Evidence mapPaperPMID 35370961Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2022

Comparative Cardiovascular Outcomes of SGLT2 Inhibitors in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Yu Jiang, Pingping Yang, Linghua Fu, Lizhe Sun, Wen Shen, Qinghua Wu

Open access · goldAbstract readNetwork Meta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. EClinicalMedicine · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Yu JiangDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
Pingping YangDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
Linghua FuDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
Lizhe SunDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Wen ShenDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
Qinghua WuDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
Nanchang University · CNSecond Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to explore the cardiovascular outcomes of all the kind and dosages of sodium-glucose cotransport-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. Method and Result: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases were systematically searched for studies to compare the therapeutic effects of different SGLT2 inhibitors in T2DM patients. The effect measurements estimate chosen were odds ratios (ORs) and their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Forty-seven RCTs involving a total of 70574 participants were eligible for direct and indirect comparisons. In direct comparison, treatment with dapagliflozin 5mg showed significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality compared with treatment with dapagliflozin 2.5mg (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01-0.70). According to NMA, interestingly, empagliflozin 10mg/25mg, and canagliflozin 100mg was associated with significantly lower risks of all-cause mortality compared with placebo (OR of 0.70, 95% CI 0.58-0.85; 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.84; and 0.83, 95% CI 0.73-0.95, respectively). Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin 10mg, empagliflozin 10mg and 25mg displayed the lower risks for cardiovascular events (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.44-1.00; OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22-0.93; and 0.43, 95% CI 0.24-0.74, respectively) by direct comparison. Moreover, canagliflozin 100/300mg showed significantly higher risks of cardiovascular events compared with empagliflozin 10mg (OR of 4.83, 95% CI 1.14-20.46 and 5.31, 95% CI 1.26-22.34, respectively) and empagliflozin 25mg (4.23, 95% CI 1.13-15.83 and 4.65, 95% CI 1.25-17.27, respectively) according to NMA. There were non-significant differences among all interventions in volume depletion in traditional pairwise meta-analysis. While in NMA, canagliflozin 100/300mg were associated with significantly increased risks of volume depletion compared with placebo (OR of 1.47, 95% CI 1.08-1.99 and 2.19, 95% CI 1.66-2.90, respectively). Conclusion: In the limitations of the NMA, this study showed that empagliflozin might be better than other SGLT2 inhibitors with low risks of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events in patients with T2DM suggesting the need for

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 InhibitorsHumansHypoglycemic AgentsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHypoglycemic AgentsSodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitorscardiovascular eventsempagliflozinmeta-analysisSGLT2 inhibitorstype 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID35370961
PMCPMC8967154
OpenAlexW4220964791

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.