Effects of canagliflozin compared with placebo on major adverse cardiovascular and kidney events in patient groups with different baseline levels of HbA1c, disease duration and treatment intensity: results from the CANVAS Program

Tamara K Young, Jing-Wei Li, Amy Kang, Hiddo J L Heerspink, Carinna Hockham, Clare Arnott, Brendon L Neuen, Sophia Zoungas, Kenneth W Mahaffey, Vlado Perkovic, Dick de Zeeuw, Greg Fulcher, Bruce Neal, Meg Jardine, Tamara K Young, Jing-Wei Li, Amy Kang, Hiddo J L Heerspink, Carinna Hockham, Clare Arnott, Brendon L Neuen, Sophia Zoungas, Kenneth W Mahaffey, Vlado Perkovic, Dick de Zeeuw, Greg Fulcher, Bruce Neal, Meg Jardine

Abstract

Aims/hypothesis: Type 2 diabetes mellitus can manifest over a broad clinical range, although there is no clear consensus on the categorisation of disease complexity. We assessed the effects of canagliflozin, compared with placebo, on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program over a range of type 2 diabetes mellitus complexity, defined separately by baseline intensity of treatment, duration of diabetes and glycaemic control.

Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of the effects of canagliflozin on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) according to baseline glucose-lowering treatments (0 or 1, 2 or 3+ non-insulin glucose-lowering treatments, or insulin-based treatment), duration of diabetes (<10, 10 to 16, >16 years) and HbA1c (≤53.0 mmol/mol [<7.0%], >53.0 to 58.5 mmol/mol [>7.0% to 7.5%], >58.5 to 63.9 mmol/mol [>7.5 to 8.0%], >63.9 to 69.4 mmol/mol [8.0% to 8.5%], >69.4 to 74.9 mmol/mol [>8.5 to 9.0%] or >74.9 mmol/mol [>9.0%]). We analysed additional secondary endpoints for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes, including a combined kidney outcome of sustained 40% decline in eGFR, end-stage kidney disease or death due to kidney disease. We used Cox regression analyses and compared the constancy of HRs across subgroups by fitting an interaction term (p value for significance <0.05).

Results: At study initiation, 5095 (50%) CANVAS Program participants were treated with insulin, 2100 (21%) had an HbA1c > 74.9 mmol/mol (9.0%) and the median duration of diabetes was 12.6 years (interquartile interval 8.0-18 years). Canagliflozin reduced MACE (HR 0.86 [95% CI 0.75, 0.97]) with no evidence that the benefit differed between subgroups defined by the number of glucose-lowering treatments, the duration of diabetes or baseline HbA1c (all p-heterogeneity >0.17). Canagliflozin reduced MACE in participants receiving insulin with no evidence that the benefit differed from other participants in the trial (HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.72, 1.00]). Similar results were observed for other cardiovascular outcomes and for the combined kidney outcome (HR for combined kidney outcome 0.60 [95% CI 0.47, 0.77]), with all p-heterogeneity >0.37.

Conclusions/interpretation: In people with type 2 diabetes mellitus at high cardiovascular risk, there was no evidence that cardiovascular and renal protection with canagliflozin differed across subgroups defined by baseline treatment intensity, duration of diabetes or HbA1c.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01032629 NCT01989754.

Keywords: Baseline HbA1c; Complications; Disease duration; Treatment intensity; Type 2 diabetes complexity.

© 2021. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
HRs for (a) cardiovascular and (b) kidney outcomes according to baseline treatment intensity. HRs cannot be directly calculated from event numbers because the trials had different randomisation ratios and different follow-up durations. The follow-up for CANVAS was 295.9 weeks and for CANVAS-R was 108.0 weeks. Cana, canagliflozin; CV, cardiovascular; HF, heart failure; MI, myocardial infarction
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
HRs for (a) cardiovascular and (b) kidney outcomes according to baseline disease duration. HRs cannot be directly calculated from event numbers because the trials had different randomisation ratios and different follow-up durations. The follow-up for CANVAS was 295.9 weeks and for CANVAS-R was 108.0 weeks. CV, cardiovascular; HF, heart failure; MI, myocardial infarction
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Cubic spline model for HR for MACE with canagliflozin vs placebo according to baseline disease duration. The y-axis is plotted on a log scale
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Cubic spline model for HR for MACE with canagliflozin vs placebo according to baseline HbA1c. The y-axis is plotted on a log scale
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
HRs for (a) cardiovascular and (b) kidney outcomes according to baseline HbA1c. HRs cannot be directly calculated from event numbers because the trials had different randomisation ratios and different follow-up durations. The follow-up for CANVAS was 295.9 weeks and for CANVAS-R was 108.0 weeks. CV, cardiovascular; HF, heart failure; MI, myocardial infarction

References

    1. Chatterjee S, Khunti K, Davies MJ. Type 2 diabetes. Lancet. 2017;389:2239–2251. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30058-2.
    1. Sav A, Salehi A, Mair FS, McMillan SS. Measuring the burden of treatment for chronic disease: implications of a scoping review of the literature. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17:140–140. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0411-8.
    1. American Diabetes Association 6. Glycemic targets: standards of medical care in diabetes—2019. Diabetes Care. 2019;42:S61–S70. doi: 10.2337/dc19-S006.
    1. Turner RC, Cull CA, Frighi V, Holman RR (1999) Glycemic control with diet, sulfonylurea, metformin, or insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: progressive requirement for multiple therapies (UKPDS 49). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. JAMA 281:2005–2012. 10.1001/jama.281.21.2005
    1. Zoungas S, Woodward M, Li Q, et al. Impact of age, age at diagnosis and duration of diabetes on the risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications and death in type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia. 2014;57:2465–2474. doi: 10.1007/s00125-014-3369-7.
    1. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33) Lancet (London, England) 1998;352:837–853. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)07019-6.
    1. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group The relationship of glycemic exposure (HbA1c) to the risk of development and progression of retinopathy in the diabetes control and complications trial. Diabetes. 1995;44:968–983. doi: 10.2337/diab.44.8.968.
    1. Zoungas S, Chalmers J, Ninomiya T, et al. Association of HbA1c levels with vascular complications and death in patients with type 2 diabetes: evidence of glycaemic thresholds. Diabetologia. 2012;55:636–643. doi: 10.1007/s00125-011-2404-1.
    1. Rodriguez-Gutierrez R, McCoy RG. Measuring what matters in DiabetesReevaluating the use of hemoglobin A1c as a surrogate marker in diabetes. JAMA. 2019;321:1865–1866. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.4310.
    1. Spencer-Bonilla G, Quinones AR, Montori VM. Assessing the burden of treatment. J Gen Intern Med. 2017;32:1141–1145. doi: 10.1007/s11606-017-4117-8.
    1. Neal B, Perkovic V, Mahaffey KW, et al. Canagliflozin and cardiovascular and renal events in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:644–657. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1611925.
    1. Perkovic V, Jardine MJ, Neal B, et al. Canagliflozin and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:2295–2306. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1811744.
    1. Wiviott SD, Raz I, Bonaca MP, et al. Dapagliflozin and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:347–357. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1812389.
    1. Zinman B, Wanner C, Lachin JM, et al. Empagliflozin, cardiovascular outcomes, and mortality in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2117–2128. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1504720.
    1. Neuen BL, Young T, Heerspink HJL et al (2019) SGLT2 inhibitors for the prevention of kidney failure in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 7:845–854
    1. Neuen Brendon L, Ohkuma T, Neal B, et al. Cardiovascular and renal outcomes with canagliflozin according to baseline kidney function. Circulation. 2018;138:1537–1550. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.035901.
    1. Petrykiv S, Sjöström CD, Greasley PJ, et al. Differential effects of dapagliflozin on cardiovascular risk factors at varying degrees of renal function. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017;12:751–759. doi: 10.2215/CJN.10180916.
    1. Cherney DZI, Cooper ME, Tikkanen I, et al. Pooled analysis of phase III trials indicate contrasting influences of renal function on blood pressure, body weight, and HbA1c reductions with empagliflozin. Kidney Int. 2018;93:231–244. doi: 10.1016/j.kint.2017.06.017.
    1. Zelniker TA, Wiviott SD, Raz I, et al. SGLT2 inhibitors for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcome trials. Lancet. 2019;393:31–39. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32590-X.
    1. Neal B, Perkovic V, Mahaffey KW, et al. Optimizing the analysis strategy for the CANVAS Program: a prespecified plan for the integrated analyses of the CANVAS and CANVAS-R trials. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2017;19:926–935. doi: 10.1111/dom.12924.
    1. Levin A, Stevens PE, Bilous RW, et al. Kidney disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD Work Group. KDIGO 2012 clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int. 2013;3:1–150. doi: 10.1038/kisup.2012.73.
    1. Davies MJ, D’Alessio DA, Fradkin J, et al. Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) Diabetologia. 2018;61:2461–2498. doi: 10.1007/s00125-018-4729-5.
    1. Neal B, Perkovic V, de Zeeuw D, et al. Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of the Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study (CANVAS)--a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Am Heart J. 2013;166:217–223. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.05.007.
    1. Raz I, Mosenzon O, Bonaca MP, et al. DECLARE-TIMI 58: participants’ baseline characteristics. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018;20:1102–1110. doi: 10.1111/dom.13217.
    1. Bajaj HS, Raz I, Mosenzon O, et al. Cardiovascular and renal benefits of dapagliflozin in patients with short and long-standing type 2 diabetes: analysis from the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2020;22:1122–1131. doi: 10.1111/dom.14011.
    1. Inzucchi SE, Kosiborod M, Fitchett D, et al. Improvement in cardiovascular outcomes with empagliflozin is independent of glycemic control. Circulation. 2018;138:1904–1907. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.035759.
    1. Zinman B, Inzucchi SE, Lachin JM, et al. Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of a randomized, placebo-controlled cardiovascular outcome trial of empagliflozin (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2014;13:102. doi: 10.1186/1475-2840-13-102.
    1. Rosenstock J, Perkovic V, Johansen OE, et al. Effect of linagliptin vs placebo on major cardiovascular events in adults with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular and renal risk: the CARMELINA randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;321:69–79. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.18269.
    1. Marso SP, Daniels GH, Brown-Frandsen K, et al. Liraglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:311–322. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1603827.
    1. Green JB, Bethel MA, Armstrong PW, et al. Effect of sitagliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:232–242. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1501352.
    1. Fu AZ, Sheehan JJ. Treatment intensification for patients with type 2 diabetes and poor glycaemic control. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2016;18:892–898. doi: 10.1111/dom.12683.
    1. Boyd CM, Weiss CO, Halter J, et al. Framework for evaluating disease severity measures in older adults with comorbidity. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007;62:286–295. doi: 10.1093/gerona/62.3.286.
    1. Nanayakkara N, Ranasinha S, Gadowski A, et al. Age, age at diagnosis and diabetes duration are all associated with vascular complications in type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Complicat. 2018;32:279–290. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2017.11.009.
    1. Huo L, Magliano DJ, Ranciere F, et al. Impact of age at diagnosis and duration of type 2 diabetes on mortality in Australia 1997-2011. Diabetologia. 2018;61:1055–1063. doi: 10.1007/s00125-018-4544-z.
    1. Herrington WG, Alegre-Diaz J, Wade R, et al. Effect of diabetes duration and glycaemic control on 14-year cause-specific mortality in Mexican adults: a blood-based prospective cohort study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018;6:455–463. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(18)30050-0.
    1. Vetrone LM, Zaccardi F, Webb DR, et al. Cardiovascular and mortality events in type 2 diabetes cardiovascular outcomes trials: a systematic review with trend analysis. Acta Diabetol. 2019;56:331–339. doi: 10.1007/s00592-018-1253-5.
    1. Zoungas S, Arima H, Gerstein HC, et al. Effects of intensive glucose control on microvascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised controlled trials. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5:431–437. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30104-3.
    1. Cavero-Redondo I, Peleteiro B, Álvarez-Bueno C, et al. Glycated haemoglobin A1c as a risk factor of cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality in diabetic and non-diabetic populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e015949. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015949.

Source: PubMed

Подписаться