The American College of Cardiology (ACC) published a 2024 expert consensus statement for optimization of heart failure treatment. While direct conversion between sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors (dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, and sotagliflozin) is not discussed, the article does provide a comparison of starting and target doses for heart failure. Dapagliflozin and empagliflozin both are recommended to have a starting and target dose of 10 mg daily, but sotagliflozin has a starting dose of 200 mg daily that may be doubled to 400 mg daily. However, there remains a lack of direct clinical comparison data between the agents. The setting of impaired kidney function further complicates dosing, as dapagliflozin and sotagliflozin are contraindicated in patients with an eGFR of 25 mL/min/1.73 m2 or lower, while empagliflozin has no lower bound cutoff. How different renal statuses might affect the conversion between SGLT2 inhibitors largely remains unexplored. [1]
A 2024 network meta-analysis synthesized data from 21 randomized, placebo-controlled trials involving 96,196 participants to indirectly compare the efficacy and safety profiles of five SGLT2 inhibitors: empagliflozin, dapagliflozin, canagliflozin, sotagliflozin, and ertugliflozin. Trials included in this meta-analysis enrolled adult patients across a range of clinical backgrounds, including those with heart failure (HF), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and diabetes, and featured a minimum study duration of 3 months and at least 500 participants per trial. The primary endpoint evaluated was the composite outcome of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), while secondary endpoints comprised individual assessments of HHF, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, kidney disease progression, and acute kidney injury (AKI). Safety evaluations included risk estimates for limb amputation, fractures, orthostatic hypotension, diabetic ketoacidosis, hypoglycemia, and genitourinary infections. Statistical estimates were predominantly expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) using random-effects models, with subgroup stratification based on diabetes status, renal function, and HF phenotype. Results from the overall cohort demonstrated no statistically significant differences among the five SGLT2 inhibitors in reducing cardiovascular death or HHF. However, empagliflozin (HR 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53–0.92) and dapagliflozin (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.56–0.96) demonstrated a lower risk of AKI compared to sotagliflozin. Among patients without CKD, empagliflozin was associated with a significantly lower risk of the primary composite outcome compared to ertugliflozin (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.60–0.98), as well as lower risks of all-cause death when compared to dapagliflozin (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.52–0.99) and cardiovascular death compared to both dapagliflozin and canagliflozin. In patients with diabetes or CKD, no significant inter-agent differences in cardiovascular or renal outcomes were observed. Safety comparisons revealed no consistent differences in the risk of limb amputation, fractures, infections, or diabetic ketoacidosis; however, empagliflozin and ertugliflozin were associated with elevated risks of orthostatic hypotension in comparison to canagliflozin. These findings suggest comparable overall efficacy across SGLT2 inhibitors, with potential preference for empagliflozin in select populations without renal impairment. [2]
A 2023 network meta-analysis of 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 20,438 patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and HF systematically evaluated the collective and comparative cardiovascular benefits of five SGLT2 inhibitors: canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, ertugliflozin, and sotagliflozin. The analysis incorporated data from trials with diverse populations, ranging from HF-specific cohorts, such as those in DAPA-HF and EMPEROR-reduced, to subgroup and post-hoc analyses of cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs) in broader T2D populations, such as CANVAS and DECLARE-TIMI 58. The primary outcomes of interest were composite cardiovascular (CV) death/heart failure hospitalization (HFH), CV death, HFH, and all-cause mortality, while adverse events were also rigorously assessed. Inclusion criteria were strict, ensuring all trials involved SGLT2 inhibitors compared with standard of care (SoC) and reported at least one outcome of interest. Outcomes were pooled through pairwise and network approaches, with rankings generated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). The analysis demonstrated that all SGLT2 inhibitors significantly reduced HFH compared to SoC, with canagliflozin (95.5% SUCRA), sotagliflozin (66.0% SUCRA), and empagliflozin (57.2% SUCRA) ranking as the top agents for HFH reduction. For composite CV death/HFH, canagliflozin (95.9%) and sotagliflozin (77.4%) emerged as the most effective treatments, bolstered by significant relative reductions compared to SoC. Head-to-head indirect comparisons revealed that canagliflozin significantly outperformed dapagliflozin in reducing composite CV death/HFH. Although all SGLT2 inhibitors trended toward reducing CV death, none reached statistical significance individually, while dapagliflozin showed the most consistent impact on all-cause mortality. Safety analyses revealed no significant differences in serious adverse events across agents, yet canagliflozin exhibited a higher likelihood of any adverse event compared to both SoC and other SGLT inhibitors. Sensitivity analyses focused on HF-specific trials further corroborated the findings, identifying sotagliflozin as the most probable agent to favorably impact composite CV death/HFH outcomes. [3]
A 2023 meta-analysis evaluated the relative efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with established heart failure. The meta-analysis, involving five randomized controlled trials and 21,927 participants, indirectly compared dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, and sotagliflozin, with placebo-controlled arms serving as a reference. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure, along with secondary endpoints such as all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and hospitalization for heart failure. Bayesian methods were applied to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI for each indirect comparison, alongside ranking probabilities across treatments based on efficacy. For sotagliflozin, there was no significant difference in the primary outcome compared to dapagliflozin (OR 1.54; 95% CI 0.91 to 2.65) or empagliflozin (OR 1.53; 95% CI 0.90 to 2.69). There was also no difference in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, or hospitalization for heart failure. However, there was a trend suggesting that sotagliflozin may be associated with the lowest risk of the composite primary outcome when ranked against the other agents. Further studies are necessary to confirm this finding. [4]
A 2022 network meta-analysis of 111 RCTs involving 103,922 patients evaluated the efficacy and safety outcomes of SGLT2 inhibitors versus combined SGLT1/2 inhibitors in patients with T2DM and type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). The trials included well-established SGLT2 inhibitors such as dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, canagliflozin, and others, as well as dual SGLT1/2 inhibitors like sotagliflozin and licogliflozin. In T2DM patients, the meta-analysis demonstrated that SGLT1/2 inhibitors resulted in a significant reduction in the hazard rate for myocardial infarction (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.98) and stroke (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.92) compared to SGLT2 inhibitors. However, SGLT2 inhibitors achieved superior glycemic control, evidenced by a greater reduction in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels (mean difference [MD] 0.21%; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.35). Despite the superior cardiovascular protection offered by SGLT1/2 inhibitors, the combined agents were associated with an increased risk of adverse events, including diarrhea (risk ratio [RR] 1.42; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.88) and severe hypoglycemia (RR 5.89; 95% CI 1.41 to 24.57). The comparison yielded no significant difference in overall metabolic or renal outcomes between the two classes, except for a modest increase in serum creatinine in patients treated with SGLT1/2 inhibitors. No substantial differences in outcomes were observed between SGLT1/2 and SGLT2 inhibitors in T1DM patients. These findings suggest that while SGLT1/2 inhibitors offer a promising cardioprotective edge for T2DM patients, their higher adverse event profile needs careful consideration in clinical decision-making. [5]
A 2021 network meta-analysis utilized a Bayesian framework to compare the efficacy of five SGLT2 inhibitors on cardiorenal outcomes, incorporating data from ten large CVOTs. The results suggest that all five SGLT2 inhibitors significantly reduced HHF, with sotagliflozin (HR 0.66) demonstrating strong efficacy. However, none of the SGLT2 inhibitors demonstrated statistically significant reductions in myocardial infarction or stroke. Canagliflozin ranked highest in reducing MACE, stroke, and HHF, whereas empagliflozin was most effective in reducing CVD, CVD or HHF, kidney function progression, and all-cause death. Compared with ertugliflozin, both empagliflozin and dapagliflozin provided superior outcomes for kidney function progression, highlighting the nuanced efficacy differences among these agents for various cardiorenal outcomes. Yet direct comparisons between sotagliflozin and other SGLT2 inhibitors remain limited. [6]
A 2021 NMA evaluated the comparative efficacy of five SGLT2 inhibitors and seven glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in reducing cardiorenal events in patients with type 2 diabetes. The analysis incorporated data from 14 CVOTs published between 2015 and 2021. The findings revealed that sotagliflozin (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76; 95% CI 0.61 to 0.94), subcutaneous semaglutide, and albiglutide were among the most effective interventions in reducing major adverse cardiac events (MACE), while sotagliflozin (HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.89), canagliflozin, and empagliflozin significantly lowered the risk of HHF. Sotagliflozin also significantly reduced the risk of MI and stroke, ranking as one of the most effective agents in preventing these outcomes. These findings suggest that sotagliflozin may be the most effective drug for lowering myocardial infarction, stroke, MACE, and HHF. However, the analysis was based on indirect comparisons as all included studies were placebo-controlled trials. [7]