It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Aims
Sodium–glucose co‐transporter‐2 (SGLT2) inhibitors improve health status and outcomes in the setting of heart failure (HF) across the range of ejection fraction (EF). Baseline kidney disease is common in HF, complicates HF management and is strongly linked to worse health status. This study aimed to assess whether the treatment effects of dapagliflozin on health status vary based on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).
Methods and Results
We conducted a pooled participant‐level analysis of two double‐blind, randomized trials, DEFINE‐HF (n = 236) and PRESERVED‐HF (n = 324), which evaluated dapagliflozin versus placebo. Both multicentre studies enrolled adults with HF, New York Heart Association Class II or higher, elevated natriuretic peptides, and an EF < 40% in DEFINE‐HF or >45% in PRESERVED‐HF. The primary exposure was eGFR. The main outcome was the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ‐CSS) at 12 weeks. Across both trials, there were 583 (99.3%) participants with a baseline eGFR. The median (25th, 75th) eGFR was 59 (46, 77) mL/min/1.73 m2. Dapagliflozin improved KCCQ‐CSS at 12 weeks [placebo‐adjusted difference, +5.0 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.6–7.5; P < 0.001], and this was consistent in participants with an eGFR ≥ 60 (+6.0 points, 95% CI 2.4–9.7; P = 0.001) and eGFR < 60 (+4.1 points, 95% CI 0.5–7.7; P = 0.025) (P interaction = 0.46). The benefits of dapagliflozin on KCCQ‐CSS remained robust across eGFR when modelled as a continuous variable (P interaction = 0.48).
Conclusions
Dapagliflozin led to early and clinically meaningful improvements in health status in HF patients, regardless of EF or baseline eGFR.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Department of Cardiology, Kaiser Permanente, San Francisco, California, USA, Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California, USA
2 Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri, USA, Kansas City School of Medicine, University of Missouri, Kansas City, Missouri, USA
3 Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri, USA
4 Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
5 Ted Rogers Centre for Heart Research, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
6 Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
7 Sections on Cardiovascular Medicine and Geriatrics, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston‐Salem, North Carolina, USA
8 Southwestern Medical Center and Parkland Health and Hospital System, University of Texas, Dallas, Texas, USA
9 Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, and Bluhm Cardiovascular Institute, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA
10 School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
11 Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA