Skip to main content
PLOS Medicine logoLink to PLOS Medicine
. 2019 Dec 9;16(12):e1002983. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002983

Acute kidney injury and adverse renal events in patients receiving SGLT2-inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Jan Menne 1,*,#, Eva Dumann 1,#, Hermann Haller 1, Bernhard M W Schmidt 1
Editor: Maarten W Taal2
PMCID: PMC6901179  PMID: 31815931

Abstract

Background

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) represent a new class of oral hypoglycemic agents used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. They have a positive effect on the progression of chronic kidney disease, but there is a concern that they might cause acute kidney injury (AKI).

Methods and findings

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of SGLT2is on renal adverse events (AEs) in randomized controlled trials and controlled observational studies. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched without date restriction until 27 September 2019. Data extraction was performed using a standardized data form, and any discrepancies were resolved by consensus. One hundred and twelve randomized trials (n = 96,722) and 4 observational studies with 5 cohorts (n = 83,934) with a minimum follow-up of 12 weeks that provided information on at least 1 adverse renal outcome (AKI, combined renal AE, or hypovolemia-related events) were included. In 30 trials, 410 serious AEs due to AKI were reported. SGLT2is reduced the odds of suffering AKI by 36% (odds ratio [OR] 0.64 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53–0.78], p < 0.001). A total of 1,089 AKI events of any severity (AEs and serious AEs [SAEs]) were published in 41 trials (OR 0.75 [95% CI 0.66–0.84], p < 0.001). Empagliflozin, dapagliflozin, and canagliflozin had a comparable benefit on the SAE and AE rate. AEs related to hypovolemia were more commonly reported in SGLT2i-treated patients (OR 1.20 [95% CI 1.10–1.31], p < 0.001). In the observational studies, 777 AKI events were reported. The odds of suffering AKI were reduced in patients receiving SGLT2is (OR 0.40 [95% CI 0.33–0.48], p < 0.001). Limitations of this study are the reliance on nonadjudicated safety endpoints, discrepant inclusion criteria and baseline hypoglycemic therapy between studies, inconsistent definitions of renal AEs and hypovolemia, varying follow-up times in different studies, and a lack of information on the severity of AKI (stages I–III).

Conclusions

SGLT2is reduced the odds of suffering AKI with and without hospitalization in randomized trials and the real-world setting, despite the fact that more AEs related to hypovolemia are reported.


In a systematic review and meta-analysis, Jan Menne and colleagues assess the risk of adverse renal events in patients receiving drugs from a class of oral hypoglycemic agents.

Author summary

Why was this study done?

  • Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) are a class of drugs used to treat high blood sugar in diabetes. They work by blocking the reuptake of filtered glucose by the kidney and therefore increase the loss of sugar in the urine, which also leads to increased water loss.

  • SLGT2is have been shown to have beneficial effects on diabetes control and heart and long-term kidney function.

  • However, there is a concern that these drugs can cause acute kidney injury, meaning a significant decline in kidney function happening over a short period of time that may or may not be reversible.

What did the authors do and find?

  • We conducted a database search to identify studies reporting on adverse effects from SLGT2i use.

  • We found 112 randomized trials. Forty-one of these reported on acute kidney injury in a total of 68,159 patients. Patients on SGLT2is had 25% lower odds for this adverse effect. In 5 observational (nonrandomized) cohorts reporting on 83,934 patients, the odds of acute kidney injury were 60% less in patients taking SGLT2is.

  • Ninety-two randomized studies with 81,763 patients reported on hypovolemia (fluid depletion); this was found to be more likely in patients not taking SGLT2is, with 20% higher odds.

What do these findings mean?

  • We could not detect an increased risk of acute kidney injury in patients taking SGLT2is. Patients taking SGLT2is had lower odds of suffering an acute kidney injury than those who did not, despite the fact that these drugs increase fluid loss by the body.

  • Our findings indicate that fear of causing acute kidney injury should not stop practitioners prescribing SGLT2is.

  • However, our analysis had some drawbacks, such as inconsistent definitions being used in some of the studies, different patient characteristics in the included studies, studies being carried out for different lengths of time, and missing details about the severity of acute kidney injury.

Introduction

Over the last few years, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) have been introduced for the treatment of patients with diabetes mellitus. In a recent meta-analysis of the 3 cardiovascular outcome trials, it was shown that SGLT2is reduce major cardiovascular events and the risk for hospitalization because of heart failure [1,2]. Furthermore, they preserve kidney function and reduce the risk of progression of renal disease [1,3]. As a consequence, SGLT2is feature prominently in the new 2018 ADA (American Diabetes Association)/EASD (European Society for the Study of Diabetes) consensus report and are recommended for patients with kidney disease and heart failure [4]. However, there is concern that SGLT2i may lead to acute kidney injury (AKI) due to hypovolemia, excessive decline in transglomerular pressure, and induction of renal medullary hypoxic injury [5]. Based on postmarketing FAERS (Food and Drug Administration Adverse Events Reporting System) reports, in June 2016, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning that SGLT2is (especially canagliflozin and dapagliflozin) might cause AKI [6,7]. A meta-analysis performed in 2017 indicated that dapagliflozin and canagliflozin might indeed increase the risk of adverse renal events, whereas empagliflozin might be beneficial [8]. Since then, several large, well-conducted randomized studies and observational studies reporting the incidence of AKI/acute renal failure have been published.

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to address the question of whether, in patients treated with SGLT2is (most, but not all, of whom had type 2 diabetes), there was a difference in the risk of AKI, volume depletion, and other adverse renal outcomes compared to patients taking placebo or other oral hypoglycemic agents. We looked at the following 3 primary renal adverse event (AE) categories with decreasing specificity but increasing incidence: 1) serious AE (SAE) due to AKI, 2) serious and nonserious AEs due to AKI, and 3) composite renal AEs. Because hypovolemia-induced prerenal AKI is one of the potential pathophysiological mechanisms, we also collected data on hypovolemia-related AE. Additionally, we analyzed the effect of SGLT2is on AKI in real-world observational cohort studies.

Methods

Data sources and searches

A search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library was performed (for search terms, see S1 Table). Additionally, we checked trial records submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov for additional reports on serious AKI/acute renal failure in any SGLT2i trial. There was no prospectively registered protocol; however, search terms, inclusion criteria, and data collection form were prespecified in an analysis plan and remained unaltered during the data collection and analysis (see S2 Text). The initial search was performed on 12 January 2019 and rerun twice, on 4 April and 27 September 2019. No publication date and language restrictions were applied. Reference lists of selected articles and reviews on SGLT2 inhibition were hand-searched for additional studies (Fig 1; see S2 Table and S3 Table for information source and AE definition).

Fig 1. PRISMA diagram.

Fig 1

AE, adverse event; AKI, acute kidney injury; NCBI, National Center for Biotechnology Information; PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; SAE, serious AE.

Study selection

Two investigators (JM, ED) independently reviewed all articles using a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria. In the case of differing results, a third investigator (BMWS) adjudicated. In the first and second step, the articles were included or excluded based on their title and abstract. The remaining articles were then reviewed in full text. All articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected for data extraction (Fig 1).

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that reported AKI/acute renal failure, a composite renal AE of interest, or volume depletion during treatment with SGLT2is and that had a control group, irrespective of the type of control (placebo or active control). After reviewing initial search results, a decision was made to exclude studies with a duration of <12 weeks and studies reporting zero events for all outcomes of interest. When several publications reported on the same study, we selected the record providing data for the longest follow-up period or the most complete set of data on outcomes of interest for further analysis. Observational studies were only included when they reported the incidence of AKI.

Data extraction and quality assessment

Data were collected in duplicate by 2 investigators (JM, ED) independently using a standardized data extraction form. In the case of discrepancies, results were discussed by all authors, and consensus was established. The primary endpoint (AKI classified as SAE) was retrieved from the original published manuscripts and/or from the results published on ClinicalTrials.gov. In one case [2,3], uncertainty about the SAE event number in the placebo group because of a different reporting in the publications and the data provided on ClinicalTrials.gov was resolved by contacting the sponsor of the study. Secondary endpoints were “any AKI AE,” “combined renal AEs,” and “volume-depletion–related AEs.”

For each study included in our analysis, we retrieved registration number, study type (RCT/observational), data source for the primary endpoint, drug received by the control group (placebo, no additional treatment, or alternative oral hypoglycemic agent), background therapy, blinding (yes/no), study duration, definition of secondary endpoints (any renal event and volume depletion), SGLT2i used, and dosage (mg) of SGLT2is. For the SGLTi group and control group in each study, respectively, we collected baseline characteristics (total number of patients, mean age, sex [% male], mean HbA1c at baseline, mean eGFR [estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate] at baseline, mean systolic blood pressure at baseline, coronary heart disease [%], eGFR <60 [%], AKI classified as SAE, AKI classified as AE or SAE) as well as numbers of events of interest in each category (AKI events reported as SAE or AE, any renal event, events related to volume depletion) (see S2 Table, S3 Table).

Risk-of-bias assessment

Following the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment, we classified each RCT contributing to the AKI endpoints as having low, high, or unclear risk based on the following criteria: random-sequence generation (selection bias), allocation concealment (selection bias), blinding (performance bias and detection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), and selective reporting (reporting bias) (see S1 Fig).

Data synthesis and analysis

As principal summary measure, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each study based on the event rate and patient number in each group. After the initial data extraction, it became evident that many studies reported separate results for different dose categories of the same SGLT2i. Metaregression analysis did not show a dose dependency for the occurrence of our primary endpoint (data not shown). Therefore, we pooled data from groups using different doses of SGLT2i within each study. A fixed-effects model was used for combining results of studies. Studies with an event rate of 0 in both treatment and control arms (SAE AKI: 3 studies; any AKI AE: 2 studies; combined renal AE: 1 study; and volume-related AE: 6 studies) were excluded from the respective analysis. Cochrane’s Q and I2 were used for assessing heterogeneity between studies and a funnel plot to check for publication bias (S2 Fig). Following review of initial results, we carried out further non-prespecified subgroup analyses to compare different SGLT2is for the “combined renal AE” endpoint and “volume depletion” endpoints. For comparison of drugs, mixed-effects analysis was used, i.e., using a random-effects model for comparison within drugs and fixed effects for comparison across different drugs. All analyses were performed using the program Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (Version 2.2.064, Biostat, Englewood, NJ, USA). See S1 Text for further details.

Results

We included a total of 112 RCTs with 96,777 patients and 5 observational cohorts with 83,934 patients in this meta-analysis. 41 RCTs with a total of 68,159 patients reported at least one AKI event. The risk of bias for the 41 RCTs with an AKI event is summarized as follows: 32 RCTs reported adequate random-sequence generation and adequate allocation concealment, and 34 reported adequate outcome data for SAE AKI, but only 14 for any AKI AE. All of the trials were funded by industry. More information is presented in S1 Fig.

SAEs of AKI in RCTs

In 30 randomized trials with a total of 58,181 patients and a mean follow-up of 140 weeks, 410 SAEs due to AKI (384 with AKI, 25 with acute renal failure, and 1 with acute prerenal failure) were reported. In 33,234 SGLT2i-treated patients, 185 SAEs were observed, and in 24,947 control patients, 225 SAEs were observed (Fig 2). 23 trials compared SGLT2is against placebo and 7 trials against another oral hypoglycemic agent. SGLT2is diminished the odds of an SAE AKI by 36% (OR 0.64 [95% CI 0.53–0.78], p < 0.001). The effect size was comparable between dapagliflozin (OR 0.62 [95% CI 0.48–0.80], p ≤ 0.001) and empagliflozin (OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.43–0.97], p = 0.037). The reported events were fewer in the canagliflozin studies, and the treatment effect showed a trend towards a reduction of SAE AKIs (OR 0.72 [95% CI 0.43–1.20], p = 0.20). For the other SGLT2is, low numbers of events are reported, so larger studies are required. No heterogeneity was detectable (I2 = 0, Cochrane’s Q p = 0.99). Removal of a single study did not affect the overall outcome (S3 Fig).

Fig 2. Effect of SGLT2is on serious AKI AEs in RCTs (Ease 2 and 3 are two separate trials).

Fig 2

AE, adverse event; AKI, acute kidney injury; CI, confidence interval; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SAE, serious AE; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

AEs of AKI in RCTs

Seventeen trials with 41,095 patients and a mean follow-up of 173 weeks also reported acute renal failure events as part of a combined AKI endpoint, which included events classified as nonserious AEs (Fig 3, S1 Fig). The control patients received placebo in 12 trials, an alternative oral hypoglycemic agent in 4 trials, and subcutaneous semaglutide in 1 trial. In 23,035 SGLT2i-treated patients, 503 events of acute renal failure occurred, whereas in the control group, 461 AKI events occurred in 18,060 patients (OR 0.77 [95% CI 0.63–0.84], p < 0.001). The effect size was comparable between empagliflozin-, dapagliflozin-, and canagliflozin-treated patients (p = 0.680). No heterogeneity was detectable (I2 = 0, Cochrane’s Q p = 0.85).

Fig 3. Effect of SGLT2is on serious and nonserious AKI AEs in RCTs (Ease 2 and 3 are two separate trials).

Fig 3

AE, adverse event; AKI, acute kidney injury; CI, confidence interval; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SAE, serious AE; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

Overall, 41 trials reported at least one SAE or a nonserious AKI AE (S4 Fig). In total, 1,089 events were reported in these trials. In the 38,441 SGLT2i-treated patients, there were 550 AKI events, compared to 539 events in 29,718 patients in the placebo arm. Overall, SGLT2is had a positive effect, with an odds reduction of 25% (OR 0.75 [95% CI 0.66–0.84], p < 0.001). No heterogeneity was detectable (I2 = 0, Cochrane’s Q p = 0.98).

AKI when eGFR < 60 ml/min

Four studies reported the AKI SAE rate in 4,983 patients with a baseline eGFR < 60 ml/min (S5 Fig). For 3,077 SGLT2i-treated patients, 48 SAEs were observed; there were 36 SAEs in 1,906 control patients. The difference was not significant, but the effect size was comparable to the effect size in the total cohort (OR 0.76 [95% CI 0.49–1.18], p = 0.22).

Renal composite AEs

A renal composite AE was reported in 48 studies, with a total of 35,146 patients and a mean follow-up of 92 weeks. Definitions of renal composite AEs varied between the different studies and included acute renal failure, renal impairment, and renal failure but also increase in creatinine or decline of eGFR, without differentiation between chronic and more acute changes in kidney function (S2 Table). It should be noted that only one of the studies on empagliflozin used this form of combined AE definition. 1,010 renal composite AEs occurred in 20,719 patients treated with a SGLT2i versus 809 events in 14,427 control patients (S6 Fig), with an OR of 0.98 [95% CI 0.89–1.09], p = 0.74). Considerable heterogeneity was detectable (I2 = 33.9, Cochrane’s Q p = 0.013). Subgroup analysis did not show a difference caused by the drug used (p = 0.722).

Hypovolemia-related AEs

Volume-depletion–related AEs were reported in 92 studies with a total of 81,763 patients and a mean follow-up of 114 weeks. The outcome was defined inconsistently across different studies (S2 Table). 1,581 hypovolemia-related AEs occurred in 32,987 patients treated with an SGLT2i compared to 912 events in 48,776 patients taking in the control group (S7 Fig). The control group received placebo in 78 studies, an alternative oral hypoglycemic agent in 13 studies, and no additional treatment in 1 study. This AE was significantly more common in the SGLT2i-treated patients (OR 1.20 [95% CI 1.10–1.31], p < 0.001). Empagliflozin (OR 1.10 [95% CI 0.91–1.33], p = 0.30) and dapagliflozin (OR 1.10 [95% CI 0.96–1.25], p = 0.29) did not increase the OR, but canagliflozin-treated patients had an OR of 1.39 [95% CI 1.18–1.65], p < 0.001). However, comparison of effects across the different drugs showed no statistically significant difference of the estimates (p = 0.41). Accordingly, no heterogeneity was detectable (I2 = 0, Cochrane’s Q p = 0.546)

AKI in observational studies

The outcomes listed above were reported in RCTs. We also analyzed observational cohort studies if they reported on our main outcome of interest, AKI. This was the case for 5 observational cohort studies (2 of which were published in a single article). The definitions of AKI varied between the 5 cohorts (see S3 Table). A total of 83,934 patients with a follow-up between 24–65 weeks were analyzed. In 33,792 SGLT2i-treated patients, 148 patients developed an acute renal failure. In the control group, 631 out of 50,142 patients had an event. Overall, SGLT2is had a positive effect, with 60% lower odds of an adverse renal event (OR 0.40 [95% CI 0.33–0.48], p < 0.001) (Fig 4). Four of the studies used propensity score matching to adjust for baseline differences and reported an OR between 0.37 and 0.55. The study by Cahn and colleagues did not perform any matching [9]. We therefore repeated the analysis and excluded this trial. The OR increased slightly to OR 0.43 (95% CI 0.35–0.53), p < 0.001 (S8 Fig). No heterogeneity was detectable between the propensity-matched cohort studies (I2 = 0, Cochrane’s Q p = 0.42).

Fig 4. Effect of SGLT2is on AKI in observational cohort studies.

Fig 4

AKI, acute kidney injury; CI, confidence interval; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

Discussion

SGLT2is are important new compounds for the treatment of patients with diabetes, and there is a growing body of evidence supporting their beneficial effect in slowing eGFR decline and preventing progressive kidney damage. However, there is concern that they might cause AKI [5,7,10]. In this systematic review, >1,800 AKI events were identified in more than 150,000 patients in 41 RCTs and 5 observational cohorts. In the RCTs, SGLT2is reduced the odds of AKI requiring hospitalization by 36% and the odds of any form of an acute renal failure by 25%. Importantly, the effect was comparable for the different SGLT2is (canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, and empagliflozin). These results are supported by 4 observational propensity-score–matched cohorts in which the odds of AKI were reduced by 45%–64% when SGLT2is were prescribed. In one additional, recently published nonmatched cohort, the risk reduction was as high as 74% [9]. Because this systematic review is based on a high AKI event rate and we observed no heterogeneity, we conclude that SGLT2is may not only reduce the progression of chronic kidney disease but also have a preventive effect on AKI.

AKI is defined by an acute worsening of the kidney function and typically staged according to the increase in serum creatinine or reduction in urine output over 48 h to 7 days. Once widely believed to represent a benign and transient problem, it is now understood as a risk factor for an increased short-term and long-term mortality, chronic kidney disease, and end-stage renal disease. The severity of AKI (stages I–III) correlates with these outcome parameters. The evidence to date is summarized in several reviews [1113]. In a large meta-analysis, roughly 20% of in-hospital patients experienced an AKI episode; likewise, a significant number of outpatients were affected [14]. It is estimated that every year, 13.3 million people will suffer from AKI. Several prediction models have been developed, and diabetes is the second most commonly used parameter beside age [15]. Therefore, a drug simultaneously improving glucose control and protecting against AKI would be advantageous.

To date, there is no mechanistic explanation why SGLT2is could prevent AKI despite the fact that a higher rate of hypovolemia, a well-known risk factor for acute prerenal failure, is reported. In 2 animal studies, administration of an SGLT2i attenuated ischemia-reperfusion injury and AKI [16,17]. The authors observed less tubular apoptosis and less peritubular vascular rarefication due to a higher local VEGF (Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor) production, with a protective effect against renal fibrosis. Interestingly, this positive effect was seen even though the animals were not diabetic. Because sodium transport is ATP-dependent, it has been postulated that a reduction in sodium reabsorption through SGLT2is in the S1 and S2 tubular segments leads to reduced tubular oxygen consumption [18]. Other SGLT2i-induced changes that could lead to tubular protection include increased erythropoietin production, suppression of peritubular inflammation and fibrosis, and increased use of ketone bodies as an alternative fuel source [18]. Biomarker studies in patients treated with dapagliflozin for 6 weeks showed a reduction of several tubular damage markers (kidney injury molecule-1, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, and liver-type fatty acid binding protein), suggesting that there may indeed be some tubular alteration that might decrease tubular susceptibility to AKI [19]. Further experimental studies to explore the underlying mechanisms are required.

In many RCTs, a combined renal AE endpoint was reported, and, in contrast to the effect on AKI, patients treated with an SGLT2i had no benefit. We believe that this discrepancy is due to the inconsistent criteria used to define the combined renal adverse outcome. Event definitions did not differentiate between acute and chronic changes, and often a change in eGFR or creatinine was reported as an AE. However, SGLT2is lead to a reversible creatinine increase and decline of the eGFR due to their well-described effects on tubuloglomerular feedback, with constriction of the afferent arteriole as a result of increased sodium delivery to the macula densa at the distal tubule [3]. Therefore, such AE events are probably of little clinical relevance. Of note, >70% of patients in the large outcome trials received inhibitors of the renin–angiotensin system (RASis), with similar proportions of patients treated with RASis in the SGLT2i and comparator groups (see S4 Table). Activation of RAS signaling causes efferent arteriolar constriction via angiotensin II; thus, RAS inhibition dilates the efferent arteriole and reduces filtration pressure. A combination of preglomerular constriction through SGLT2is and postglomerular dilation under RASis would be expected to cause an increased risk of AKI. A recent subgroup analysis of data from the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial by baseline background medications found a slightly increased risk of acute renal failure in patients on angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) compared to patients not taking these drugs [20]. However, empagliflozin was able to improve the risk of incident or worsening nephropathy regardless of ACE inhibitor/ARB use, and the risk of acute renal failure with ACE inhibitor/ARB use tended to be lower in patients also taking empagliflozin (for patients on ACE inhibitors/ARBs, acute renal failure rates were 5.4% and 5.9% in empagliflozin-treated patients versus 7% in the placebo group).

AEs related to volume depletion were more commonly observed in SGLT2i-treated patients. For canagliflozin and sotagliflozin, the difference was significant against the control group. This was not the case for all other SGLT2is. However, in a mixed-effects analysis, no significant difference was observed between the compounds.

The study has 6 major limitations. 1) We used safety endpoints as reported in the corresponding publications. These endpoints are not validated by an endpoint committee. However, the vast majority of randomized SGLT2i studies published so far used MedDRA (Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities) terminology to classify the AEs, leading to some standardization across the different studies. To further enhance the value of the analysis, we selected an SAE of AKI as our primary outcome. SAEs are vigorously monitored, and a more detailed description of the event is collected. 2) Non-SAE AKI events were only reported in 17 studies, including the DECLARE, EMPAREG-OUTCOME, CANVAS, and CREDENCE studies, and they are only mentioned as part of a broader composite renal AE safety endpoint in the rest of the studies. The interpretation of these results is difficult. 3) In some studies, there was probably an under-reporting of AKI events. The best example is the CANVAS study. It is not plausible that 0.9% of patients had an SAE due to AKI but only 1% had an AKI. This would suggest that only 0.1% had a nonserious AKI event. This is far below the event rate reported in the other outcome studies. 4) None of the included studies reported AKI stages. Because there is a clear link between the severity of AKI and short-term and long-term consequences, these data would be very helpful in understanding the effect of SGLT2is on AKI. 5) While most RCTs compared the effect of SGLT2is against placebo, a number of studies had an active comparator group receiving an alternative oral hypoglycemic agent. 6) The length of follow-up varied between studies, from our cutoff of 12 weeks to as long as 208 weeks.

Conclusions

In summary, this analysis suggests that SGLT2is may reduce the occurrence of AKI in patients with diabetes mellitus. This observation was seen in RCTs and observational cohort studies. There was no heterogeneity between the different SGLT2is. We suggest that a randomized placebo-controlled study should be performed in diabetic patients undergoing a medical procedure with a high risk of AKI (e.g., cardiothoracic on-pump surgery) to demonstrate the beneficial effects of SGLT2 inhibition on mechanisms of AKI.

Supporting information

S1 Text. PRISMA checklist.

PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

(DOC)

S2 Text. Analysis plan.

(DOCX)

S1 Table. Search strategy.

(XLSX)

S2 Table. Basic information about study type and AE definitions in the different RCTs.

AE, adverse event; RCT, randomized controlled trial.

(XLSX)

S3 Table. Basic information about study type and AE definitions in the different observational cohorts.

AE, adverse event.

(XLSX)

S4 Table. Number of patients treated with RASis in trials reporting AKI events.

AKI, acute kidney injury; RASi, renin–angiotensin system inhibitor.

(XLSX)

S1 Fig. Risk-of-bias assessment in 41 studies reporting at least one AKI as SAE or AE.

AE, adverse event; AKI, acute kidney injury; SAE, serious AE.

(TIF)

S2 Fig. Funnel plot.

(TIF)

S3 Fig. Effect of SGLT2is on serious AKI AEs after removal of one of the 28 studies reporting an SAE.

This analysis suggests that the overall result was not due to a single study. Even when the results of the largest study (DECLARE) was removed, the result remained highly significant (p < 0.001). AE, adverse event; AKI, acute kidney injury; SAE, serious AE; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

(TIF)

S4 Fig. Effect of SGLT2is on any AKI in RCTs.

AKI, acute kidney injury; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

(TIF)

S5 Fig. Effect of SGLT2i on SAE AKI AEs in patients with eGFR <60 ml/min.

AE, adverse event; AKI, acute kidney injury; eGFR, estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate; SAE, serious AE; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

(TIF)

S6 Fig. Effect of SGLT2is on combined renal AEs in RCTs.

AE, adverse event; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

(TIF)

S7 Fig. Effect of SGLT2is on hypovolemia-related AEs in RCTs.

(a) Canagliflozin, (b) dapagliflozin, (c) empagliflozin, (d) ertugliflozin, (e) other SGLT2is, and (f) comparison of estimates of all examined drugs. AE, adverse event; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

(TIF)

S8 Fig. Effect of SGLT2is on AKI in propensity-score–matched observational cohorts.

AKI, acute kidney injury; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

(TIF)

Abbreviations

ACE

angiotensin converting enzyme

ADA

American Diabetes Association

AE

adverse event

AKI

acute kidney injury

ARB

angiotensin receptor blocker

CI

confidence interval

EASD

European Society for the Study of Diabetes

eGFR

estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate

FAERS

FDA Adverse Event Reporting System

FDA

Food and Drug Administration

MedDRA

Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities

NCBI

National Center for Biotechnology Information

OR

odds ratio

PRISMA

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

RASi

renin–angiotensin system inhibitor

RCT

randomized controlled trial

SAE

serious AE

SGLT2i

sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor

VEGF

Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Zelniker TA, Wiviott SD, Raz I, Im K, Goodrich EL, Bonaca MP, et al. SGLT2 inhibitors for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcome trials. Lancet. 2019;393(10166):31–39. Epub 2018 Nov 10. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32590-X . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Zinman B, Wanner C, Lachin JM, Fitchett D, Bluhmki E, Hantel S, et al. Empagliflozin, Cardiovascular Outcomes, and Mortality in Type 2 Diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(22):2117–2128. 10.1056/NEJMoa1504720 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Wanner C, Inzucchi SE, Lachin JM, Fitchett D, von Eynatten M, Mattheus M, et al. Empagliflozin and Progression of Kidney Disease in Type 2 Diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(4):323–334. 10.1056/NEJMoa1515920 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Davies MJ, D'Alessio DA, Fradkin J, Kernan WN, Mathieu C, Mingrone G, et al. Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2018. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care. 2018;41(12):2669–2701. 10.2337/dci18-0033 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Hahn K, Ejaz AA, Kanbay M, Lanaspa MA, Johnson RJ. Acute kidney injury from SGLT2 inhibitors: potential mechanisms. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2016;12(12):711–2. 10.1038/nrneph.2016.159 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.FDA. 6-14-2016; FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA strengthens kidney warnings for diabetes medicines canagliflozin (Invokana, Invokamet) and dapagliflozin (Farxiga, Xigduo XR). 2016 [cited 2019 Feb 15]. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm505860.htm.
  • 7.Perlman A, Heyman SN, Matok I, Stokar J, Muszkat M, Szalat A. Acute renal failure with sodium-glucose-cotransporter-2 inhibitors: Analysis of the FDA adverse event report system database. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2017;27(12):1108–1113. 10.1016/j.numecd.2017.10.011 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Tang H, Li D, Zhang J, Li Y, Wang T, Zhai S, et al. Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors and risk of adverse renal outcomes among patients with type 2 diabetes: A network and cumulative meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2017;19(8):1106–1115. 10.1111/dom.12917 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Cahn A, Melzer-Cohen C, Pollack R, Chodick G, Shalev V. Acute renal outcomes with sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors: Real-world data analysis. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2019;21(2):340–348. Epub 2018 Oct 15. 10.1111/dom.13532 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Szalat A, Perlman A, Muszkat M, Khamaisi M, Abassi Z, Heyman SN. Can SGLT2 Inhibitors Cause Acute Renal Failure? Plausible Role for Altered Glomerular Hemodynamics and Medullary Hypoxia. Drug Saf. 2018;41(3):239–252. Epub 2017 Sept 26. 10.1007/s40264-017-0602-6 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Doyle JF, Forni LG. Acute kidney injury: short-term and long-term effects. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):188 10.1186/s13054-016-1353-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Fortrie G, de Geus HRH, Betjes MGH. The aftermath of acute kidney injury: a narrative review of long-term mortality and renal function. Crit Care. 2019;23(1):24 10.1186/s13054-019-2314-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.See EJ, Jayasinghe K, Glassford N, Bailey M, Johnson DW, Polkinghorne KR, et al. Long-term risk of adverse outcomes after acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies using consensus definitions of exposure. Kidney Int. 2019;95(1):160–172. Epub 2018 Nov 23. 10.1016/j.kint.2018.08.036 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Susantitaphong P, Cruz DN, Cerda J, Abulfaraj M, Alqahtani F, Koulouridis I, et al. World incidence of AKI: a meta-analysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013;8(9):1482–93. 10.2215/CJN.00710113 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Hodgson LE, Sarnowski A, Roderick PJ, Dimitrov BD, Venn RM, Forni LG. Systematic review of prognostic prediction models for acute kidney injury (AKI) in general hospital populations. BMJ Open. 2017;7(9):e016591 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016591 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Zhang Y, Nakano D, Guan Y, Hitomi H, Uemura A, Masaki T, et al. A sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor attenuates renal capillary injury and fibrosis by a vascular endothelial growth factor-dependent pathway after renal injury in mice. Kidney Int. 2018;94(3):524–535. 10.1016/j.kint.2018.05.002 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Chang YK, Choi H, Jeong JY, Na KR, Lee KW, Lim BJ, et al. Dapagliflozin, SGLT2 Inhibitor, Attenuates Renal Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(7):e0158810 10.1371/journal.pone.0158810 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Ito M, Tanaka T. The Anticipated Renoprotective Effects of Sodium-glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors. Intern Med. 2018;57(15):2105–2114. 10.2169/internalmedicine.9842-17 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Dekkers CCJ, Petrykiv S, Laverman GD, Cherney DZ, Gansevoort RT, Heerspink HJL. Effects of the SGLT-2 inhibitor dapagliflozin on glomerular and tubular injury markers. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018;20(8):1988–1993. 10.1111/dom.13301 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Mayer GJ, Wanner C, Weir MR, Inzucchi SE, Koitka-Weber A, Hantel S, et al. Analysis from the EMPA-REG OUTCOME((R)) trial indicates empagliflozin may assist in preventing the progression of chronic kidney disease in patients with type 2 diabetes irrespective of medications that alter intrarenal hemodynamics. Kidney Int. 2019;96(2):489–504. 10.1016/j.kint.2019.02.033 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Clare Stone

20 Sep 2019

Dear Dr. Menne,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript "Effect of SGLT-2 inhibition on acute kidney injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis" (PMEDICINE-D-19-02279) for consideration at PLOS Medicine.

Your paper was evaluated by a senior editor and discussed among all the editors here. It was also discussed with an academic editor with relevant expertise, and sent to independent reviewers, including a statistical reviewer. The reviews are appended at the bottom of this email and any accompanying reviewer attachments can be seen via the link below:

[LINK]

In light of these reviews, I am afraid that we will not be able to accept the manuscript for publication in the journal in its current form, but we would like to consider a revised version that addresses the reviewers' and editors' comments. Obviously we cannot make any decision about publication until we have seen the revised manuscript and your response, and we plan to seek re-review by one or more of the reviewers.

In revising the manuscript for further consideration, your revisions should address the specific points made by each reviewer and the editors. Please also check the guidelines for revised papers at http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/revising-your-manuscript for any that apply to your paper. In your rebuttal letter you should indicate your response to the reviewers' and editors' comments, the changes you have made in the manuscript, and include either an excerpt of the revised text or the location (eg: page and line number) where each change can be found. Please submit a clean version of the paper as the main article file; a version with changes marked should be uploaded as a marked up manuscript.

In addition, we request that you upload any figures associated with your paper as individual TIF or EPS files with 300dpi resolution at resubmission; please read our figure guidelines for more information on our requirements: http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/figures. While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the PACE digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at PLOSMedicine@plos.org.

We expect to receive your revised manuscript by Oct 11 2019 11:59PM. Please email us (plosmedicine@plos.org) if you have any questions or concerns.

***Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.***

We ask every co-author listed on the manuscript to fill in a contributing author statement, making sure to declare all competing interests. If any of the co-authors have not filled in the statement, we will remind them to do so when the paper is revised. If all statements are not completed in a timely fashion this could hold up the re-review process. If new competing interests are declared later in the revision process, this may also hold up the submission. Should there be a problem getting one of your co-authors to fill in a statement we will be in contact. YOU MUST NOT ADD OR REMOVE AUTHORS UNLESS YOU HAVE ALERTED THE EDITOR HANDLING THE MANUSCRIPT TO THE CHANGE AND THEY SPECIFICALLY HAVE AGREED TO IT. You can see our competing interests policy here: http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/competing-interests.

Please use the following link to submit the revised manuscript:

https://www.editorialmanager.com/pmedicine/

Your article can be found in the "Submissions Needing Revision" folder.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/submission-guidelines#loc-methods.

Please ensure that the paper adheres to the PLOS Data Availability Policy (see http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/data-availability), which requires that all data underlying the study's findings be provided in a repository or as Supporting Information. For data residing with a third party, authors are required to provide instructions with contact information for obtaining the data. PLOS journals do not allow statements supported by "data not shown" or "unpublished results." For such statements, authors must provide supporting data or cite public sources that include it.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Sincerely,

Clare Stone, PhD

Managing Editor

PLOS Medicine

plosmedicine.org

-----------------------------------------------------------

Requests from the editors:

Abstract – please avoid the list like appearance and sectioning. The abstract should have 3 sections: Background, Methods and Findings and Conclusions. The final sentence of the Methods and Findings should be the limitations of the study. Please look at other published systematic reviews to see formatting for an abstract.

At this stage, we ask that you include a short, non-technical Author Summary of your research to make findings accessible to a wide audience that includes both scientists and non-scientists. The Author Summary should immediately follow the Abstract in your revised manuscript. This text is subject to editorial change and should be distinct from the scientific abstract. Please see our author guidelines for more information: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/revising-your-manuscript#loc-author-summary

Please use square brackets in the main text for references numbers instead of superscript.

Study Selection (Two independent investigators reviewed all articles) – please give initials of these authors. And then those for the 3rd.

Remove “Role of the Funding Source: No external funding.” From the main text

I note some use of causal language (eg from abstract “SGLT2i prevents AKI with”). Even though this SR does feature trials there is also the inclusion of observational studies. Please avoid overheated language.

Page 6 – “that there is indeed some tubular alteration” may instead of is.

Insert a subheading ‘Conclusions’ page 7

Remove conflict of interest from the main text

Comments from the reviewers:

Reviewer #1: Nice review, up-to-date on methods. Data are in line with results from the major large CV and renal outcome studies.

- Suggest to edit figures because the point estimated of the smaller studies are not visible.

- suggest to analyse a subgroup of studies that were double-blind

- suggest to explain in the discussion that most randomised patients in the large trials received inhibitor of the RAS. Thus post-glomerular dilation (RASi) combined with pre-glomerular constriction (SGLT2i) should increase risk of AKI. The opposite was found and there is animal studies of experimental ischemic AKI showing much the same.

Reviewer #2: Alex McConnachie

Menne et al report a meta-analysis of RCTs and observational studies of the effect of SGLT-2 inhibitors on AKI. This review looks at the use of statistics in the paper.

I have no major concerns with the analyses presented in the paper, just a few minor observations.

First, a typo: the final paragraph refers to the use of a "Funnel blot".

Then, an issue with wording: the second paragraph of the results states that "SGLT2i diminished the odds ratio by 32%"; this should perhaps be "SGLT2i diminished the odds by 32%".

There are a few places in the paper where the authors make statements about the effects of different SGLT-2 inhibitors being similar (e.g. in the section headed "AEs of AKI in RCT") or different (under "Hypovolemia related AE"), though they do not present any statistical tests to back up these statements. For hypovolemia, in particular, some sort of interaction test would be useful.

When talking about AKI in observational studies, there is a little confusion as to whether there are four studies, or five.

In the first paragraph of the discussion, it is stated that SLGT-2i reduce the incidence of acute renal failure. Is "incidence" correct here, or should "odds" be used?

Given that the included studies will have different lengths of follow-up, to what extent are the odds ratios directly comparable between studies? This could perhaps be listed among the limitations of the analysis.

The figures are generally good, though S8 is extremely hard to read. Would it be better to break it up into a number of figures, perhaps one for each individual drug, then give one showing how the drug-specific estimates combine to give an overall SGLT-2i effect estimate?

Reviewer #3: Well written, timely and clinically important. Although the emphasis was on AKI, I think it is also important to include all genitourinary AEs such as UTIs in this report.

Reviewer #4: In the systematic review, the authors have included randomized control trials as well as observational studies of an SGLT2 inhibitor compared to controls. The outcomes were acute kidney injury, as defined on the basis of serious adverse event or adverse event reporting for the trials. In addition they also report hypovolemia similarly defined from the trials. Lastly they also have observational studies which reported acute kidney injury events.

Overall the authors report that the risk of acute kidney injury is decreased by about 24 to 32%, depending on which definition is used, and the trials and by 60% in the observational studies. In contrast, hypovolemia is increased by about 20%.

Overall the results do seem valid, however, this reviewer has some concerns about the interpretation, especially given the high heterogeneity, with respect to the difference between agents. The patient population and the studies does vary quite a lot, with the population in CREDENCE being at higher risk than in the other large trials. This may cast canagliflozin and an unfavorable light in some analysis and in favorable light in some other analysis. It is unlikely that these are true differences, versus a difference in baseline the risk and these conclusions should be drawn very cautiously.

The other major concern is that most of the data in this systematic review comes from the for major trials, CANVAS, EMPAREG, CREDENCE and DECLARE. The remaining trials add a very few numbers in the overall analysis. Unfortunately for the authors, a competing systematic review has recently been published which also reports a similar findings on acute kidney injury (25% RRR)from these 4 trials combined together https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(19)30256-6/fulltext. The difference of the present manuscript, is that they include different definitions of acute kidney injury, observational studies, and the outcome of hypovolemia. Separating the trial outcomes [ AKI and hypovolemia] and the observational studies [ acute kidney injury] would be helpful in the flow of the manuscript to make this apparent. Though this was not prespecified, some more analyses could help this paper stand out even more. For example, in the analysis where high heterogeneity was reported, some exploration of the heterogeneity would be useful. This could be done either a subgroup analysis or as Metaregressions. Understandably, these would all be post hoc analysis, however they may shed some more light on the underlying statistical heterogeneity.

Otherwise the discussion is clearly written, and emphasizes the lack of a mechanistic explanation, as well as the next steps.

Any attachments provided with reviews can be seen via the following link:

[LINK]

Decision Letter 1

Clare Stone

23 Oct 2019

Dear Dr. Menne,

Thank you very much for re-submitting your manuscript "Effect of SGLT-2 inhibition on acute kidney injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis" (PMEDICINE-D-19-02279R1) for review by PLOS Medicine.

I have discussed the paper with my colleagues and the academic editor and it was also seen again by reviewers. I am pleased to say that provided the remaining editorial and production issues are dealt with we are planning to accept the paper for publication in the journal.

The remaining issues that need to be addressed are listed at the end of this email. Any accompanying reviewer attachments can be seen via the link below. Please take these into account before resubmitting your manuscript:

[LINK]

Our publications team (plosmedicine@plos.org) will be in touch shortly about the production requirements for your paper, and the link and deadline for resubmission. DO NOT RESUBMIT BEFORE YOU'VE RECEIVED THE PRODUCTION REQUIREMENTS.

***Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.***

In revising the manuscript for further consideration here, please ensure you address the specific points made by each reviewer and the editors. In your rebuttal letter you should indicate your response to the reviewers' and editors' comments and the changes you have made in the manuscript. Please submit a clean version of the paper as the main article file. A version with changes marked must also be uploaded as a marked up manuscript file.

Please also check the guidelines for revised papers at http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/revising-your-manuscript for any that apply to your paper. If you haven't already, we ask that you provide a short, non-technical Author Summary of your research to make findings accessible to a wide audience that includes both scientists and non-scientists. The Author Summary should immediately follow the Abstract in your revised manuscript. This text is subject to editorial change and should be distinct from the scientific abstract.

We expect to receive your revised manuscript within 1 week. Please email us (plosmedicine@plos.org) if you have any questions or concerns.

We ask every co-author listed on the manuscript to fill in a contributing author statement. If any of the co-authors have not filled in the statement, we will remind them to do so when the paper is revised. If all statements are not completed in a timely fashion this could hold up the re-review process. Should there be a problem getting one of your co-authors to fill in a statement we will be in contact. YOU MUST NOT ADD OR REMOVE AUTHORS UNLESS YOU HAVE ALERTED THE EDITOR HANDLING THE MANUSCRIPT TO THE CHANGE AND THEY SPECIFICALLY HAVE AGREED TO IT.

Please ensure that the paper adheres to the PLOS Data Availability Policy (see http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/data-availability), which requires that all data underlying the study's findings be provided in a repository or as Supporting Information. For data residing with a third party, authors are required to provide instructions with contact information for obtaining the data. PLOS journals do not allow statements supported by "data not shown" or "unpublished results." For such statements, authors must provide supporting data or cite public sources that include it.

If you have any questions in the meantime, please contact me or the journal staff on plosmedicine@plos.org.

We look forward to receiving the revised manuscript by Oct 30 2019 11:59PM.

Sincerely,

Clare Stone, PhD

Managing Editor

PLOS Medicine

plosmedicine.org

------------------------------------------------------------

Requests from Editors:

- I think the authors need to say what SGLT-2 therapy is used for at the start of the abstract!

- Restructure abstract – the Methods and findings should be combined into one section, per house style. And please start the sentence on Limitations with “Limitations of this study are…” (instead of in terms of….)

- In the abstract, you say that SGLT-2 inhibitors had a "protective effect" in observational studies, which seems to overstate what can be shown from an observational study; I suggest "in the observational studies, the risk of adverse events was reduced in patients receiving SGLT2i" or similar

Remove ‘non-technical’ from the heading for the Author Summary

- Amend author summary to pull these 2 bullet points together, e.g. "Among 112 trials, 41 reported ..."

Did your study have a prospective protocol or analysis plan? Please state this (either way) early in the Methods section.

a) If a prospective analysis plan (from your funding proposal, IRB or other ethics committee submission, study protocol, or other planning document written before analyzing the data) was used in designing the study, please include the relevant prospectively written document with your revised manuscript as a Supporting Information file to be published alongside your study, and cite it in the Methods section. A legend for this file should be included at the end of your manuscript.

b) If no such document exists, please make sure that the Methods section transparently describes when analyses were planned, and when/why any data-driven changes to analyses took place.

c) In either case, changes in the analysis—including those made in response to peer review comments—should be identified as such in the Methods section of the paper, with rationale.

- In the first paragraph of the discussion, "systemic"-> "systematic"

- square brackets in the wrong place for references. They should be before the full stop at the end of the sentence, not after.

- Please provide a PRISMA checklist as a Supp file and please ensure that sections and paragraphs are used rather than page numbers as these can change on publication.

Discussion – overstating findings : “As this systemic review is based on a high AKI event rate and we observed no heterogeneity, we conclude that SGLT2i may not only reduce the progression of chronic kidney disease, but also have a preventive effect on acute kidney injury.” A systematic review cannot show a preventative effect. Please remove.

As above “However, in our analysis, we could find no evidence of this, further underscoring that reversible changes in glomerular haemodynamics caused by SGLT2i are probably of little relevance to hard outcomes such as AKI SAE and AEs.” Evidence cannot be shown in a systematic review – please remove.

Conclusion “This observation is robust” – please remove the entire sentence – it’s vague and not quantified.

Comments from Reviewers:

Reviewer #4: all previous comments addressed

Inclusion of DAPA-HF and other recent studies an additional strength

Any attachments provided with reviews can be seen via the following link:

[LINK]

Decision Letter 2

Clare Stone

11 Nov 2019

Dear Dr. Menne,

On behalf of my colleagues and the academic editor, Dr. Maarten Taal, I am delighted to inform you that your manuscript entitled "Acute kidney injury and adverse renal events in patients receiving SGLT2-Inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis" (PMEDICINE-D-19-02279R2) has been accepted for publication in PLOS Medicine.

PRODUCTION PROCESS

Before publication you will see the copyedited word document (in around 1-2 weeks from now) and a PDF galley proof shortly after that. The copyeditor will be in touch shortly before sending you the copyedited Word document. We will make some revisions at the copyediting stage to conform to our general style, and for clarification. When you receive this version you should check and revise it very carefully, including figures, tables, references, and supporting information, because corrections at the next stage (proofs) will be strictly limited to (1) errors in author names or affiliations, (2) errors of scientific fact that would cause misunderstandings to readers, and (3) printer's (introduced) errors.

If you are likely to be away when either this document or the proof is sent, please ensure we have contact information of a second person, as we will need you to respond quickly at each point.

PRESS

A selection of our articles each week are press released by the journal. You will be contacted nearer the time if we are press releasing your article in order to approve the content and check the contact information for journalists is correct. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact.

PROFILE INFORMATION

Now that your manuscript has been accepted, please log into EM and update your profile. Go to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pmedicine, log in, and click on the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page. Please update your user information to ensure an efficient production and billing process.

Thank you again for submitting the manuscript to PLOS Medicine. We look forward to publishing it.

Best wishes,

Clare Stone, PhD

Managing Editor

PLOS Medicine

plosmedicine.org

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Text. PRISMA checklist.

    PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

    (DOC)

    S2 Text. Analysis plan.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Table. Search strategy.

    (XLSX)

    S2 Table. Basic information about study type and AE definitions in the different RCTs.

    AE, adverse event; RCT, randomized controlled trial.

    (XLSX)

    S3 Table. Basic information about study type and AE definitions in the different observational cohorts.

    AE, adverse event.

    (XLSX)

    S4 Table. Number of patients treated with RASis in trials reporting AKI events.

    AKI, acute kidney injury; RASi, renin–angiotensin system inhibitor.

    (XLSX)

    S1 Fig. Risk-of-bias assessment in 41 studies reporting at least one AKI as SAE or AE.

    AE, adverse event; AKI, acute kidney injury; SAE, serious AE.

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. Funnel plot.

    (TIF)

    S3 Fig. Effect of SGLT2is on serious AKI AEs after removal of one of the 28 studies reporting an SAE.

    This analysis suggests that the overall result was not due to a single study. Even when the results of the largest study (DECLARE) was removed, the result remained highly significant (p < 0.001). AE, adverse event; AKI, acute kidney injury; SAE, serious AE; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

    (TIF)

    S4 Fig. Effect of SGLT2is on any AKI in RCTs.

    AKI, acute kidney injury; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

    (TIF)

    S5 Fig. Effect of SGLT2i on SAE AKI AEs in patients with eGFR <60 ml/min.

    AE, adverse event; AKI, acute kidney injury; eGFR, estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate; SAE, serious AE; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

    (TIF)

    S6 Fig. Effect of SGLT2is on combined renal AEs in RCTs.

    AE, adverse event; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

    (TIF)

    S7 Fig. Effect of SGLT2is on hypovolemia-related AEs in RCTs.

    (a) Canagliflozin, (b) dapagliflozin, (c) empagliflozin, (d) ertugliflozin, (e) other SGLT2is, and (f) comparison of estimates of all examined drugs. AE, adverse event; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

    (TIF)

    S8 Fig. Effect of SGLT2is on AKI in propensity-score–matched observational cohorts.

    AKI, acute kidney injury; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor.

    (TIF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Revision_Responses_3.10.19.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Revisions.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS Medicine are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES