Search

Background: Epidemiology of patients with comorbid heart failure (HF) and diabetes mellitus (DM) without coronary heart disease (CHD) is not well described., Methods and Results: We assessed HF incidence and outcomes in 2896 participants of the Health ABC Study (age 74.0 ± 3.0 years, 48.4% men, 41.1% black, 34.6% with DM) in relation to prio DM and CHD status. During a median follow-up of 11.4 years, 484 participants (16.7%) developed incident HF; 214 (44.2%) had DM of whom 71 (33.1%) had no prio CHD. Incident HF rate was 2.5% per 100 person-years in those with and 1.5% in those without DM (hazard ratio [HR] 1.66, 95% CI 1.39-1.99). In those with DM, incident HF rate was 4.6% in those with and 1.3% in those without CHD (HR 3.75, 95% CI 2.81-4.99). During a median follow-up of 2.1 years after HF onset, 329 (68.0%) of the participants died. Amongst those with DM, annual mortality was 22.6% in those with versus 25.9% without CHD (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.61-1.22). All-cause hospitalizations after incident HF in DM patients were 55.0 per 100 person-years in those with and 33.3 in those without CHD (rate ratio [RR] 1.64, 95% CI 1.24-2.16); HF hospitalizations were 42.7 and 30.7 per 100-person years (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.03-1.86) in those with and without CHD. Reduced ejection fraction was seen in 49.6% of HF patients with DM and CHD and in 34.7% of those without CHD (P = .08); mortality but not hospitalization risk tended to be lower in those with reduced compared with preserved ejection fraction regardless of CHD status., Conclusions: A sizeable proportion of HF in patients with DM develops in the absence of prior CHD; these patients are at risk for mortality similar to those with CHD. These data underscore the importance of modulating risk beyond atherosclerosis in patients with comorbid HF and DM., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To compare the management of patients with diabetes and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in the United States and Asia to understand variations in treatment patterns across different healthcare systems., Materials and Methods: Our cohort included patients with diabetes and HFrEF (ejection fraction <40%) from a US-based registry of adults with diabetes (2013-2016, electronic health records) and a multi-national Asian registry of adults with heart failure (2010-2016, prospective registry). Asian countries were categorized as high income (HI) or low income (LI), according to the United Nations classification. Rates of use of guideline-directed medical therapies (determined through review of active medication lists) were compared across regions., Results: Patients with diabetes and HFrEF in the United States (n = 28 877) were older, had higher body mass indices, and were more likely to have coronary disease than those in Asia (n = 2235). Compared with US patients, the use of guideline-directed medical therapy for HFrEF was lower in patients in LI Asian countries (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers: patients in the United States, 77% vs. patients in HI Asian countries, 76% vs patients in LI Asian countries, 69%; β-blockers: patients in the United States, 91% vs. patients in HI Asian countries, 87% vs. patients in LI Asian countries, 69%; P < 0.001 for both). Insulin was used more commonly in the United States (44% vs. 24% vs. 25%, respectively; P < 0.001), whereas sulphonylureas were more often prescribed in Asian countries (42% vs. 52% vs. 54%; respectively, P < 0.001). Thiazolidinediones were prescribed in 6% of US patients compared with <1% of patients in Asia. The use of newer diabetes medications was <5% in all., Conclusion: In both the United States and Asia, opportunities for improvement in the use of evidence-based therapies exist for patients with both diabetes and HFrEF. Effective tools to guide medication choices for these complex, high-risk patients could have substantial impact on quality and outcomes., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor therapy is well suited for initiation during the heart failure hospitalization, owing to clinical benefits that accrue rapidly within days to weeks, a strong safety and tolerability profile, minimal to no effects on blood pressure, and no excess risk of adverse kidney events. There is no evidence to suggest that deferring initiation to the outpatient setting accomplishes anything beneficial. Instead, there is compelling evidence that deferring in-hospital initiation exposes patients to excess risk of early postdischarge clinical worsening and death. Lessons from other heart failure with reduced ejection fraction therapies highlight that deferring initiation of guideline-recommended medications to the U.S. outpatient setting carries a >75% chance they will not be initiated within the next year. Recognizing that 1 in 4 patients hospitalized for worsening heart failure die or are readmitted within 30 days, clinicians should embrace the in-hospital period as an optimal time to initiate sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor therapy and treat this population with the urgency it deserves.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the associations between long-term change and variability in glycemia with risk of heart failure (HF) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).Research design and methodsAmong participants with T2DM enrolled in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial, variability in HbA1c was assessed from stabilization of HbA1c following enrollment (8 months) to 3 years of follow-up as follows: average successive variability (ASV) (average absolute difference between successive values), coefficient of variation (SD/mean), and SD. Participants with HF at baseline or within 3 years of enrollment were excluded. Adjusted Cox models were used to evaluate the association of percent change (from baseline to 3 years of follow-up) and variability in HbA1c over the first 3 years of enrollment and subsequent risk of HF.ResultsThe study included 8,576 patients. Over a median follow-up of 6.4 years from the end of variability measurements at year 3, 388 patients had an incident HF hospitalization. Substantial changes in HbA1c were significantly associated with higher risk of HF (hazard ratio [HR] for ≥10% decrease 1.32 [95% CI 1.08-1.75] and for ≥10% increase 1.55 [1.19-2.04]; reference

Following regulatory guidance set forth in 2008 by the US Food and Drug Administration for new drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus, many large randomized, controlled trials have been conducted with the primary goal of assessing the safety of antihyperglycemic medications on the primary end point of major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Heart failure (HF) was not specifically mentioned in the US Food and Drug Administration guidance and therefore it was not a focus of these studies when planned. Several trials subsequently showed the impact of antihyperglycemic drugs on HF outcomes, which were not originally specified as the primary end point of the trials. The most impressive finding has been the substantial and consistent risk reduction in HF hospitalization seen across 4 trials of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. However, to date, these results have not led to regulatory approval of any of these drugs for a HF indication or a recommendation for use by US HF guidelines. It is therefore important to explore to what extent persuasive treatment effects on nonprimary end points can be used to support regulatory claims and guideline recommendations. This topic was discussed by researchers, clinicians, industry sponsors, regulators, and representatives from professional societies, who convened on the US Food and Drug Administration campus on March 6, 2019. This report summarizes these discussions and the key takeaway messages from this meeting.

ObjectiveTo develop and validate a novel, machine learning-derived model to predict the risk of heart failure (HF) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).Research design and methodsUsing data from 8,756 patients free at baseline of HF, with

For all other aspects concerning the management of patients with diabetes, we refer to the recommendations from diabetes associations, e.g. the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) or the American Diabetes Association (ADA).[1] These Guidelines offer evidence-based recommendations to manage CV risk in patients with diabetes and provide guidance for the treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in patients with diabetes. The impact of diabetes on peripheral atherosclerosis Diabetes is one of the most important risk factors for the development and progression of atherosclerosis.[[749], [751], [753]] The number of patients with atherosclerosis associated with diabetes is steadily increasing alongside the increasing number of patients with diabetes worldwide. There has not been a specific trial on revascularization strategies in patients with diabetes; however, a review of 56 studies including patients with diabetes suggested higher limb-salvage rates after revascularization (78-85% at 1 year) compared with conservative management.[770] Due to disease progression, long-term follow-up is very important in patients with diabetes and LEAD.[771] 10.1.2. [Extracted from the article]

3 Despite the prognostic importance of kidney disease for cardiovascular outcomes, patients with T2DM are rarely risk-stratified by kidney measures in cardiology practice, with these measures being absent from commonly used cardiovascular risk prediction algorithms. Cannon CP, Pratley R, Dagogo-Jack S, Mancuso J, Huyck S, Masiukiewicz U, Charbonnel B, Frederich R, Gallo S, Cosentino F, et al; VERTIS CV Investigators. Cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, type 2, diabetic nephropathies, heart failure, kidney diseases, renal insufficiency, chronic. [Extracted from the article]

Aims: Whether glycaemic control is associated with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is unclear. Consequently, we assessed the relationship between glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and cardiovascular outcomes in a placebo‐controlled randomized trial which demonstrated no cardiovascular effect of sitagliptin in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic vascular disease. Methods and results: Secondary analysis of 14 656 TECOS participants with time to event analyses using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. During a median 3.0 (interquartile range 2.3–3.8) year follow‐up, 456 (3.1% of 14 656) patients had first hospitalization for heart failure (HF), 1084 (11.5%) died, 1406 (9.6%) died or were hospitalized for HF, and 1689 (11.5%) had a non‐HF cardiovascular event (cardiovascular death, non‐fatal stroke, non‐fatal myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina). Associations between baseline or time‐varying HbA1c and cardiovascular outcomes were U‐shaped, with the lowest risk when HbA1c was around 7%. Each one‐unit increase in the time‐varying HbA1c above 7% was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.21 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11–1.33] for first HF hospitalization, 1.11 (1.03–1.21) for all‐cause death, 1.18 (1.09–1.26) for death or HF hospitalization, and 1.10 (1.02–1.17) for non‐HF cardiovascular events. Each one‐unit decrease in the time‐varying HbA1c below 7% was associated with an adjusted HR of 1.35 (95% CI 1.12–1.64) for first HF hospitalization, 1.37 (1.16–1.61) for death, 1.42 (1.23–1.64) for death or HF hospitalization, and 1.22 (1.06–1.41) for non‐HF cardiovascular events. Conclusion: Glycated haemogobin exhibits a U‐shaped association with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic vascular disease, with nadir around 7%. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00790205. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To assess the effect of rosiglitazone on cardiovascular performance and cardiac function. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) consistently improve heart failure and kidney-related outcomes; however, effects on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) across different patient populations are less clear. METHODS: This was a collaborative trial-level meta-analysis from the SGLT2i Meta-analysis Cardio-Renal Trialists Consortium, which includes all phase 3, placebo-controlled, outcomes trials of SGLT2i across 3 patient populations (patients with diabetes at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure [HF], or chronic kidney disease). The outcomes of interest were MACE (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), individual components of MACE (inclusive of fatal and nonfatal events), all-cause mortality, and death subtypes. Effect estimates for SGLT2i versus placebo were metaanalyzed across trials and examined across key subgroups (established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, previous myocardial infarction, diabetes, previous HF, albuminuria, chronic kidney disease stages, and risk groups). RESULTS: A total of 78 607 patients across 11 trials were included: 42 568 (54.2%), 20 725 (26.4%), and 15 314 (19.5%) were included from trials of patients with diabetes at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, HF, or chronic kidney disease, respectively. SGLT2i reduced the rate of MACE by 9% (hazard ration [HR], 0.91 [95% CI, 0.87-0.96], P<0.0001) with a consistent effect across all 3 patient populations (I²=0%) and across all key subgroups. This effect was primarily driven by a reduction in cardiovascular death (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.81-0.92], P<0.0001), with no significant effect for myocardial infarction in the overall population (HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.87-1.04], P=0.29), and no effect on stroke (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.91-1.07], P=0.77). The benefit for cardiovascular death was driven primarily by reductions in HF death and sudden cardiac death (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.46-1.02] and HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.78-0.95], respectively) and was generally consistent across subgroups, with the possible exception of being more apparent in those with albuminuria (Pinteraction=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: SGLT2i reduce the risk of MACE across a broad range of patients irrespective of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, diabetes, kidney function, or other major clinical characteristics at baseline. This effect is driven primarily by a reduction of cardiovascular death, particularly HF death and sudden cardiac death, without a significant effect on myocardial infarction in the overall population, and no effect on stroke. These data may help inform selection for SGLT2i therapies across the spectrum of cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With worsening epidemiological trends for both the incidence and prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and heart failure (HF) worldwide, it is critical to implement optimal prevention and treatment strategies for patients with these comorbidities, either alone or concomitantly. Several guidelines and consensus statements have recommended glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors as add-ons to lifestyle interventions with or without metformin in those at high atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. However, these recommendations are either silent about HF or fail to differentiate between the prevention of HF in those at risk versus the treatment of individuals with manifest HF. Furthermore, these documents do not differentiate among those with different HF phenotypes. This distinction, even though important, may not be critical for sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors in view of the consistent data for benefit for both atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease- and HF-related outcomes that have emerged from the regulatory-mandated cardiovascular outcome trials for all sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors and the recent DAPA-HF trial (Dapagliflozin in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction)demonstrating the benefit of dapagliflozin on HF-related outcomes in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction with or without T2DM. However, the distinction may be crucial for glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and other antihyperglycemic agents. Indeed, in several of the new statements, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists are suggested treatment not only for patients with T2DM and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, but also in those with manifest HF, despite a lack of evidence for the latter recommendation. Although glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists may be appropriate to use in patients at risk for HF, mechanistic insights and observations from randomized trials suggest no clear benefit on HF-related outcomes and even uncertainty regarding the safety in those with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Conversely, theoretical rationales suggest that these agents may benefit patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction. Considering that millions of patients with T2DM have HF, these concerns have public health implications that necessitate the thoughtful use of these therapies. Achieving this aim will require dedicated trials with these drugs in both patients who have HF with reduced ejection fraction and HF with preserved ejection fraction with T2DM to assess their efficacy, safety, and risk-benefit profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Metformin is first-line therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus, although its effects on the cardiovascular system are unproved.Methods: In this post hoc analysis, patients in SAVOR-TIMI 53 (Saxagliptin and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus) with baseline biomarker samples (n=12 156) were classified as ever versus never taking metformin during the trial period. Associations between metformin exposure and outcomes were estimated with inverse probability of treatment weighting Cox modeling for the composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke, as well as cardiovascular death and all-cause mortality, with biomarkers included as covariates. Additional sensitivity analyses included propensity score matching and Cox multivariable models.Results: Of the 12 156 patients with baseline biomarker samples, 8971 (74%) had metformin exposure, 1611 (13%) had prior heart failure, and 1332 (11%) had at least moderate chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤45 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2). Metformin use was associated with no difference in risk for the composite end point (hazard ratio for inverse probability of treatment weighting, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.76-1.11]) but lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for inverse probability of treatment weighting, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.59-0.95]). There was no significant relationship between metformin use and these end points in patients with prior heart failure or moderate to severe chronic kidney disease.Conclusions: In a cohort of 12 156 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and high cardiovascular risk, metformin use was associated with lower rates of all-cause mortality, including after adjustment for clinical variables and biomarkers, but not lower rates of the composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke. This association was most apparent in patients without prior heart failure or moderate to severe chronic kidney disease.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01107886. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hyperkalemia increases risk of cardiac arrhythmias and death and limits the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, which improve clinical outcomes in people with chronic kidney disease or systolic heart failure. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce the risk of cardiorenal events in people with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk or with chronic kidney disease. However, their effect on hyperkalemia has not been systematically evaluated.Methods: A meta-analysis was conducted using individual participant data from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical outcome trials with SGLT2 inhibitors in people with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk or with chronic kidney disease in whom serum potassium levels were routinely measured. The primary outcome was time to serious hyperkalemia, defined as central laboratory-determined serum potassium ≥6.0 mmol/L, with other outcomes including investigator-reported hyperkalemia events and hypokalemia (serum potassium ≤3.5 mmol/L). Cox regression analyses were performed to estimate treatment effects from each trial with hazards ratios and corresponding 95% CIs pooled with random-effects models to obtain summary treatment effects, overall and across key subgroups.Results: Results from 6 trials were included comprising 49 875 participants assessing 4 SGLT2 inhibitors. Of these, 1754 participants developed serious hyperkalemia, and an additional 1119 investigator-reported hyperkalemia events were recorded. SGLT2 inhibitors reduced the risk of serious hyperkalemia (hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.76-0.93]), an effect consistent across studies (Pheterogeneity=0.71). The incidence of investigator-reported hyperkalemia was also lower with SGLT2 inhibitors (hazard ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.68-0.93]; Pheterogeneity=0.21). Reductions in serious hyperkalemia were observed across a range of subgroups, including baseline kidney function, history of heart failure, and use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor, diuretic, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. SGLT2 inhibitors did not increase the risk of hypokalemia (hazard ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.94-1.15]; Pheterogeneity=0.42).Conclusions: SGLT2 inhibitors reduce the risk of serious hyperkalemia in people with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk or with chronic kidney disease without increasing the risk of hypokalemia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiple sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) have been shown to impart significant cardiovascular and kidney benefits, but are underused in clinical practice. Both SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA were first studied as glucose-lowering drugs, which may have impeded uptake by cardiologists in the wake of proven cardiovascular efficacy. Their significant effect on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes, which are largely independent of glucose-lowering effects, must drive a broader use of these drugs. Cardiologists are 3 times more likely than endocrinologists to see patients with both type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, thus they are ideally positioned to share responsibility for SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA treatment with primary care providers. In order to increase adoption, SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA must be reframed as primarily cardiovascular and kidney disease risk-reducing agents with a side effect of glucose-lowering. Coordinated and multifaceted interventions engaging clinicians, patients, payers, professional societies, and health systems must be implemented to incentivize the adoption of these medications as part of routine cardiovascular and kidney care. Greater use of SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA will improve outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular and kidney disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are at increased risk of developing heart failure. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) in patients with T2DM. We aimed to develop and validate a practical clinical risk score for HHF in patients with T2DM and assess whether this score can identify high-risk patients with T2DM who have the greatest reduction in risk for HHF with a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.Methods: We developed a clinical risk score for HHF in 8212 patients with T2DM in the placebo arm of SAVOR-TIMI 53 (Saxagliptin Assessment of Vascular Outcomes Recorded in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 53). Candidate variables were assessed using multivariable Cox regression, and independent clinical risk indicators achieving statistical significance of P<0.001 were included in the risk score. We externally validated the score in 8578 patients with T2DM in the placebo arm of DECLARE-TIMI 58 (Dapagliflozin Effect on Cardiovascular Events-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 58). The relative and absolute risk reductions in HHF with the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor dapagliflozin were assessed by baseline HHF risk.Results: Five clinical variables were independent risk predictors of HHF: prior heart failure, history of atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio. A simple integer-based score (0-7 points) using these predictors identified a >20-fold gradient of HHF risk (P for trend <0.001) in both the derivation and validation cohorts, with C indices of 0.81 and 0.78, respectively. Although relative risk reductions with dapagliflozin were similar for patients across the risk scores (25%-34%), absolute risk reductions were greater in those at higher baseline risk (1-sided P for trend=0.04), with high-risk (2 points) and very-high-risk (≥3 points) patients having 1.5% and 2.7% absolute reductions in Kaplan-Meier estimates of HHF risk at 4 years, respectively.Conclusions: Risk stratification using a novel clinical risk score for HHF in patients with T2DM identifies patients at higher risk for HHF who derive greater absolute benefit from sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibition.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01107886 and NCT01730534. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In DECLARE-TIMI 58 (Dapagliflozin Effect on Cardiovascular Events-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 58), the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor dapagliflozin reduced the composite end point of cardiovascular death/hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) in a broad population of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, the impact of baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) on the clinical benefit of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibition is unknown.Methods: In the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial, baseline heart failure (HF) status was collected from all patients, and EF was collected when available. HF with reduced EF (HFrEF) was defined as EF <45%. Outcomes of interest were the composite of cardiovascular death/HHF, its components, and all-cause mortality.Results: Of 17 160 patients, 671 (3.9%) had HFrEF, 1316 (7.7%) had HF without known reduced EF, and 15 173 (88.4%) had no history of HF at baseline. Dapagliflozin reduced cardiovascular death/HHF more in patients with HFrEF (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.45-0.86]) than in those without HFrEF (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.76-1.02]; P for interaction=0.046), in whom the treatment effect of dapagliflozin was similar in those with HF without known reduced EF (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.66-1.17]) and those without HF (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.74-1.03]). Whereas dapagliflozin reduced HHF both in those with (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.43-0.95]) and in those without HFrEF (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.62-0.92]), it reduced cardiovascular death only in patients with HFrEF (HR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.34-0.90]) but not in those without HFrEF (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.89-1.31]; P for interaction=0.012). Likewise, dapagliflozin reduced all-cause mortality in patients with HFrEF (HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.40-0.88;) but not in those without HFrEF (HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.86-1.10]; P for interaction=0.016).Conclusions: In the first sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor cardiovascular outcome trial to evaluate patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus stratified by EF, we found that dapagliflozin reduced HHF in patients with and without HFrEF and reduced cardiovascular death and all-cause mortality in patients with HFrEF.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01730534. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite multiple examples of glucose-lowering therapies affecting heart failure (HF) risk, ascertainment of HF data in cardiovascular outcome trials of these medications has not been systematically characterized. In this review, large (n >1,000) published phase III and IV cardiovascular outcome trials evaluating glucose-lowering therapies through June 2017 were identified. Data were abstracted from publications, U.S. Food and Drug Administration advisory committee records, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration labeling documents. Overall, 21 trials including 152,737 patients were evaluated. Rates and definitions of baseline HF and incident HF were inconsistently provided. Baseline ejection fraction data were provided in 3 studies but not specific to patients with HF. No trial reported functional class, ejection fraction, or HF therapy at the time of incident HF diagnosis. HF hospitalization data were available in 15 trials, but only 2 included HF-related events within the primary composite endpoint. This systematic review highlights gaps in HF data capture within cardiovascular outcome trials of glucose-lowering therapies and outlines rationale and strategies for improving HF characterization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background--Diabetes mellitus and heart failure frequently coexist. However, few diabetes mellitus trials have prospectively evaluated and adjudicated heart failure as an end point. Methods and Results--A total of 16492 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and a history of, or at risk of, cardiovascular events were randomized to saxagliptin or placebo (mean follow-up, 2.1 years). The primary end point was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke. Hospitalization for heart failure was a predefined component of the secondary end point. Baseline N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide was measured in 12301 patients. More patients treated with saxagliptin (289, 3.5%) were hospitalized for heart failure compared with placebo (228, 2.8%; hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% confidence intercal, 1.07-1.51 ;P=0.007). Corresponding rates at 12monthswere 1.9% versus 1.3% (hazard ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.88; P=0.002), with no significant difference thereafter (time-varying interaction, P=0.017). Subjects at greatest risk of hospitalization for heart failure had previous heart failure, an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤60 mL/min, or elevated baseline levels of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide. There was no evidence of heterogeneity between N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide and saxagliptin (P for interaction=0.46), although the absolute risk excess for heart failure with saxagliptin was greatest in the highest N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide quartile (2.1 %). Even in patients at high risk of hospitalization for heart failure, the risk of the primary and secondary end points were similar between treatment groups. Conclusions--In the context of balanced primary and secondary end points, saxagliptin treatment was associated with an increased risk or hospitalization for heart failure. This increase in risk was highest among patients with elevated levels of natriuretic peptides, previous heart failure, or chronic kidney disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]