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.

OBJECTIVE Type 2 diabetes is associated with cognitive dysfunction and an increased dementia risk, particularly in individuals with concomitant cardiovascular and/or kidney disease. Incretin therapies may modulate this risk via glycemic and nonglycemic pathways. We explored if the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor linagliptin could prevent cognitive decline in people with type 2 diabetes with cardiorenal disease. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The CArdiovascular and Renal Microvascular outcomE study with LINAgliptin (CARMELINA)-COG substudy was an integral part of CARMELINA (NCT01897532) that randomized participants with cardiorenal disease to linagliptin 5 mg or placebo once daily (1:1), in addition to standard of care. The primary cognitive outcome was the occurrence of accelerated cognitive decline at the end of treatment, defined as a regression-based index score ≤16th percentile on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) or a composite measure of attention and executive functioning and analyzed in participants with a baseline MMSE ≥24. Effects across subgroups by baseline factors, as well as absolute cognitive changes, were also assessed. RESULTS Of the 6,979 participants in CARMELINA, CARMELINA-COG included 1,545 (mean ± SD age, 68 ± 8 years; MMSE, 28.3 ± 1.7; estimated glomerular filtration rate, 52 ± 23 mL/min/1.73 m²; and HbA_1c, 7.8 ± 0.9% [61.4 ± 10.1 mmol/mol]). Over a median treatment duration of 2.5 years, accelerated cognitive decline occurred in 28.4% (linagliptin) vs. 29.3% (placebo) (odds ratio 0.96 [95% CI 0.77, 1.19]). Consistent effects were observed across subgroups by baseline characteristics. Absolute cognitive performance changes were also similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS In a large international cardiovascular outcome trial in people with type 2 diabetes and cardiorenal disease, linagliptin did not modulate cognitive decline over 2.5 years.

The cardiovascular (CV) safety of linagliptin was evaluated in subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Pre-specified patient-level pooled analysis of all available double-blind, randomized, controlled trials, ≥12 weeks’ duration (19 trials, 9459 subjects) of linagliptin versus placebo/active treatment. Primary end point: composite of prospectively adjudicated CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, and hospitalization for unstable angina (4P-MACE). Hospitalization for congestive heart failure (CHF) was also evaluated; adjudication of CHF was introduced during the phase 3 program (8 trials; 3314 subjects). 4P-MACE was assessed in placebo-controlled trials (subgroup of 18 trials; 7746 subjects). Investigator-reported events suggestive of CHF from 24 placebo-controlled trials (including trials <12 weeks’ duration, 8778 subjects) were also analyzed. 5847 patients received linagliptin (5 mg: 5687, 10 mg: 160) and 3612 comparator (glimepiride: 775, voglibose: 162, placebo: 2675); cumulative exposure, 4421.3 and 3254.7 patient-years, respectively. 4P-MACE incidence rates: 13.4 per 1000 patient-years, linagliptin (60 events), 18.9, total comparators (62 events); overall hazard ratio (HR), 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55–1.12). HR for adjudicated hospitalization for CHF (n = 21): 1.04 (0.43–2.47). For placebo-controlled trials, 4P-MACE incidence rates: 14.9 per 1000 patient-years, linagliptin (43 events), 16.4, total comparators (29 events); overall HR, 1.09 (95% CI, 0.68–1.75). Occurrence of investigator-reported events suggestive of CHF was low for linagliptin- (26 events, 0.5%; serious: 16 events, 0.3%) and placebo-treated (8 events, 0.2%; serious: 6 events, 0.2%) patients. Linagliptin is not associated with increased CV risk versus pooled active comparators or placebo in patients with T2DM.

The global epidemic of type 2 diabetes affects women and men equally; however, the relative impact on the cardiovascular (CV) system appears greater for women than men when compared with peers without diabetes. Furthermore, women are often under-represented in CV outcome trials, resulting in less certainty about the impact of CV prevention therapies across the sexes. The EMPA-REG OUTCOME® trial, which included 28.5% women, found that empagliflozin, given in addition to standard of care, reduced the risk of CV death by 38%, heart failure (HF) hospitalisation by 35% and a composite endpoint for incident or worsening nephropathy by 39%. Here we report a secondary analysis of the trial to determine the relative effects of empagliflozin in women vs men.

OBJECTIVE Type 2 diabetes is a leading cause of kidney failure, but few outcome trials proactively enrolled individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD). We performed secondary analyses of cardiovascular (CV) and kidney outcomes across baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) categories (≥60, 45 to <60, 30 to <45, and <30 mL/min/1.73 m²) in Cardiovascular and Renal Microvascular Outcome Study With Linagliptin (CARMELINA), a cardiorenal placebo-controlled outcome trial of the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor linagliptin (NCT01897532). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Participants with CV disease and/or CKD were included. The primary outcome was time to first occurrence of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke (three-point major adverse CV event [3P-MACE]), with a secondary outcome of renal death, end-stage kidney disease, or sustained ≥40% decrease in eGFR from baseline. Other end points included progression of albuminuria, change in HbA_1c, and adverse events (AEs) including hypoglycemia. RESULTS A total of 6,979 subjects (mean age 65.9 years; eGFR 54.6 mL/min/1.73 m²; 80.1% albuminuria) were followed for 2.2 years. Across eGFR categories, linagliptin as compared with placebo did not affect the risk for 3P-MACE (hazard ratio 1.02 [95% CI 0.89, 1.17]) or the secondary kidney outcome (1.04 [0.89, 1.22]) (interaction P values >0.05). Regardless of eGFR, albuminuria progression was reduced with linagliptin, as was HbA_1c, without increasing risk for hypoglycemia. AEs were balanced among groups overall and across eGFR categories. CONCLUSIONS Across all GFR categories, in participants with type 2 diabetes and CKD and/or CV disease, there was no difference in risk for linagliptin versus placebo on CV and kidney events. Significant reductions in risk for albuminuria progression and HbA_1c and no difference in AEs were observed.