 mg daily) or placebo in addition to recommended therapy. We prespecified a comparison of the effect of empagliflozin in patients with and without diabetes. Results: Of the 3730 patients enrolled, 1856 (50%) had diabetes, 1268 (34%) had prediabetes (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] 5.7–6.4%), and 606 (16%) had normoglycemia (HbA1c &lt;5.7%). The risks of the primary outcome (cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure), total hospitalizations for heart failure, and adverse renal outcomes were higher in patients with diabetes, but were similar between patients with prediabetes and normoglycemia. Empagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary outcome in patients with and without diabetes (hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.60–0.87] and 0.78 [95% CI, 0.64–0.97], respectively, P -interaction=0.57). Patients with and without diabetes also did not differ with respect to the effect of empagliflozin on total hospitalizations for heart failure, on the decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate over time, and on the risk of serious adverse renal outcomes. Among these end points, the effects of the drug did not differ in patients with prediabetes or normoglycemia. When analyzed as a continuous variable, baseline HbA1c did not significantly modify the benefits of empagliflozin on the primary outcome ( P -interaction=0.40). Empagliflozin did not lower HbA1c in patients with prediabetes or normoglycemia and was not associated with increased risk of hypoglycemia. Conclusions: In EMPEROR-Reduced (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction), empagliflozin significantly improved cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, independent of baseline diabetes status and across the continuum of HbA1c. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03057977.

BACKGROUND: Evidence concerning the importance of glucose lowering in the prevention of cardiovascular (CV) outcomes remains controversial. Given the multi-faceted pathogenesis of atherosclerosis in diabetes, it is likely that any intervention to mitigate this risk must address CV risk factors beyond glycemia alone. The SGLT-2 inhibitor empagliflozin improves glucose control, body weight and blood pressure when used as monotherapy or add-on to other antihyperglycemic agents in patients with type 2 diabetes. The aim of the ongoing EMPA-REG OUTCOME™ trial is to determine the long-term CV safety of empagliflozin, as well as investigating potential benefits on macro-/microvascular outcomes. METHODS: Patients who were drug-naïve (HbA1c ≥7.0% and ≤9.0%), or on background glucose-lowering therapy (HbA1c ≥7.0% and ≤10.0%), and were at high risk of CV events, were randomized (1:1:1) and treated with empagliflozin 10 mg, empagliflozin 25 mg, or placebo (double blind, double dummy) superimposed upon the standard of care. The primary outcome is time to first occurrence of CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke. CV events will be prospectively adjudicated by an independent Clinical Events Committee. The trial will continue until ≥691 confirmed primary outcome events have occurred, providing a power of 90% to yield an upper limit of the adjusted 95% CI for a hazard ratio of <1.3 with a one-sided α of 0.025, assuming equal risks between placebo and empagliflozin (both doses pooled). Hierarchical testing for superiority will follow for the primary outcome and key secondary outcomes (time to first occurrence of CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or hospitalization for unstable angina pectoris) where non-inferiority is achieved. RESULTS: Between Sept 2010 and April 2013, 592 clinical sites randomized and treated 7034 patients (41% from Europe, 20% from North America, and 19% from Asia). At baseline, the mean age was 63 ± 9 years, BMI 30.6 ± 5.3 kg/m2, HbA1c 8.1 ± 0.8%, and eGFR 74 ± 21 ml/min/1.73 m2. The study is expected to report in 2015. DISCUSSION: EMPA-REG OUTCOME™ will determine the CV safety of empagliflozin in a cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes and high CV risk, with the potential to show cardioprotection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01131676.

Aims: Empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular (CV) death and heart failure (HF) hospitalizations in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and established CV disease (CVD) in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME® trial. We investigated whether the benefit of empagliflozin was observed across the spectrum of HF risk. Methods and results: Seven thousand and twenty patients with T2D (HbA1c 7-10% and eGFR > 30 mL/min/1.73 m2) were treated with empagliflozin 10 or 25 mg, or placebo once daily and followed for median 3.1 years. In patients without HF at baseline (89.9%), we derived the 5-year risk for incident HF using the 9-variable Health ABC HF Risk score [classified as low-to-average (<10%), high (10-20%), and very high (≥ 20%)]. Overall, 67.2% of the population had low-to-average, 24.2% high, and 5.1% very high 5-year HF risk. Across these groups, the effect on CV death and HF hospitalization with empagliflozin was consistent [hazard ratio 0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.52, 0.96), 0.52 (0.36, 0.75), and 0.55 (0.30, 1.00), respectively]. Effects on CV death in the ostensibly highest HF risk group (HF at baseline and/or incident HF during the trial) in whom 37.9% of the overall CV deaths occurred, was also beneficial [0.67 (0.47, 0.97)], yet, similar benefits were seen in the lower risk patients. Conclusion: In patients with T2D and established CVD, a sizeable proportion without HF at baseline are at high or very high risk for HF outcomes, indicating the need for active case finding in this patient population. Empagliflozin consistently improved HF outcomes both in patients at low or high HF risk.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the cardiovascular (CV) safety profile of the dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitor linagliptin versus comparator treatments. METHODS: This was a pre-specified meta-analysis of CV events in linagliptin or comparator-treated patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) from eight Phase 3 studies. All suspected CV events were prospectively adjudicated by a blinded independent expert committee. The primary endpoint was a composite of CV death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and hospitalization for unstable angina. Three secondary composite endpoints derived from the adjudicated CV events were also pre-specified. Risk estimates were calculated using several statistical methods including Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 5239 treated patients (mean ± SD HbA1c 65 ± 10 mmol/mol [8.0 ± 0.9%], age 58 ± 10 years, BMI 29 ± 5 kg/m2), 3319 received linagliptin once daily (5 mg, 3159; 10 mg, 160) and 1920 received comparators (placebo, 977; glimepiride 1-4 mg, 781; voglibose 0.6 mg, 162). Cumulative exposure (patient-years) was 2060 for linagliptin and 1372 for comparators. Primary CV events occurred in 11 (0.3%) patients receiving linagliptin and 23 (1.2%) receiving comparators. The hazard ratio (HR) for the primary endpoint showed significantly lower risk with linagliptin than comparators (HR 0.34 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16-0.70]) as did estimates for all secondary endpoints (HR ranging from 0.34 to 0.55 [all upper 95% CIs < 1.0]). CONCLUSIONS: These results from a large Phase 3 programme support the hypothesis that linagliptin may have CV benefits in patients with T2DM.

CARdiovascular Outcome Trial of LINAgliptin Versus Glimepiride in Type 2 Diabetes (NCT01243424) is an ongoing, randomized trial in subjects with early type 2 diabetes and increased cardiovascular risk or established complications that will determine the long-term cardiovascular impact of linagliptin versus the sulphonylurea glimepiride. Eligible patients were sulphonylurea-naïve with HbA1c 6.5%-8.5% or previously exposed to sulphonylurea (in monotherapy or in a combination regimen <5 years) with HbA1c 6.5%-7.5%. Primary outcome is time to first occurrence of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or hospitalization for unstable angina. A total of 631 patients with primary outcome events will be required to provide 91% power to demonstrate non-inferiority in cardiovascular safety by comparing the upper limit of the two-sided 95% confidence interval as being below 1.3 for a given hazard ratio. Hierarchical testing for superiority will follow, and the trial has 80% power to demonstrate a 20% relative cardiovascular risk reduction. A total of 6041 patients were treated with median type 2 diabetes duration 6.2 years, 40.0% female, mean HbA1c 7.2%, 66% on 1 and 24% on 2 glucose-lowering agents and 34.5% had previous cardiovascular complications. The results of CARdiovascular Outcome Trial of LINAgliptin Versus Glimepiride in Type 2 Diabetes may influence the decision-making process for selecting a second glucose-lowering agent after metformin in type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To investigate the pharmacodynamics, efficacy and safety of empagliflozin as adjunct to insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: A total of 75 patients with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentrations of ≥7.5 to ≤10.5% (≥58 to ≤91 mmol/mol) were randomized to receive once-daily empagliflozin 2.5 mg, empagliflozin 10 mg, empagliflozin 25 mg, or placebo as adjunct to insulin for 28 days. Insulin dose was to be kept as stable as possible for 7 days then adjusted, at the investigator's discretion, to achieve optimum glycaemic control. The primary exploratory endpoint was change from baseline in 24-h urinary glucose excretion (UGE) on day 7. RESULTS: Empagliflozin significantly increased 24-h UGE versus placebo on days 7 and 28. On day 28, adjusted mean differences with empagliflozin versus placebo in changes from baseline in: HbA1c were -0.35 to -0.49% (-3.8 to -5.4 mmol/mol; all p < 0.05 vs. placebo); total daily insulin dose -0.07 to -0.09 U/kg (all p<0.05 vs placebo); and weight were -1.5 to -1.9 kg (all p < 0.001 vs. placebo). In the placebo, empagliflozin 2.5, 10 and 25 mg groups, respectively, adverse events were reported in 94.7, 89.5, 78.9 and 100.0% of patients, and the rate of symptomatic hypoglycaemic episodes with glucose ≤3.0 mmol/l not requiring assistance was 1.0, 0.4, 0.5 and 0.8 episodes per 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 1 diabetes, empagliflozin for 28 days as adjunct to insulin increased UGE, improved HbA1c and reduced weight with lower insulin doses compared with placebo and without increasing hypoglycaemia.

AIMS: To determine the effects of empagliflozin on adiposity indices among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Changes in weight, waist circumference, estimated total body fat, index of central obesity and visceral adiposity index were assessed using analysis of covariance and testing of treatment by strata for age, sex and baseline waist circumference in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus randomized to blinded treatment with empagliflozin versus placebo in clinical trials of 12 weeks (cohort 1) or 24 weeks (cohort 2) duration. RESULTS: This study comprised 3300 patients (cohort 1, N = 823; cohort 2, N = 2477). Empagliflozin reduced weight, waist circumference and adiposity indices versus placebo in both cohorts. Adjusted mean (95% confidence interval) change from baseline in empagliflozin versus placebo was -1.7 kg (-2.1 to -1.4 kg) and -1.9 kg (-2.1 to -1.7 kg) for body weight (p < 0.001); -1.3 cm (-1.8 to -0.7 cm) and -1.3 cm (-1.7 to -1.0 cm) for waist circumference (p < 0.001); -0.2% (-0.7% to 0.3%; p = 0.45) and -0.3% (-0.7% to 0.0%; p = 0.08) for estimated total body fat; -0.007 (-0.011 to -0.004) and -0.008 (-0.010 to -0.006) for index of central obesity (p < 0.001); and -0.3 (-0.5 to 0.0; p = 0.07) and -0.4 (-0.7 to -0.1; p = 0.003) for visceral adiposity index in cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. Adipose reductions were seen across most age, sex and waist circumference subgroups. CONCLUSION: Empagliflozin significantly reduced weight and adiposity indices with the potential to improve cardiometabolic risk among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus are at increased risk for heart failure (HF), particularly those with coexisting atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and/or kidney disease. Some but not all dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors have been associated with increased HF risk. We performed secondary analyses of HF and related outcomes with the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor linagliptin versus placebo in CARMELINA (The Cardiovascular and Renal Microvascular Outcome Study With Linagliptin), a cardiovascular outcomes trial that enrolled participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and/or kidney disease. METHODS: Participants in 27 countries with type 2 diabetes mellitus and concomitant atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and/or kidney disease were randomized 1:1 to receive once daily oral linagliptin 5 mg or placebo, on top of standard of care. All hospitalization for HF (hHF), cardiovascular outcomes, and deaths were prospectively captured and centrally adjudicated. In prespecified and post hoc analyses of HF and related events, Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for region and baseline history of HF were used. Recurrent hHF events were analyzed using a negative binomial model. In a subset of participants with left ventricular ejection fraction captured within the year before randomization, HF-related outcomes were assessed in subgroups stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction > or ≤50%. RESULTS: ; hemoglobin A1c, 8.0%; 62.9% men; diabetes mellitus duration, 14.8 years), including 1873 (26.8%) with a history of HF at baseline. Median follow-up was 2.2 years. Linagliptin versus placebo did not affect the incidence of hHF (209/3494 [6.0%] versus 226/3485 [6.5%], respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.74-1.08), the composite of cardiovascular death/hHF (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.82-1.08), or risk for recurrent hHF events (326 versus 359 events, respectively; rate ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.75-1.20). There was no heterogeneity of linagliptin effects on hHF by history of HF at baseline, baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate or urine albumin-creatinine ratio, or prerandomization left ventricular ejection fraction. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, international cardiovascular outcome trial in participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus and concomitant atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and/or kidney disease, linagliptin did not affect the risk of hHF or other selected HF-related outcomes, including among participants with and without a history of HF, across the spectrum of kidney disease, and independent of previous left ventricular ejection fraction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01897532.

Background and Purpose— In the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial (Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients), empagliflozin added to standard of care in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and high cardiovascular risk reduced the risk of 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events, driven by a reduction in cardiovascular mortality, with no significant difference between empagliflozin and placebo in risk of myocardial infarction or stroke. In a modified intent-to-treat analysis, the hazard ratio for stroke was 1.18 (95% confidence interval, 0.89–1.56; P =0.26). We further investigated cerebrovascular events. Methods— Patients were randomized to empagliflozin 10 mg, empagliflozin 25 mg, or placebo; 7020 patients were treated. Median observation time was 3.1 years. Results— The numeric difference in stroke between empagliflozin and placebo in the modified intent-to-treat analysis was primarily because of 18 patients in the empagliflozin group with a first event &gt;90 days after last intake of study drug (versus 3 on placebo). In a sensitivity analysis based on events during treatment or ≤90 days after last dose of drug, the hazard ratio for stroke with empagliflozin versus placebo was 1.08 (95% confidence interval, 0.81–1.45; P =0.60). There were no differences in risk of recurrent, fatal, or disabling strokes, or transient ischemic attack, with empagliflozin versus placebo. Patients with the largest increases in hematocrit or largest decreases in systolic blood pressure did not have an increased risk of stroke. Conclusions— In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and high cardiovascular risk, there was no significant difference in the risk of cerebrovascular events with empagliflozin versus placebo. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01131676.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of empagliflozin versus placebo as add-on therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycemic control with linagliptin and metformin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Patients with HbA1c ≥8.0% and ≤10.5% (≥64 and ≤91 mmol/mol) while receiving stable-dose metformin received open-label linagliptin 5 mg (n = 606) for 16 weeks. Subsequently, those with HbA1c ≥7.0 and ≤10.5% (≥53 and ≤91 mmol/mol) were randomized to receive double-blind, double-dummy treatment with empagliflozin 10 mg (n = 112), empagliflozin 25 mg (n = 111), or placebo (n = 110) for 24 weeks; all patients continued treatment with metformin and linagliptin 5 mg. The primary end point was the change from baseline in HbA1c after 24 weeks of double-blind treatment. RESULTS At week 24, empagliflozin significantly reduced HbA1c (mean baseline 7.96–7.97% [63–64 mmol/mol]) versus placebo; the adjusted mean differences in the change from baseline with empagliflozin 10 and 25 mg versus placebo were −0.79% (95% CI ‒1.02, ‒0.55) (−8.63 mmol/mol [‒11.20, ‒6.07 mmol/mol]) and −0.70% (95% CI ‒0.93, ‒0.46) (−7.61 mmol/mol [‒10.18, ‒5.05 mmol/mol]), respectively (both P &amp;lt; 0.001). Fasting plasma glucose and weight were significantly reduced in both empagliflozin groups versus placebo (P &amp;lt; 0.001 for all comparisons). More patients receiving placebo than empagliflozin 10 and 25 mg reported adverse events during double-blind treatment (68.2%, 55.4%, and 51.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Empagliflozin treatment for 24 weeks improved glycemic control and weight versus placebo as an add-on to linagliptin 5 mg and metformin and was well tolerated.