Search

Purpose Strategies to identify and validate acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and stroke in primary‐care electronic records may impact effect measures, but to an unknown extent. Additionally, the validity of cardiovascular risk factors that could act as confounders in studies on those endpoints has not been thoroughly assessed in the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink's (CPRD's) GOLD database. We explored the validity of algorithms to identify cardiovascular outcomes and risk factors and evaluated different outcome‐identification strategies using these algorithms for estimation of adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs). Methods First, we identified AMI, stroke, smoking, obesity, and menopausal status in a cohort treated for overactive bladder by applying computerized algorithms to primary care medical records (2004–2012). We validated these cardiovascular outcomes and risk factors with physician questionnaires (gold standard for this analysis). Second, we estimated IRRs for AMI and stroke using algorithm–identified and questionnaire–confirmed cases, comparing these with IRRs from cases identified through linkage with hospitalization/mortality data (best estimate). Results For AMI, the algorithm's positive predictive value (PPV) was >90%. Initial algorithms for stroke performed less well because of inclusion of codes for prevalent stroke; algorithm refinement increased PPV to 80% but decreased sensitivity by 20%. Algorithms for smoking and obesity were considered valid. IRRs based on questionnaire‐confirmed cases only were closer to IRRs estimated from hospitalization/mortality data than IRRs from algorithm‐identified cases. Conclusions AMI, stroke, smoking, obesity, and postmenopausal status can be accurately identified in CPRD. Physician questionnaire–validated AMI and stroke cases yield IRRs closest to the best estimate.

Purpose To describe the characteristics of new users of cilostazol in Europe with the aim to support the evaluation of its benefit/risk as used in regular clinical practice before the implementation of labeling changes recommended by the European Medicines Agency. Methods New users of cilostazol were identified in populations enrolled in five European health automated databases in the UK (The Health Improvement Network [THIN]), Spain (EpiChron cohort and Information System for the Improvement of Research in Primary Care [SIDIAP]), Sweden (National Registers), and Germany (German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database [GePaRD]) between 2002 and 2012. New users were characterized according to the prevalence of cardiovascular disease and other comorbidities, concurrent use of interacting medications, new contraindications, duration of use, and potential off-label prescribing. Results We identified 22 593 new users of cilostazol. The median age was between 68.0 (THIN) and 73.7 (Sweden) years. More than 78% of users had concomitant cardiovascular disease, and between 78.8% (GePaRD) and 91.6% (THIN) were treated with interacting medications. Prevalence of new cardiovascular contraindications ranged from 1.5% (THIN) to 11.6% (GePaRD), and concurrent use of two or more antiplatelet drugs ranged from 6.3% (SIDIAP) to 13.5% (EpiChron cohort). Between 39.4% (Sweden) and 52.9% (THIN) of users discontinued cilostazol in the first 3 months. Between 41.0% (SIDIAP) and 93.4% (THIN) were considered to have received cilostazol according to the European Medicines Agency labeling. Conclusions In this collaborative European study, most cilostazol users were elderly patients with a high prevalence of cardiovascular diseases and other comorbidity and concurrent use of interacting drugs, indicating that this is a vulnerable population at high risk of complications, especially cardiovascular events. © 2017 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Background Blocking muscarinic receptors could have an effect on cardiac function, especially among elderly patients with overactive bladder (OAB). Study objective To investigate the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events in users of antimuscarinic drugs to treat OAB. Design, setting, and participants Cohort study of new users of darifenacin, fesoterodine, oxybutynin, solifenacin, tolterodine, or trospium, 18 years or older, in the United Kingdom's Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), 2004-2012. Outcome measurements and main results Using tolterodine as the reference, we estimated propensity-score-stratified incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for acute myocardial infarction, stroke, CV mortality, major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a combined end point of the previous three), and all-cause death for individual antimuscarinic drugs. The study cohort included 119,912 new users of OAB drugs. The mean age at cohort entry was 62 years, 70% were female, and the mean follow-up was 3.3 years. The adjusted IRR for MACE and current use of oxybutynin compared with current use of tolterodine was 1.14 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.30). In contrast, the IRR was 0.65 (CI 0.56-0.76) for current use of solifenacin compared with tolterodine. In this study, performed with health care data, the distribution of risk factors was relatively similar across users of different OAB drugs and, although our analyses controlled for a range of measured potential confounders, residual confounding cannot be ruled out. Conclusions In an observational comparative study of users of medications to treat OAB conducted in routine clinical practice, the risk for CV side effects was increased in users of oxybutynin and decreased in users of solifenacin compared with users of tolterodine.

Introduction Epidemiological studies have linked domperidone use with serious cardiac arrhythmias, including sudden cardiac death, but data on age, dose, and duration of use are limited. Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the risk of out-of-hospital sudden cardiac death associated with domperidone use versus proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), metoclopramide, or non-use of all three medications, and to evaluate the risk of sudden cardiac death in relation to age and domperidone dose. Methods This was a population-based case-control study nested in a cohort of subjects aged ≥2 years in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink with one or more prescriptions for domperidone, any PPI, or metoclopramide from 2005 to 2011. Out-of-hospital sudden cardiac death was assessed by linkage with Hospital Episode Statistics and death certificates. Controls were matched on age, sex, and medical practice. The risk of sudden cardiac death in domperidone users versus risk in users of PPIs or metoclopramide was evaluated with multivariable conditional logistic regression; case-crossover analysis addressed possible residual confounding. Results From the study cohort (n = 681,104), 3239 sudden cardiac death cases were matched to 12,572 controls. The adjusted odds ratio (95 % confidence interval) for sudden cardiac death with current use of domperidone alone was 1.71 (0.92–3.18) versus non-use of study medications, 1.26 (0.68–2.34) versus current PPI use, and 0.40 (0.17–0.94) current metoclopramide use. The adjusted odds ratio (95 % confidence interval) relative to exposure to no study drug for domperidone >30 mg/day (eight cases, five controls) was 3.20 (0.59–17.3) and 1.65 (0.89–3.07) for age ≥61 years (27 cases, 49 controls). The odds ratio (95 % confidence interval) was 3.17 (1.72–5.83) for within-person periods of domperidone use versus non-use in the case-crossover analysis. Conclusions Compared with non-use of any study drug, current domperidone use was associated with sudden cardiac death in nested case-control and case-crossover analyses, with a suggestion of higher risk in older persons and users of higher daily doses. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40264-015-0338-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore the cardiovascular safety of antimuscarinic drugs to treat overactive bladder (OAB) in Denmark. Methods: This was a cohort study using data recorded in Danish registries from patients newly exposed to darifenacin, fesoterodine, oxybutynin, solifenacin, tolterodine, or trospium in 2004–2012. We estimated crude and standardized incidence rates (IRs) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI); stroke; cardiovascular mortality; major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a combined endpoint of the previous three outcomes); and all-cause death for the individual and combined drugs. We also estimated crude, standardized, and propensity score-stratified incidence rate ratios (IRRs) comparing individual antimuscarinic drugs to tolterodine as the reference. Results: Among 72,917 new users of OAB drugs (mean age, 66 years; 60% women), the standardized IR (95% confidence interval) per 1000 person-years for current use of any OAB drug was 2.7 (2.5–2.9) for AMI, 1.3 (1.2–1.5) for stroke, 7.8 (7.5–8.1) for MACE, 4.8 (4.5–5.0) for cardiovascular mortality, and 15.2 (14.8–15.6) for all-cause mortality. Propensity score-stratified IRRs for current use (reference, tolterodine) were close to the null for all drugs and endpoints. Conclusions: We did not identify differences in the risk of cardiovascular events or mortality among users of individual antimuscarinic OAB drugs.

Purpose: To report and discuss estimated prevalence of potential off-label use and associated methodological challenges using a case study of dabigatran. Methods: Observational, cross-sectional study using 3 databases with different types of clinical information available: Cegedim Strategic Data Longitudinal Patient Database (CSD-LPD), France (cardiologist panel, n = 1706; general practitioner panel, n = 2813; primary care data); National Health Databases, Denmark (n = 28 619; hospital episodes and dispensed ambulatory medications); and Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), UK (linkable to Hospital Episode Statistics [HES], n = 2150; not linkable, n = 1285; primary care data plus hospital data for HES-linkable patients). Study period: August 2011 to August 2015. Two definitions were used to estimate potential off-label use: a broad definition of on-label prescribing using codes for disease indication (eg, atrial fibrillation [AF]), and a restrictive definition excluding patients with conditions for which dabigatran is not indicated (eg, valvular AF). Results: Prevalence estimates under the broad definition ranged from 5.7% (CPRD-HES) to 34.0% (CSD-LPD) and, under the restrictive definition, from 17.4% (CPRD-HES) to 44.1% (CSD-LPD). For the majority of potential off-label users, no diagnosis potentially related to anticoagulant use was identified. Key methodological challenges were the limited availability of detailed clinical information, likely leading to overestimation of off-label use, and differences in the information available, which may explain the disparate prevalence estimates across data sources. Conclusions: Estimates of potential off-label use should be interpreted cautiously due to limitations in available information. In this context, CPRD HES-linkable estimates are likely to be the most accurate.

Andrea V Margulis,1 Manel Pladevall,1 Nuria Riera-Guardia,1 Cristina Varas-Lorenzo,1 Lorna Hazell,2,3 Nancy D Berkman,4 Meera Viswanathan,4 Susana Perez-Gutthann,1 1RTI Health Solutions, Barcelona, Spain; 2Drug Safety Research Unit, Southampton, UK; 3Associate Department of the School of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK; 4RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA Background: The study objective was to compare the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the RTI item bank (RTI-IB) and estimate interrater agreement using the RTI-IB within a systematic review on the cardiovascular safety of glucose-lowering drugs. Methods: We tailored both tools and added four questions to the RTI-IB. Two reviewers assessed the quality of the 44 included studies with both tools, (independently for the RTI-IB) and agreed on which responses conveyed low, unclear, or high risk of bias. For each question in the RTI-IB (n=31), the observed interrater agreement was calculated as the percentage of studies given the same bias assessment by both reviewers; chance-adjusted interrater agreement was estimated with the first-order agreement coefficient (AC1) statistic. Results: The NOS required less tailoring and was easier to use than the RTI-IB, but the RTI-IB produced a more thorough assessment. The RTI-IB includes most of the domains measured in the NOS. Median observed interrater agreement for the RTI-IB was 75% (25th percentile [p25] =61%; p75 =89%); median AC1 statistic was 0.64 (p25 =0.51; p75 =0.86). Conclusion: The RTI-IB facilitates a more complete quality assessment than the NOS but is more burdensome. The observed agreement and AC1 statistic in this study were higher than those reported by the RTI-IB's developers. Keywords: systematic review, meta-analysis, quality assessment, AC1

Purpose To describe the characteristics of new users of cilostazol in Europe with the aim to support the evaluation of its benefit/risk as used in regular clinical practice before the implementation of labeling changes recommended by the European Medicines Agency. Methods New users of cilostazol were identified in populations enrolled in five European health automated databases in the UK (The Health Improvement Network [THIN]), Spain (EpiChron cohort and Information System for the Improvement of Research in Primary Care [SIDIAP]), Sweden (National Registers), and Germany (German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database [GePaRD]) between 2002 and 2012. New users were characterized according to the prevalence of cardiovascular disease and other comorbidities, concurrent use of interacting medications, new contraindications, duration of use, and potential off‐label prescribing. Results We identified 22 593 new users of cilostazol. The median age was between 68.0 (THIN) and 73.7 (Sweden) years. More than 78% of users had concomitant cardiovascular disease, and between 78.8% (GePaRD) and 91.6% (THIN) were treated with interacting medications. Prevalence of new cardiovascular contraindications ranged from 1.5% (THIN) to 11.6% (GePaRD), and concurrent use of two or more antiplatelet drugs ranged from 6.3% (SIDIAP) to 13.5% (EpiChron cohort). Between 39.4% (Sweden) and 52.9% (THIN) of users discontinued cilostazol in the first 3 months. Between 41.0% (SIDIAP) and 93.4% (THIN) were considered to have received cilostazol according to the European Medicines Agency labeling. Conclusions In this collaborative European study, most cilostazol users were elderly patients with a high prevalence of cardiovascular diseases and other comorbidity and concurrent use of interacting drugs, indicating that this is a vulnerable population at high risk of complications, especially cardiovascular events. © 2017 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

textabstractAims: To perform a quantitative systematic review of observational studies on the risk of stroke associated with the use of individual NSAIDs. Methods and results: Searches were conducted using the Medline database within PubMed (1990-2008). Observational cohort or case-control studies were eligible if reported on the risk of cardiovascular events associated with individual NSAIDs versus the nonuse of NSAIDs. We found 3193 articles, in which 75 were eligible for review and abstraction. Of the 75 articles, 6 reported relative risk (RR) of stroke. Data were abstracted into a database using a standardized entry form. Two authors assessed study quality, and discrepancies were resolved by consensus. The pooled RR of all subtypes of incident stroke was increased with the current use of rofecoxib (RR=1.64, 95% CI=1.15-2.33) and diclofenac (RR=1.27, 95% CI=1.08-1.48). The pooled estimates for naproxen, ibuprofen, and celecoxib were close to unity. The risk of ischemic stroke was also increased with rofecoxib (RR=1.82, 95% CI=1.09-3.04) and diclofenac (RR=1.20, 95% CI=0.99-1.45). Data were inadequate to estimate the pooled RR by dose and duration, for other individual NSAIDs or nonischemic stroke subtypes. Conclusion: This meta-analysis supports an increased risk of ischemic stroke with the current use of rofecoxib and diclofenac. Additional studies are required to evaluate most individual NSAIDS, the effect of dose and duration, and the subtypes of stroke.

Purpose Limited information from spontaneous reports and results of two case-control studies raised concern about the cardiotoxicity of oral domperidone therapy. This case-control study nested in a retrospective cohort evaluated the combined risk of serious ventricular arrhythmia (SVA) and sudden cardiac death (SCD) in users of domperidone compared with users of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), or non-users of these medications. Methods A cohort of users of domperidone or a PPI from 1990 to 2005 was identified from existing electronic databases of Saskatchewan Health. Possible cases of SVA/SCD were identified using hospital discharge and vital statistics codes. SVA cases were validated by cardiologist review of abstracted hospital medical charts. Up to four controls were matched to each case by index date, year of birth, sex, and diabetes status. The odds ratio (OR) of current domperidone exposure relative to non-use or to current PPI exposure was estimated and adjusted for possible confounding variables using conditional logistic regression. Results From 83 212 individuals in the exposure cohort we identified 1608 cases, 49 SVA and 1559 SCD (mean age 79.4 years, females 52.9%, diabetes 22.3%) and 6428 matched controls. The adjusted OR for SVA/SCD with current domperidone use compared with non-use was (1.59, 95%CI: 1.28–1.98), or compared with current PPI use was (1.44, 95%CI: 1.12–1.86). In stratified analyses adjusted ORs were numerically higher in males, older subjects, and non-diabetics. Conclusions The increased risk of SVA/SCD for current domperidone users remained after adjustment for multiple covariates. The risk may vary among subgroups of exposed individuals. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The results of observational studies evaluating and comparing the cardiovascular safety of glitazones, metformin and sufonylureas are inconsistent.To conduct and evaluate heterogeneity in a meta-analysis of observational studies on the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes using non-insulin blood glucose–lowering drugs (NIBGLD). We systematically identified and reviewed studies evaluating NIBGLD in patients with type 2 diabetes indexed in Medline, Embase, or the Cochrane Library that met prespecified criteria. The quality of included studies was assessed with the RTI item bank. Results were combined using fixed- and random-effects models, and the Higgins I 2 statistic was used to evaluate heterogeneity. Sensitivity analyses by study quality were conducted. The summary relative risk (sRR) (95 % CI) of AMI for rosiglitazone versus pioglitazone was 1.13 (1.04–1.24) [I 2 = 55 %]. In the sensitivity analysis, heterogeneity was reduced [I 2 = 16 %]. The sRR (95 % CI) of stroke for rosiglitazone versus pioglitazone was 1.18 (1.02–1.36) [I 2 = 42 %]. There was strong evidence of heterogeneity related to study quality in the comparisons of rosiglitazone versus metformin and rosiglitazone versus sulfonylureas (I 2 ≥ 70 %). The sRR (95 % CI) of AMI for sulfonylurea versus metformin was 1.24 (1.14–1.34) [I 2 = 41 %] and for pioglitazone versus metformin was 1.02 (0.75–1.38) [I 2 = 17 %]. Sensitivity analyses decreased heterogeneity in most comparisons. Sulfonylureas increased the risk of AMI by 24 % compared with metformin; an imprecise point estimate indicated no difference in risk of AMI when comparing pioglitazone with metformin. The presence of heterogeneity precluded any conclusions on the other comparisons. The quality assessment was valuable in identifying methodological problems in the individual studies and for analysing potential sources of heterogeneity.

Purpose To validate ICD 9 codes with a high positive predictive value (PPV) for incident strokes. The study population consisted of Tennessee Medicaid enrollees aged from 50 to 84 years. Methods We identified all patients who were hospitalized with a discharge diagnosis of stroke between 1999 and 2003 using highly specific codes (ischemic stroke ICD 9-CM codes 433.x1, 434 [excluding 434.x0], or 436; intracerebral hemorrhage [431]; and subarachnoid hemorrhage [430]). We reviewed medical records of a systematic sample of 250 cohort members. We randomly selected 10–30 eligible records for review from hospitals with at least 10 stroke hospitalizations. Results We reviewed 231 charts (93% of total sampled), and 205 (89%) met study criteria for new outpatient stroke. Of the 205 confirmed new outpatient strokes, 196 had stroke listed as the primary discharge diagnosis (PPV = 96%). However, 46 (23%) of the 196 patients identified by the primary diagnosis also had a remote stroke history (recurrent stroke not incident). Thus the PPV of the primary discharge diagnosis for identifying incident stroke decreased to 74%. When we applied an algorithm that restricted our population to those with stroke as the primary diagnosis and excluded patients with any prior outpatient diagnosis of stroke, we identified incident stroke events with more precision (PPV = 80%). Conclusion The PPV of incident strokes was 80% using our strategy of primary discharge diagnosis and excluding prior outpatient diagnoses of stroke. Although an unknown percentage of incident strokes are missed, this group of proven incident stroke patients can be used for etiologic studies of medication exposures. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Objectives: To estimate the risk of a first hospital admission for heart failure (HF) associated with the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Methods: Cohort study with a nested case–control analysis based on the UK General Practice Research Database. Overall, 1396 cases of first hospital admission for non-fatal HF were identified (January 1997 to December 2000) and compared with a random sample of 5000 controls. Results: The incidence rate was 2.7/1000 person years. Prior clinical diagnosis of HF was the main independent risk factor triggering a first HF hospitalisation (relative risk 7.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.1 to 8.8). The risk of a first hospital admission for HF associated with current use of NSAIDs was 1.3 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.6) after controlling for major confounding factors. No effects of dose and duration were found. The relative risk in current users of NSAIDs with prior HF was 8.6 (95% CI 5.3 to 13.8) compared with patients who did not use NSAIDs and without prior clinical diagnosis of HF. Conclusion: Use of NSAIDs was associated with a small increase in risk of a first hospitalisation for HF. In patients with prior clinical diagnosis of HF, the use of NSAIDs may lead to worsening of pre-existing HF that triggers their hospital admission. This increased risk, although small, may result in considerable public health impact, particularly among the elderly.

Purpose To estimate the prevalence of glucose metabolism abnormalities, including diabetes, and its associated cardiovascular risk factors and co-morbidity in the US elderly population. Methods Cross-sectional analysis of data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III, 1988–1994) in adults aged 65 years and more. The 1997 American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the 1998 World Health Organization (WHO) criteria were used to classify the subject's glucose metabolism status. The 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed only among those participants aged 40 to 74 years. Results The age-adjusted prevalence of diagnosed diabetes was 12.5% (95% CI: 11.4%–13.6%) among US adults aged 65 years or more. According to the ADA definition 40% of men and 28% of women were affected by some degree of glucose metabolism impairment. According to the WHO definition, 55% of men and 50% of women aged 65 to 74 years were affected by glucose metabolism abnormalities. Mexican-Americans were the most affected under both definitions (51% and 77%, respectively). Overall, 72% of elderly diagnosed diabetics had hypertension, 28% had coronary heart disease (CHD), 47% suffered from cardiovascular disease and 80% of them presented known CHD or multiple coronary risk factors, other than age, level of LDL-cholesterol and diabetes. Under both definitions, a trend towards a worsening coronary risk profile with increased glucose metabolism impairment was observed. Conclusion A notable proportion of elderly people is affected by some degree of glucose metabolism impairment which in turn is associated with cardiovascular co-morbidity. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Objetivo Estudio de la morbimortalidad coronaria y la mortalidad total asociadas al colesterol plasmatico, presion arterial, glucemia, consumo de cigarrillos e indice de masa corporal en el examen inicial de una cohorte de varones seguida durante 28 anos Plan de investigacion y metodos Se ha estudiado una cohorte de 1.059 varones de 30-59 anos, libres de cardiopatia en el examen inicial (1968), que han sido reexaminados cada 5 anos hasta 1988. El examen final se realizo en 1996. Durante el tiempo de seguimiento se obtuvo informacion del 96,4% del total de los participantes Resultados Las tasas de incidencia y mortalidad coronaria y de mortalidad total por 105 personas/anos de observacion (pao) fueron 499,80, 235,80 y 925,33, respectivamente. Los valores elevados de colesterol y el consumo habitual de cigarrillos estaban asociados con la incidencia y la mortalidad coronaria, ajustado por la edad, presion arterial, glucemia y el indice de masa corporal. Los valores elevados de colesterol, glucemia y consumo de cigarrillos se asociaron independientemente con el riesgo de muerte por todas las causas Conclusiones En esta cohorte, con tasas relativamentebajas de incidencia y mortalidad coronaria, el consumode cigarrillos y el valor de colesterol plasmatico inicialesse asociaron de manera independiente con laenfermedad coronaria. Esta asociacion se ha mantenidoa lo largo de 28 anos de seguimiento

The risk of a newly diagnosed episode of upper gastrointestinal bleeding, acute liver and renal failure, agranulocytosis, aplastic anemia, severe skin disorders, and anaphylaxis was examined within 30 days after the first prescription for a low dose of diclofenac, naproxen, or ibuprofen in a cohort in the United Kingdom. We identified 22,146 persons using diclofenac (< or = 75 mg), 46,919 using naproxen (< or = 750 mg), and 54,830 using ibuprofen (< or = 1200 mg). Age, gender, and comorbidity were similar in the three cohorts. Overall 64 potential cases were identified, and 20 were confirmed by medical record review. Incidence rates (95% CI) of upper gastrointestinal bleeding/10,000 people using diclofenac, naproxen, and ibuprofen were 1.8 (0.5-4.6), 2.3 (1.2-4.2), and 0.4 (0.04-1.3), respectively. There were three cases of hepatic injury, one with naproxen and two with ibuprofen. Although low, the incidence of gastrointestinal toxicity remains the main serious adverse event for all study drugs.

Objective To conduct a systematic review of observational studies on the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with use of individual nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Methods A search of Medline (PubMed) for observational studies published from 1990 to 2011 identified 3829 articles; 31 reported relative risk (RR) of AMI with use of individual NSAIDs versus nonuse of NSAIDs. Information abstracted in a standardized form from 25 publications was used for the meta-analysis on 18 independent study populations. Results Random-effects RR (95% confidence interval (CI)) was lowest for naproxen 1.06 (0.94–1.20), followed by celecoxib 1.12 (1.00–1.24), ibuprofen 1.14 (0.98–1.31), meloxicam 1.25 (1.04–1.49), rofecoxib 1.34 (1.22–1.48), diclofenac 1.38 (1.26–1.52), indometacin 1.40 (1.21–1.62), etodolac 1.55 (1.16–2.06), and etoricoxib 1.97 (1.35–2.89). Heterogeneity between studies was present. For new users, RRs (95% CIs) were for naproxen, 0.85 (0.73–1.00); ibuprofen, 1.20 (0.97–1.48); celecoxib, 1.23 (1.00–1.52); diclofenac, 1.41 (1.08–1.86); and rofecoxib, 1.43 (1.21–1.66). Except for naproxen, higher risk was generally associated with higher doses, as defined in each study, overall and in patients with prior coronary heart disease. Low and high doses of diclofenac and rofecoxib were associated with high risk of AMI, with dose–response relationship for rofecoxib. In patients with prior coronary heart disease, except for naproxen, duration of use ≤3 months was associated with an increased risk of AMI. Conclusions Most frequently NSAIDs used in clinical practice, except naproxen, are associated with an increased risk of AMI at high doses or in persons with diagnosed coronary heart disease. For diclofenac and rofecoxib, the risk was increased at low and high doses. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Background: The risk of upper gastrointestinal (GI) complications associated with the use of NSAIDs is a serious public health concern. The risk varies between individual NSAIDs; however, there is little information on the risk associated with some NSAIDs and on the impact of risk factors. These data are necessary to evaluate the benefit-risk of individual NSAIDs for clinical and health policy decision making. Within the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme, the Safety Of non-Steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) [SOS] project aims to develop decision models for regulatory and clinical use of individual NSAIDs according to their GI and cardiovascular safety. Objective: The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies to provide summary relative risks (RR) of upper GI complications (UGIC) associated with the use of individual NSAIDs, including selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. Methods: We used the MEDLINE database to identify cohort and case-control studies published between 1 January 1980 and 31 May 2011, providing adjusted effect estimates for UGIC comparing individual NSAIDs with non-use of NSAIDs. We estimated pooled RR and 95% CIs of UGIC for individual NSAIDs overall and by dose using fixed- and random-effects methods. Subgroup analyses were conducted to evaluate methodological and clinical heterogeneity between studies. Results: A total of 2984 articles were identified and 59 were selected for data abstraction. After review of the abstracted information, 28 studies met the meta-analysis inclusion criteria. Pooled RR ranged from 1.43 (95% CI 0.65, 3.15) for aceclofenac to 18.45 (95% CI 10.99, 30.97) for azapropazone. RR was less than 2 for aceclofenac, celecoxib (RR 1.45; 95% CI 1.17, 1.81) and ibuprofen (RR 1.84; 95% CI 1.54, 2.20); 2 to less than 4 for rofecoxib (RR 2.32; 95% CI 1.89, 2.86), sulindac (RR 2.89; 95% CI 1.90, 4.42), diclofenac (RR 3.34; 95% CI 2.79, 3.99), meloxicam (RR 3.47; 95% CI 2.19, 5.50), nimesulide (RR 3.83; 95% CI 3.20, 4.60) and ketoprofen (RR 3.92; 95% CI 2.70, 5.69); 4–5 for tenoxicam (RR 4.10; 95% CI 2.16, 7.79), naproxen (RR 4.10; 95% CI 3.22, 5.23), indometacin (RR 4.14; 95% CI 2.91, 5.90) and diflunisal (RR 4.37; 95% CI 1.07, 17.81); and greater than 5 for piroxicam (RR 7.43; 95% CI 5.19, 10.63), ketorolac (RR 11.50; 95% CI 5.56, 23.78) and azapropazone. RRs for the use of high daily doses of NSAIDs versus non-use were 2-3 times higher than those associated with low daily doses. Conclusions: We confirmed variability in the risk of UGIC among individual NSAIDs as used in clinical practice. Factors influencing findings across studies (e.g. definition and validation of UGIC, exposure assessment, analysis of new vs prevalent users) and the scarce data on the effect of dose and duration of use of NSAIDs and on concurrent use of other medications need to be addressed in future studies, including SOS.

Limited information from spontaneous reports and results of two case-control studies raised concern about the cardiotoxicity of oral domperidone therapy. This case-control study nested in a retrospective cohort evaluated the combined risk of serious ventricular arrhythmia (SVA) and sudden cardiac death (SCD) in users of domperidone compared with users of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), or non-users of these medications.A cohort of users of domperidone or a PPI from 1990 to 2005 was identified from existing electronic databases of Saskatchewan Health. Possible cases of SVA/SCD were identified using hospital discharge and vital statistics codes. SVA cases were validated by cardiologist review of abstracted hospital medical charts. Up to four controls were matched to each case by index date, year of birth, sex, and diabetes status. The odds ratio (OR) of current domperidone exposure relative to non-use or to current PPI exposure was estimated and adjusted for possible confounding variables using conditional logistic regression.From 83 212 individuals in the exposure cohort we identified 1608 cases, 49 SVA and 1559 SCD (mean age 79.4 years, females 52.9%, diabetes 22.3%) and 6428 matched controls. The adjusted OR for SVA/SCD with current domperidone use compared with non-use was (1.59, 95%CI: 1.28-1.98), or compared with current PPI use was (1.44, 95%CI: 1.12-1.86). In stratified analyses adjusted ORs were numerically higher in males, older subjects, and non-diabetics.The increased risk of SVA/SCD for current domperidone users remained after adjustment for multiple covariates. The risk may vary among subgroups of exposed individuals.

Background— The cardiovascular safety of individual nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is highly controversial, particularly in persons with serious coronary heart disease. Methods and Results— We conducted a multisite retrospective cohort study of commonly used individual NSAIDs in Tennessee Medicaid, Saskatchewan Health, and United Kingdom General Practice Research databases. The cohort included 48566 patients recently hospitalized for myocardial infarction, revascularization, or unstable angina pectoris with more than 111000 person-years of follow-up. Naproxen users had the lowest adjusted rates of serious coronary heart disease (myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease death) and serious cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction, stroke)/death from any cause, with respective incidence rate ratios (relative to NSAID nonusers) of 0.88 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.17) and 0.91 (0.78 to 1.06). Risk did not increase with doses ≥1000 mg. Relative to NSAID nonusers, serious coronary heart disease risk increased with short term (P =0.076) and serious cardiovascular disease/death (1.52 [1.22 to 1.89], P =0.0002), and those of ibuprofen had increased risk of the latter end point (1.25 [1.02 to 1.53], P =0.032). Compared to naproxen in doses ≥1000 mg, serious coronary heart disease incidence rate ratios were increased for rofecoxib >25 mg (2.29 [1.24 to 4.22], P =0.008) and celecoxib >200 mg (1.61 [1.01 to 2.57], P =0.046). Conclusions— In patients recently hospitalized for serious coronary heart disease, naproxen had better cardiovascular safety than did diclofenac, ibuprofen, and higher doses of celecoxib and rofecoxib.

Background Meta-analyses of observational studies show variability in the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) among non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), with an increase in risk for rofecoxib and diclofenac, and no increase in risk for celecoxib, naproxen, or ibuprofen. Methods and Results We identified a cohort of 364 658 individuals aged 40–84 years who were enrolled in Saskatchewan Health, Canada, from 15 November 1999 to 31 December 2001. A nested case–control analysis compared 3252 incident cases of hospitalized AMI and out-of-hospital CHD deaths with 20 002 controls randomly sampled from the cohort. The incidence of AMI/CHD was 5.1 per 1000 person-years (95%CI: 5.0–5.3). The adjusted ORs (95%CI) of AMI/CHD in current users of individual NSAIDs compared with non-use were: celecoxib (1.11; 0.84–1.47), rofecoxib (1.32; 0.91–1.91), diclofenac (1.02; 0.75–1.38), naproxen (1.57; 0.98–2.52), ibuprofen (1.59; 0.88–2.89), and indomethacin (1.34; 0.81–2.19). Long-term use of rofecoxib was compatible with an increased risk (OR = 1.46; 0.97–2.22) while estimates of other individual NSAIDs were close to unity. Overall NSAID use was associated with a 30% increased risk of nonfatal AMI but was absent for fatal AMI/CHD. Conclusions This study showed a modest increased risk of AMI/CHD with various traditional NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors. Confidence intervals of estimated ORs included the null value for most comparisons. The study confirmed that the differentiation between traditional NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors is not a reliable tool for predicting cardiovascular risk associated with NSAIDs. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Background Case definitions are essential to epidemiological research. Objectives To evaluate ICD-9 codes 410 and 411 to identify cases of acute coronary syndromes (ACS), and the clinical information availability in the administrative and hospital discharge records of Saskatchewan, Canada. Methods In the context of a safety cohort study, we identified hospitalisations with primary discharge codes 410 (2260) and 411 (799). We selected all records with code 411, and a random sample (200) with code 410. Based on information obtained by trained abstractors from hospital records, events were classified by two cardiologists as definite or possible according to adapted AHA/ESC criteria. The validity of 410 and 411 codes was assessed by calculating the positive predictive value (PPV). Completeness of the recorded information on risk factors and use of aspirin was explored. Results The PPVs of the codes 410 and 411 for ACS were 0.96 (95%CI: 0. 92–0.98) and 0.86 (95%CI: 0.83–0.88), respectively. The PPV of 410 for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) was 0.95 (95%CI: 0.91–0.98). The PPV of 411 was 0.73 (95%CI: 0.70–0.77) for primary unstable angina (UA) and 0.09 (95%CI: 0.07–0.11) for AMI. Hospital charts review revealed key information for clinical variables, smoking, obesity and use of aspirin at admission. Conclusions ICD-9 410 code has high PPV for AMI cases, likewise 411 for UA cases. Case validation remains important in epidemiological studies with administrative health databases. Given the pathophysiology of ACS, both AMI and UA might be used as study end points. In addition to code 410, we recommend the use of 411 plus validation. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Purpose To estimate the net cardiovascular (CV) (coronary heart disease, stroke, congestive heart failure), and gastrointestinal (GI) (peptic ulcer complications) risk-benefit public health impact of the use of celecoxib compared to non-selective NSAIDs in the arthritis population. Methods We applied discrete event simulation models to data from the US National Health Surveys, CV risk-prediction models from the Framingham Heart Study, and population-based studies. Models took into account the multifactorial effect of risk factors, comorbidity, and competing risk of mortality. We simulated the natural history of CV and GI disease in the U.S. arthritis population over 1 year, through the individual baseline cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risk profile. This model was modified with relative risks associated with the use of each treatment. The mean number of events was estimated for each end-point in each model: natural history, celecoxib, diclofenac, ibuprofen, naproxen. The number of events for celecoxib was compared with each NSAID. Results The evaluation included 1% of the U.S. population with arthritis. Celecoxib, when applied to 100 000 patients over 1 year, resulted in 570 (range from sensitivity analysis: 440–691), 226 (124–313), and 746 (612–868) fewer ulcer complications than diclofenac, ibuprofen, and naproxen, respectively. There were 20 (16–25), 8 (4–12), and 27 (22–32) fewer deaths from ulcer complications, respectively. No increase in cardiovascular events or all cause mortality was observed for celecoxib versus the other individual NSAIDs. Conclusion Results from these simulations suggest a gastrointestinal benefit for celecoxib not offset by increased cardiovascular events or mortality. The methodology used here provides a risk-benefit assessment framework for evaluating the public heath impact of drugs. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Whether non-aspirin non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) affect the risk of myocardial infarction is unclear. Also, it is unknown whether the effect varies by individual NSAIDs. To summarize the evidence from published observational studies on the risk of myocardial infarction associated with both traditional NSAIDs (tNSAIDs) and selective inhibitors of cyclooxygenase-2 (Coxibs), the authors conducted a systematic review of cohort and case-control studies on NSAIDs and myocardial infarction published between 2000 and 2005. Sixteen original studies were selected according to predefined criteria. Two researchers independently extracted the data on individual study characteristics and results. The authors calculated pooled relative risk (RR) estimates of myocardial infarction for specific NSAIDs compared with no NSAID use, tested the heterogeneity of effects, and evaluated potential reasons for heterogeneity. The pooled RR of myocardial infarction was 0.98 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.92-1.05) for naproxen, 1.07 (95% CI: 1.02-1.12) for ibuprofen, 1.44 (95% CI: 1.32-1.56) for diclofenac, 0.96 (95% CI: 0.90-1.02) for celecoxib, and 1.26 (95% CI: 1.17-1.36) for rofecoxib (all doses). The pooled RR for rofecoxib at doses >25 mg/day was 1.78 (95% CI: 1.36-2.34), and 1.18 (95% CI: 1.07-1.31) for doses < or =25 mg/day. The RR associated with naproxen was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.72-0.90) among non-users of low-dose aspirin. The RR associated with rofecoxib (all doses) was 1.39 (95% CI: 1.25-1.54) among subjects without a history of myocardial infarction. The risk of myocardial infarction varies with individual NSAIDs. An increased risk was observed for diclofenac and rofecoxib, the latter one with a clear dose-response trend. There was a suggestion of a small increased risk with ibuprofen. Also, data suggest a small reduced risk for naproxen present only in non-users of aspirin, mainly people free of clinically apparent vascular disease.

Introduction A few epidemiological studies suggested an increased coronary heart disease (CHD) risk with high doses of oral corticosteroids. Methods We performed a cohort study with nested case-control analysis to estimate the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) associated with the use of oral corticosteroids by dose and duration. We followed-up 404,183 persons, 50–84 years old, without cancer from the general UK population. After validation of a random sample (confirmation rate of 96%), we included 4795 hospitalised cases of AMI or CHD deaths. We randomly sampled 20,000 controls, frequency matched by sex, age and calendar year. Relative risks were estimated using unconditional logistic regression. Results The adjusted OR for AMI in current users of oral corticosteroids compared to non-users was 1.42 (95% CI: 1.17–1.72). The risk during the first 30 days of use (OR = 2.24; 95% CI: 1.56–3.20) was greater than with longer duration (OR = 1.22; 95% CI 0.98–1.52). The risk was more pronounced (OR = 2.15; 95% CI 1.45–3.14) among users of prednisolone equivalent doses >10 mg/day. The dose effect was observed both among patients with and without CHD or COPD/asthma. Conclusion These results suggest a small increased risk of AMI with oral corticosteroid use with a greater risk observed among users of high corticosteroid dose.

To Study the incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD) and all-cause mortality in a cohort of men followed during 28 years, and their association with serum cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, glycemia, cigarette smoking and body mass index measured at baseline.A cohort of 1,059 men aged 30 to 59 years and free of cardiovascular diseases at baseline in 1968, was reexamined every five years until 1988. The last examination was performed in 1996. Information was collected on 96.4% of the participants.Incidence and mortality rates from CHD and from all-causes of death per 10(5) person-years of observation were 499.80, 235.80 y 925.33, respectively. At the end of follow-up, high levels of serum cholesterol and smoking were independently associated with the incidence and mortality from CHD controlling by age, blood pressure, glycemia and BMI. Serum cholesterol, hyperglycemia and smoking were independently associated with all-cause mortality.In this industrial cohort of men, with relative low incidence of CHD, smoking and serum cholesterol at baseline remained associated with the incidence of CHD through 28 years of observation.

Background— Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are reversible inhibitors of cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 and COX-2. Whether transient and incomplete COX-1 inhibition with NSAIDs other than aspirin will translate into clinical cardioprotection is unclear. Some reports suggest that concurrent aspirin and ibuprofen might be associated with lower cardioprotection than aspirin alone because of a pharmacodynamic interaction. Methods and Results— —We conducted a cohort study with a nested case-control analysis. Overall, 4975 cases of acute myocardial infarction (MI) and death from coronary heart disease (CHD) were identified (January 1997 to December 2000) in the UK. A total of 20 000 controls were randomly sampled, and frequency was matched to cases by age, sex, and calendar year. The incidence rate was 5.0 per 1000 person-years. The multivariate-adjusted OR for current NSAID use compared with nonuse was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.95 to 1.20). Treatment duration or daily dose did not change the results. The effect was similar among patients free of CHD history (1.04; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.20) and patients with previous history (1.12; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.38). Estimates for individual NSAIDs were all comparable, with no major effect on the risk of acute MI. Naproxen was associated with an OR of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.64 to 1.24). The OR of aspirin and concurrent NSAIDs use was 1.10 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.37) compared with aspirin alone. We observed the same result when analyzing ibuprofen and aspirin taken concomitantly. Conclusions— This study could not demonstrate any detectable risk reduction of NSAIDs on the occurrence of MI. Our results do not support the existence of a clinically meaningful interaction between aspirin and NSAIDs, including ibuprofen.

Background —Epidemiological studies suggest a decreased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) in healthy women taking hormonal replacement therapy (HRT). Whether this effect is shared by oral and transdermal preparations is unknown. Methods and Results —We conducted a population-based case-control study nested in a cohort of women 50 to 74 years of age without cardiovascular disease history in the United Kingdom. Among 164 769 women from the General Practice Research Database (January 1, 1991, to December 31, 1995), we identified 1242 first acute myocardial infarctions (AMI) and confirmed 1013 after medical record review. We randomly selected 5000 age-frequency–matched control subjects. AMI incidence was 1.6 per 1000 person-years; 13% and 17% of cases and control subjects used HRT within 6 months before the index date. Risk factor and comorbidity–adjusted OR of AMI for current-recent HRT users compared with nonusers was 0.72 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.89). The OR was similar within 30 days before the index date. The beneficial effect was present after 1 year of use (OR 0. 68; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.86), with no increase in risk within the first year. ORs for unopposed and opposed therapy were 0.52 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.78) and 0.79 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.08); 79% and 21% used oral and transdermal therapy. The protective effect was present at medium-high doses of estrogens with ORs for oral and transdermal therapy of 0.63 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.86) and 0.62 (95% CI 0.37 to 1.06) and ceased after 2 to 3 years since stopping HRT. Conclusions —Results are consistent with those previously reported in women without CHD who were taking oral HRT and, although based on few users, suggest that transdermal therapy might have similar cardioprotective effects.

Sequential angiographic follow-up is needed for interpretating coronary events that occur after successful percutaneous translumial coronary angioplasty (PTCA). One hundred eight consecutive patients who had undergone successful dilatation were followed for 10 years, and quantitative sequential angiograms were recorded at 6 months (n = 101) and 10 years (n = 68). The 10-year event rate was: 5.8 ± 2.4% for cardiac death, 9.7 ± 3.3.% for Q-wave acute myocardial infarction, 18.3 ± 4.5% for additional surgery, and 22.4 ± 4.9% for repeated angioplasty. Using Cox’s proportional-hazards regression, multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) (RR 5.6; 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.2 to 24.7; p = 0.02), restenosis within 6 months (RR 7.8; 95% CI 3.1 to 20.0; p = 0.0001), and CAD progression over 10 years (RR 10.6; 95% CI 1.3 to 87.1; p = 0.004) were the strongest predictors of all-cause death, repeated PTCA, and additional surgery, respectively, after controlling for age and coronary risk factors. The minimal luminal diameter of 48 narrowings with complete sequential angiographic follow-up and without restenosis remained stable from 6 months (2.13 ± 0.60 mm) to 10 years (2.18 ± 0.61 mm). Disease progression was similar in nondilated arteries and dilated arteries (32% vs 30%). The 10-year risk of coronary events was higher in patients with baseline multivessel CAD than in those with 1-vessel CAD because of more frequent progression of CAD (RR 3.8; 95% CI 1.6 to 6.8; p = 0.001). Thus, early cardiac events after successful PTCA were related to restenosis, and late events to CAD progression. Nevertheless, after the restenosis period, the target lesion remained stable for the next 10 years. Coronary disease progression was not related to the angioplasty procedure.

The authors evaluated the risk of venous thromboembolism associated with hormone replacement therapy in a cohort of 265,431 women aged 45-79 years who did not have major risk factors for venous thromboembolism. Through review of hospital charts, 171 cases were confirmed (pulmonary embolism = 77; deep venous thrombosis = 94). Ten thousand controls were randomly sampled. The risk of venous thromboembolism among nonusers of hormone replacement therapy was 1.3 per 10,000 women per year. Current users of hormone replacement therapy had 2.3 times higher risk of venous thromboembolism (95 percent confidence interval 1.0-5.3) compared with nonusers. The increased risk was restricted to the first year of treatment.

Background Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are at high risk of heart failure. A summary of the effects of blood glucose-lowering drugs other than glitazones on the risk of heart failure in routine clinical practice is lacking. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies on the risk of heart failure when using blood glucose-lowering drugs. Methods We systematically identified and reviewed cohort and case–control studies in which the main exposure of interest was noninsulin blood glucose-lowering medications in patients with T2DM. We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify publications meeting prespecified eligibility criteria. The quality of included studies was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the RTI item bank. Results were combined using fixed and random-effects models when at least 3 independent data points were available for a drug-drug comparison. Results The summary relative risk of heart failure in rosiglitazone users versus pioglitazone users (95% CI) was 1.16 (1.05-1.28) (5 cohort studies). Heterogeneity was present (I2 = 66%). For new users (n = 4) the summary relative risk was 1.21 (1.14-1.30) and the heterogeneity was reduced (I2 = 31%);. The summary relative risk for rosiglitazone versus metformin was 1.36 (95% CI, 1.17-1.59) (n = 3). The summary relative risk (95% CI) of heart failure in sulfonylureas users versus metformin users was 1.17 (95% CI, 1.06-1.29) (5 cohort studies; I2 = 24%) and 1.22 (1.02-1.46) when restricted to new users (2 studies). Information on other comparisons was very scarce. Information on dose and duration of treatment effects was lacking for most comparisons. Few studies accounted for disease severity; therefore, confounding by indication might be present in the majority of the within-study comparisons of this meta-analysis. Conclusions Use of glitazones and sulfonylureas was associated with an increased risk of heart failure compared with metformin use. However, indication bias cannot be ruled out. Ongoing large multidatabase studies will help to evaluate the risk of heart failure in treated patients with diabetes, including those using newer blood glucose-lowering therapies. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2261-14-129) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.