Use of Antidiabetic drugs during pregnancy among U.S. women with Livebirth deliveries in the Mini-Sentinel system.

BACKGROUND: As the prevalence of diabetes mellitus increases in the population, the exposure to antidiabetic drugs (ADDs) during pregnancies is expected to grow, as has been seen over the last decade. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of ADD use during pregnancy among women in the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database (MSDD) who delivered a liveborn infant. METHODS: We identified qualifying livebirth pregnancies among women aged 10 to 54 years in the MSDD from 2001 to 2013. ADD use was estimated using outpatient pharmacy dispensing claims and days-supplied among three cohorts: all livebirth pregnancies, pregnancies among women with pre-existing diabetes, and pregnancies among women without prior ADD use. RESULTS: Among the 1.9 million pregnancies in the MSDD that resulted in a livebirth from 2001 to 2013, 4.4% were exposed to an ADD. Of the 15,606 pregnancies (0.8%) with pre-existing diabetes, 92.8% were also exposed during the pregnancy period. The most commonly used product in these pregnancies was insulin (75.6% of pregnancies). In contrast, in pregnancies of women without prior ADD use, the most commonly used products were glyburide and insulin, and most of these users were diagnosed with gestational diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Patterns of ADD use during pregnancy described here, along with changes in disease incidence and management, highlight the importance of continuing surveillance of ADD utilization patterns and examining the safety and effectiveness of these products in pregnancy.

Comparative Stroke, Bleeding, and Mortality Risks in Older Medicare Patients Treated with Oral Anticoagulants for Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are alternatives to warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Randomized trials compared NOACs with warfarin, but none have compared individual NOACs against each other for safety and effectiveness. METHODS: We performed a retrospective new-user cohort study of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation enrolled in US Medicare who initiated warfarin (n = 183,318), or a standard dose of dabigatran (150 mg twice daily; n = 86,198), rivaroxaban (20 mg once daily; n = 106,389), or apixaban (5 mg twice daily; n = 73,039) between October 2010 and September 2015. Propensity score-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the outcomes of thromboembolic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, major extracranial bleeding, and all-cause mortality, comparing each NOAC with warfarin, and with each other NOAC. RESULTS: Compared with warfarin, each NOAC was associated with reduced risks of thromboembolic stroke (20%-29% reduction; P = .002 [dabigatran], P < 0.001 [rivaroxaban, apixaban]), intracranial hemorrhage (35%-62% reduction; P < 0.001 [each NOAC]), and mortality (19%-34% reduction; P < .001 [each NOAC]). The NOACs were similar for thromboembolic stroke but rivaroxaban was associated with increased risks of intracranial hemorrhage (vs dabigatran: HR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.35-2.17), major extracranial bleeding (vs dabigatran: HR = 1.32; 95% CI, 1.21-1.45; vs apixaban: HR = 2.70; 95% CI, 2.38-3.05), and death (vs dabigatran: HR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01-1.24; vs apixaban: HR = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.38). Dabigatran was associated with reduced risk of intracranial hemorrhage (HR = 0.70; 95% CI ,0.53-0.94) and increased risk of major extracranial bleeding (HR = 2.04; 95% CI, 1.78-2.32) compared with apixaban. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated with standard-dose NOAC for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and warfarin users with similar baseline characteristics, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban were associated with a more favorable benefit-harm profile than warfarin. Among NOAC users, dabigatran and apixaban were associated with a more favorable benefit-harm profile than rivaroxaban.

Outpatient influenza antivirals in a distributed data network for influenza surveillance.

Electronic data collected from routine health care can be used for public health surveillance. To examine the Sentinel System, a distributed data network of health plans, as a source for influenza surveillance, we compared trends in outpatient prescription dispensings of influenza antivirals in Sentinel to trends in CDC's ILINet and NREVSS systems over five seasons. There were 2 102 885 dispensed prescriptions of oseltamivir capsules, 494 188 of oseltamivir powder, and 7955 of zanamivir. Across all seasons, the magnitude and timing of peaks in drug utilization were highly comparable to those in ILINet and NREVSS. Oseltamivir capsules and powder were well correlated with ILINet and NREVSS. This lays the foundation for further exploration of Sentinel's utility for influenza surveillance.

Prospective surveillance pilot of rivaroxaban safety within the US Food and Drug Administration Sentinel System.

PURPOSE: The US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel system developed tools for sequential surveillance. METHODS: In patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, we sequentially compared outcomes for new users of rivaroxaban versus warfarin, employing propensity score matching and Cox regression. A total of 36 173 rivaroxaban and 79 520 warfarin initiators were variable-ratio matched within 2 monitoring periods. RESULTS: Statistically significant signals were observed for ischemic stroke (IS) (first period) and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) (second period) favoring rivaroxaban, and gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) (second period) favoring warfarin. In follow-up analyses using primary position diagnoses from inpatient encounters for increased definition specificity, the hazard ratios (HR) for rivaroxaban vs warfarin new users were 0.61 (0.47, 0.79) for IS, 1.47 (1.29, 1.67) for GIB, and 0.71 (0.50, 1.01) for ICH. For GIB, the HR varied by age: <66 HR = 0.88 (0.60, 1.30) and 66+ HR = 1.49 (1.30, 1.71). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the capability of Sentinel to conduct prospective safety monitoring and raises no new concerns about rivaroxaban safety.

Prospective Postmarketing Surveillance of Acute Myocardial Infarction in New Users of Saxagliptin: A Population-Based Study.

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.

Safety assessment of niacin in the US Food and Drug Administration's mini-sentinel system.

PURPOSE: The Heart Protection Study 2-Treatment of HDL to Reduce the Incidence of Vascular Events (HPS2-THRIVE) trial found higher incidence rates of adverse reactions, including bleeding, in patients receiving the combination of extended-release niacin and laropiprant versus placebo. It is not known whether these adverse events are attributable to laropiprant, not approved in the USA, or to extended-release niacin. We compared rates of major gastrointestinal bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage among initiators of extended-release niacin and initiators of fenofibrate. METHODS: We used Mini-Sentinel (now Sentinel) to conduct an observational, new user cohort analysis. We included data from 5 Data Partners covering the period from January 1, 2007 to August 31, 2013. Individuals who initiated extended-release niacin were propensity score-matched to individuals who initiated fenofibrate. Within the matched cohorts, we used Cox proportional hazards models to compare rates of hospitalization for major gastrointestinal bleeding events and intracranial hemorrhage assessed using validated claims-based algorithms. RESULTS: A total of 234 242 eligible extended-release niacin initiators were identified, of whom 210 389 (90%) were 1:1 propensity score-matched to eligible fenofibrate initiators. In propensity score-matched analyses, no differences were observed between exposure groups in rates of major gastrointestinal bleeding (hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.18) or intracranial hemorrhage (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.66 to 2.22). Results were similar in pre-specified sensitivity and subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: We did not observe evidence for an association between extended-release niacin versus fenofibrate and rates of major gastrointestinal bleeding or intracranial hemorrhage.

Outcomes of Dabigatran and Warfarin for Atrial Fibrillation in Contemporary Practice: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Dabigatran (150 mg twice daily) has been associated with lower rates of stroke than warfarin in trials of atrial fibrillation, but large-scale evaluations in clinical practice are limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare incidence of stroke, bleeding, and myocardial infarction in patients receiving dabigatran versus warfarin in practice. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: National U.S. Food and Drug Administration Sentinel network. PATIENTS: Adults with atrial fibrillation initiating dabigatran or warfarin therapy between November 2010 and May 2014. MEASUREMENTS: Ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, extracranial bleeding, and myocardial infarction identified from hospital claims among propensity score-matched patients starting treatment with dabigatran or warfarin. RESULTS: Among 25 289 patients starting dabigatran therapy and 25 289 propensity score-matched patients starting warfarin therapy, those receiving dabigatran did not have significantly different rates of ischemic stroke (0.80 vs. 0.94 events per 100 person-years; hazard ratio [HR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.65 to 1.28]) or extracranial hemorrhage (2.12 vs. 2.63 events per 100 person-years; HR, 0.89 [CI, 0.72 to 1.09]) but were less likely to have intracranial bleeding (0.39 vs. 0.77 events per 100 person-years; HR, 0.51 [CI, 0.33 to 0.79]) and more likely to have myocardial infarction (0.77 vs. 0.43 events per 100 person-years; HR, 1.88 [CI, 1.22 to 2.90]). However, the strength and significance of the association between dabigatran use and myocardial infarction varied in sensitivity analyses and by exposure definition (HR range, 1.13 [CI, 0.78 to 1.64] to 1.43 [CI, 0.99 to 2.08]). Older patients and those with kidney disease had higher gastrointestinal bleeding rates with dabigatran. LIMITATION: Inability to examine outcomes by dabigatran dose (unacceptable covariate balance between matched patients) or quality of warfarin anticoagulation (few patients receiving warfarin had available international normalized ratio values). CONCLUSION: In matched adults with atrial fibrillation treated in practice, the incidences of stroke and bleeding with dabigatran versus warfarin were consistent with those seen in trials. The possible relationship between dabigatran and myocardial infarction warrants further investigation. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Antihypertensive drug associated angioedema: effect modification by race/ethnicity.

PURPOSE: Assess angioedema risk with exposure to angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) compared with beta-blockers, by race/ethnicity. METHODS: New-user cohorts of Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older initiating ACEI, ARB, or beta-blocker treatment from March 2007 to March 2014 were constructed. Angioedema incidence rates by drug and race/ethnicity were computed for 1-30 and 31-365 days of treatment. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine angioedema risk between cohorts. RESULTS: Angioedema incidence rates (per 1000 person years) in beta-blocker users were 1.80 (whites), 4.11 (blacks), 1.89 (Asians), and 2.10 (Hispanics); in ACEI users, 4.03, 23.77, 2.94, and 4.27; and in ARB users, 1.73, 3.11, 1.10, and 1.90, respectively. Incidence rates were significantly higher in the first 30 days of exposure for all drug × race/ethnic groups. Overall, angioedema risk increased among ACEI users (hazard ratio, 2.91; 95% confidence interval, 2.75-3.07) but not ARB users (0.93, 0.85-1.02) versus beta-blocker users. Angioedema risk with ACEIs versus beta-blockers increased more in blacks (6.28, 5.44-7.24) than whites (2.33, 2.19-2.48), Hispanics (2.04, 1.36-3.07), and Asians (1.48, 0.94-2.35). Compared with white beta-blocker users, angioedema risk was increased 2.9-fold in whites, 20.2-fold in blacks, and 2.3-fold in other race/ethnic groups combined during the first 30 days of ACEI exposure. CONCLUSIONS: There was significant effect modification of angioedema risk by race and ACEI use for blacks, but not for other race/ethnicity groups. Angioedema risk was significantly greater in the first 30 days of exposure for all, and highest among blacks.

Antiemetic use among pregnant women in the United States: the escalating use of ondansetron.

PURPOSE: To examine ondansetron use in pregnancy in the context of other antiemetic use among a large insured United States population of women delivering live births. METHODS: We assessed ondansetron and other antiemetic use among pregnant women delivering live births between 2001 and 2015 in 15 data partners contributing data to the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database. We identified live birth pregnancies using a validated algorithm, and all forms of ondansetron and other available antiemetics were identified using National Drug Codes or procedure codes. We assessed the prevalence of antiemetic use by trimester, calendar year, and formulation. RESULTS: In over 2.3 million pregnancies, the prevalence of ondansetron, promethazine, metoclopramide, or doxylamine/pyridoxine use anytime in pregnancy was 15.2, 10.3, 4.0, and 0.4%, respectively. Ondansetron use increased from <1% of pregnancies in 2001 to 22.2% in 2014, with much of the increase attributable to oral ondansetron beginning in 2006. Promethazine and metoclopramide use increased modestly between 2001 (13.8%, 3.2%) and 2006 (16.0%, 6.0%) but decreased annually through 2014 (8.0%, 3.2%). Doxylamine/pyridoxine, approved for management of nausea and vomiting in pregnancy in 2013, was used in 1.8% of pregnancies in 2014. For all antiemetics, use was highest in the first trimester. CONCLUSIONS: We observed a marked increase in ondansetron use by study year, prescribed to nearly one-quarter of insured pregnant women in 2014, occurring in conjunction with decreased use of promethazine and metoclopramide. Given the widespread use of ondansetron in pregnancy, data establishing product efficacy and methodologically rigorous evaluation of post-marketing safety are needed. Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

A Synthesis of Current Surveillance Planning Methods for the Sequential Monitoring of Drug and Vaccine Adverse Effects Using Electronic Health Care Data.

INTRODUCTION: The large-scale assembly of electronic health care data combined with the use of sequential monitoring has made proactive postmarket drug- and vaccine-safety surveillance possible. Although sequential designs have been used extensively in randomized trials, less attention has been given to methods for applying them in observational electronic health care database settings. EXISTING METHODS: We review current sequential-surveillance planning methods from randomized trials, and the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) and Mini-Sentinel Pilot projects-two national observational electronic health care database safety monitoring programs. FUTURE SURVEILLANCE PLANNING: Based on this examination, we suggest three steps for future surveillance planning in health care databases: (1) prespecify the sequential design and analysis plan, using available feasibility data to reduce assumptions and minimize later changes to initial plans; (2) assess existing drug or vaccine uptake, to determine if there is adequate information to proceed with surveillance, before conducting more resource-intensive planning; and (3) statistically evaluate and clearly communicate the sequential design with all those designing and interpreting the safety-surveillance results prior to implementation. Plans should also be flexible enough to accommodate dynamic and often unpredictable changes to the database information made by the health plans for administrative purposes. CONCLUSIONS: This paper is intended to encourage dialogue about establishing a more systematic, scalable, and transparent sequential design-planning process for medical-product safety-surveillance systems utilizing observational electronic health care databases. Creating such a framework could yield improvements over existing practices, such as designs with increased power to assess serious adverse events.

Stroke, Bleeding, and Mortality Risks in Elderly Medicare Beneficiaries Treated With Dabigatran or Rivaroxaban for Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

Importance: Dabigatran and rivaroxaban are non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants approved for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). There are no randomized head-to-head comparisons of these drugs for stroke, bleeding, or mortality outcomes. Objective: To compare risks of thromboembolic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), major extracranial bleeding including major gastrointestinal bleeding, and mortality in patients with nonvalvular AF who initiated dabigatran or rivaroxaban treatment for stroke prevention. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective new-user cohort study of 118 891 patients with nonvalvular AF who were 65 years or older, enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare, and who initiated treatment with dabigatran or rivaroxaban from November 4, 2011, through June 30, 2014. Differences in baseline characteristics were adjusted using stabilized inverse probability of treatment weights based on propensity scores. The data analysis was performed from May 7, 2015, through June 30, 2016. Exposures: Dabigatran, 150 mg, twice daily; rivaroxaban, 20 mg, once daily. Main Outcomes and Measures: Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for the primary outcomes of thromboembolic stroke, ICH, major extracranial bleeding including major gastrointestinal bleeding, and mortality, with dabigatran as reference. Adjusted incidence rate differences (AIRDs) were also estimated. Results: A total of 52 240 dabigatran-treated and 66 651 rivaroxaban-treated patients (47% female) contributed 15 524 and 20 199 person-years of on-treatment follow-up, respectively, during which 2537 primary outcome events occurred. Rivaroxaban use was associated with a statistically nonsignificant reduction in thromboembolic stroke (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.65-1.01; P = .07; AIRD = 1.8 fewer cases/1000 person-years), statistically significant increases in ICH (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.20-2.26; P = .002; AIRD = 2.3 excess cases/1000 person-years) and major extracranial bleeding (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.32-1.67; P < .001; AIRD = 13.0 excess cases/1000 person-years), including major gastrointestinal bleeding (HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.23-1.59; P < .001; AIRD = 9.4 excess cases/1000 person-years), and with a statistically nonsignificant increase in mortality (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.00-1.32; P = .051; AIRD = 3.1 excess cases/1000 person-years). In patients 75 years or older or with CHADS2 score greater than 2, rivaroxaban use was associated with significantly increased mortality compared with dabigatran use. The excess rate of ICH with rivaroxaban use exceeded its reduced rate of thromboembolic stroke. Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment with rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily was associated with statistically significant increases in ICH and major extracranial bleeding, including major gastrointestinal bleeding, compared with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily.

Use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in women delivering liveborn infants and other women of child-bearing age within the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Mini-Sentinel program.

This study was conducted in order to assess the prevalence of use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) among pregnant women delivering a liveborn infant in the USA. A retrospective study was conducted using the automated databases of 15 health-care systems participating in the Mini-Sentinel program. Diagnosis and procedure codes were used to identify women ages 10 to 54 years delivering a liveborn infant between April 2001 and December 2013. A comparison group of age- and date-matched women without live births was identified. The frequency of use of SSRIs was identified from outpatient dispensing data. Among the 1,895,519 liveborn deliveries, 113,689 women (6.0 %) were exposed to an SSRI during pregnancy during the period 2001-2013; 5.4 % were exposed to an SSRI during 2013. During the corresponding time period, 10.5 % of the age- and date-matched cohort of women without live births was exposed to an SSRI, with 10.1 % exposed to an SSRI during 2013. The most common agents dispensed during pregnancy were sertraline (n = 48,678), fluoxetine (n = 28,983), and citalopram (n = 20,591). Among those women exposed to an SSRI during pregnancy, 53.8 % had a diagnosis of depression and 37.3 % had a diagnosis of an anxiety disorder during pregnancy or within 180 days prior to pregnancy. Our finding that 6 % of women with live births were prescribed SSRIs during pregnancy highlights the importance of understanding the differential effects of these medications and other therapeutic options on the developing fetus and on the pregnant women.

Uptake of new drugs in the early post-approval period in the Mini-Sentinel distributed database.

PURPOSE: Several factors limit the statistical power of drug safety surveillance during the early post-approval period, including uptake of the drug and lag in data availability. This study characterized new drug uptake in the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database and determined statistical power to detect levels of risk in post-launch safety assessments. METHODS: The cumulative exposure among initiators of 46 new molecular entities approved from 2008 to 2011 was assessed. Using a Poisson estimation method, minimum incidence rate ratios (IRRs) detectable, with 80% power, were calculated under varying background incidence rates. RESULTS: Twelve products (26.1%) had more than 15 000 new users after 2 years. With comparator group incidence rate of 1/1000 person-years, 16 (33.3%) products had enough exposure to detect an IRR of 5 with 24 months of data collected that would be available for assessment at 33 months post-launch. With an incidence rate of 5/1000 person-years, 23 (50%) products had enough exposure to detect an IRR of ≥3 with 2 years of data collected. At 33 months post-launch, only two (4.3%) of the drugs examined had enough data availability to detect IRR of <2, and eight (17.4%) of <3, with a background rate of 1/1000 person-years. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the importance of drug uptake and data availability in early post-approval drug safety surveillance in Mini-Sentinel. There is limited ability to detect rate ratios below three for events with background rates of 1/1000 person-years or lower. This is largely due to low product uptake. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Risk for Hospitalized Heart Failure Among New Users of Saxagliptin, Sitagliptin, and Other Antihyperglycemic Drugs: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Recent postmarketing trials produced conflicting results about the risk for hospitalized heart failure (hHF) associated with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, creating uncertainty about the safety of these antihyperglycemic agents. OBJECTIVE: To examine the associations of hHF with saxagliptin and sitagliptin. DESIGN: Population-based, retrospective, new-user cohort study. SETTING: 18 health insurance and health system data partners in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Mini-Sentinel program. PATIENTS: Patients aged 18 years or older with type 2 diabetes who initiated therapy with saxagliptin, sitagliptin, pioglitazone, second-generation sulfonylureas, or long-acting insulin products from 2006 to 2013. MEASUREMENTS: Hospitalized HF, identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes 402.x1, 404.x1, 404.x3, and 428.xx recorded as the principal discharge diagnosis. RESULTS: 78 553 saxagliptin users and 298 124 sitagliptin users contributed an average of 7 to 9 months of follow-up data to 1 or more pairwise comparisons. The risk for hHF was not higher with DPP-4 inhibitors than with the other study drugs. The hazard ratios from the disease risk score (DRS)-stratified analyses were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.99) for saxagliptin versus sitagliptin, 0.63 (CI, 0.47 to 0.85) for saxagliptin versus pioglitazone, 0.69 (CI, 0.54 to 0.87) for saxagliptin versus sulfonylureas, and 0.61 (CI, 0.50 to 0.73) for saxagliptin versus insulin. The DRS-stratified hazard ratios were 0.74 (CI, 0.64 to 0.85) for sitagliptin versus pioglitazone, 0.86 (CI, 0.77 to 0.95) for sitagliptin versus sulfonylureas, and 0.71 (CI, 0.64 to 0.78) for sitagliptin versus insulin. Results from the 1:1 propensity score-matched analyses were similar. Results were also similar in subgroups of patients with and without prior cardiovascular disease and in a subgroup defined by the 2 highest DRS deciles. LIMITATION: Residual confounding and short follow-up. CONCLUSION: In this large cohort study, a higher risk for hHF was not observed in users of saxagliptin or sitagliptin compared with other selected antihyperglycemic agents. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Using a Handheld Device for Patient Data Collection: A Pilot for Medical Countermeasures Surveillance.

Medical countermeasures (MCMs) are medical products used during public health emergencies. This study, conducted within the Mini-Sentinel Initiative, sought to develop the patient identification and matching processes necessary to assess safety outcomes for MCMs. A handheld device was used to collect identifying information (e.g., name, birthdate, and sex) from the driver's licenses of 421 individuals presenting for routine care at their primary care medical office. Overall, 374 individuals (88.8%) could be linked to their electronic health data using driver's license information. The device was also pilot-tested at a seasonal influenza immunization clinic: detailed vaccine information (e.g., lot number and manufacturer) was captured with a high degree of accuracy. This investigation demonstrated that a handheld device is a feasible means of collecting patient identity and medical product receipt data. This capacity should be useful for safety surveillance of MCMs, particularly when dispensed in settings outside the traditional health-care delivery system.

Surveillance of Medication Use During Pregnancy in the Mini-Sentinel Program.

OBJECTIVES: Mini-Sentinel is a pilot project sponsored by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to create an active surveillance system to monitor the safety of FDA-regulated medical products. We assessed the capability of the Mini-Sentinel pilot to provide prevalence rates of medication use among pregnant women delivering a liveborn infant. METHODS: An algorithm was developed to identify pregnancies for a reusable analytic tool to be executed against the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database. Diagnosis and procedure codes were used to identify women ages 10-54 years delivering a liveborn infant between April 2001 and December 2012. A comparison group of age- and date-matched nonpregnant women was identified. The analytic code was distributed to all 18 Mini-Sentinel data partners. The use of specific medications, selected because of concerns about their safe use during pregnancy, was identified from outpatient dispensing data. We determined the frequency of pregnancy episodes and nonpregnant episodes exposed to medications of interest, any time during the pregnant/matched nonpregnant period, and during each trimester. RESULTS: The analytic tool successfully identified 1,678,410 live birth deliveries meeting the eligibility criteria. The prevalence of use at any time during pregnancy was 0.38 % for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and 0.22 % for statins. For ≤0.05 % of pregnancy episodes, the woman was dispensed warfarin, methotrexate, ribavirin, or mycophenolate. CONCLUSIONS: The analytic tool developed for this study can be used to assess the use of medications during pregnancy as safety issues arise, and is adaptable to include different medications, observation periods, pre-existing conditions, and enrollment criteria.

Comparative Risk of Anaphylactic Reactions Associated With Intravenous Iron Products.

IMPORTANCE: All intravenous (IV) iron products are associated with anaphylaxis, but the comparative safety of each product has not been well established. OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of anaphylaxis among marketed IV iron products. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective new user cohort study of IV iron recipients (n = 688,183) enrolled in the US fee-for-service Medicare program from January 2003 to December 2013. Analyses involving ferumoxytol were limited to the period January 2010 to December 2013. EXPOSURES: Administrations of IV iron dextran, gluconate, sucrose, or ferumoxytol as reported in outpatient Medicare claims data. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Anaphylaxis was identified using a prespecified and validated algorithm defined with standard diagnosis and procedure codes and applied to both inpatient and outpatient Medicare claims. The absolute and relative risks of anaphylaxis were estimated, adjusting for imbalances among treatment groups. RESULTS: A total of 274 anaphylaxis cases were identified at first exposure, with an additional 170 incident anaphylaxis cases identified during subsequent IV iron administrations. The risk for anaphylaxis at first exposure was 68 per 100,000 persons for iron dextran (95% CI, 57.8-78.7 per 100,000) and 24 per 100,000 persons for all nondextran IV iron products combined (iron sucrose, gluconate, and ferumoxytol) (95% CI, 20.0-29.5 per 100,000) , with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 2.6 (95% CI, 2.0-3.3; P < .001). At first exposure, when compared with iron sucrose, the adjusted OR of anaphylaxis for iron dextran was 3.6 (95% CI, 2.4-5.4); for iron gluconate, 2.0 (95% CI 1.2, 3.5); and for ferumoxytol, 2.2 (95% CI, 1.1-4.3). The estimated cumulative anaphylaxis risk following total iron repletion of 1000 mg administered within a 12-week period was highest with iron dextran (82 per 100,000 persons, 95% CI, 70.5- 93.1) and lowest with iron sucrose (21 per 100,000 persons, 95% CI, 15.3- 26.4). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients in the US Medicare nondialysis population with first exposure to IV iron, the risk of anaphylaxis was highest for iron dextran and lowest for iron sucrose.

Cardiovascular, bleeding, and mortality risks in elderly Medicare patients treated with dabigatran or warfarin for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: The comparative safety of dabigatran versus warfarin for treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in general practice settings has not been established. METHODS AND RESULTS: We formed new-user cohorts of propensity score-matched elderly patients enrolled in Medicare who initiated dabigatran or warfarin for treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation between October 2010 and December 2012. Among 134 414 patients with 37 587 person-years of follow-up, there were 2715 primary outcome events. The hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) comparing dabigatran with warfarin (reference) were as follows: ischemic stroke, 0.80 (0.67-0.96); intracranial hemorrhage, 0.34 (0.26-0.46); major gastrointestinal bleeding, 1.28 (1.14-1.44); acute myocardial infarction, 0.92 (0.78-1.08); and death, 0.86 (0.77-0.96). In the subgroup treated with dabigatran 75 mg twice daily, there was no difference in risk compared with warfarin for any outcome except intracranial hemorrhage, in which case dabigatran risk was reduced. Most patients treated with dabigatran 75 mg twice daily appeared not to have severe renal impairment, the intended population for this dose. In the dabigatran 150-mg twice daily subgroup, the magnitude of effect for each outcome was greater than in the combined-dose analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In general practice settings, dabigatran was associated with reduced risk of ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, and death and increased risk of major gastrointestinal hemorrhage compared with warfarin in elderly patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. These associations were most pronounced in patients treated with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily, whereas the association of 75 mg twice daily with study outcomes was indistinguishable from warfarin except for a lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage with dabigatran.

Adherence to guidelines for glucose assessment in starting second-generation antipsychotics.

OBJECTIVES: In 2003, the US Food and Drug Administration issued warnings about hyperglycemia and diabetes with second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs); guidelines have recommended metabolic screening since 2004. However, little is known of contemporary practices of glucose screening among youth initiating SGAs. Our objective was to evaluate baseline glucose assessment among youth in the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database starting an SGA. METHODS: The cohort included youth ages 2 through 18 newly initiating SGAs January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2011, across 10 sites. Baseline glucose was defined as fasting/random glucose or hemoglobin A1c (GLU) measurement occurring relative to first SGA dispensing. Differences in GLU assessment were evaluated with χ(2) tests and logistic regression. RESULTS: The cohort included 16,304 youth; 60% boys; mean age 12.8 years. Risperidone was most commonly started (43%). Eleven percent (n = 1858) had GLU assessed between 90 days before and 3 days after first dispensing. Assessment varied across SGAs (olanzapine highest), sites (integrated health care systems higher), ages (16-18 highest), years (2007 highest), and gender (female higher; all P < .001). GLU assessment among those starting olanzapine was more likely than among those starting quetiapine (odds ratio [OR]: 1.72 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.37-2.18]), aripiprazole (OR: 1.49 [95% CI: 1.18-1.87]), or risperidone (OR: 1.61 [95% CI: 1.28-2.03]). CONCLUSIONS: Few children and adolescents starting SGA have baseline glucose assessed. This is concerning because those at high diabetes risk may not be identified. Further, lack of screening impedes determining the contribution of SGAs to hyperglycemia development.

[Implicit value judgments in the measurement of health inequalities]. / Juicios de valor implícitos en la medición de las desigualdades en salud.

CONTEXT: Quantitative estimates of the magnitude, direction, and rate of change of health inequalities play a crucial role in creating and assessing policies aimed at eliminating the disproportionate burden of disease in disadvantaged populations. It is generally assumed that the measurement of health inequalities is a value-neutral process, providing objective data that are then interpreted using normative judgments about whether a particular distribution of health is just, fair, or socially acceptable. METHODS: We discuss five examples in which normative judgments play a role in the measurement process itself, through either the selection of one measurement strategy to the exclusion of others or the selection of the type, significance, or weight assigned to the variables being measured. FINDINGS: Overall, we find that many commonly used measures of inequality are value laden and that the normative judgments implicit in these measures have important consequences for interpreting and responding to health inequalities. CONCLUSIONS: Because values implicit in the generation of health inequality measures may lead to radically different interpretations of the same underlying data,we urge researchers to explicitly consider and transparently discuss the normative judgments underlying their measures. We also urge policymakers and other consumers of health inequalities data to pay close attention to the measures on which they base their assessments of current and future health policies.