2020
DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2020.1761312
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Acute pancreatitis risk in type 2 diabetes patients treated with canagliflozin versus other antihyperglycemic agents: an observational claims database study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
3
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
3
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A further study of three US claims databases evaluated the risk of acute pancreatitis in new users of canagliflozin compared with new users of six other classes of glucose-lowering agents. 40 Compared with the present study, the PS matched analysis of the canagliflozin groups showed lower incidence rates for acute pancreatitis (1.5 to 2.2 per 1000 PY for canagliflozin in the on-treatment analysis versus 10.30 per 1000 PY with empagliflozin) in the present study, although this could partly reflect methodological differences between the studies and populations. Specifically, the definition of acute pancreatitis used in the present study was based on a validated algorithm selected to detect acute pancreatitis in all clinical settings rather than only at hospital discharge, resulting in more cases identified.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A further study of three US claims databases evaluated the risk of acute pancreatitis in new users of canagliflozin compared with new users of six other classes of glucose-lowering agents. 40 Compared with the present study, the PS matched analysis of the canagliflozin groups showed lower incidence rates for acute pancreatitis (1.5 to 2.2 per 1000 PY for canagliflozin in the on-treatment analysis versus 10.30 per 1000 PY with empagliflozin) in the present study, although this could partly reflect methodological differences between the studies and populations. Specifically, the definition of acute pancreatitis used in the present study was based on a validated algorithm selected to detect acute pancreatitis in all clinical settings rather than only at hospital discharge, resulting in more cases identified.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 90%
“…The analysis showed no significant increase in the risk of acute pancreatitis associated with the use of SGLT2 inhibitors versus control groups (receiving oral anti‐diabetes therapies or insulin). A further study of three US claims databases evaluated the risk of acute pancreatitis in new users of canagliflozin compared with new users of six other classes of glucose‐lowering agents 40 . Compared with the present study, the PS matched analysis of the canagliflozin groups showed lower incidence rates for acute pancreatitis (1.5 to 2.2 per 1000 PY for canagliflozin in the on‐treatment analysis versus 10.30 per 1000 PY with empagliflozin) in the present study, although this could partly reflect methodological differences between the studies and populations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Metformin, known for its potential to cause pancreatitis, 12 but also the 1st line treatment in T2D, so therefore expected to be used together with gliflozins, 1,33 was co‐suspect or interacting drug in 58 reports. The association between gliflozins and metformin was also found in all but one of the literature case reports of AP to gliflozins 22–24,26–28 . One possible mechanism proposed by other authors for AP cases associated with gliflozins and metformin could involve dehydration and lactic acidosis (due to metformin), leading to pancreatitis 19 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…On the other hand, recent meta‐analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) failed to identify a risk of pancreatitis associated with SGLT2i use 22,23 . Moreover, an observational study that looked at the association between canagliflozin and AP found no evidence to suggest that canagliflozin is associated with an increased risk of AP compared with other GLA 24 . Similar results were found in a nationwide register‐based cohort study from Sweden and Denmark 25 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 75%