Characterization of chronic and acute ESA hyporesponse: a retrospective cohort study of hemodialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Some patients with chronic kidney disease do not respond adequately to erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) treatment; these patients are referred to as ESA hyporesponders. There is no widely accepted contemporary definition for chronic ESA hyporesponse. The study objective was to propose and validate an operational definition for chronic ESA hyporesponse. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using electronic health care records. Participants were anemic hemodialysis patients treated during February 2012 and were followed for 15 months. Patients' ESA response (responders) or lack of response (chronic and acute hyporesponders) based on longitudinal patterns of ESA dose and hemoglobin level was assessed. Persistence of hyporesponse, longitudinal iron measures, transfusion rates, and mortality rates were analyzed. Frequency of blood transfusions (monthly) and death rates (quarterly) were calculated. Log normalized serum ferritin concentration was analyzed. RESULTS: Of 97,677 eligible patients, 6632 had acute hyporesponsiveness (ESA responsiveness restituted in ≤ 4 months) and 3086 had chronic hyporesponsiveness (lack of ESA response for > 4 months). Over months 1-4 among chronic hyporesponders, mean serum ferritin (722-785 ng/mL) and transferrin saturation (TSAT; 26.76 %-27.08 %) were constant, while acute hyporesponsive patients experienced increased ferritin (654-760 ng/mL) and TSAT (25.71-30.88 %) levels. Compared to ESA responders (0.19-0.30 %), chronic hyporesponders were transfused 7-times (1.20-2.17 %) more frequently over follow-up. Quarterly mortality was greatest in chronic ESA hyporesponders (2.98-5.48 %), followed by acute ESA hyporesponders (2.17-3.30 %) and ESA responders (1.43-2.49 %). With consistence over the study, chronic hyporesponders died more frequently than patients in the other study cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that 4 months of continuous ESA hyporesponsiveness can be used to differentiate acute from chronic hyporesponsiveness. This definition of chronic hyporesponsiveness is supported by outcome data showing higher mortality and transfusion rates in chronic hyporesponders compared to acute hyporesponders.

Meta-analysis of clinical trial safety data in a drug development program: answers to frequently asked questions.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses of clinical trial safety data have risen in importance beyond regulatory submissions. During drug development, sponsors need to recognize safety signals early and adjust the development program accordingly, so as to facilitate the assessment of causality. Once a product is marketed, sponsors add postapproval clinical trial data to the body of information to help understand existing safety concerns or those that arise from other postapproval data sources, such as spontaneous reports. PURPOSE: This article focuses on common questions encountered when designing and performing a meta-analysis of clinical trial safety data. Although far from an exhaustive set of questions, they touch on some basic and often misunderstood features of conducting such meta-analyses. METHODS: The authors reviewed the current literature and used their combined experience with regulatory and other uses of meta-analysis to answer common questions that arise when performing meta-analyses of safety data. RESULTS: We addressed the following topics: choice of studies to pool, effects of the method of ascertainment, use of patient-level data compared to trial-level data, the need (or not) for multiplicity adjustments, heterogeneity of effects and sources of it, and choice of fixed effects versus random effects. LIMITATIONS: The list of topics is not exhaustive and the opinions offered represent only our perspective; we recognize that there may be other valid perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis can be a valuable tool for evaluating safety questions, but a number of methodological choices need to be made in designing and conducting any meta-analysis. This article provides advice on some of the more commonly encountered choices.

SGLT2 Inhibitors and the Risk of Hospitalization for Fournier's Gangrene: A Nested Case-Control Study.

INTRODUCTION: Based on post-marketing surveillance, concern has been raised that sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) may increase the risk of necrotizing fasciitis of the perineum (Fournier's gangrene, FG). As a result of the low incidence of FG, data from clinical trials may be insufficient to robustly assess this issue because of the relatively limited numbers of participants. Real-world evidence may help clarify the association between SGLT2i and FG in the type 2 diabetes (T2D) population. METHODS: A nested case-control study was performed using Truven Health MarketScan™ databases. Each patient with T2D hospitalized for FG between 1 April 2013 (when the first SGLT2i was available) and 31 March 2018 (latest available data) was matched (on the basis of sex, age, and cohort entry date) with six controls from the same cohort. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) of hospitalization for FG was estimated for patients receiving SGLT2i compared with those receiving two or more non-SGLT2i antihyperglycemic agents (AHAs) or insulin alone using conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: The cohort included 1,897,935 patients, with 216 hospitalized for FG (incidence rate, 5.2 events per 100,000 person-years). Patients with FG ranged from 23 to 79 years of age; 201 (93.1%) were men. Among the 216 FG cases, 9 (4.2%) were current SGLT2i users; among the 1296 matched controls, 100 (7.7%) were current SGLT2i users. Approximately 93% of SGLT2i were used in combination. The adjusted OR of FG in patients treated with SGLT2i compared with patients treated with two or more non-SGLT2i AHAs or insulin alone was 0.55 [95% CI 0.25-1.18]. CONCLUSION: The study did not find that treatment with SGLT2i, as compared with treatment with two or more non-SGLT2i AHAs or insulin alone, was statistically significantly associated with an increased risk of hospitalization for FG. Additional studies are needed to corroborate the findings.

The risk of myopathy associated with thiazolidinediones and statins in patients with type 2 diabetes: a nested case-control analysis.

BACKGROUND: The implementation of more aggressive goals for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering in subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and the expected increase in the use of statins is likely to increase the concomitant use of thiazolidinediones (TZDs) and statins. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated whether concomitant use of TZDs and statins is associated with an increased risk of myopathic events in subjects with T2D. METHODS: This was a nested case-control study in subjects with T2D. Cases and controls were identified from a cohort of 125,394 subjects with T2D in the Integrated Healthcare Information Services database. Each case with a myopathic event (rhabdomyolysis, myositis, myopathy, or myalgia) was matched to up to 6 controls by age (+/-5 years), sex, calendar year of diagnosis of a myopathic event, and length of follow-up in the database. Incident cases of myopathy were identified using the following International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes: 359.x for myopathy, 728.88 for rhabdomyolysis, and 729.1 for unspecified myalgia and myositis. Prescription claims were used as a proxy for drug exposure. Five categories of exposure were employed: statins only, TZDs only, concomitant TZDs and statins, other antidiabetic agents only, and neither statins nor antidiabetic agents. Exposure to statins and/or TZDs within 90 days before the case index date was defined as recent exposure, and exposure at any time before the case index date was defined as ever exposure. Concomitant exposure to TZDs and statins, either recent or ever, was defined by an overlap of at least 30 days in the days supply of TZDs and statins during the exposure period. RESULTS: The 3696 cases of myopathy were matched with 21,871 controls. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for myopathic events for ever exposure to concomitant TZDs and statins compared with statins alone was 1.03 (95% CI, 0.83-1.26). Compared with neither statins nor antidiabetic agents, ever use of statins alone was associated with an increased likelihood of myopathic events (adjusted OR=1.36; 95% CI, 1.12-1.64). The likelihood of myopathic events was not significantly different for TZDs compared with other antidiabetic agents. CONCLUSION: In this population of subjects with T2D, concomitant use of statins and TZDs was not associated with an increased risk of myopathic events beyond that conferred by statins alone.

An assessment of the effect of thiazolidinedione exposure on the risk of myocardial infarction in type 2 diabetic patients.

PURPOSE: To determine the likelihood of myocardial infarction (MI) in type 2 diabetic patients exposed to rosiglitazone and pioglitazone, separately, compared to other antidiabetic therapies. METHODS: A case-control analysis nested within the cohort of type 2 diabetic subjects from the Integrated Healthcare Information Services (IHCIS) claims database. Incident cases of MI were matched to three controls each on age (+/-5 years), gender, and year of first diabetes diagnosis. Subjects were classified according to their antidiabetic drug exposure in the 3, < 6, 6-12, and > 12 months prior to the index date. The adjusted odds ratios of MI were calculated for subjects exposed to rosiglitazone and pioglitazone, separately, compared to other antidiabetic agents. Risk factors adjusted for are age, ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, diuretics, nitrates, diagnosis of hyperlipidemia, and hypertension and coronary artery disease (CAD). RESULTS: A total of 891 901 diabetic subjects (9870 cases and 29 610 control) identified from 1999 to 2006 were included in the analysis. The mean age was 63 years for the cases and controls. Compared to those treated with other antidiabetic therapies, the adjusted odds ratio of MI was 1.03 [95%CI: 0.93-1.12] for rosiglitazone and 0.92 [95%CI: 0.83-1.01] for pioglitazone in the 3 months prior to the index date. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the risk of MI in subjects exposed to rosiglitazone or pioglitazone for < or = 12 months is not different from those exposed to other antidiabetic agents but exposure for > 12 months is associated with 15 and 13% increased risk of MI, respectively.

Coronary heart disease outcomes in patients receiving antidiabetic agents in the PharMetrics database 2000-2007.

BACKGROUND: The risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) in users of antidiabetic agents must be quantified to permit reasoned therapeutic choices. OBJECTIVES: To assess the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and coronary revascularization (CR), in diabetic patients who began rosiglitazone, pioglitazone, metformin, or sulfonylureas. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of MI and CR in the PharMetrics database. We performed head-to-head comparisons using propensity-score-stratified Cox proportional hazards models, examining risks both on-treatment and during total follow-up before regimen switches. RESULTS: For the combined outcome (MI and CR), the crude rates per 1000 person years were 9 on monotherapy, 13 on dual therapy, and 21 on therapies combined with insulin. In the absence of insulin, regimens containing thiazolidinediones (TZDs) tended toward lower risk than comparable regimens containing sulfonylureas and higher risk than those containing metformin. The summary hazard ratio for rosiglitazone versus pioglitazone was 1.04 (95%CI: 0.94-1.14) for total follow-up and 1.05 (0.92-1.19) for on-treatment time. For MI, the hazard ratios were 1.07 (0.89-1.27) for total follow-up and 1.21 (0.95-1.54) for on-treatment time. CONCLUSIONS: The present data indicate that the risk of CHD in patients using TZDs appears to lie between the risks associated with sulfonylureas and metformin. Neither the risk of MI and CR together nor the risk of MI alone was significantly different between rosiglitazone and pioglitazone. A nonsignificant observed excess risk of 21% for MI during on-treatment time will require combination with the results of other studies to provide a reliable assessment.

Does statin therapy initiation increase the risk for myopathy? An observational study of 32,225 diabetic and nondiabetic patients.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of myopathy rates in the literature are based on adverse events reported in clinical trials, which may not be representative of the clinical practice setting. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of myopathic events, particularly myalgia, myositis, and rhabdomyolysis in a community-based practice among a cohort of subjects with or without diabetes, some of whom received statin treatment. METHODS: In this retrospective data analysis, we identified members of a health maintenance organization (HMO) who initiated statin treatment between 1997 and 2004 and classified them into 2 groups: those subjects with diabetes and those without. We matched them to an equal number of health plan members based on age group, diabetes diagnosis, and year of health plan enrollment. We defined 4 levels of myopathic events according to the American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association, and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's definitions as follows: myalgia, mild myositis, severe myositis, and rhabdomyolysis. Subjects were observed for approximately 9 years. Prevalence rates were calculated by adjusting for known myopathic risk factors and also by utilizing Cox regression models to identify predictors of time for myopathic events. RESULTS: Of the 35,413 HMO members initially assessed for inclusion, 32,225 were identified and classified into the 2 cohorts: diabetes (n = 10,247) and nondiabetes (n = 21,978). A greater proportion of statin initiators in both the diabetes (7.9% vs 5.5%; P < 0.001) and nondiabetes cohorts (9.0% vs 3.7%; P < 0.001) experienced myopathic events. However, 95% of events were myalgia or mild myositis. The prevalence of severe myositis was 0.4 per 1000 person-years (95% CI, 0.2-0.7) and 0.8 per 1000 person-years (95% CI, 0.6-1.1) among statin initiators with or without diabetes, respectively. By comparison, rates were 0.3 (95% CI, 0.1-0.5) and 0.2 (95% CI, 0.1-0.4) per 1000 person-years among nonstatin users with or without diabetes, respectively. Rates of rhabdomyolysis were 0.1 (95% CI, 0.1-0.3) and 0.2 (95% CI, 0.1-0.5) per 1000 person-years among statin and non-statin users with diabetes, respectively, and 0.2 (95% CI, 0.1-0.4) in both groups without diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Statin initiation was associated with an approximate doubling of the risk for any myopathic event but did not appear to be associated with an increased risk for rhabdomyolysis in these patients. Because clinically significant elevations of creatine kinase levels were rare, statins appeared to be well tolerated in diabetic and nondiabetic patients who used them.

The independent correlation between high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and subsequent major adverse coronary events.

BACKGROUND: There is substantial evidence from clinical trials that lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduces cardiovascular risk. There is less evidence for the salutatory effects of raising high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). The predictive strength of an initial HDL-C measurement and its change over time for major adverse coronary events is not well understood. METHODS: We identified a cohort of all 6928 patients in an urban primary care practice who had two or more lipid measurements between January 1985 and December 1997. We used bivariable and multivariable (Cox proportional hazards) techniques to identify independent predictors of subsequent major adverse coronary events (hospitalization for myocardial infarction or acute coronary syndrome) after the second set of lipid measurements. RESULTS: The time between first and second lipid measurements averaged 2.6 years. During a mean of 5.1 +/- 3.2 years of observation after their second lipid measurements, 2167 (31%) patients had an acute coronary event. Patients having events were significantly older, more often white, male, and smokers and more often had antecedent diabetes, hypertension, coronary heart disease, and myocardial infarctions. Adjusting for covariates, a 10-mg/dL higher initial HDL-C was associated with an 11% (95% CI 7%-14%) lower risk of coronary events. A 10-mg/dL increase in HDL-C between lipid measurements was associated with a 7% (95% CI 3%-10%) lower risk of events. Neither initial or change in triglycerides nor LDL-C predicted subsequent coronary events. CONCLUSION: High-density lipoprotein cholesterol measurements and change in HDL-C predicted major adverse coronary events in this urban practice, which provides support studying interventions targeting HDL-C for cardiovascular risk reduction.

The association between fibrate use, change in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and the risk of cardiovascular disease: a retrospective chart review involving up to 8 years of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have indicated that the use of fibric acid derivatives confers a benefit against cardiovascular disease (CVD) in selected populations. However, whether fibrates provide a CVD risk reduction independent of changes in the traditional lipoprotein fractions and other known CVD risk factors is not clear. OBJECTIVE: This study examined whether the use of fibrate therapy in a general clinical setting provided cardiovascular benefits independent of changes in the traditional lipoprotein fractions. METHODS: This was a matched, retrospective cohort study. From the electronic records of a large health maintenance organization in the northwestern United States, we identified a population that had newly initiated fibrate pharmacotherapy between January 1, 1996, and December 31, 2000. We then identified a comparator group of patients not using fibrates, matching them to fibrate users based on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglyceride (TG) levels, age, sex, and year of HDL-C and TG measurement. Subjects were followed until a CVD hospitalization, termination from the health plan, or December 31, 2003, whichever came first. We then used multivariate analysis accounting for differences in followup to identify predictors of CVD incidence. RESULTS: The study population included 1722 matched pairs (56.6% male; mean [SD] age, 57.3 [11.1] years). The patients who had newly initiated fibrate pharmacotherapy had low baseline HDL-C levels (mean, 37.4 mg/dL) and very high TG levels (617 mg/dL). The 2 groups were similar overall, with the only significant differences between fibrate users and nonfibrate controls being a greater prevalence of diabetes (37.7% vs 34.3%, respectively; P=0.040) and greater use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin-receptor blockers (56.6% vs 51.6%, respectively; P=0.003), beta-blockers (53.7% vs 49.0%; P=0.006), calcium channel blockers (25.1% vs 20.9%; P=0.004), and niacin (11.7% vs 7.4%; P<0.001). Overall, CVD risk was 26% lower for every 5-mg/dL increment in HDL-C. After adjustment for age, sex, smoking history, diabetes, existing diagnosis of CVD, weight, systolic blood pressure, baseline HDL-C, change in HDL-C, total cholesterol, TG, and use of statins, niacin, and other CVD drugs, fibrate use did not confer an additional CVD risk reduction. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort with low baseline HDL-C levels and very high TG levels, fibrate use did not confer an independent CVD risk reduction after adjustment for CVD risk factors. Given the current obesity epidemic in the United States and the corresponding rise in the number of patients with the metabolic syndrome, the apparent risk reduction observed in association with higher HDL-C levels should not be ignored.

New National Cholesterol Education Program III guidelines for primary prevention lipid-lowering drug therapy: projected impact on the size, sex, and age distribution of the treatment-eligible population.

BACKGROUND: The guidelines in the Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP III) include absolute risk and lower LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) levels to assess eligibility for lipid-lowering drug therapy. We studied the impact of these changes on the size, sex, and age distribution of the target US population using data from the Third Annual National Health and Nutrition Survey (NHANES III) (1988 to 1994). METHODS AND RESULTS: A subsample of NHANES III participants aged 20 to 79 years with known cardiovascular risk factors and LDL-C levels was identified (n=13 589). We assessed their eligibility for drug therapy first using NCEP II guidelines and then using the new NCEP III criteria. We also calculated the number eligible for LDL-C lowering to <100 mg/dL. An estimated 15 million individuals aged 20 to 79 years are eligible for drug therapy under NCEP II; 51% are males, 49% are females, 26% are <45 years old, and 28% are > or =65 years old. Under NCEP III, 36 million would be eligible for treatment; 55% are males, 45% are females, 32% are <45 years old, and 27% are > or =65 years old. This represents a 140% increase in eligibility overall, a 157% increase among males, a 122% increase among females, a 131% increase among those > or =65 years old, and a 201% increase among those < 45 years old. Of treatment-eligible individuals, 26% of males, 24% of females, 39% of elderly, and 14% of those <45 years old are targeted for LDL-C lowering to <100 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: The NCEP III guidelines will alter the age and sex distributions of the treatment-eligible population, targeting many more younger (<45 years old) and greater numbers of elderly (> or =65 years) individuals, particularly for aggressive intervention.

An assessment of the independent effects of olanzapine and risperidone exposure on the risk of hyperlipidemia in schizophrenic patients.

BACKGROUND: The newer antipsychotic agents exhibit a superior safety profile compared with conventional antipsychotic agents in terms of extrapyramidal symptoms. Previous studies have suggested an association between olanzapine treatment and hyperlipidemia. We evaluated this association using a large health care database. METHODS: The study was derived from the England and Wales-based General Practice Research Database, composed of 3.5 million subjects followed up between June 1, 1987, and September 24, 2000. A total of 18 309 individuals diagnosed as having schizophrenia were identified. A 6:1 matched nested case-control design was used. Conditional logistic regression was used to derive adjusted odds ratios (ORs), controlling for sex, age, and other medications and disease conditions influencing lipid levels. Antipsychotic drug exposure was defined as the receipt of at least 1 prescription for an antipsychotic medication within the 3 months before the date of diagnosis of hyperlipidemia. RESULTS: There were 1268 incident cases of hyperlipidemia in the cohort, matched to 7598 control subjects. Olanzapine use was associated with nearly a 5-fold increase in the odds of developing hyperlipidemia compared with no antipsychotic exposure (OR, 4.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.44-8.85) (P<.001) and more than a 3-fold increase compared with those receiving conventional agents (OR, 3.36; 95% CI, 1.77-6.39) (P<.001). Risperidone was not associated with increased odds of hyperlipidemia compared with no antipsychotic exposure (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.60-2.11) (P =.72) or conventional antipsychotic exposure (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.44-1.52) (P =.52). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a strong association between olanzapine exposure and hyperlipidemia in schizophrenic patients. The possible metabolic consequences of olanzapine use should be given serious consideration by treating physicians.

Atypical antipsychotic therapy and hyperlipidemia: a review.

Ziprasidone (Geodon), risperidone (Risperdal), and aripiprazole (Abilify) appear to be associated with a relatively low risk for hyperlipidemia, whereas quetiapine (Seroquel), olanzapine (Zyprexa), and clozapine (Clozaril) are associated with a relatively high risk for hyperlipidemia. Possible underlying causes of lipid dysregulation include weight gain, dietary changes, and glucose intolerance. Given the multiple cardiovascular risk factors reported for patients with schizophrenia, great care must be exercised to minimize the additional risk for hyperlipidemia when choosing antipsychotic therapy. It is recommended that a lipid panel be obtained at baseline for all patients with schizophrenia and annually thereafter for patients taking relatively low-risk agents or quarterly thereafter for patients taking relatively high-risk agents. Patients with persistent dyslipidemia should be referred for lipid-lowering therapy or switched to a less lipid-enhancing antipsychotic agent.

Glycemic control from 1988 to 2000 among U.S. adults diagnosed with type 2 diabetes: a preliminary report.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the changes in demographics, antidiabetic treatment, and glycemic control among the prevalent U.S. adult diagnosed type 2 diabetes population between the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III (1988-1994) and the initial release of NHANES 1999-2000. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The study population was derived from NHANES III (n = 1,215) and NHANES 1999-2000 (n = 372) subjects who reported a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes with available data on diabetes medication and HbA(1c). Four therapeutic regimens were defined: diet only, insulin only, oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) only, or OADs plus insulin. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine changes in antidiabetic regimens and glycemic control rates over time, adjusted for demographic and clinical risk factors. The outcome measure for glycemic control was HbA(1c). Glycemic control rates were defined as the proportion of type 2 diabetic patients with HbA(1c) level <7%. RESULTS: Dietary treatment in individuals with diabetes decreased as the sole therapy from 27.4 to 20.2% between the surveys. Insulin use also decreased from 24.2 to 16.4%, while those on OADs only increased from 45.4 to 52.5%. Combination of OADs and insulin increased from 3.1 to 11.0%. Glycemic control rates declined from 44.5% in NHANES III (1988-1994) to 35.8% in NHANES 1999-2000. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment regimens among U.S. adults diagnosed with type 2 diabetes have changed substantially over the past 10 years. However, a decrease in glycemic control rates was also observed during this time period. This trend may contribute to increased rates of macrovascular and microvascular diabetic complications, which may impact health care costs. Our data support the public health message of implementation of early, aggressive management of diabetes.

The incidence of congestive heart failure in type 2 diabetes: an update.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to update previous estimates of the congestive heart failure (CHF) incidence rate in patients with type 2 diabetes, compare it with an age- and sex-matched nondiabetic group, and describe risk factors for developing CHF in diabetic patients over 6 years of follow-up. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 8,231 patients with type 2 diabetes and 8,845 nondiabetic patients of similar age and sex who did not have CHF as of 1 January 1997, following them for up to 72 months to estimate the CHF incidence rate. In the diabetic cohort, we constructed a Cox regression model to identify risk factors for CHF development. RESULTS: Patients with diabetes were much more likely to develop CHF than patients without diabetes (incidence rate 30.9 vs. 12.4 cases per 1,000 person-years, rate ratio 2.5, 95% CI 2.3-2.7). The difference in CHF development rates between persons with and without diabetes was much greater in younger age-groups. In addition to age and ischemic heart disease, poorer glycemic control (hazard ratio 1.32 per percentage point of HbA(1c)) and greater BMI (1.12 per 2.5 units of BMI) were important predictors of CHF development. CONCLUSIONS: The CHF incidence rate in type 2 diabetes may be much greater than previously believed. Our multivariate results emphasize the importance of controlling modifiable risk factors for CHF, namely hyperglycemia, elevated blood pressure, and obesity. Younger patients may benefit most from risk factor modification.

The effects of antipsychotic therapy on serum lipids: a comprehensive review.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this paper is to review the literature since 1970 documenting the effects of antipsychotic agents on serum lipids, including a discussion of possible mechanisms for the observed phenomena, the clinical significance and recommendations for monitoring hyperlipidemia during antipsychotic therapy. RESULTS: High-potency conventional antipsychotics (e.g., haloperidol) and the atypical antipsychotics, ziprasidone, risperidone and aripiprazole, appear to be associated with lower risk of hyperlipidemia. Low-potency conventional antipsychotics (e.g., chlorpormazine, thioridazine) and the atypical antipsychotics, quetiapine, olanzapine and clozapine, are associated with higher risk of hyperlipidemia. Possible hypotheses for lipid dysregulation include weight gain, dietary changes and the development of glucose intolerance. CONCLUSIONS: Given the multiple cardiovascular risk factors seen in patients with schizophrenia, great care must be exercised in the choice of antipsychotic therapy to minimize the medical burden of additional risk imposed by hyperlipidemia. It is recommended that a lipid panel be obtained at baseline in all patients with schizophrenia, annually thereafter for patients on agents associated with lower risk of hyperlipidemia and quarterly in patients on agents associated with higher risk for hyperlipidemia. All patients with persistent dyslipidemia should be referred for lipid-lowering therapy or switched to a less lipid-offending antipsychotic agent.

Incretin-mimetic therapies and pancreatic disease: a review of observational data.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Signals from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) and pre-clinical and human pancreata obtained from organ donors have suggested that incretin-based therapies used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus, such as glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, may increase the risk of acute pancreatitis (AP) and pancreatic cancer (PC). However, data from observational studies and randomized trials have been conflicting. We conducted a literature review to identify and summarize all observational data published assessing the pancreatic safety of incretins. METHODS: Searches were conducted in MEDLINE via PubMed and Embase using the key terms for the time period of 1 January 2005, to 12 February 2014. A total of 180 articles were screened in abstract form and 49 were subsequently reviewed in full text for inclusion. Data from 12 articles are included in this report. FINDINGS: Data from the FDA AERS database suggest increased risk of AP and PC with GLP-1 receptor agonist and DPP-4 inhibitor use. These findings are not supported by population-based observational studies for either AP or PC; however, studies assessing the relationship between PC and incretin-based therapies are limited. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence is conflicting and inadequate to conclude whether use of incretin-based therapies increases the risk of AP and PC. Further studies, with the ability to provide long term follow-up, are needed.

An assessment of the association between carvedilol exposure and severe hypersensitivity reactions, angioedema, and anaphylactic reactions: a retrospective nested case-control analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is limited information in the literature regarding the risk of severe hypersensitivity reactions due to different ß-blocking agents. Most of the available information addresses the potential for increased severity of anaphylaxis or poor response to treatments among patients receiving ß-blocking agents. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate the incidence rates of severe hypersensitivity reactions (angioedema and anaphylactic reactions) for various ß-blockers and to examine the risk of severe hypersensitivity reactions in patients exposed to carvedilol extended-release compared with carvedilol and compared with other ß-blockers. METHODS: A case-control analysis nested within a cohort of ß-blocker users in the LabRx Database was conducted. A case was defined as an incident hypersensitivity reaction of either anaphylactic shock (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision [ICD-9] code 995.0) or angioneurotic edema (ICD-9 code 995.1). Three controls were matched to each case. Patients were classified according to their ß-blocker exposure in the 30 day-period before the index date. Conditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios and 95% CIs. RESULTS: A total of 1,810,487 ß-blocker users were identified; 7811 hypersensitivity cases and 23,433 controls were included in this analysis. The mean (SD) age of the cohort was 53 (14) years, and 49% were men. The overall incidence rates of severe hypersensitivity reactions among various ß-blockers categories were similar to that in the overall ß-blocker users cohort (2.40 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, 2.35-2.45]). The odds ratios of severe hypersensitivity reaction for carvedilol extended-release compared with carvedilol and with other long-acting ß-blockers were 0.86 (95% CI, 0.48-1.53) and 1.10 (95% CI, 0.90-1.35), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective database analysis of mostly middle-aged patients detected no statistically significant differences in the likelihood of severe hypersensitivity reactions among patients who received carvedilol extended-release versus carvedilol or other long-acting ß-blockers.