ABSTRACT
Importance: Dialysis-dependent patients experience high rates of morbidity from fractures, yet little evidence is available on optimal treatment strategies. Chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder is nearly universal in dialysis-dependent patients, complicating diagnosis and treatment of skeletal fragility. Objective: To examine the incidence and comparative risk of severe hypocalcemia with denosumab compared with oral bisphosphonates among dialysis-dependent patients treated for osteoporosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of female dialysis-dependent Medicare patients aged 65 years or older who initiated treatment with denosumab or oral bisphosphonates from 2013 to 2020. Clinical performance measures including monthly serum calcium were obtained through linkage to the Consolidated Renal Operations in a Web-Enabled Network database. Exposures: Denosumab, 60 mg, or oral bisphosphonates. Main Outcomes and Measures: Severe hypocalcemia was defined as total albumin-corrected serum calcium below 7.5 mg/dL (1.88 mmol/L) or a primary hospital or emergency department hypocalcemia diagnosis (emergent care). Very severe hypocalcemia (serum calcium below 6.5 mg/dL [1.63 mmol/L] or emergent care) was also assessed. Inverse probability of treatment-weighted cumulative incidence, weighted risk differences, and weighted risk ratios were calculated during the first 12 treatment weeks. Results: In the unweighted cohorts, 607 of 1523 denosumab-treated patients and 23 of 1281 oral bisphosphonate-treated patients developed severe hypocalcemia. The 12-week weighted cumulative incidence of severe hypocalcemia was 41.1% with denosumab vs 2.0% with oral bisphosphonates (weighted risk difference, 39.1% [95% CI, 36.3%-41.9%]; weighted risk ratio, 20.7 [95% CI, 13.2-41.2]). The 12-week weighted cumulative incidence of very severe hypocalcemia was also increased with denosumab (10.9%) vs oral bisphosphonates (0.4%) (weighted risk difference, 10.5% [95% CI, 8.8%-12.0%]; weighted risk ratio, 26.4 [95% CI, 9.7-449.5]). Conclusions and Relevance: Denosumab was associated with a markedly higher incidence of severe and very severe hypocalcemia in female dialysis-dependent patients aged 65 years or older compared with oral bisphosphonates. Given the complexity of diagnosing the underlying bone pathophysiology in dialysis-dependent patients, the high risk posed by denosumab in this population, and the complex strategies required to monitor and treat severe hypocalcemia, denosumab should be administered after careful patient selection and with plans for frequent monitoring.
Subject(s)
Bone Density Conservation Agents , Hypocalcemia , Osteoporosis , United States , Humans , Aged , Female , Hypocalcemia/chemically induced , Hypocalcemia/blood , Denosumab/adverse effects , Bone Density Conservation Agents/adverse effects , Calcium/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , Renal Dialysis , Medicare , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Diphosphonates/adverse effectsABSTRACT
The Food and Drug Administration has completed its review of 4 clinical trials evaluating the use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in infants (ages 1 month to <12 months) for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). An Advisory Committee meeting was held in November 2010 to discuss the potential reasons why PPI use in these trials failed to show a benefit in infants with GERD, and directions for future study. The present review summarizes the findings from the clinical trials. Potential mechanisms for the failed clinical trials are discussed. The safety of long-term use is also discussed. As a result of our analysis and review, the authors agree with the Advisory Committee members that PPIs should not be administered to treat the symptoms of GERD in the otherwise healthy infant without the evidence of acid-induced disease.
Subject(s)
Gastroesophageal Reflux/drug therapy , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Proton Pump Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Advisory Committees , Humans , Infant , Proton Pump Inhibitors/adverse effects , Treatment Failure , United States , United States Food and Drug AdministrationABSTRACT
This case series identifies cases reported in the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System of acute cholecystitis associated with use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists that did not have gallbladder disease warnings in their labeling.
Subject(s)
Cholecystitis, Acute , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Glucagon-Like Peptide 1/agonists , Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor/agonists , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/adverse effects , United States , United States Food and Drug AdministrationABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical outcomes of etonogestrel implant patients with migration to the vasculature, chest wall and other distant body sites spontaneously reported to the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a standardized Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) query in the FAERS database (through November 15, 2015), with reports coded with one or more MedDRA preferred terms that indicate complications with device placement or migration of the device from the original site of insertion to the vasculature, chest wall and other distant body sites. We excluded any cases previously described in the medical literature. RESULTS: We identified 38 cases of pronounced etonogestrel implant migration. Migration locations included the lung/pulmonary artery (n=9), chest wall (n=1), vasculature at locations other than the lung/pulmonary artery (n=14) and extravascular migrations (n=14) to other body sites (e.g., the axilla and clavicle/neck line/shoulder). The majority of cases were asymptomatic and detected when the patient desired implant removal; however, seven cases reported symptoms such as pain, discomfort and dyspnea in association with implant migration. Three cases also describe pulmonary fibrosis and skin reactions as a result of implant migration to the vasculature, chest wall and other distant body sites. Sixteen cases reported surgical removal in an operating room setting. CONCLUSIONS: Our FAERS case series demonstrates etonogestrel implant migration to the vasculature, chest wall and other body sites distant from the site of original insertion. IMPLICATIONS STATEMENT: As noted by the sponsor in current prescribing information, a key determinant in the risk for etonogestrel contraceptive implant migration appears to be improper insertion technique. Although migration of etonogestrel implants to the vasculature is rare, awareness of migration and education on proper insertion technique may reduce the risk.