Study type

Study type

Non-interventional study

Scope of the study

Effectiveness study (incl. comparative)
Safety study (incl. comparative)
Non-interventional study

Non-interventional study design

Cohort
Other

Non-interventional study design, other

Sequential matched cohort study
Study drug and medical condition

Study drug International non-proprietary name (INN) or common name

EMPAGLIFLOZIN
SITAGLIPTIN
SAXAGLIPTIN
LINAGLIPTIN
ALOGLIPTIN

Medical condition to be studied

Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Population studied

Age groups

  • Adult and elderly population (≥18 years)
    • Adults (18 to < 65 years)
      • Adults (18 to < 46 years)
      • Adults (46 to < 65 years)
    • Elderly (≥ 65 years)
      • Adults (65 to < 75 years)
      • Adults (75 to < 85 years)
      • Adults (85 years and over)

Estimated number of subjects

232000
Study design details

Main study objective

To compare selected CV effectiveness outcomes in patients with T2DM initiating empagliflozin compared to propensity score (PS) matched patients with T2DM initiating a DPP-4 inhibitor in sequential analyses within periodically updated cohorts in the U.S. secondary objectives include other effectiveness outcomes, safety outcomes, and healthcare utilization outcomes.

Outcomes

- 3-point MACE hospital admission for MI, hospital admission for stroke, CV mortality and its individual components- hospital admission for HF- all-cause mortality, - Coronary revascularization procedure - End-stage renal disease - Initiation of laser treatment for retinopathy- Bone fracture- Diabetic ketoacidosis- Severe hypoglycemia- All urinary tract cancers and its individual components, additional cancers may be considered.- Lower-limb amputation- Acute kidney injury requiring dialysis- Healthcare resource utilization- Cost

Data analysis plan

We will receive new data as they become available on a periodic basis (every 12 months) and, at each data cut, we will update the original set of data, form sequential cohorts by propensity score (PS) matching within 12-month blocks of time, follow patients for each of the outcomes of interest in a prospective manner, and estimate measures of effect using person-time based analyses among patients who initiate empagliflozin versus DPP-4 inhibitor use. Unadjusted and adjusted relative risks (hazard ratios) and rate differences will be estimated. In adjusted analyses, we will use propensity score (PS) matching to balance potential confounders.