Empagliflozin's cardiovascular benefit did not vary by who the patient was

Design

Propensity score–matched active-comparator cohort study using Medicare claims

Population

Adults aged 65 and over with type 2 diabetes initiating empagliflozin, a DPP-4 inhibitor or a GLP-1 receptor agonist, 2014–2020

Primary outcome

Major adverse cardiovascular events, heart failure hospitalisation and all-cause mortality

Effect

Versus DPP-4 inhibitors: MACE HR 0.77 (99.9% CI 0.69–0.85); heart failure hospitalisation HR 0.72 (0.67–0.79); all-cause mortality HR 0.66 (0.57–0.76)

EMPRISE used 2014–2020 Medicare claims to compare propensity-matched adults aged 65 and over with type 2 diabetes starting empagliflozin against those starting a DPP-4 inhibitor or a GLP-1 receptor agonist. Against DPP-4 inhibitors, empagliflozin was associated with lower major adverse cardiovascular events (HR 0.77, 99.9% CI 0.69–0.85), lower heart failure hospitalisation (HR 0.72, 0.67–0.79) and lower all-cause mortality (HR 0.66, 0.57–0.76). Against GLP-1 receptor agonists it was associated with lower heart failure hospitalisation (HR 0.88, 0.81–0.95).

The question the analysis was built to answer was whether that benefit is distributed evenly. It was. No effect heterogeneity appeared by age, sex, race, ethnicity or socioeconomic factors. The only consistent modifier was baseline cardiovascular disease, and mostly on the absolute scale: the incidence rate difference was larger in those who already had cardiovascular disease, while the hazard ratio moved only for heart failure hospitalisation.

That distinction matters in practice. A constant relative risk reduction applied to a higher baseline risk produces a bigger absolute gain, which is an argument for prioritising the patient with established disease rather than an argument that the drug works differently in them. The numeric trend towards greater absolute benefit above age 75 follows the same logic and should not be read as an age-specific effect.

• In an older patient with type 2 diabetes and heart failure, an SGLT2 inhibitor is doing more work than a DPP-4 inhibitor on every outcome measured here.
• Record estimated GFR and volume status before starting, and review both within four to six weeks.
• Counsel on genital mycotic infection and sick-day rules at the first prescription, and again at review.
• Do not defer the drug on the assumption that a patient's social circumstances will blunt its effect — this analysis found no such signal.
• Empagliflozin is widely available in India at generic prices, which makes the access argument weaker here than the cost data from US claims would suggest.

Why it matters

The case for withholding an SGLT2 inhibitor from a particular kind of patient has just lost its evidence.

Don't overread it

This was observational — matched claims analysis cannot establish that empagliflozin caused the lower mortality.

The statistics, in plain English

The 99.9% confidence intervals are unusually wide by convention — the authors tested many subgroups and widened the intervals to account for it, so an interval excluding 1.0 here is a stronger signal than the same interval at 95%. This is claims data with propensity matching, not a randomised trial, so confounding by indication is possible even after matching: prescribers who chose empagliflozin may have chosen it for patients they judged fitter.

Read the rest in the app

You have read your two free briefings this month. The app carries all 27 specialties, every morning, free — and this finding is waiting in it.

Get Daily Doctor — free

Scan to keep reading on your phone. No account needed to start.