Sezai, Akira Nihon University
Tanaka, Atsushi Saga University
Imai, Takumi Osaka Metropolitan University
Kida, Keisuke St. Marianna University School of Medicine
Sekino, Hisakuni Sekino Hospital
Murohara, Toyoaki Nagoya University
Sata, Masataka Tokushima University Tokushima University Educator and Researcher Directory KAKEN Search Researchers
Suzuki, Norio St. Marianna University School of Medicine
Node, Koichi Saga University
sodium–glucose transporter 2 inhibitors
Background: We present results of a 24-week comparative study of the effects of the sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor canagliflozin vs. the sulfonylurea glimepiride, by baseline body mass index (BMI), in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic heart failure. Methods: We conducted a post hoc analysis of the CANDLE trial. This subanalysis evaluated NT-proBNP, BMI, and other laboratory parameters, according to the subgroups stratified by BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 vs. BMI < 25 kg/m2. Results: A group ratio of proportional changes in the geometric means of NT-proBNP was 0.99 (p = 0.940) for the subgroup with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 and 0.85 (p = 0.075) for the subgroup with BMI < 25 kg/m2, respectively. When baseline BMI was modeled as a continuous variable, results for patients with BMI < 30 kg/m2 showed a slightly smaller increase in NT-proBNP in the canagliflozin group vs. the glimepiride group (p = 0.295); that difference was not seen among patients with BMI ≥30 kg/m2 (p = 0.948). Irrespective of obesity, the canagliflozin group was associated with significant reduction in BMI compared to the glimepiride group. Conclusion: There was no significant difference in the effects of canagliflozin, relative to glimepiride, on NT-proBNP concentrations irrespective of baseline obesity. UMIN clinical trial registration number: UMIN000017669.
This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
|DOI (Published Version)|
|URL ( Publisher's Version )|
biomed_10_7_1656.pdf 1.19 MB