↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Following the results of the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial with empagliflozin, is it possible to speak of a class effect?

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of General Medicine, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
Title
Following the results of the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial with empagliflozin, is it possible to speak of a class effect?
Published in
International Journal of General Medicine, January 2017
DOI 10.2147/ijgm.s115566
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francisco Javier Ampudia-Blasco, Irene Romera, Bernat Ariño, Ramón Gomis

Abstract

The recently published cardiovascular outcomes data for the first sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, empagliflozin, have shown cardiovascular safety and additional benefits in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease. Empagliflozin showed lower rates of death from cardiovascular causes or from any causes and lower hospitalization rates from heart failure compared with placebo, both in addition to standard care. This commentary discusses the existence of a possible class effect considering the available evidence described for other SGLT2 inhibitors. Empagliflozin, dapagliflozin and canagliflozin share the same mechanism of action, and it is a plausible hypothesis that some of the benefits of empagliflozin treatment could also be expected from other SGLT2 inhibitors. However, the rapid and persistent occurrence of cardiovascular benefits observed with empagliflozin and the different results shown by the three inhibitors in meta-analyses of some of their respective Phase II and III trials might suggest another possible mechanism of action, perhaps related to the different selectivity to inhibit SGLT-2 and other SGLT family members that these compounds present. There is still lack of evidence to answer whether the cardiovascular benefits observed with empagliflozin in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME study could be seen as a "class effect", which is also attributable to dapagliflozin and canagliflozin.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 14%
Student > Postgraduate 8 11%
Student > Master 8 11%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 24 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 44%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 26 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 October 2017.
All research outputs
#18,573,839
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of General Medicine
#956
of 1,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#311,404
of 421,224 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of General Medicine
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,464 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,224 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.