The glucoretics
SGLT-2 inhibitors have really come with a wave to improve the outcomes in
diabetic patients, especially cardio-vascular and renal outcomes. I had the
pleasure to listen to Inzucchi SE
recently on this topic and the science has really taken off.
Here is a summary of what is
happening in the world of SGLT-2 inhibitors and what we need to know as
nephrologists.
SLGT-2 inhibitors overall( all of them) only have a minor to modest
effect on A1C reduction. For anything, it might even stay the same after 12
weeks on the drug. This doesn’t translate into the benefits we see in trials.
Regardless of the A1C being only modestly decreased, the cardiac benefits are
amazing.
Even though they have a weight loss effect(
usually just 2kg total no matter what), they are not approved for weight loss
Even though they have a significant bp
effect, not approved for BP management
Obviously, they are not going to work if you
have no URINE, so unclear benefit in ESRD patients
All trials, from CANVAS to EMPA-REG(empagliflozin), the cardiovascular
benefits have been astounding- decreased number of MACE events( MI, stroke,
cardiac event).
What the cardiologist world is excited about
is also the decreased CHF admissions and readmissions ( perhaps due to the naturetic
effect of the agent acting as a proximal tubule diuretic without really increasing
renin-aldo axis)—making it an amazing drug for volume management. Recent studies have also shown increase in HCT with the
drug use showing it’s effect on plasma volume. Ongoing trials might shed light on CHF management
in diabetics and non-diabetics with this agent. A recent review summarizes this.
CANVAS study- with a different drug- also
similar MACE outcomes as EMPA-REG, but component of MACE individual were less
pronounced. Comparable CHF benefits. Canaglifozin related CANVAS had more
amputations and fractures as a major side effect that EMPA-REG(empagliflozin)
data didn’t show that when re done to look for it; unclear why one drug does it
and other doesn’t. Visual abstract from NephJC
Should
we start using this drug in diabetic patients with CKD? Or even CKD patients
without DMII given significant cardio-vascular and renal benefit. When cost analysis was done, empagliflozin use resulted in higher total lifetime treatment costs
($371,450 versus $272,966) but yielded greater QALYs (10.712 vs. 9.419)
compared to standard treatment. This corresponded to an ICER of $76,167 per
QALY gained. This suggested that empagliflozin would be cost-effective
in 96% of 10,000 iterations assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000
per QALY gained.
Here is a nice review on both drugs and effects.
If we start prescribing as nephrologists,
likely will be empagliflozin and dose of 10mg given similar effect and monitor
for what effects? As might not change A1C anyway—more long term benefits such
as cardio-vascular and renal effects.
We truly have entered a new era!!
Results are really amazing. Have you been aware of any study/studies where patients with CKD IV patients were included.
ReplyDelete