Search

OBJECTIVE The cardiovascular safety of saxagliptin, a dipeptidyl-peptidase 4 inhibitor, compared with other antihyperglycemic treatments is not well understood. We prospectively examined the association between saxagliptin use and acute myocardial infarction (AMI). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We identified patients aged ≥18 years, starting from the approval date of saxagliptin in 2009 and continuing through August 2014, using data from 18 Mini-Sentinel data partners. We conducted seven sequential assessments comparing saxagliptin separately with sitagliptin, pioglitazone, second-generation sulfonylureas, and long-acting insulin, using disease risk score (DRS) stratification and propensity score (PS) matching to adjust for potential confounders. Sequential testing kept the overall chance of a false-positive signal below 0.05 (one-sided) for each pairwise comparison. RESULTS We identified 82,264 saxagliptin users and more than 1.5 times as many users of each comparator. At the end of surveillance, the DRS-stratified hazard ratios (HRs) (95% CI) were 1.08 (0.90–1.28) in the comparison with sitagliptin, 1.11 (0.87–1.42) with pioglitazone, 0.79 (0.64–0.98) with sulfonylureas, and 0.57 (0.46–0.70) with long-acting insulin. The corresponding PS-matched HRs were similar. Only one interim analysis of 168 analyses met criteria for a safety signal: the PS-matched saxagliptin-pioglitazone comparison from the fifth sequential analysis, which yielded an HR of 1.63 (1.12–2.37). This association diminished in subsequent analyses. CONCLUSIONS We did not find a higher AMI risk in saxagliptin users compared with users of other selected antihyperglycemic agents during the first 5 years after U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of the drug.

Objective.To determine which antibiotics increase or decrease the risk of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD).Design.Retrospective case-control study.Setting.Nonprofit, integrated healthcare delivery system in Northern California.Patients.Study participants included patients with cases of hospital-acquired CDAD that occurred during the period from 1999 through 2005 (n = 1,142) and control patients (n = 3,351) matched for facility, calendar quarter during which hospitalization occurred, diagnosis related group for the index hospitalization, and length of hospital stay. All case and control patients had received antibiotics in the 60 days before the index date. For each antibiotic, the risk of CDAD was examined in relation to whether the patient received the antibiotic, after adjustment for use of other antibiotics, demographic characteristics, selected health conditions, and use of healthcare services.Results.The following antibiotics were associated with a significantly increased risk of acquiring CDAD: imipenem-cilastin (odds ratio [OR], 2.77), clindamycin (OR, 2.31), cefuroxime (OR, 2.16), moxifloxacin (OR, 1.88), ceftazidime (OR, 1.82), cefpodoxime (OR, 1.58), ceftizoxime (OR, 1.57), and ceftriaxone (OR, 1.49). Metronidazole and doxycycline were associated with a significantly reduced risk of CDAD (OR for metronidazole, 0.67; OR for doxycycline, 0.41). Other factors associated with an increased risk of CDAD were older age, longer hospital stays, use of proton pump inhibitors, prior gastrointestinal disease, and prior infection (not including C. difficile infection.)Conclusions.Some antibiotics appear to increase the risk of acquiring CDAD, notably clindamycin, third-generation cephalosporins, and carbapenems, whereas metronidazole and doxycycline appear to be protective, compared with other antibiotics.

A large-scale, postmarketing observational database safety study was conducted following 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) licensure. A secondary outcome was the occurrence of predefined diagnoses among PCV7 vaccinees versus historic controls. Forty-two PCV7 recipients and 17 controls were hospitalized for Kawasaki disease (P = 0.012). After adjusting for potential confounding variables, this difference was not significant (P = 0.083). No association between Kawasaki disease and PCV7 was found.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends influenza vaccination for women who will be in the second or third trimester of pregnancy during the influenza season. We analyzed hospital admissions with principal diagnoses of influenza or pneumonia and influenza-like illness (ILI) outpatient visits to study the effectiveness of influenza vaccine during pregnancy in protecting women and infants from influenza-related morbidity. Estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness across five flu seasons (Fall 1997 to Spring 2002) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models for women and infant study populations in Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Outpatient utilization outcomes included physician visits with a diagnosis of upper respiratory infection, pharyngitis, otitis media, asthma, bronchial asthma, viral infection, pneumonia, fever, cough, or wheezing associated with respiratory illness. Inpatient outcomes included hospitalizations with principal diagnoses of influenza or pneumonia. Women who received influenza vaccine during pregnancy had the same risk for ILI visits compared with unvaccinated women, adjusting for women's age and week of delivery. When asthma visits were excluded from the outcome measure, we also found no difference in the risk of outpatient visits for vaccinated and unvaccinated women. Hospital admissions for influenza or pneumonia for women in the study population were quite rare and no women died of respiratory illness during pregnancy. Infants born to women who received influenza vaccination had the same risks for influenza or pneumonia admissions compared with infants born to unvaccinated women, adjusting for infant's gender, gestational age, week of birth, and birth facility. Maternal influenza vaccination was also not a significant determinant of risk of ILI (excluding otitis media) outpatient visits for infants, nor did it significantly affect the risk of otitis media visits. Influenza vaccination during pregnancy did not significantly affect the risk of cesarean section, adjusting for the woman's age. It also did not affect the risk of preterm delivery. Although the immunogenicity of influenza vaccination in pregnancy in mother and infant has been well documented, in this study, we were unable to demonstrate the effectiveness of influenza vaccination with data for hospital admissions and physician visits. One possible interpretation of these findings is that typical influenza surveillance measures based on utilization data are not reliable in distinguishing influenza from other respiratory illness. Hospitalizations for respiratory illness were uncommon in both vaccinees and nonvaccinees.