Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of Sodium-glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors on Amputation, Bone Fracture, and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Using an Alternative Measure to the Hazard Ratio

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Clinical Drug Investigation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background and Objective

Empagliflozin and canagliflozin decreased the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) compared with placebo in randomized clinical trials which were conducted to evaluate their cardiovascular risks. However, canagliflozin increased the risks of amputation and bone fracture, and the reasons for these observed differences remain unclear. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety risks, specifically the risks of amputation and bone fracture, associated with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors by using the difference in restricted mean survival time (RMST), an alternative measure to the hazard ratio.

Methods

This study included all the randomized clinical trials with cardiovascular events as a primary endpoint, comparing SGLT2 inhibitors with placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, the results of which have been published as of 11 September 2018: EMPA-REG OUTCOME (empagliflozin) and CANVAS Program (canagliflozin). We reevaluated these trials by estimating RMSTs based on the reconstructed individual patient data for each time-to-event outcome from publicly available information.

Results

The differences of RMSTs (SGLT2 inhibitors minus placebo: point estimate and 95% confidence interval) for lower-extremity amputations and low-trauma fracture were − 20 days (− 30, − 10) and − 15 days (− 30, 0), respectively, in CANVAS Program (2190 days follow-up). That for lower-limb amputation was 1 day (−  6, 8) in EMPA-REG OUTCOME (1440 days follow-up). Regarding the MACE, both empagliflozin and canagliflozin statistically significantly decreased the risk compared with placebo.

Conclusions

Canagliflozin was shown to increase the risks of amputation and bone fracture compared with placebo when using the difference in RMST.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes—2018. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(suppl 1):S74.

    Google Scholar 

  2. US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration; Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Guidance for industry: diabetes mellitus—evaluating cardiovascular risk in new antidiabetic therapies to treat type 2 diabetes. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM071627.pdf. Accessed 11 Sep 2018.

  3. Zinman B, Wanner C, Lachin JM, Fitchett D, Bluhmki E, Hantel S, et al. Empagliflozin, cardiovascular outcomes, and mortality in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2117–28.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Neal B, Perkovic V, Mahaffey KW, de Zeeuw D, Fulcher G, Erondu N, et al. Canagliflozin and cardiovascular and renal events in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:644–57.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Wanner C, Inzucchi SE, Lachin JM, Fitchett D, von Eynatten M, Mattheus M, et al.; EMPA-REG OUTCOME Investigators. Empagliflozin and progression of kidney disease in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:323–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Uno H, Claggett B, Tian L, Inoue E, Gallo P, Miyata T, et al. Moving beyond the hazard ratio in quantifying the between-group difference in survival analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:2380–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Uno H, Wittes J, Fu H, Solomon SD, Claggett B, Tian L, et al. Alternatives to hazard ratios for comparing the efficacy or safety of therapies in noninferiority studies. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163:127–34.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Trinquart L, Jacot J, Conner SC, Porcher R. Comparison of treatment effects measured by the hazard ratio and by the ratio of restricted mean survival times in oncology randomized controlled trials. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:1813–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chappell R, Zhu X. Describing differences in survival curves. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2:906–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zucker DM. Restricted mean life with covariates: modification and extension of a useful survival analysis method. J Am Stat Assoc. 1998;93:702–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Royston P, Parmar MK. The use of restricted mean survival time to estimate the treatment effect in randomized clinical trials when the proportional hazards assumption is in doubt. Stat Med. 2011;30:2409–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhao L, Tian L, Uno H, Solomon SD, Pfeffer MA, Schindler JS, et al. Utilizing the integrated difference of two survival functions to quantify the treatment contrast for designing, monitoring, and analyzing a comparative clinical study. Clin Trials. 2012;9:570–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Royston P, Parmar MK. Restricted mean survival time: an alternative to the hazard ratio for the design and analysis of randomized trials with a time-to-event outcome. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13:152.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. American Diabetes Association Conference 2017. The results of the CANVAS study. https://www.georgeinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canvas-study-results-ada-2017.pdf. Accessed 11 Sep 2018.

  15. Inzucchi SE, Iliev H, Pfarr E, Zinman B. Empagliflozin and Assessment of Lower-Limb Amputations in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME Trial. Diabetes Care. 2018;41:e4–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Guyot P, Ades AE, Ouwens MJ, Welton NJ. Enhanced secondary analysis of survival data: reconstructing the data from published Kaplan-Meier survival curves. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. https://www.R-project.org. Accessed 11 Sep 2018.

  18. US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Jardiance [prescribing information]. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/204629s016lbl.pdf. Accessed 11 Sep 2018.

  19. d’Emden M, Amerena J, Deed G, Pollock C, Cooper ME. SGLT2 inhibitors with cardiovascular benefits: transforming clinical care in Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2018;136:23–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fadini GP, Avogaro A. SGTL2 inhibitors and amputations in the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5:680–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yuan Z, DeFalco FJ, Ryan PB, Schuemie MJ, Stang PE, Berlin JA, et al. Risk of lower extremity amputations in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors in the USA: a retrospective cohort study. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018;20:582–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fisher M. The CANVAS trial programme raises more questions than answers. Pract Diab. 2017;34:232–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Invokana [prescribing information]. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/204042s026lbl.pdf. Accessed 11 Sep 2018.

  24. Japan Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. Canaglu [package insert]. http://www.pmda.go.jp/PmdaSearch/iyakuDetail/ResultDataSetPDF/400315_3969022F1029_1_11. Accessed 11 Sep 2018.

  25. Rastogi A, Bhansali A. SGLT2 inhibitors through the windows of EMPA-REG and CANVAS trials: a review. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8:1245–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Khouri C, Cracowski JL, Roustit M. SGLT-2 inhibitors and the risk of lower-limb amputation: is this a class effect? Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018;20:1531–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. US National Library of Medicine, Clinicaltrials.gov. Multicenter trial to evaluate the effect of dapagliflozin on the incidence of cardiovascular events (DECLARE-TIMI58). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01730534. Accessed 11 Sep 2018.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Medicine (Pharmaceutical Medicine), Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kitasato University, 5-9-1 Shirokane, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 108-8641, Japan

    Masayuki Kaneko & Mamoru Narukawa

Authors
  1. Masayuki Kaneko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mamoru Narukawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masayuki Kaneko.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Masayuki Kaneko and Mamoru Narukawa declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Funding

The preparation of this manuscript was not supported by any external funding.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaneko, M., Narukawa, M. Effects of Sodium-glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors on Amputation, Bone Fracture, and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Using an Alternative Measure to the Hazard Ratio. Clin Drug Investig 39, 179–186 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40261-018-0731-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40261-018-0731-4

Search

Navigation