Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the role of serum irisin level in predicting clinical outcome in heart failure (HF) patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).Methods: 153 T2DM patients with HF aged 41–62 years were prospectively recruited for the study. Serum levels of irisin and NT-proBNP were measured by ELISA. Laboratory tests including HbA1c, fasting glucose, blood creatinine, insulin, lipids and creatinine with estimation of GFR were performed along with echocardiography at baseline. The observation period was 56 weeks.Results: We identified 76 composite cardiovascular (CV) outcomes, which included CV death and death from all causes, resuscitated cardiac death, non-fatal/fatal acute myocardial infarction or stroke, and HF hospitalization. Therefore, the entire patient cohort was divided into 2 groups with (n = 76) and without (n = 77) composite CV outcomes. We found that the concentrations of NT-proBNP were higher in HF patients with T2DM who had a CV composite outcome than in patients without CV composite outcome (p = 0.001). In contrast, the relationship was exactly reversed for irisin, as HF and T2DM patients with CV composite outcome had significantly lower irisin levels (p = 0.001). Unadjusted multivariate Cox regression analyses showed that LVEF < 40%, LAVI > 39 ml/m2, NT-proBNP > 2,250 pmol/ml, and irisin < 6.50 ng/ml were the strongest predictors of CV outcomes in HF patients with T2DM. After adjustment for LVEF, serum levels of NT-proBNP and irisin remained independent predictors of end points. Furthermore, divergence of Kaplan-Meier curves pointed out that patients with NT-proBNP > 2,250 pmol/ml and irisin < 6.50 ng/ml had worse prognosis than those with any other compartment of the bomarkers’ levels.Conclusion: Adding irisin to NT-proBNP significantly improved discriminative value of the whole model. HF patients with T2DM had significantly worse clinical outcomes when showing the constellation NT-proBNP > 2,250 pmol/ml and irisin < 6.50 ng/ml, respectively, in comparison to patients with opposite trends for both biomarkers.