Search

Purpose: Results from observational studies on inhaled long-acting beta-2-agonists (LABA) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) risk are conflicting, presumably due to variation in methodology. We aimed to evaluate the impact of applying a common study protocol on consistency of results in three databases. Methods: In the primary analysis, we included patients from two GP databases (Dutch-Mondriaan, UK-CPRD GOLD) with a diagnosis of asthma and/or COPD and at least one inhaled LABA or a 'non-LABA inhaled bronchodilator medication' (short-acting beta-2-agonist or short-/long-acting muscarinic antagonist) prescription between 2002 and 2009. A claims database (USA-Clinformatics) was used for replication. LABA use was divided into current, recent (first 91 days following the end of a treatment episode), and past use (after more than 91 days following the end of a treatment episode). Adjusted hazard ratios (AMI-aHR) and 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI) were estimated using time-dependent multivariable Cox regression models stratified by recorded diagnoses (asthma, COPD, or both asthma and COPD). Results: For asthma or COPD patients, no statistically significant AMI-aHRs (age- and sex-adjusted) were found in the primary analysis. For patients with both diagnoses, a decreased AMI-aHR was found for current vs. recent LABA use in the CPRD GOLD (0.78; 95 % CI 0.68-0.90) and in Mondriaan (0.55; 95 % CI 0.28-1.08), too. The replication study yielded similar results. Adjusting for concomitant medication use and comorbidities, in addition to age and sex, had little impact on the results. Conclusions: By using a common protocol, we observed similar results in the primary analysis performed in two GP databases and in the replication study in a claims database. Regarding differences between databases, a common protocol facilitates interpreting results due to minimized methodological variations. However, results of multinational comparative observational studies might be affected by bias not fully addressed by a common protocol. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) by patients is essential for a comprehensive risk–benefit evaluation of drugs after marketing, but only few data are available regarding patient-centred web-based ADR reporting systems. Hence, we aimed to analyze ADRs reported by patients with a particular emphasis on novel drugs and serious ADRs not yet labelled in the respective summary of product characteristics (SPC). Methods: All ADR reports received by a web-based, patient-centred platform (www.nebenwirkungen.de) between April 1, 2019, and September 1, 2020, were descriptively analyzed. ADRs and drugs were coded automatically according to MedDRA and ATC classification system. SPC labelling of reported ADRs for novel drugs marketed since 2015 was checked manually. Results: In total, 13,515 patient reports including 29,529 ADRs were received during the study period (serious ADRs [SADRs] n = 1,318; 4.5%). Women were affected in more than two-thirds of ADR reports. The most common patient-reported ADRs were nausea, dizziness and headache, whereas arrhythmia, intestinal obstruction and erectile dysfunction were the most frequent SADRs. Ciprofloxacin, levothyroxine and venlafaxine were the compounds most frequently suspected for causing both ADRs and SADRs. Regarding novel compounds, 289 reports including 739 ADRs were received (mainly fatigue, headache and myalgia). Three hundred thirty-one (44.8%) out of those ADRs were not yet labelled in the respective SPC, whereof twelve were SADRs. Conclusion: The majority of patient-reported ADRs were non-serious. However, a relevant number of non-labelled even serious ADRs was reported for novel compounds by patients. Despite well-known limitations of patient-reported ADRs, this web-based ADR reporting system contributes to the identification of new ADRs and thus can help to improve patients' safety complementing other pharmacovigilance instruments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hip fractures represent a major public health challenge worldwide. Multinational studies using a common methodology are scarce. We aimed to estimate the incidence rates (IRs) and trends of hip/femur fractures over the period 2003-2009 in five European countries. The study was performed using seven electronic health-care records databases (DBs) from Denmark, The Netherlands, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom, based on the same protocol. Yearly IRs of hip/femur fractures were calculated for the general population and for those aged ≥50 years. Trends over time were evaluated using linear regression analysis for both crude and standardized IRs. Sex- and age-standardized IRs for the UK, Netherlands, and Spanish DBs varied from 9 to 11 per 10,000 person-years for the general population and from 22 to 26 for those ≥50 years old; the German DB showed slightly higher IRs (about 13 and 30, respectively), whereas the Danish DB yielded IRs twofold higher (19 and 52, respectively). IRs increased exponentially with age in both sexes. The ratio of females to males was ≥2 for patients aged ≥70-79 years in most DBs. Statistically significant trends over time were only shown for the UK DB (CPRD) (+0.7 % per year, P < 0.01) and the Danish DB (−1.4 % per year, P < 0.01). IRs of hip/femur fractures varied greatly across European countries. With the exception of Denmark, no decreasing trend was observed over the study period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]