Cohort studyindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key study I-ODD-116 in-depth review

Fournier gangrene on SGLT2 drugs: very rare, any extra risk uncertain

Association of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor Treatment With Risk of Hospitalization for Fournier Gangrene Among Men.

Overview

Dave CV et al.. JAMA Intern Med 2019 · PMID 31479145 · DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.2813

15.0 vs 9.7 cases per 100,000 person-years; HR 1.73 (0.87-3.42).

Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Measure Fournier gangrene risk in men starting SGLT2i.

How was the study done?

Claims-data cohort vs DPP-4i.

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

About 500,000 men.

What was actually found?

Very rare; possible but non-significant increase.

How large was the observed effect?

HR 1.73 (0.87-3.42).

What do the results mean in everyday life?

This severe infection is very rare; genital pain with fever needs urgent care.

What are the study's limitations?

Few events.

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Shows the FDA numbers cannot establish a risk ratio.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

High.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Causality.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Dave CV et al.
Journal
JAMA Intern Med
Year
2019
Identifier
PMID 31479145 DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.2813
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26; Crossref works API 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
full text
Conflicts of interest and funding

Brigham and Women's Hospital and NIA career grant; senior authors report grants from industry outside the submitted work.

2. Research question

Is initiation of an SGLT2 inhibitor associated with hospitalisation for Fournier gangrene in men?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Cohort study – Cohort study (research letter) of new users with propensity-score weighting, US claims data
Population

Men >=18 years with type 2 diabetes initiating SGLT2i or DPP-4i

Country

USA

Period

After SGLT2i approval (2013) onward; mean follow-up about 7.7 months

Sample size

138,158 SGLT2i and 360,685 DPP-4i initiators

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Excluded nursing home care, type 1 or secondary diabetes, ESRD, cancer, HIV

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

SGLT2 inhibitor initiation

Comparator

DPP-4 inhibitor initiation

Endpoints

Hospitalisation for Fournier gangrene (ICD code plus surgery)

Statistical methods

Stabilised IPTW from propensity score with 37 covariates

5. Actual results

Results

13 cases with SGLT2i (15.0 per 100,000 PY) vs 24 with DPP-4i (9.7 per 100,000 PY); adjusted rate difference 6.7 per 100,000 PY (-2.8 to 16.1); adjusted HR 1.73 (0.87-3.42).

Absolute risks

15.0 vs 9.7 per 100,000 person-years; adjusted difference 6.7 per 100,000 PY (not significant).

Authors' conclusion

Fournier gangrene occurred rarely; among men initiating an SGLT-2 inhibitor there was a potential increase of approximately 1 case per 10,000 men treated, which was not statistically significant; limitation: lack of randomisation and potential residual confounding.

6. Strengths

  • Active comparator new-user design
  • Large sample
  • Outcome requires surgery

7. Weaknesses

  • Very few events
  • Short follow-up
  • Men only

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
ROBINS-E
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

Residual confounding and low event numbers.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

HR CI log-symmetric; CI includes both no effect and a tripling (stats/C-ODD-08.py). If causal, about 1 extra case per 15,000 person-years.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Provides incidence data that the FDA report counts in the claim cannot: the condition is very rare and any excess is uncertain.

11. Independent contrary findings

RCT meta-analysis (I-ODD-12) MH-OR 0.41 (0.09-1.82).

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

High.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Possible small excess, not established.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultslow
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilitypartly replicated
Consistency with the overall evidencemixed
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Risk in women; true causality.

15. Linked fact checks