Dapagliflozin improves myocardial flow reserve in patients with type 2 diabetes: the DAPAHEART Trial: a preliminary report

Objective Cardiovascular (CV) outcome trials have shown that in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), treatment with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) reduces CV mortality and hospital admission rates for heart failure (HF). However, the mechanisms behind these benefits are not fully understood. This study was performed to investigate the effects of the SGLT-2i dapagliflozin on myocardial perfusion and glucose metabolism in patients with T2D and stable coronary artery disease (coronary stenosis >= 30% and < 80%), with or without previous percutaneous coronary intervention (> 6 months) but no HF. Methods This was a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial including 16 patients with T2D randomized to SGLT-2i dapagliflozin (10 mg daily) or placebo. The primary outcome was to detect changes in myocardial glucose uptake (MGU) from baseline to 4 weeks after treatment initiation by [(18)F]2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) PET/CT during hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp. The main secondary outcome was to assess whether the hypothetical changes in MGU were associated with changes in myocardial blood flow (MBF) and myocardial flow reserve (MFR) measured by N-13-ammonia PET/CT. The study was registered at eudract.ema.europa.eu (EudraCT No. 2016-003614-27) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT 03313752). Results 16 patients were randomized to dapagliflozin (n = 8) or placebo (n = 8). The groups were well-matched for baseline characteristics (age, diabetes duration, HbA1c, renal and heart function). There was no significant change in MGU during euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp in the dapagliflozin group (2.22 +/- 0.59 vs 1.92 +/- 0.42 mu mol/100 g/min, p = 0.41) compared with the placebo group (2.00 +/- 0.55 vs 1.60 +/- 0.45 mu mol/100 g/min, p = 0.5). Dapagliflozin significantly improved MFR (2.56 +/- 0.26 vs 3.59 +/- 0.35 p = 0.006 compared with the placebo group 2.34 +/- 0.21 vs 2.38 +/- 0.24 p = 0.81; p(int) = 0.001) ass