Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40011379›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2025

The Data Monitoring Experience in Empagliflozin Randomized Clinical Trials Between 2011 and 2024.

Francine K Welty, Klaus G Parhofer, Marvin Konstam, Michael K Palmer, Barry Greenberg, Ralph Daher, Tim Clayton

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Francine K WeltyDivision of Cardiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. francinewelty@gmail.com.
Klaus G ParhoferLudwig-Maximilians University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Marvin KonstamThe CardioVascular Center, Tufts Medical Center and Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Michael K PalmerN Zero 1 Ltd, Wilmslow, UK.
Barry GreenbergDivision of Cardiology, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Ralph DaherCooper University Healthcare, Camden, NJ, USA.
Tim ClaytonDepartment of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In November 2007, a black box warning was mandated for rosiglitazone in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) based on an increased risk of ischemic cardiovascular (CV) events. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a directive that a CV outcomes trial must be done for any new diabetes drug to demonstrate no CV harm. Therefore, the Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) trial was started in 2011 alongside 13 additional randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of empagliflozin in T2DM. The results of EMPA-REG OUTCOME set the stage for later RCTs in heart failure. Results from these clinical trials have changed the outlook for patients both with and without T2DM and with and without heart failure. A Program Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) with the same core members was utilized for these trials between 2011 and 2024. This committee is likely to be one of the longest serving DMCs since it served 28 trials with empagliflozin between 2011 and 2024. The committee encountered several important challenges which are discussed in this article. Moreover, the committee provides several important take-home messages which we hope will be of value in discussing issues in creating, developing and running DMCs in the future. These include: 1. Whether and when to be blinded and unblinded; 2. How to proceed when the primary endpoint shows no evidence of benefit, but there is evidence for a mortality benefit; 3. Development of presentation of data using figures and boxplots for rapid review of adverse events and laboratory data to assess clinical challenges; 4. How to manage a catastrophic serious adverse event; 5. Suggestions for an ideal structure of the report for the DMC closed session; and 6. The relation between the DMC, sponsor and Contract Research Organization. Our experience emphasizes the value of continuity with the same members serving over a 13-year period.

Indexed as

Benzhydryl CompoundsClinical Trials Data Monitoring CommitteesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2GlucosidesHypoglycemic AgentsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSodium-Glucose Transporter 2 InhibitorsHumansUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationBenzhydryl CompoundsempagliflozinGlucosidesHypoglycemic AgentsSodium-Glucose Transporter 2 InhibitorsData Monitoring CommitteeDiabetesEmpagliflozinHeart failureMyocardial infarction

Identifiers

PMID40011379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.