Sodium Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors
2019; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 140; Issue: 21 Linguagem: Italiano
10.1161/circulationaha.119.043487
ISSN1524-4539
Autores Tópico(s)Pancreatic function and diabetes
ResumoHomeCirculationVol. 140, No. 21Sodium Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors Free AccessEditorialPDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessEditorialPDF/EPUBSodium Glucose Cotransporter 2 InhibitorsSearching for Mechanisms in the Wake of Large, Positive Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials Mark C. Petrie, MBChB Mark C. PetrieMark C. Petrie Mark C. Petrie, MBChB, Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK. Email E-mail Address: [email protected] Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, United Kingdom. Originally published18 Nov 2019https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.043487Circulation. 2019;140:1703–1705This article is a commentary on the followingEffect of Empagliflozin on Left Ventricular Mass in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Coronary Artery DiseaseArticle, see p 1693At the 2019 European Society of Cardiology congress, sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors were firmly planted at the feet of cardiologists. The Dapa-HF trial (Study to Evaluate the Effect of Dapagliflozin on the Incidence of Worsening Heart Failure or Cardiovascular Death in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure) reported a clear-cut clinical benefit when these drugs are used to treat patients with established heart failure and reduced ejection fraction without (as well as with) diabetes mellitus.1 These diabetes drugs should not now be left solely in the hands of diabetologists for use in people with diabetes mellitus. Their benefits in preventing heart failure had been previously firmly established in 4 large, well-conducted cardiovascular outcomes trials,2 but this cutting of the diabetic umbilical cord should help with their acceptance and adoption by cardiologists.3, 4In this issue of Circulation, Verma and colleagues5 have investigated the mechanism of action of the cardiac effects of empagliflozin. A rigorously designed, placebo-controlled, randomized mechanistic trial was conducted, EMPA-HEART (Effects of Empagliflozin on Cardiac Structure in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes). Such trials require sweat and devotion from the trial team and large donations of goodwill from patients. Empagliflozin reduced the primary end point of indexed left ventricular mass (measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging) in an EMPA-REG OUTCOME-like cohort (BI 10773 [Empagliflozin] Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients). This reduction in left ventricular mass may have been simply attributable to the sizeable reduction in blood pressure (7 mm Hg systolic and 3 mm Hg diastolic) or attributable to many other, as yet unidentified, mechanisms. These are novel and enlightening data, but this is very much a first step in understanding how these drugs work. In trials like EMPA-HEART, there are limits to the amount of data that can be gathered. Patients need to be protected from an excessive burden of trial-related procedures. Multiple imaging techniques, frequent large-volume phlebotomy, and many return visits are unreasonable to request from patients who have volunteered their time and patience. As a result, EMPA-HEART does not shed light on cardiac metabolism, renal, diuretic, vascular, or other mechanisms.EMPA-HEART was designed to answer the pertinent question when the trial was conceived: the mechanism of benefit in the first SGLT2 cardiovascular outcome trial (EMPA-REG-OUTCOME6). When we consider mechanisms that result in the benefits observed in renal disease (CREDENCE7 [Evaluation of the Effects of Canagliflozin on Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Participants With Diabetic Nephropathy]) or heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (Dapa-HF), EMPA-HEART cannot help. Patients with estimated glomerular filtration rates <60 mL·min–1·1.73 m–2 were excluded and only 2 patients had heart failure.Many research groups are searching for the mechanism of action, but it seems unlikely that there is one holy-grail answer. Multiple editorials and opinion pieces with colorful diagrams have postulated scores of elegant (and sometimes confusing) theories, but little firm evidence exists from studies in humans with cardiovascular disease.8 EMPA-HEART is one of the first of many SGLT2 inhibitor mechanistic trials (in humans) to report. Many more trials will be required to piece together what are likely to be different mechanisms of action in the diverse patient populations in which benefits have been shown. There are at least 4 broad populations that have been investigated: those with and without established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, those with established heart failure, and those with renal impairment.In the EMPA-REG-OUTCOME–, CANVAS (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study)–, and DECLARE (Multicenter Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Dapagliflozin on the Incidence of Cardiovascular Events)–like populations,2 like the one recruited in EMPA-HEART, there are potential groups that might benefit from well-established effects of these drugs: patients with obesity (weight loss), those with hypertension (blood pressure reduction), patients with recognized or unrecognized heart failure (diuretic effects), and patients with renal disease (renal effects). Of course, there may be straightforward or complex reasons why each of these simple mechanisms might improve cardiovascular outcomes. For example, obesity has a myriad of effects on the cardiovascular system, so weight loss might result in benefit by many mechanisms. Similarly, blood pressure reduction might result in improved cardiac function by simple mechanisms (reduced left ventricular mass or improved cardiac index) or by a host of secondary mechanisms. Many of the more elaborate theories that have nothing to do with obesity, blood pressure, or renal disease might hold true, but these must be proven and not remain as speculation.Perhaps the most controversial mechanism of action is the diuretic effect of SGLT2 inhibitors. Patients with cardiovascular disease frequently have unrecognized congestion. Clinicians often do not increase diuretics unless patients display clear evidence of edema or pulmonary rales. A reduction in venous pressure after SGLT2 inhibition as a result of diuresis might be a major mediator of renal benefits. A consequent increase in the transrenal blood pressure gradient might result in improved renal perfusion. At present, we know little of the diuretic and hemodynamic effects of these agents, and these were outside the scope of EMPA-HEART.It is fashionable to state that glucose lowering is in no way responsible for the mechanism of SGLT2 inhibitor clinical efficacy. Two potential glucose-related mechanisms are possible, or even likely. The first is that quality of life might be improved with tighter glycemic control (fewer hyperglycemic symptoms). A second possible mechanism is a SGLT2 inhibitor–mediated improvement in glucose-related cardiac or cardiovascular abnormalities (diabetic cardiomyopathy5). Of course, glucose lowering cannot be responsible for beneficial effects in patients without diabetes mellitus. The benefits seen in patients without diabetes mellitus in the Dapa-HF trial1 will spark a swathe of trials looking at potential mechanisms of action in those without diabetes mellitus.Do SGLT2 inhibitors have more of a role in cardiology than has already been established? It is very likely that patients with post–myocardial infarction heart failure (or severe left ventricular dysfunction) are likely to benefit. Most of the drug classes that are used as evidence-based, guideline-directed heart failure treatments have proven to be beneficial after large myocardial infarctions: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, β-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. If a trial of SGLT2 inhibitors were conducted after large myocardial infarctions, this would be very likely to lead to these drugs joining this list of coronary care unit stalwarts.SGLT2 inhibitors have now been proven to be very useful as cardiology drugs. Can we adopt any more of the diabetes drugs into the cardiology armamentarium? Glucagon-like protein 1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RAs) may have a small beneficial effect in preventing heart failure in patients with risk factors or established cardiovascular disease.9 Details of the phenotype of the heart failure that is prevented are currently lacking. There is so far no evidence that GLP1-RAs can be used as treatments for heart failure. Two small trials of GLP1-RAs in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction were discouraging but not terminal.10,11 It seems possible, or maybe probable, that GLP1-RAs could benefit patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. The GLP1-RAs cause substantial weight reduction, blood pressure reduction, and a reduction in inflammation and atherosclerosis. These are all prevalent in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.What will become of the other drugs formally known as drugs for diabetes mellitus? Drugs used in patients with diabetes mellitus should not just be glucose lowering, but also have benefits in terms of reducing cardiovascular events. Metformin is under scrutiny because the evidence of cardiovascular benefit appears weak when juxtaposed with evidence from modern cardiovascular outcomes trials.12,13 The gradual relegation that is taking place in guidelines is warranted.14 The only nonneutral cardiovascular result in trials of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors has been the negative finding of increased heart failure hospitalizations caused by saxagliptin.15 Although the safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors has been trumpeted, is it acceptable to recommend drugs with no cardiovascular benefit, even if they may offer some microvascular benefits over the longer term?These are exciting times for SGLT2 inhibitors. Many large cardiovascular outcome trials are ongoing in heart failure and renal disease in patients with and without diabetes mellitus, so the coming few years will see a wealth of new evidence. The host of mechanistic trials that are progressing may steadily fill in the mechanistic jigsaw puzzle, although these insights will continue to lag behind the clinical benefit that has blazed the way.DisclosuresDr Petrie's institution received payment from Astra Zeneca for his role in Dapa-HF; Dr Petrie's institution has received research grants from Boehringer Ingelheim and Novartis; Dr Petrie has served as a speaker, on advisory boards, and on clinical events committees for Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, and Novartis; advisory boards for Lilly and Napp; clinical event committees for Alnylam, Abbvie, Cardiorentis, Resverlogix, and Takeda.FootnotesThe opinions expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the editors or of the American Heart Association.https://www.ahajournals.org/journal/circMark C. Petrie, MBChB, Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK. Email mark.[email protected]ac.ukREFERENCES1. McMurray JJV, 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 [published online ahead of print September 19, 2019].N Engl J Med. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1911303Google Scholar2. 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. 2019; 393:31–39. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32590-XCrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Cherney DZ, Udell JA. Use of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in the hands of cardiologists: with great power comes great responsibility.Circulation. 2016; 134:1915–1917. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.024764LinkGoogle Scholar4. Nassif ME, Kosiborod M. Are we ready to bell the cat? A call for cardiologists to embrace glucose-lowering therapies proven to improve cardiovascular outcomes.Circulation. 2018; 138:4–6. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.022680LinkGoogle Scholar5. Verma S, Mazer CD, Yan AT, Mason T, Garg V, Teoh H, Zuo F, Quan A, Farkouh ME, Fitchett DH, et al; For the EMPA-HEART CardioLink-6 Investigators. Effect of empagliflozin on left ventricular mass in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease: the EMPA-HEART CardioLink-6 randomized clinical trial.Circulation. 2019; 140:1693–1702. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.042375LinkGoogle Scholar6. Zinman B, Wanner C, Lachin JM, Fitchett D, Bluhmki E, Hantel S, Mattheus M, Devins T, Johansen OE, Woerle HJ, et al; EMPA-REG OUTCOME Investigators. Empagliflozin, cardiovascular outcomes, and mortality in type 2 diabetes.N Engl J Med. 2015; 373:2117–2128. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1504720CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7. Perkovic V, Jardine MJ, Neal B, Bompoint S, Heerspink HJL, Charytan DM, Edwards R, Agarwal R, Bakris G, Bull S, et al; CREDENCE Trial Investigators. Canagliflozin and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes and nephropathy.N Engl J Med. 2019; 380:2295–2306. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1811744CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Heerspink HJ, Perkins BA, Fitchett DH, Husain M, Cherney DZ. Sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in the treatment of diabetes mellitus: cardiovascular and kidney effects, potential mechanisms, and clinical applications.Circulation. 2016; 134:752–772. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.021887LinkGoogle Scholar9. Kristensen SL, Rørth R, Jhund PS, Docherty KF, Sattar N, Preiss D, Køber L, Petrie MC, McMurray JJV. Cardiovascular, mortality, and kidney outcomes with GLP-1 receptor agonists in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcome trials.Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019; 7:776–785. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30249-9CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10. Margulies KB, Hernandez AF, Redfield MM, Givertz MM, Oliveira GH, Cole R, Mann DL, Whellan DJ, Kiernan MS, Felker GM, et al; NHLBI Heart Failure Clinical Research Network. Effects of liraglutide on clinical stability among patients with advanced heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: a randomized clinical trial.JAMA. 2016; 316:500–508. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.10260CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar11. Jorsal A, Kistorp C, Holmager P, Tougaard RS, Nielsen R, Hänselmann A, Nilsson B, Møller JE, Hjort J, Rasmussen J, et al. Effect of liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue, on left ventricular function in stable chronic heart failure patients with and without diabetes (LIVE)-a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.Eur J Heart Fail. 2017; 19:69–77. doi: 10.1002/ejhf.657CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar12. Harrington JL, de Albuquerque Rocha N, Patel KV, Verma S, McGuire DK. Should metformin remain first-line medical therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease? An alternative approach.Curr Diab Rep. 2018; 18:64. doi: 10.1007/s11892-018-1035-zCrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar13. Effect of intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group.Lancet. 1998; 352:854–865.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar14. Cosentino F, Grant PJ, Aboyans V, Bailey CJ, Ceriello A, Delgado V, Federici M, Filippatos G, Grobbee DE, Hansen TB, et al. 2019 ESC Guidelines on diabetes, pre-diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases developed in collaboration with the EASD.Eur Heart J. 2019:ehz486. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz486CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar15. Scirica BM, Bhatt DL, Braunwald E, Steg PG, Davidson J, Hirshberg B, Ohman P, Frederich R, Wiviott SD, Hoffman EB, et al; SAVOR-TIMI 53 Steering Committee and Investigators. Saxagliptin and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.N Engl J Med. 2013; 369:1317–1326. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1307684CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited By Oikonomou E, Suchard M, McGuire D and Khera R (2022) Phenomapping-Derived Tool to Individualize the Effect of Canagliflozin on Cardiovascular Risk in Type 2 Diabetes, Diabetes Care, 10.2337/dc21-1765, 45:4, (965-974), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2022. Schubert M, Hansen S, Leefmann J and Guan K (2020) Repurposing Antidiabetic Drugs for Cardiovascular Disease, Frontiers in Physiology, 10.3389/fphys.2020.568632, 11 Related articlesEffect of Empagliflozin on Left Ventricular Mass in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Coronary Artery DiseaseSubodh Verma, et al. Circulation. 2019;140:1693-1702 November 19, 2019Vol 140, Issue 21 Advertisement Article InformationMetrics © 2019 American Heart Association, Inc.https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.043487PMID: 31738593 Originally publishedNovember 18, 2019 Keywordsclinical trialdiabetes mellitussodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitorsheart failureEditorialsPDF download Advertisement SubjectsClinical StudiesMechanisms
Referência(s)