• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Comparative Effectiveness of Individual Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors.钠-葡萄糖协同转运蛋白2抑制剂个体间的比较疗效
JAMA Intern Med. 2025 Mar 1;185(3):302-313. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2024.7357.
2
Comparative Genitourinary Safety of In-class Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors among Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Cohort Study.具有射血分数保留的心力衰竭患者中钠-葡萄糖共转运蛋白 2 抑制剂的类内比较生殖泌尿系统安全性:一项队列研究。
Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2024 May;24(3):455-464. doi: 10.1007/s40256-024-00648-2. Epub 2024 Apr 30.
3
Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients Initiating First-Line Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes With Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors Versus Metformin : A Cohort Study.钠-葡萄糖共转运蛋白 2 抑制剂与二甲双胍作为二线治疗药物起始治疗 2 型糖尿病患者的心血管结局:一项队列研究。
Ann Intern Med. 2022 Jul;175(7):927-937. doi: 10.7326/M21-4012. Epub 2022 May 24.
4
Rationale for the Early Use of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.钠-葡萄糖共转运蛋白 2 抑制剂在 2 型糖尿病患者中的早期应用的理由。
Adv Ther. 2019 Oct;36(10):2567-2586. doi: 10.1007/s12325-019-01054-w. Epub 2019 Aug 23.
5
Empagliflozin and the Risk of Heart Failure Hospitalization in Routine Clinical Care.恩格列净在常规临床治疗中心衰住院风险的研究
Circulation. 2019 Jun 18;139(25):2822-2830. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.039177. Epub 2019 Apr 8.
6
Effectiveness and safety of empagliflozin: final results from the EMPRISE study.恩格列净的有效性和安全性:EMPIRSE 研究的最终结果。
Diabetologia. 2024 Jul;67(7):1328-1342. doi: 10.1007/s00125-024-06126-3. Epub 2024 Mar 21.
7
Cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin versus canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, or standard of care in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease.恩格列净与卡格列净、达格列净或标准治疗方案相比在2型糖尿病合并已确诊心血管疾病患者中的成本效益
BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2021 May;9(1). doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001313.
8
Comparative Cardiovascular Effectiveness of Empagliflozin Versus Dapagliflozin in Adults With Treated Type 2 Diabetes: A Target Trial Emulation.恩格列净与达格列净治疗成年 2 型糖尿病患者的心血管有效性比较:一项模拟目标试验。
Circulation. 2024 Oct 29;150(18):1401-1411. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.068613. Epub 2024 Aug 29.
9
Can we go beyond surrogates?我们能否超越代理人?
J Diabetes. 2017 Nov;9(11):976-977. doi: 10.1111/1753-0407.12583.
10
Comparative risk evaluation for cardiovascular events associated with dapagliflozin vs. empagliflozin in real-world type 2 diabetes patients: a multi-institutional cohort study.在真实世界的 2 型糖尿病患者中,达格列净与恩格列净相关心血管事件的比较风险评估:一项多机构队列研究。
Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2019 Sep 24;18(1):120. doi: 10.1186/s12933-019-0919-9.

引用本文的文献

1
Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors, Erythrocytosis, and Thrombosis in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes.2型糖尿病成人患者中的钠-葡萄糖协同转运蛋白2抑制剂、红细胞增多症和血栓形成
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Jun 2;8(6):e2517086. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.17086.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparative Cardiovascular Effectiveness of Empagliflozin Versus Dapagliflozin in Adults With Treated Type 2 Diabetes: A Target Trial Emulation.恩格列净与达格列净治疗成年 2 型糖尿病患者的心血管有效性比较:一项模拟目标试验。
Circulation. 2024 Oct 29;150(18):1401-1411. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.068613. Epub 2024 Aug 29.
2
Risk of Urogenital Bacterial Infection with Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using a Claims Database.钠-葡萄糖协同转运蛋白2抑制剂导致泌尿生殖系统细菌感染的风险:一项使用索赔数据库的回顾性队列研究
Diabetes Ther. 2024 Aug;15(8):1821-1830. doi: 10.1007/s13300-024-01613-7. Epub 2024 Jul 3.
3
Comparative Outcomes of Empagliflozin to Dapagliflozin in Patients With Heart Failure.恩格列净与达格列净治疗心力衰竭患者的疗效比较。
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 May 1;7(5):e249305. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.9305.
4
Comparison of Effectiveness Among Different Sodium-Glucose Cotransoporter-2 Inhibitors According to Underlying Conditions: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.根据基础疾病比较不同钠-葡萄糖协同转运蛋白2抑制剂之间的有效性:一项随机对照试验的网状Meta分析
J Am Heart Assoc. 2024 Feb 6;13(3):e031805. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.123.031805. Epub 2024 Jan 31.
5
Impact of SGLT2 inhibitors on patient outcomes: a network meta-analysis.SGLT2 抑制剂对患者结局的影响:网状荟萃分析。
Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2023 Oct 27;22(1):290. doi: 10.1186/s12933-023-02035-8.
6
Comparison of cardiovascular outcomes between SGLT2 inhibitors in diabetes mellitus.比较 SGLT2 抑制剂在糖尿病患者中的心血管结局。
Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2022 May 18;21(1):67. doi: 10.1186/s12933-022-01508-6.
7
Evolving channeling in prescribing SGLT-2 inhibitors as first-line treatment for type 2 diabetes.新型 SGLT-2 抑制剂的处方渠道演变:作为 2 型糖尿病的一线治疗药物。
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2022 May;31(5):566-576. doi: 10.1002/pds.5406. Epub 2022 Jan 17.
8
9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022.9. 血糖治疗的药物学方法:《2022 年糖尿病医学诊疗标准》。
Diabetes Care. 2022 Jan 1;45(Suppl 1):S125-S143. doi: 10.2337/dc22-S009.
9
Trends in First-Line Glucose-Lowering Drug Use in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes in Light of Emerging Evidence for SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA.鉴于 SGLT-2i 和 GLP-1RA 的新证据,观察 2 型糖尿病成人一线降糖药物的使用趋势。
Diabetes Care. 2021 Aug;44(8):1774-1782. doi: 10.2337/dc20-2926. Epub 2021 Jun 18.
10
Risk of amputation with canagliflozin across categories of age and cardiovascular risk in three US nationwide databases: cohort study.三种美国全国性数据库中年龄和心血管风险类别与卡格列净截肢风险的关系:队列研究。
BMJ. 2020 Aug 25;370:m2812. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m2812.

钠-葡萄糖协同转运蛋白2抑制剂个体间的比较疗效

Comparative Effectiveness of Individual Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors.

作者信息

Shin HoJin, Paik Julie M, Everett Brendan M, DiCesare Elyse, Alix Caroline, Glynn Robert J, Wexler Deborah J, Patorno Elisabetta

机构信息

Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

Formally with Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.

出版信息

JAMA Intern Med. 2025 Mar 1;185(3):302-313. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2024.7357.

DOI:10.1001/jamainternmed.2024.7357
PMID:39836397
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11877166/
Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Evidence on cardiovascular benefits and safety of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors is mainly from placebo-controlled trials. Therefore, the comparative effectiveness and safety of individual SGLT-2 inhibitors remain unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the use of canagliflozin or dapagliflozin with empagliflozin for a composite outcome (myocardial infarction [MI] or stroke), heart failure hospitalization, MI, stroke, all-cause death, and safety outcomes, including diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), lower-limb amputation, bone fracture, severe urinary tract infection (UTI), and genital infection and whether effects differed by dosage or cardiovascular disease (CVD) history.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This comparative effectiveness study using target trial emulation included adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) using 3 US claims databases using data from August 2014 through June 2020. The study was conducted from August 2023 to July 2024, with a follow-up period of up to 8 years, and the analysis was completed in July 2024.

EXPOSURES

First dispensing of canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, or empagliflozin without any use of SGLT-2 inhibitors during the prior 365 days.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Database-specific models were weighted using propensity score matching-weights to adjust for 129 confounders. Hazard ratios and 95% CIs for outcomes were estimated using weighted Cox proportional hazards models. HRs were pooled across databases using a fixed-effect meta-analysis.

RESULTS

: Across the databases, 232 890 patients receiving canagliflozin, 129 881 patients receiving dapagliflozin, and 295 043 patients receiving empagliflozin were identified. Compared with empagliflozin initiators, those receiving canagliflozin or dapagliflozin were less likely to have diabetes-related conditions or a history of CVD at baseline. For MI/stroke risk, both canagliflozin (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.05) and dapagliflozin (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89-1.03) were comparable to empagliflozin. For heart failure hospitalization, dapagliflozin initiators had a higher risk (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02-1.39), particularly at the low dose of 5 mg (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.12-1.50). These findings were consistent across subgroups of CVD history. For safety events, compared with empagliflozin, canagliflozin initiators had a lower risk of genital infections (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91-0.97) but a higher risk of severe UTIs (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03-1.24), and dapagliflozin initiators had lower risks of genital infections (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.89-0.95) and DKA (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68-0.90).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that individual SGLT-2 inhibitors demonstrated comparable cardiovascular effectiveness at clinically effective doses, though low-dose dapagliflozin showed a reduced benefit for heart failure hospitalization compared with empagliflozin.

摘要

重要性

钠-葡萄糖协同转运蛋白2(SGLT-2)抑制剂对心血管益处及安全性的证据主要来自安慰剂对照试验。因此,各SGLT-2抑制剂的相对有效性和安全性仍不明确。

目的

比较卡格列净、达格列净与恩格列净用于复合结局(心肌梗死[MI]或卒中)、心力衰竭住院、MI、卒中、全因死亡以及安全性结局(包括糖尿病酮症酸中毒[DKA]、下肢截肢、骨折、严重尿路感染[UTI]和生殖器感染)的情况,以及疗效是否因剂量或心血管疾病(CVD)病史而异。

设计、设置和参与者:这项采用目标试验模拟的比较有效性研究纳入了使用3个美国索赔数据库中2014年8月至2020年6月数据的2型糖尿病(T2D)成人患者。该研究于2023年8月至2024年7月进行,随访期长达8年,分析于2024年7月完成。

暴露因素

首次配给卡格列净、达格列净或恩格列净,且在之前365天内未使用过任何SGLT-2抑制剂。

主要结局和测量指标

使用倾向评分匹配权重对特定数据库模型进行加权,以调整129个混杂因素。使用加权Cox比例风险模型估计结局的风险比和95%置信区间。通过固定效应荟萃分析汇总各数据库的风险比。

结果

在各数据库中,分别识别出232890例接受卡格列净治疗的患者、129881例接受达格列净治疗的患者和295043例接受恩格列净治疗的患者。与开始使用恩格列净的患者相比,开始使用卡格列净或达格列净的患者在基线时患糖尿病相关疾病或有CVD病史的可能性较小。对于MI/卒中风险,卡格列净(风险比,0.98;95%置信区间,0.91 - 1.05)和达格列净(风险比,0.95;95%置信区间,0.89 - 1.03)与恩格列净相当。对于心力衰竭住院,开始使用达格列净的患者风险较高(风险比,1.19;95%置信区间,1.02 - 1.39),尤其是低剂量5 mg时(风险比,1.30;95%置信区间,1.12 - 1.50)。这些发现在CVD病史亚组中是一致的。对于安全事件,与恩格列净相比,开始使用卡格列净的患者生殖器感染风险较低(风险比,0.94;95%置信区间,0.91 - 0.97),但严重UTI风险较高(风险比,1.13;95%置信区间,1.03 - 1.24),而开始使用达格列净的患者生殖器感染风险较低(风险比,0.92;95%置信区间,0.89 - 0.95),DKA风险较低(风险比,0.78;95%置信区间,0.68 - 0.90)。

结论和相关性

本研究发现,各SGLT-2抑制剂在临床有效剂量下心血管有效性相当,尽管低剂量达格列净与恩格列净相比,心力衰竭住院获益有所降低。