(1131) Scoping Review on the Use of SGLT2 Inhibitors in BIPOC Populations in the United States

Objectives: Research

Objective: This scoping review aims to comprehensively examine the existing literature on the use of Sodium-Glucose Transport Protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in the context of cardiovascular diseases, with a particular focus on their application, safety, and efficacy within and BIPOC communities. SGLT2 inhibitors have emerged as a promising class of medications for managing cardiovascular diseases, particularly in individuals with diabetes. Several clinical trials have been carried out in recent years demonstrating the SGLT2 inhibitors’ impact on cardiovascular health, heart failure outcomes, and improvement of ASCVD. This has led to FDA approvals for these agents over time and recommendation in guidelines such as the ADA Standards of Care in Diabetes and the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA heart failure guidelines. There remains a dearth of literature exploring the utilization and effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors in BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) populations facing a higher burden of cardiovascular disease.

Methods: A scoping review was conducted using Covidence, a virtual screening and extraction tool. Pubmed, CINAHL, and ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Source Complete were the primary search engines used for the initial search, and the research team conducted hand searching to identify articles not included in this search that might meet the scoping review protocol. English language, human studies, and peer-reviewed, published literature were all used as filters for the search strategy. Included in the review were peer-reviewed clinical research trials, while qualitative and pharmacokinetic studies were excluded. Only studies that had data that could be isolated according to the number of participants included within the US were included, and any sub-analyses of already included studies were not included in order to prevent duplication of observed data. At least two reviewers looked at each article during the three steps of the screening process (title/abstract screening, full text review, and data extraction), and one of the primary investigators made the final decision on any conflicts between reviewers. One data analysis component of the review will involve comparing BIPOC populations included in trials as reported and comparing those characteristics to that of the general population of the US to evaluate if the study BIPOC populations is truly representative of the general population.

Results: The initial search yielded 1781 studies for abstract and title screening, which was subsequently narrowed down to a final selection of 243 studies for full-text review. The most common reason for excluding studies during the full-text review stage was for the wrong patient population. After meticulous full-text review, over 22 studies were identified for data extraction. The data extraction component is currently in process. Remarkably, the majority of studies analyzed in this review focused on populations outside of BIPOC communities, emphasizing the critical gap in research focusing on these populations. Information to be elaborated further within the poster and during the poster presentation. Data points for collection include baseline characteristics, ethnic and demographic information, year of publication, author, title, primary and secondary outcomes, inclusion and exclusion criteria, recruitment strategy, and overall study design.

Conclusions: Work in Progress