Thanks Duke2, appreciate the reply, yes you are right but there...

Thanks Duke2, appreciate the reply, yes you are right but there is some questioning of the safety profile...


Here is what I'm finding:

Safety Events:

Serious adverse events occurred in 1436 patients (47.9%) in the empagliflozin group and in 1543 patients (51.6%) in the placebo group. Adverse events leading to discontinuation of treatment occurred in 571 patients (19.1%) in the empagliflozin group and in 551 patients (18.4%) in the placebo group.


and this...

Post hoc analyses of a large-scale trial of dapagliflozin in type 2 diabetes indicated that SGLT2 inhibition might not reduce the incidence of serious adverse heart failure outcomes in patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction.⁷ In contrast, benefits in such patients were reported in a trial with sotagliflozin, but the number of events was too small to allow for a reliable estimate of a treatment effect.



So I would think it's better than nothing, I think there is a patient subset it will work better for perhaps. I don't like the number of AE's, specially the serious ones! It will certainly take some time for us to address this indication, but eventually we should have better results at lower cost, well lower costs in terms of unwanted effects. Our safety profile is indeed, second to none.








Reference:

1) https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2107038

2) https://www.ultromics.com/articles/emerging-therapy-for-hfpef-the-role-of-sglt2-inhibitors#:~:text=SGLT2%20inhibitors%20were%20very%20recently,HF%20in%20patients%20with%20HFpEF.