Comparative Cardiovascular Effectiveness of Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists and Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors in Diabetes Mellitus

Background: GLP1 receptor agonists (GLP1RAs) and SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2Is) have established cardiovascular benefits for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), with similar class-level effectiveness found in previous studies. However, real-world comparative effectiveness assessments of individual agents remain limited. Objectives: To compare the cardiovascular effectiveness of individual GLP1RAs and SGLT2Is. Methods: We conducted a multi-national, retrospective, new-user active-comparator cohort study using 10 US and non-US administrative claims and electronic health record databases. The study included 1,245,211 adults with T2DM receiving metformin who initiated second-line therapy with one of six GLP1RAs (albiglutide, dulaglutide, exenatide, liraglutide, lixisenatide, semaglutide) or one of four SGLT2Is (canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, ertugliflozin). Empagliflozin (393,499; 31.6%), semaglutide (235,585; 18.9%), dapagliflozin (208,666; 16.8%), and dulaglutide (207,348; 16.8%) were most commonly used. A secondary subgroup analysis included 316,242 patients with established cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Primary outcomes were 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: acute myocardial infarction, stroke, sudden cardiac death) and 4-point MACE (adding hospitalization/ER visit with heart failure). Secondary outcomes included the individual components. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated for pairwise agent comparisons while on-treatment (per-protocol) and over total follow-up using Cox proportional hazards models, with propensity score adjustments, negative control calibration, and pre-specified study diagnostics to guard against potential confounding. Random-effects meta-analysis produced summary HR estimates across data sources that passed diagnostics. Results: Across the study cohort, individual GLP-1RAs and SGLT2Is demonstrated broadly similar cardiovascular effectiveness, both within and across drug classes. For example, semaglutide and empagliflozin showed comparable risks for 3-point MACE (meta-analytic HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.79-1.39) and 4-point MACE (meta-analytic HR 0.95; 95% CI 0.81-1.12), with consistent findings in the CVD subgroup. Study diagnostics confirmed adequate equipoise, covariate balance and statistical power to detect similarity in HRs between 0.8 and 1.2 for commonly used agents. Conclusions: In this large-scale real-world study, individual GLP-1RAs and SGLT2Is exhibited largely comparable cardiovascular benefits, including in patients with established CVD. These findings align with network meta-analytic estimates from major cardiovascular outcome trials and broadly support current treatment guidelines. Clinical choices should be guided by relevant factors such as safety, adherence, tolerability, cost, and patient preference, where further work is needed.