EMPA-REG OUTCOME: Cumulative incidence of the primary outcome

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Description of Each Study in the Cross Trial Safety Analysis Solomon SD, et al. Circulation 2008 [Epub Mar 31]

Advertisements

Efficacy and safety of angiotensin receptor blockers: a meta-analysis of randomized trials Elgendy IY et al. Am J Hypertens. 2014; doi:10,1093/ajh/hpu209.

Results Fox K, Ford I, Steg PG, Tardif JC, Tendera M, Ferrari R. N Eng J Med August 31. DOI: /NEJMoa

Clinical Outcomes with Newer Antihyperglycemic Agents

S ystolic H eart failure treatment with the I f inhibitor ivabradine T rial Main results Swedberg K, et al. Lancet. 2010;376(9744):

Aim To determine the effects of a Coversyl- based blood pressure lowering regimen on the risk of recurrent stroke among patients with a history of stroke.

Background There are 12 different types of medications to lower blood sugar levels in patients with type 2 diabetes. It is widely agreed upon that metformin.

The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) 2 Investigators. N Engl J Med 2006; available at: End pointActive therapy PlaceboRelative.

The ILLUMINATE Study: Enrollment and Outcomes Philip Barter, et al. N Engl J Med 2007;357:

Clinical Outcomes with Newer Antihyperglycemic Agents FDA-Mandated CV Safety Trials 1.

Baseline Characteristics of the Patients* - Part I The ONTARGET Investigators. N Engl J Med 2008 [Epub on Mar 31]

Rosuvastatin 10 mg n=2514 Placebo n= to 4 weeks Randomization 6weeks3 monthly Closing date 20 May 2007 Eligibility Optimal HF treatment instituted.

Enrollment and Outcomes Duckworth W, et al. N Engl J Med 2009;360:

R1. 이정미 / prof. 이상열. INTRODUCTION Type 2 diabetes is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease The presence of both type 2 diabetes and.

Clinical Outcomes with Newer Antihyperglycemic Agents

Discontinuation of medication after nonfatal event: MI

Clinical Outcomes with Newer Antihyperglycemic Agents

Mikhail Kosiborod, MD Professor of Medicine (Cardiology)

Flow of Individuals Through the Vitamin E and Vitamin C Components of the Physicians’ Health Study II Howard D. Sesso et al. JAMA 2008;300:

LEADER trial: Primary Outcome

Recent Breakthroughs in Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials in T2DM

Disclosure Consultations and Honoraria Grant Support

TNT: Baseline and final LDL cholesterol levels

with type 2 diabetes without heart failure?

CV Risk reduction in T2DM with GLP-1 Agonists: Should We Change Our Clinical Practice?

Updates on CVOT Data and Clinical Comparisons That Matter

Cardiovascular outcomes

on behalf of the LEADER Trial Steering Committee and Investigators

CV Risk Management in T2DM: What Did We Learn From EASD 2016?

Prevalence, Predictors, and Outcomes in Treatment-resistant Hypertension in Patients with Coronary Disease Sripal Bangalore, MD, MHA, Rana Fayyad, PhD,

Baseline characteristics of patients

Impacting CV Risk With Diabetes Medications

EMPA-REG OUTCOME Trial design: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) at high risk for CV events were randomized to receive in a 1:1:1 fashion either.

Impacting CV Risk With Diabetes Medications

Introduction The American Journal of Medicine

The Hypertension in the Very Elderly Trial (HYVET)

T2DM and CV Outcomes Trials: A Deep Dive!

Expert Appraisal of CV Outcome Trial Results in T2DM for the Diabetologist.

LIFE: Reduction in primary end-point events seen with reduction of LVH by two electrocardiographic criteria End point % reduction with each 1050-mm x ms.

Should SGLT2 Inhibitors Be the Primary Agents for CV Risk Reduction in T2DM?

Diabetes and CV Risk Reduction: Cardiologists’ Perspectives on the Latest Outcomes Data.

CV Risk Management in T2DM: What Did We Learn from ADA 2016?

ASCOT-BPLA: Primary and secondary end points

Relative risk of major events with atenolol vs placebo

T2DM, CV Risk, and SGLT2 Inhibition in the Spotlight

P2Y12 blockade versus placebo; risk ratio with 95% CIs for the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and.

Tackling CV Risk in Type 2 Diabetes -- Gaps Between Guidelines and Clinical Practice?

Svend A. Mortensen et al. JCHF 2014;2:

Inclusion Criteria for Patients with Multiple Atherothrombotic Risk Factors and for Those with Established Cardiovascular Disease Deepak L.Bhatt, et al,

Berger JS, et al. JAMA 2009;301:

2015 EASD In Review: CV Risk management in t2dm

Entry, Randomization, and Follow-up of Patients in the Hypertension in the Very Elderly Trial Of the 461 patients who did not meet the protocol criteria,

Baseline Characteristics of the Patients – Part I

Baseline Characteristics by hs-CRP

An ACCORD BP sub-analysis HR: 1.06; 95%CI: ; P=0.61

The ACCORD Study Group. NEJM 2010; Epub March 14

Cumulative incidence of cardiovascular events according to medication group in participants of the 4D study with an LDL-C in its fourth quartile at baseline.

T2DM patients with HF may benefit from SGLT2 inhibitor therapy

Comparison of Baseline Characteristics by Primary End Point

Comparison of outcomes in patients with versus patients without diabetes; primary outcome event rate (CV death, non-fatal MI and non-fatal CVA) as a percentage.

An ACCORD BP sub-analysis HR: 1.06; 95%CI: ; P=0.61

Additional benefit of PCSK9 inhibition in high risk patients after myocardial infarction A FOURIER subanalysis Primary endpoint: composite of CV death,

The benefit of evolocumab treatment is consistent regardless of inflammation level HR %CI ARR 1.6% 1.8%

FIELD: Primary outcome

Prasugrel versus clopidogrel; risk ratio with 95% CIs for the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and.

Orly Vardeny et al. JCHF 2016;4:

BRIDGING CVD AND T2DM: LESSONS LEARNED FROM OUTCOME TRIALS

Prasugrel and ticagrelor versus clopidogrel; risk ratio with 95% CIs for the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial.

The cumulative incidence curve demonstrated that patients with a sub-optimal LDL-C response to statin therapy were associated with a higher risk of CVD.

Presentation transcript:

EMPA-REG OUTCOME: Cumulative incidence of the primary outcome Death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke In patients with T2DM and at high risk of CV events, in addition to standard care Placebo Empagliflozin Patients with Event (%) P=0.04 for superiority Hazard ratio, 0.86 (95.02% CI, 0.74–0.99) Month Adapted from: Zinman et al., NEJM 2015

EMPA-REG OUTCOME: cumulative incidence of death from CV causes In patients with T2DM and at high risk of CV events, in addition to standard care Placebo Patients with Event (%) Empagliflozin P<0.001 Hazard ratio, 0.62 (95% CI, 0.49–0.77) Month Adapted from: Zinman et al., NEJM 2015

EMPA-REG OUTCOME: Death from any cause In patients with T2DM and at high risk of CV events, in addition to standard care Placebo Patients with Event (%) Empagliflozin P<0.001 Hazard ratio, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.57–0.82) Month Adapted from: Zinman et al., NEJM 2015

EMPA-REG OUTCOME: Hospitalization for Heart Failure In patients with T2DM and at high risk of CV events, in addition to standard care Placebo Patients with Event (%) Empagliflozin P=0.002 Hazard ratio, 0.65 (95% CI, 0.50–0.85) Month Adapted from: Zinman et al., NEJM 2015