Neumiller, Joshua J.

Background SGLT2 (sodium‐glucose cotransporter 2) inhibitors reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in type 2 diabetes. However, no direct comparison of individual SGLT2 inhibitor drugs has been conducted, particularly among adults with moderate cardiovascular risk who comprise most people with type 2 diabetes. Methods We used data for commercial, Medicare Advantage, and Medicare fee‐for‐service beneficiaries to emulate a target trial of adults (≥21 years) with type 2 diabetes and moderate cardiovascular risk who started canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, or empagliflozin between 2015 and 2020. We estimated propensity scores using the super learner ensemble method and incorporated them as inverse probability of treatment weights into Cox models, estimating risk of MACE, expanded MACE, and hyperglycemic and hypoglycemic crises through December 31, 2022. Results The weighted cohort, balanced on all baseline covariates, included 137 232 patients (mean age 65.7 years [SD, 8.1], 75.3% non‐Hispanic White, 57.0% male, 81.9% on metformin, 11.4% on glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists) starting canagliflozin (N=42 877), dapagliflozin (N=17 871), or empagliflozin (N=7648). The risk of MACE was lower among patients starting empagliflozin versus canagliflozin (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.87–0.97]), driven by reduced risk of all‐cause mortality (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.80–0.94]). There was no difference in MACE between empagliflozin versus dapagliflozin or dapagliflozin versus canagliflozin therapy. There was no difference in remaining outcomes between the three drugs. Conclusions The 3 most used SGLT2 inhibitor medications demonstrate similar effectiveness on cardiovascular outcomes among patients with type 2 diabetes at moderate cardiovascular risk, with differences between these drugs small in magnitude. Clinicians and health systems should prioritize enhancing access to these cardioprotective therapies.

Key Points Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists were superior to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor and sulfonylurea for preventing kidney complications in patients with type 2 diabetes at moderate cardiovascular disease risk. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor therapy compared favorably with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists for kidney disease outcomes. Background CKD is a serious diabetes-related complication. While guidelines recommend use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) therapies to mitigate cardiorenal risk in high-risk patients, the benefit of early initiation of these agents relative to other commonly prescribed glucose-lowering agents in patients at lower baseline cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk remains less clear. Methods This retrospective observational study emulated an idealized target trial using claims data from OptumLabs data warehouse to test the comparative association of treatment with a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i), SGLT2i, GLP-1RA, or sulfonylurea (SU) on a primary kidney composite outcome of incident CKD stages 3–5, kidney failure, or need for KRT in patients with type 2 diabetes and moderate CVD risk. A secondary composite outcome included all components of the primary composite outcome plus death. Results A total of 364,714 adults aged 21 years or older initiating treatment with a DPP-4i ( N =78,843), GLP-1RA ( N =42,049), SGLT2i ( N =45,466), or SU ( N =198,356) were identified. Relative to DPP-4i, SGLT2i (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67 to 0.74; P < 0.001) and GLP-1RA (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.92; P < 0.001) treatment was superior for the primary composite outcome. Similarly, SGLT2i (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.73) and GLP-1RA (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.91) treatment was associated with risk reductions for the primary outcome relative to SU treatment. When comparing SGLT2i with GLP-1RA therapy, SGLT2is were superior for the primary composite outcome (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.86; P < 0.001). Similar findings were observed for the secondary composite outcome across all comparisons. Conclusions SGLT2is and GLP-1RAs were superior to DPP-4is and SUs for preventing kidney complications in a type 2 diabetes population with moderate baseline CVD risk. Clinical Trial registry name and registration number: NCT05214573.

OBJECTIVETo characterize contemporary trends in glucagon fill rates and expenditures in a nationwide cohort of adults with diabetes overall and by key demographic and clinical characteristics.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSIn this retrospective cohort study, we examined 1) glucagon fill rates per 1,000 person-years and 2) patient out-of-pocket and health plan costs per filled glucagon dose among adults with diabetes included in OptumLabs Data Warehouse between 1 January 2011 and 31 March 2021.RESULTSThe study population comprised 2,814,464 adults with diabetes with a mean age of 62.8 (SD 13.2) years. The overall glucagon fill rate decreased from 2.91 to 2.28 per 1,000 person-years (−22%) over the study period. In groups at high risk for severe hypoglycemia, glucagon fill rates increased from 22.46 to 36.76 per 1,000 person-years (64%) among patients with type 1 diabetes, 11.64 to 16.63 per 1,000 person-years (43%) among those treated with short-acting insulin, and 16.08 to 20.12 per 1,000 person-years (25%) among those with a history of severe hypoglycemia. White patients, women, individuals with high income, and commercially insured patients had higher glucagon fill rates compared with minority patients, males, individuals with low income, and Medicare Advantage patients, respectively. Total cost per dosing unit increased from $157.97 to $275.32 (74%) among commercial insurance beneficiaries and from $150.37 to $293.57 (95%) among Medicare Advantage beneficiaries.CONCLUSIONSGlucagon fill rates are concerningly low and declined between 2011 and 2021 but increased in appropriate subgroups with type 1 diabetes, using short-acting insulin, or with a history of severe hypoglycemia. Fill rates were disproportionately low among minority patients and individuals with low income.