Electronic medical records-based retrospective, longitudinal, observational study to understand the patient management of benign prostatic hyperplasia with alpha-blockers monotherapy in Indian population.

Objective: The present retrospective study evaluates the effectiveness and tolerability of alpha-blockers as monotherapy in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia associated with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Materials and Methods: A total of 335 male patients >50 years were categorized into four groups (Alfuzosin: 166, Silodosin: 67, Tamsulosin: 70, Prazosin: 32). The efficacy evaluated as a change in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), peak flow rate (Qmax), residual urine volume, and relief from LUTS, and tolerability of the various alpha-blockers was assessed across the study group. Results: At baseline, most of the patients in alfuzosin (60%), silodosin (77%), and tamsulosin (90%) groups presented with severe IPSS (20-35), whereas patients in the prazosin group (69%) presented with a moderate score. At the end of the study, the mean IPSS gradually improved to moderate (41%, 62%, 66%, and 28%) and mild (59%, 38%, 28%, and 72%) in the alfuzosin, silodosin, tamsulosin, and prazosin groups, respectively (P = 0.004), with improvement in mean change in residual urine volume and complete relief from LUTS symptoms with no surgical or radiological interventions. Overall, 194 adverse events (AEs) were observed in 38.8% of patients. Of the total AEs, patients in the alfuzosin, silodosin, tamsulosin, and prazosin groups experienced 21%, 22%, 39%, and 18% of AEs, respectively. Conclusion: The nonselective alpha-adrenergic receptor antagonist, alfuzosin, emerged as noninferior in effectiveness and superior in tolerability than other selective alpha-blockers, silodosin, tamsulosin, and prazosin.

Evaluation of Effectiveness and Tolerability of Fondaparinux in the Management of Symptomatic Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Real-World Evidence-Based Study on an Indian Population.

INTRODUCTION: Fondaparinux is a low molecular weight heparin anticoagulant used to manage the full spectrum of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients and has proved its efficacy and safety in multiple clinical trials. However, there are limited data available showing whether the same results could be reproduced in real-world practice on an Indian population. Our objective was to determine the effectiveness and tolerability of fondaparinux in the management of symptomatic ACS in real-world clinical practice. METHODS: The EMR data of hospitalized ACS patients (n = 611), from January 2015 to January 2020, representing UA or NSTEMI or STEMI and were prescribed fondaparinux (2.5 mg once daily) to manage ACS were analyzed. The effectiveness was analyzed as recurrence of ACS and tolerability as total incidence of major bleeding during hospitalization, at 30 days and 180 days. Appropriate statistical analysis was used with a statistically significance of p value < 0.05. RESULTS: The incidence of recurrent ACS was not seen during hospitalization and in the first 30 days, while in only 0.65% (n = 4) patients, ACS reoccurred within 180 days. In a mean duration of 172.75 ± 3.20 days, UA was reported in 0.49% (n = 3) patients, NSTEMI in 0.16% (n = 1) of patients, and STEMI was not documented. None of the major bleeding events occurred during the entire study period, whereas minor bleeding events were reported during hospitalization 0.98% (n = 6) and at 30 days 0.16% (n = 1). The bleeding events were statistically insignificant (p value > 0.05). No incidences of stent thrombosis were reported during the entire study period. CONCLUSIONS: In the real world, fondaparinux was found to be effective and tolerable when used to manage symptomatic ACS patients regardless of revascularization procedure with no incidence of stent thrombosis, and minimal recurrent ACS and insignificant increase in bleeding events.

Role of Lactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 on Crying Time Reduction in Infantile Colic and Its Impact on Maternal Depression: A Real-Life Clinic-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Infantile colic is characterized by prolonged periods of inconsolable, incessant crying and persistent fussing in an otherwise healthy infant. It is a self-limiting condition, but causes significant stress to mothers. AIM: To observe the role of Lactobacillus reuteriDSM 17938 in reducing crying time in colicky infants in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This was a prospective observational multicentric clinic-based study. Each practitioner included approximately 30 infants < 5 months of age with infantile colic who were prescribed L. reuteri DSM 17938 for a period of 21 days. There were four physical consultations and two telephonic consultations. The parents were given a daily diary to record the duration of crying and fussing episodes and a questionnaire was administered during the consultations. RESULTS: A total of 120 infants with a mean age of 56.9 ± 34.2 days were included in this 28-day study. The mean crying time as reported by the parents in the subject diary reduced from 248.2 ± 101.2 min, 95% CI: 229.45, 266.94 at baseline to 45.6 ± 79.1 min 95% CI: 31.02, 60.31 at study end (P < 0.01). The clinical response (defined as reduction of 50% in crying time) was observed in 85% of subjects at study end. The fussiness and parental perception of colic recorded during the consultations were reduced by 66% and 72%, respectively, at study end. The maternal depression scores were reduced to 63% at study end. CONCLUSION: L. reuteri DSM 17938 was associated with a significant reduction in crying time in colicky infants, and showed improvement in maternal depression.

Effectiveness and Tolerability of Fondaparinux vs Enoxaparin in a Population of Indian Patients with Symptomatic Deep Vein Thrombosis: A Retrospective Real-World Study.

BACKGROUND: Fondaparinux is the first approved anticoagulant drug among factor Xa inhibitors, with proven effectiveness and safety in preventing deep vein thrombosis. However, limited data are available supporting the benefit-risk profile of fondaparinux vs enoxaparin in a real-world group of Indian patients with deep vein thrombosis. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of fondaparinux vs enoxaparin in patients with symptomatic deep vein thrombosis in a long-term real-world setting. METHODS: Data from the electronic medical records of adult patients diagnosed with deep vein thrombosis prescribed fondaparinux (n = 503) or enoxaparin (n = 508) as monotherapy were analyzed. Effectiveness was analyzed in terms of recurrence, duration, and type of deep vein thrombosis event, and tolerability as bleeding events at initial hospitalization and follow-up visits up to 3 months duration. Appropriate statistical methods were used to determine the significance (p < 0.05) between the two groups. RESULTS: The deep vein thrombosis recurrence in the fondaparinux group was non-inferior (2.78%) when compared with enoxaparin (3.76%), with a mean duration of 47 and 48 days, respectively. The number of events and mean duration of events (in days) were not significant (p > 0.05). Major bleeding events were higher in the enoxaparin group at 3.17% than the fondaparinux group at 2.19%, and the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The weight-based, once-daily subcutaneous fondaparinux dose showed non-inferior effectiveness and a comparable tolerability profile when compared with the twice-daily enoxaparin dose for the management of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis.

Retrospective, Observational Study to Determine the Choice of Antihypertensive agent According to Stage of Hypertension, Risk factors and Co-morbidities in Real World Setting in India: A Report of Baseline Data.

BACKGROUND: The present study intended to estimate the comorbidities and risk factors among patients with hypertension in India. Further, the current practice of hypertension management was evaluated and the choice of therapy was assessed based on hypertension grade, risk factors, and comorbidities. METHODS: Electronic medical record data (June 2017-June 2019) of Indian adult hypertensive patients (≥140/90 mmHg) who had two blood pressure (BP) readings were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic characteristics, BP readings, comorbidities, medications and co-medications, and laboratory data were collected at baseline. Grids based on hypertension grade (I, II, and III), demographic factors, risk factors, and comorbidities were created and prescribed antihypertensive drugs (AHDs) in each grid were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 100,075 patients, the proportion of patients in 18-40 year, 40-65 year, and >65 year age groups were 11.4%, 65.1%, and 23.4%, respectively. Proportion of men and women was similar (52.0% vs 47.9%). Proportion of patients with BMI <25 Kg/m2 was 8.1%, 25-29.9 Kg/m2 was 11.9%, and >30 Kg/m2 was 8.8%. Mean BP of patients with hypertension was: grade I (145.05/90.73 mmHg), grade II (160.07/95.64 mmHg), and grade III (180.82/102.76 mmHg). Mean low density lipoprotein (113.26 mg/dL), serum creatinine (2.28 mg/dL), mean HbA1c (8.7%) levels were highest among patients with grade III hypertension. Commonly observed comorbidities were type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM: 51.5%), dyslipidemia (36.4%), and chronic kidney disease (CKD: 4.4%). Top concomitant medications included anti-diabetic therapies (34.6%), drugs for dyslipidemia (30.0%), and anti-platelet therapies (6.9%). CONCLUSION: Most prescribed AHD monotherapies were angiotensin receptor II blockers (ARBs) and calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and most prescribed combination therapies were ARBs + diuretics and ARBs + CCBs. Telmisartan and amlodipine+telmisartan for patients with comorbid T2DM or dyslipidemia and metoprolol for those with coronary artery disease were the commonly prescribed AHDs.

Demographic profile, clinical characteristics and medical management patterns of Indian coronary artery disease patients: a nationwide urban-based, real-world, retrospective, observational electronic medical record study- report of baseline data.

Background: This is the first detailed Indian electronic medical record (EMR)-based real-world observational study to understand the clinical characteristics, associated comorbidities/risk factors and treatment(s) of CAD patients across India.Methods: EMR data of adult Indians (aged ≥ 18 years) diagnosed with CAD was retrospectively analyzed.Results: The majority of the participants had stable IHD (93%), were men (68.5% in ACS, 59.8% in stable IHD), most common age group was 40-64 years in ACS (56.6%) and stable IHD (51.4%). Both are common in metros (ACS 52%, 62% stable IHD). There is a high frequency of hypertension (38.2% in ACS, 59% in stable IHD) and diabetes mellitus (32.3% in ACS, 57.6% in stable IHD). Most common treatments are antiplatelet drugs and lipid-lowering drugs (96%).Conclusions: In India, stable IHD is the most prevalent form in vast majority of patients. The patients with CAD are mostly males, are mainly located in metros and majority fall between the age group of 40-64. The major comorbidities are hypertension and diabetes mellitus. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics for CAD in India may not be similar to what is reported from the west. There is a significant difference in drug usage and adherence to guidelines in India for CAD.

Effectiveness of Telmisartan on Blood Pressure Control in Hypertensive Patients in India: A Real-World Retrospective Study from Electronic Medical Records.

INTRODUCTION: The effectiveness of telmisartan has been reported in Indian clinical trials; however, real-world data are limited. We aimed to provide real-world evidence regarding the effectiveness of telmisartan as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensive drugs (AHDs) in Indian patients with essential hypertension. METHODS: Electronic medical record data of adult patients diagnosed with essential hypertension (≥ 140/90 mmHg) and who were prescribed telmisartan as mono- or add-on therapy were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were classified according to the number of AHD classes prescribed on initiating telmisartan. Change in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) after a month of treatment and the proportion of patients who achieved treatment goals according to the 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension guidelines were evaluated. RESULTS: A majority (90.6%) of the 1304 patients included in the study were on telmisartan monotherapy or telmisartan + 1 AHD. The mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) change in the telmisartan monotherapy group was SBP (-13.3 [-14.6, -12.0] mmHg) and DBP (-7.2 [-7.9, -6.5] mmHg), and the mean (95% CI) change in the telmisartan + 1 AHD group was SBP (-10.8 [-13.1, -8.5] mmHg) and DBP (-6.5 [-7.7, -5.3] mmHg) (P < 0.001 for all). SBP and DBP goals were achieved by 35.9% and 47.3% of patients on telmisartan monotherapy and by 35.9% and 46.8% of patients on telmisartan + 1 AHD. Among patients with comorbid diabetes, the mean (95% CI) change in the telmisartan monotherapy group was SBP (-13.3 [-15.0, -11.6] mmHg) and DBP (-7.3 [-8.2, -6.5] mmHg), and the mean (95% CI) change in the telmisartan + 1 AHD group was SBP (-13.0 [-16.5, -9.5] mmHg) and DBP (-6.9 [-8.7, -5.1] mmHg) (P < 0.001 for all). SBP and DBP goals were achieved by 31.7% and 39.7% of patients on telmisartan monotherapy and by 31.9% and 41.8% of patients on telmisartan + 1 AHD. CONCLUSION: Telmisartan may be a good candidate for blood pressure control in Indian patients with essential hypertension and comorbidities.

Effectiveness of Amlodipine on Blood Pressure Control in Hypertensive Patients in India: A Real-World, Retrospective Study from Electronic Medical Records.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of amlodipine has been reported in clinical trials in India. However, real-world data on the effectiveness of amlodipine in India is limited. OBJECTIVE: To provide real-world evidence regarding the effectiveness of amlodipine as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensive drugs (AHDs) in Indian patients with essential hypertension. METHODS: Electronic medical record data of adult patients who were diagnosed with essential hypertension (≥ 140/90 mmHg) and were prescribed amlodipine as monotherapy or add-on therapy were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were classified based on the number of AHD classes prescribed on initiation of amlodipine. Change in systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure from baseline was the primary endpoint. Evaluation of proportion of patients who achieved treatment goals as per 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension guidelines was the secondary endpoint. Readings were obtained before initiating amlodipine and after at least a month of therapy with amlodipine. RESULTS: Among the 462 included patients, the majority (90.7%) were on amlodipine monotherapy or amlodipine + 1AHD. Mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) change in the amlodipine monotherapy group was: SBP (- 12.1 [- 14.9, - 9.3] mmHg) and DBP (- 7.5 [- 8.9, - 6.1] mmHg) and mean (95% CI) change in the amlodipine + 1AHD group was: SBP (- 17.8 [- 21.0, - 14.6] mmHg) and DBP (- 9.5 [- 11.0, - 8.0] mmHg) (P < 0.001 for all). SBP and DBP goals were achieved by 31.4% and 42.9% of patients on amlodipine monotherapy and by 38.9% and 51.8% of patients on amlodipine + 1AHD, respectively. Among patients aged ≤ 45 years, mean (95% CI) change in the amlodipine monotherapy group was: SBP (- 11.7 [- 16.0, - 7.4] mmHg; P < 0.001) and DBP (- 7.2 [- 9.7, - 4.7] mmHg; P < 0.001) and mean (95% CI) change in the amlodipine + 1AHD group was: SBP (- 14.6 [- 21.9, - 7.3] mmHg; P < 0.05) and DBP (- 10.6 [- 14.8, - 6.4] mmHg; P < 0.01). SBP and DBP goals were achieved by 35.4% and 33.8% of patients on amlodipine monotherapy and by 48.0% and 56.0% of patients on amlodipine + 1AHD, respectively. Among patients aged ≥ 65 years, mean (95% CI) change in the amlodipine monotherapy group was: SBP (- 13.9 [- 20.2, - 7.6] mmHg; P < 0.01) and DBP (- 8.5 [- 11.4, - 5.7] mmHg; P < 0.001) and mean (95% CI) change in the amlodipine + 1AHD group was: SBP (- 22.4 [- - 28.8, - 16.0] mmHg; P < 0.001) and DBP (- 10.8 [- 14.0, - 7.6] mmHg; P < 0.001). SBP and DBP goals were achieved by 25.5% and 13.7% of patients on amlodipine monotherapy and by 29.8% and 14.0% of patients on amlodipine + 1AHD. CONCLUSION: Amlodipine prescribed as monotherapy or add-on therapy during routine clinical practice significantly reduced BP in ≤ 45- and ≥ 65-year-old Indian patients with mild to moderate hypertension, emphasizing that amlodipine may be a good candidate for BP control in Indian patients with essential hypertension in these age groups.

Effectiveness of Olmesartan on Blood Pressure Control in Hypertensive Patients in India: A Real World, Retrospective, Observational Study from Electronic Medical Records.

BACKGROUND: Real-world data on the effectiveness of antihypertensive drugs (AHDs) in India is limited. The present study aims to provide updated evidence regarding the effectiveness of olmesartan as monotherapy or in combination with other AHDs in Indian patients with essential hypertension. METHODS: Electronic medical record data of adult patients who were diagnosed with essential hypertension (≥140/90 mmHg) and were prescribed olmesartan as mono- or add-on therapy were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were classified based on the number of AHD classes prescribed on initiation of olmesartan. Change in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) from baseline was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoint was evaluation of proportion of patients who achieved treatment goals as per 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension guidelines. Readings were obtained before initiating olmesartan and after at least a month of therapy with olmesartan. RESULTS: Among the 459 included patients, majority were on olmesartan monotherapy or olmesartan+1AHD (91.7%). Mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) change in olmesartan monotherapy group was: SBP (-13.4 [-15.7, -11.1] mmHg) and DBP (-8.3 [-9.5, -7.1] mmHg) and mean (95% CI) change in olmesartan+1AHD group was: SBP (-11.7 [-15.1, -8.3] mmHg) and DBP (-6.6 [-8.3, -4.9] mmHg) (P<0.001 for all). SBP and DBP goals were achieved by 40.4% and 50.3% of patients on olmesartan monotherapy and by 36.1% and 46.2% of patients on olmesartan+1AHD. Among patients with comorbid diabetes, mean (95% CI) change in olmesartan monotherapy group was: SBP (-15.5 [-18.6, -12.4] mmHg) and DBP (-8.7 [-10.2, -7.2] mmHg) and mean (95% CI) change in olmesartan+1AHD group was: SBP (-13.5 [-18.3, -8.7] mmHg) and DBP (-7.6 [-9.8, -5.4] mmHg) (P<0.001 for all). SBP and DBP goals were achieved by 38.5% and 49.4% of patients on olmesartan monotherapy and by 31.7% and 42.9% of patients on olmesartan+1AHD. CONCLUSION: Olmesartan prescribed as mono- or add-on therapy during routine clinical practice significantly reduced blood pressure in Indian patients with essential hypertension as well as in patients with comorbid diabetes.