5.6.0.0 An­ti­hy­per­glycemic Ther­a­pies and Heart Fail­ure

As many as 50% of pa­tients with type 2 di­a­betes may de­vel­op heart fail­ure (164). Data on the ef­fects of glu­cose-‍low­er­ing agents on heart fail­ure out­comes have demon­strat­ed that thi­a­zo­lidine­diones have a strong and con­sis­tent re­la­tion­ship with in­creased risk of heart fail­ure (165-167). There­fore, thi­a­zo­lidine­dione use should be avoid­ed in pa­tients with symp­tomat­ic heart fail­ure.

Re­cent stud­ies have also ex­am­ined the re­la­tion­ship be­tween DPP-4 in­hibitors and heart fail­ure and have had mixed re­sults. The Saxagliptin As­sess­ment of Vas­cu­lar Out­comes Record­ed in Pa­tients with Di­a­betes Mel­li­tus-Throm­bol­y­sis in My­ocar­dial In­farc­tion 53 (SAVOR-‍TIMI 53) study showed that pa­tients treat­ed with saxagliptin (a DPP-4 in­hibitor) were more like­ly to be hos­pi­talized for heart fail­ure than those given place­bo (3.5% vs. 2.8%, re­spectively) (168). Two other re­cent mul­ti­cen­ter, ran­dom­ized, dou­ble-‍blind, no­nin­fe­rio­ri­ty tri­als, Ex­am­i­na­tion of Car­dio­vas­cu­lar Out­comes with Alogliptin ver­sus Stan­dard of Care (EX­AM­INE) and Trial Eval­u­at­ing Car­dio­vas­cu­lar Out-‍comes with Sitagliptin (TECOS), did not show as­so­ci­a­tions be­tween DPP-4 in­hibitor use and heart fail­ure. The FDA re­port­ed that the hos­pi­tal ad­mis­sion rate for heart fail­ure in EX­AM­INE was 3.9% for pa­tients ran­dom­ly as­signed to alogliptin com­pared with 3.3% for those ran­dom­ly as­signed to place­bo (169). Alogliptin had no ef­fect on the com­pos­ite end point of car­dio­vas­cu­lar death and hos­pi­tal ad­mis­sion for heart fail­ure in the post hoc anal­y­sis (HR 1.0 [95% CI 0.82–1.21]) (170). TECOS showed no dif­ference in the rate of heart fail­ure hos­pi­tal­iza­tion for the sitagliptin group (3.1%; 1.07 per 100 per­son-‍years) com­pared with the place­bo group (3.1%; 1.09 per 100 per­son-‍years) (171).

In four car­dio­vas­cu­lar out­come tri­als of GLP-1 re­cep­tor ag­o­nists, no ev­i­dence for an in­creased risk of heart fail­ure was found and the agents had a neu­tral ef­fect on hos­pi­tal­iza­tion for heart fail­ure (159–162).

A benefit on the in­ci­dence of heart fail­ure has been ob­served with the use of some SGLT2 in­hibitors. In EMPA-REG OUT­COME, the ad­di­tion of em­pagliflozin to stan­dard care led to a significant 35% re­duc­tion in hos­pi­tal­iza­tion for heart fail­ure com­pared with place­bo (8). Al­though the ma­jor­i­ty of pa­tients in the study did not have heart fail­ure at base­line, this benefit was con­sis­tent in pa­tients with and with­out a prior his­to­ry of heart fail­ure (172). Sim­i­lar­ly, in CAN­VAS, there was a 33% re­duc­tion in hos­pi­tal­iza­tion for heart fail­ure with canagliflozin ver­sus place­bo (9). Al­though heart fail­ure hos­pi­tal­iza­tions were prospec­tively ad­ju­di­cat­ed in both tri­als, the type(s) of heart fail­ure events pre­vent­ed were not char­ac­ter­ized. These pre­lim­i­nary find­ings, which strong­ly sug­gest heart fail­ure–re­lat­ed benefits of SGLT2 in­hibitors (par­tic­u­lar­ly the pre­ven­tion of heart fail­ure), are being fol­lowed up with new out­comes tri­als in pa­tients with es­tab­lished heart fail­ure, both with and with­out di­a­betes, to de­ter­mine their efficacy in treat­ment of heart fail­ure.