Is Statin Use Associated With Risk of Thyroid Diseases? Results of a Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Given the ubiquity of statin use and prevalence of thyroid diseases, such as thyroid cancer, hyperthyroidism, and thyroiditis, understanding their association deserves further attention. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between statin use and thyroid cancer, thyrotoxicosis, goiter, and thyroiditis. METHODS: Using Tricare data, 2 propensity score (PS)-matched cohorts of statin users and nonusers were formed: (1) a PS-matched general cohort (all patients aged 30-85 years) and (2) a PS-matched healthy cohort (excluded patients with cardiovascular diseases or severe comorbidities). Outcomes were thyroid cancer, thyrotoxicosis, goiter, and thyroiditis. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs of outcomes were estimated using conditional regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 43 438 patients, the PS-matched general cohort matched 6342 statin users to 6342 nonusers. The OR of thyroid cancer was 0.62 (95% CI = 0.39-0.996). There was no significant difference between statin users and nonusers in risk of thyrotoxicosis (OR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.71-1.09), goiter (OR = 0.9; 95% CI = 0.77-1.03), or thyroiditis (OR = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.53-1.15). In the PS-matched healthy cohort (3351 statin users to 3351 nonusers), there was no difference between statin users and nonusers in any outcome. Limitations of the study include its retrospective observational design and use of administrative codes in outcomes ascertainment. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: This study did not demonstrate any association of statins with harmful effects on thyroid diseases, which offers assurance to clinicians and patients. Furthermore, statin use appears to be associated with a decreased risk of thyroid cancer, but more studies are needed.

Statins in survivors of traumatic brain injury: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Several in-vitro and animal studies suggest that statins may have beneficial effects on clinical outcomes of traumatic brain injury (TBI), however, clinical data are scarce. OBJECTIVES: To examine the association of statin use with TBI clinical outcomes among patients with TBI. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of Tricare beneficiaries who had a TBI diagnosis, as defined by the Barbell injury diagnosis matrix. Outcomes were defined using ICD-9 codes and included: post-concussion syndrome, neurological disorders, substance dependence or abuse, and psychiatric disorders. Statin-users and non-users were propensity score (PS)-matched using 103 baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Out of 1187 adult patients with a TBI diagnosis (172 statin-users and 1015 nonusers), we PS-matched 70 statin-users to 70 non-users. There were no statistically significant differences in the PS-matched cohort of statin-users in comparison to nonusers for post-concussion syndrome (odds ratio [OR]: 0.24, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.03-2.20), neurological disorders (OR: 0.60, CI: 0.31-1.16); substance dependence or abuse (OR: 0.80, CI: 0.40-1.60), or psychiatric disorders (OR 0.80, CI: 0.41-1.55). CONCLUSION: This study did not show benefit or harm for statins among survivors of TBI. Our findings do not support the evidence from some animal studies and small randomized controlled trials. Further studies utilizing larger sample sizes are warranted.

Association of Statin Therapy With Risk of Epilepsy in 2 Propensity Score-Matched Cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested that statins may have a neuroprotective effect against epilepsy. However, evidence from rat models and case reports have suggested an opposite effect. Overall data are limited. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between statin use and epilepsy risk in a general population and in a healthy population (individuals with no severe comorbidities). METHODS: Patients were Tricare beneficiaries from October 2003 to March 2012. Based on patients' characteristics during baseline phase (fiscal year [FY] 2004-2005), 2 propensity score (PS)-matched cohorts of statin users and nonusers were formed: (1) a PS-matched general cohort and (2) a PS-matched healthy cohort. Our outcome was defined using inpatient or outpatient ICD-9 codes for epilepsy during the follow-up phase (FY 2006 to March 2012) in the cohorts of statin users and nonusers. RESULTS: The study included a total of 43 438 patients (13 626 statin users and 29 812 nonusers). The PS-matched general cohort matched 6342 statin users to 6342 nonusers; the odds ratio (OR) of epilepsy in this cohort during follow-up was 0.91; 95% CI = 0.67-1.23. The PS-matched healthy cohort matched 3351 statin users to 3351 nonusers; OR in the PS-matched healthy cohort during follow-up was 1.08; 95% CI = 0.64-1.83. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not demonstrate a significant beneficial or deleterious effect of statin use on risk of being diagnosed with epilepsy. Clinicians should not withhold statins, whenever indicated, in patients with epilepsy.

Association of statins with aortic, peripheral, and visceral artery aneurysm development.

Objectives Prior studies examining the effects of statins on arterial aneurysm development and progression yielded conflicting results due to their smaller size and presence of residual confounders. The objective of this study is to examine the association of statins with risk of being diagnosed with aortic, peripheral, and visceral artery aneurysm. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of Tricare enrollees (from 1 October 2003 to 31 March 2012). Main outcomes were diagnosis of aortic, peripheral, or visceral artery aneurysm and undergoing aortic aneurysm repair procedure during follow-up period. Using 115 baseline characteristics, we generated a propensity score to match statin users and nonusers and examine the odds of outcomes (primary analysis). Secondary analysis examined outcomes at various subcohorts. Results Out of 10,910 statin users and 49,545 nonusers, we propensity score-matched 6728 pairs of statin users and nonusers. Statin users and nonusers had similar odds of being diagnosed with aortic, peripheral, and visceral artery aneurysms (odds ratio [OR]: 1.06, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.85-1.33) and of undergoing aortic aneurysm repair procedures (OR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.22-1.35). Secondary analysis showed a tendency toward fewer aortic aneurysm procedures among statin users that did not reach statistical significance. However, high-intensity statin users in comparison to non-intensive statin users had higher adjusted odds of aortic, peripheral, and visceral artery aneurysms (OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.37-2.25, p < .0001). Conclusions This study does not support a clinically significant benefit or harm from statins regarding development of arterial aneurysm. However, secondary analyses may support the hypothesis proposed by previous research proposing a bidirectional role for statins.

Association of Statin Therapy and Risks of Cholelithiasis, Biliary Tract Diseases, and Gallbladder Procedures: Retrospective Cohort Analysis of a US Population.

BACKGROUND: Gallstone disease is a leading cause of morbidity in Western countries and carries a high economic burden. Statin medications decrease hepatic cholesterol biosynthesis and may, therefore, lower the risk of cholesterol cholelithiasis by reducing the cholesterol concentration in the bile. Population-based evidence, however, is sparse. OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk of gallbladder diseases among statin users compared with nonusers in an American patient cohort. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients enrolled in the San Antonio Tricare health system using data between October 2003 and March 2012. We defined 2 groups: statin users (use for 90 days or greater) and nonusers (no prior statin). A propensity score based on 82 variables was generated to match statin users and nonusers 1:1. Outcomes included incidence of cholelithiasis, biliary tract diseases, and gallbladder procedures. RESULTS: A total of 43 438 patients were identified; 13 626 (31.4%) were statin users, and 29 812 (68.6%) were nonusers. We matched 6342 pairs of statin users and nonusers based on propensity score. The odds ratios (ORs) in statin users in comparison to nonusers were similar for cholelithiasis (OR = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.73, 1.02), biliary tract disease (OR = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.67-1.08), and gall bladder procedures (OR = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.69, 1.04). CONCLUSIONS: Statin use was not significantly associated with either an increased or decreased risk of cholelithiasis or gallbladder disease.

Statins and New-Onset Diabetes Mellitus and Diabetic Complications: A Retrospective Cohort Study of US Healthy Adults.

BACKGROUND: Statin use is associated with increased incidence of diabetes and possibly with increased body weight and reduced exercise capacity. Data on the long-term effects of these associations in healthy adults, however, are very limited. In addition, the relationship between these effects and diabetic complications has not been adequately studied. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between statin use and new-onset diabetes, diabetic complications, and overweight/obesity in a cohort of healthy adults. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects were Tricare beneficiaries who were evaluated between October 1, 2003 and March 1, 2012. Patients were divided into statin users and nonusers. INTERVENTION: We excluded patients who, at baseline, had a preexisting disease indicative of cardiovascular diseases, any positive element of the Charlson comorbidity index (including diabetes mellitus), or life-limiting chronic diseases. Using 42 baseline characteristics, we generated a propensity score to match statin users and nonusers. MAIN MEASURES: Outcomes assessed included new-onset diabetes, diabetic complications, and overweight/obesity. KEY RESULTS: A total of 25,970 patients (3982 statin users and 21,988 nonusers) were identified as healthy adults at baseline. Of these, 3351 statins users and 3351 nonusers were propensity score-matched. Statin users had higher odds of new-onset diabetes (odds ratio [OR] 1.87; 95 % confidence interval [95 % CI] 1.67-2.01), diabetes with complications (OR 2.50; 95 % CI 1.88-3.32), and overweight/obesity (OR 1.14; 95 % CI 1.04-1.25). Secondary and sensitivity analyses demonstrated similar findings. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes, diabetic complications, and overweight/obesity were more commonly diagnosed among statin-users than similar nonusers in a healthy cohort of adults. This study demonstrates that short-term clinical trials might not fully describe the risk/benefit of long-term statin use for primary prevention.

Statins and male sexual health: a retrospective cohort analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Conflicting reports exist regarding the role of statins in male gonadal and sexual function. Some studies report a beneficial effect, particularly for erectile dysfunction (ED), through statins' anti-inflammatory and cardiovascular protective properties. Others suggest that statins might be associated with sexual dysfunction through negative effects on hormone levels. AIM: This study aims to compare the risk of gonadal or sexual dysfunction in statin users vs. nonusers in a single-payer healthcare system. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all male patients (30-85 years) enrolled in the Tricare San Antonio market. Using 79 baseline characteristics, we created a propensity score-matched cohort of statin users and nonusers. The study duration was divided into a baseline period (October 1, 2003 to September 30, 2005) to describe patient baseline characteristics, and a follow-up period (October 1, 2005 to March 1, 2012) to determine patient outcomes. Statin users were defined as those prescribed a statin for ≥3 months between October 1, 2004 and September 30, 2005. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes were identified as the occurrence of benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH), ED, infertility, testicular dysfunction, or psychosexual dysfunction during the follow-up period as identified by inpatient or outpatient International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Logistic regression was used to determine the association of statin use with patient outcomes. RESULTS: Of 20,731 patients who met study criteria, we propensity score-matched 3,302 statin users with 3,302 nonusers. Statin use in men was not significantly associated with an increased or decreased risk of BPH (odds ratio [OR] 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.19), ED (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.90-1.13), infertility (OR 1.22; 95% CI 0.66-2.29), testicular dysfunction (OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.73-1.14), or psychosexual dysfunction (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.94-1.14). CONCLUSIONS: Statin use was not associated with increased risk of being diagnosed with gonadal or sexual dysfunction in men. Further studies using a larger sample may be needed.

The association of statin use and gonado-sexual function in women: a retrospective cohort analysis.

INTRODUCTION: It has been hypothesized that statins reduce sex hormone biosynthesis through hepatic inhibition of cholesterol synthesis, which is a precursor of androstenedione and estradiol. Such a reduction has been associated with menstrual irregularities, menopausal disorders, infertility, and low libido, but studies are conflicting. Few studies have evaluated the clinical effects of statins on gonadal-sexual function in women. AIM: To compare the risk of gonado-sexual dysfunction in statin users vs. nonusers. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all female, adult patients (30-85 years) enrolled in the Tricare Prime/Plus San Antonio catchment area. Using 79 baseline characteristics, we created a propensity score-matched cohort of statin users and nonusers. The study duration was divided into a baseline period (October 1, 2003 to September 30, 2005) to describe patient baseline characteristics and a follow-up period (October 1, 2005 to March 1, 2012) to determine patient outcomes. Statin users were defined as those prescribed a statin for ≥3 months between October 1, 2004 and September 30, 2005. Logistic regression was used to determine the association of statin use with patient outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes included menstrual disorders, menopausal disorders, infertility, and ovarian/sexual dysfunction during the follow-up period. Outcomes were identified using inpatient or outpatient International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes as defined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Clinical Classifications Software. RESULTS: Of 22,706 women who met study criteria, we propensity score-matched 2,890 statin users with 2,890 nonusers; mean age 58 ± 12 years. Statin use was not significantly associated with menstrual disorders (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.81-1.16), menopausal disorders (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.83-1.02), infertility (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.36-1.73), or ovarian/sexual dysfunction (OR 1.18; 95% CI 0.83-1.70). CONCLUSIONS: Statin use was not associated with higher risk of gonado-sexual dysfunction in women.

Statin therapy and gastrointestinal hemorrhage: a retrospective cohort study with propensity score-matching.

PURPOSE: Whereas some studies suggest that statins exert a gastroprotective effect against gastrointestinal hemorrhage, others report that statin use is associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Aim of report: To investigate the risk of gastrointestinal hemorrhage among statin-users compared with non-users. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using clinical, administrative, and pharmacy data encompassing October 2003 to March 2012 from patients enrolled in the San Antonio military health care system. Two treatment groups were defined: statin-users (use for at least 90 days) and non-users (never received statin). A propensity score-matched cohort was generated to match statin-users and non-users based on 82 variables. Main outcome measures were defined by the International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision-clinical modification diagnoses codes or procedural codes for gastrointestinal hemorrhage, gastritis/doudenitis, gastroduodenal ulcers, endoscopy procedures, and endoscopy procedures related to gastrointestinal hemorrhage. RESULTS: A total of 43,438 patients were identified; 13,626 (31.4%) were statin-users and 29,812 were non-users. We propensity score-matched 6342 non-users with 6342 statin-users. The risk of outcomes was similar between the two groups for gastrointestinal hemorrhage (Odds Ratio [OR]: 1.0; 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 0.91, 1.11); gastrointestinal ulcers (OR: 0.99; 95%CI [0.80, 1.24]); gastritis/duodenitis (OR: 0.92; 95%CI [0.83, 1.02]); and endoscopic procedures (OR: 1.07; 95%CI [0.98, 1.17]). CONCLUSION: Statin use was not significantly associated with either an increased or decreased risk of gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Choice of statin therapy should not be limited in those patients at risk of gastrointestinal hemorrhage.

Outpatient antibiotic prescribing in the United States: 2000 to 2010.

BACKGROUND: The use of antibiotics is the single most important driver in antibiotic resistance. Nevertheless, antibiotic overuse remains common. Decline in antibiotic prescribing in the United States coincided with the launch of national educational campaigns in the 1990s and other interventions, including the introduction of routine infant immunizations with the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV-7); however, it is unknown if these trends have been sustained through recent measurements. METHODS: We performed an analysis of nationally representative data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys from 2000 to 2010. Trends in population-based prescribing were examined for overall antibiotics, broad-spectrum antibiotics, antibiotics for acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) and antibiotics prescribed during ARTI visits. Rates were reported for three age groups: children and adolescents (<18 years), adults (18 to 64 years), and older adults (≥65 years). RESULTS: An estimated 1.4 billion antibiotics were dispensed over the study period. Overall antibiotic prescribing decreased 18% (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.72 to 0.94) among children and adolescents, remained unchanged for adults, and increased 30% (1.30, 1.14 to 1.49) among older adults. Rates of broad-spectrum antibiotic prescriptions doubled from 2000 to 2010 (2.11, 1.81 to 2.47). Proportions of broad-spectrum antibiotic prescribing increased across all age groups: 79% (1.79, 1.52 to 2.11) for children and adolescents, 143% (2.43, 2.07 to 2.86) for adults and 68% (1.68, 1.45 to 1.94) for older adults. ARTI antibiotic prescribing decreased 57% (0.43, 0.35 to 0.52) among children and adolescents and 38% (0.62, 0.48 to 0.80) among adults; however, it remained unchanged among older adults. While the number of ARTI visits declined by 19%, patients with ARTI visits were more likely to receive an antibiotic (73% versus 64%; P <0.001) in 2010 than in 2000. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic use has decreased among children and adolescents, but has increased for older adults. Broad-spectrum antibiotic prescribing continues to be on the rise. Public policy initiatives to promote the judicious use of antibiotics should continue and programs targeting older adults should be developed.

Association of statins and risk of fractures in a military health system: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Contradictory evidence exists regarding statin use and risk of osteoporotic fractures. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to examine the effect of statins on fracture risk in a Military Healthcare System (MHS) with similar access and standard of health care for its beneficiaries. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients enrolled in an MHS encompassing the period from October 1, 2003, to March 1, 2010. Statin users were defined as those receiving a statin for ≥90 days in Fiscal Year 2005, whereas nonusers were defined as individuals not receiving a statin throughout the study period. A propensity score-matched cohort of statin users and nonusers was created using 42 variables. The outcomes were identified using ICD-9-CM codes in the follow-up period (October 1, 2006, to March 1, 2010). In all, 4 outcomes were examined: all fractures, femoral neck fractures, upper-extremity fractures, and lower-extremity fractures. RESULTS: Of 46 249 patients, 6967 pairs of statin users and nonusers were matched. Statin users had a lower risk of femoral neck fracture in comparison to nonusers (odds ratio=0.58, 95% CI=0.36-0.94) but similar risk of all fractures, lower-extremity fractures, and upper-extremity fractures. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients managed in an MHS, statin use was associated with a lower risk of femoral neck fractures, but not all fractures, upper-extremity fractures, or lower-extremity fractures.

Association of statins with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in patients with diabetes.

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common cause of chronic liver disease in patients with diabetes; limited data suggested that statins may reduce the risk of NAFLD progression. This study aimed to examine the association between statins and the development or progression of NAFLD in veterans with diabetes. In a new-user negative control design, we conducted a retrospective propensity score (PS)-matched cohort study of patients with diabetes between 2003 and 2015. After excluding patients with other causes of liver disease, we formed PS using 85 characteristics. The primary outcome was a composite NAFLD progression outcome. Primary analysis examined odds of outcome in PS-matched cohort. Post-hoc analysis included a PS-matched cohort of statin users with intensive lowering of low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) vs low-intensity lowering. We matched 34,102 pairs from 300,739 statin users and 38,038 non-users. The composite outcome occurred in 8.8% of statin users and 8.6% of non-users (odds ratio (OR) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.97-1.08). In the post-hoc analysis, intensive lowering of LDL-C compared to low-intensity showed increased NAFLD progression (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.13-1.30). This study showed that statin use in patients with diabetes was not associated with decreased or increased risk of NAFLD progression. Intensive LDL-C lowering, compared to low-intensity LDL-C lowering, was associated with an increased risk of NAFLD progression.

Association of Strict Versus Lenient Cholesterol Lowering with Cardiac Outcomes, Diabetes Progression and Complications, and Mortality in Patients with Diabetes Treated with Statins: Is Less More?

INTRODUCTION: Whereas some guidelines recommend statin use to achieve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal < 70 mg/dL for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in patients at higher risk, others recommend against a target LDL-C level. Achieving a target level < 70 mg/dL commonly requires the use of high intensity statins, which has been associated with higher risk of diabetes progression. The objective of this study is to assess the association of strict (≤ 70 mg/dL) versus lenient (> 70 to100 mg/dL) LDL-C lowering on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), diabetes progression, diabetes microvascular complications, and total mortality in patients with diabetes. METHODS: This was a retrospective propensity score (PS)-matched study from a national cohort of, predominantly male, veterans diagnosed with diabetes without prior cardiovascular disease (from fiscal years 2003-2015), who were initiated on a statin. We created PS to match strict (mean LDL-C during follow-up ≤ 70 mg/dL) versus lenient (mean LDL-C during follow up > 70-100 mg/dL) using 65 baseline characteristics including comorbidities, risk scores, medication classes usage, vital signs, and laboratory data. Outcomes included MACE, diabetes progression, microvascular diabetes complications, and total mortality. RESULTS: From 80,110 eligible patients, we PS-matched 21,294 pairs of statin initiators with strict or lenient LDL-C lowering. The mean (SD) age was 64 (9.5) years and mean (SD) duration of follow-up was 6 (3) years. MACE was similar in the PS-matched groups [6.1% in strict versus 5.8% in lenient; odds ratio (OR): 1.06; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.98-1.15, P = 0.17]. Diabetes progression was higher among the strict vs lenient group (66.7% in strict versus 64.1% in lenient; OR 1.12; 95% CI 1.08-1.17, P < 0.001). There was no difference in microvascular diabetes complications (22.3% in strict versus 21.9% in lenient; OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.98-1.07, P = 0.31) and no difference in total mortality (14.6% in strict versus 15% in lenient; OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.92-1.02, P = 0.20). CONCLUSION: Strict compared with lenient lowering of LDL-C with statins in men with diabetes without preexisting ASCVD did not decrease the risk of MACE but was associated with an increased diabetes progression. Clinicians should monitor their patients for diabetes progression upon escalating statins to achieve LDL-C levels ≤ 70 mg/dL.

Association of Thiazide Diuretics With Diabetes Progression, Kidney Disease Progression, Cardiovascular Outcomes, and Death Among Patients With Diabetes Who Initiate Statins.

Statins have been associated with diabetes mellitus (DM) progression but their cardiovascular benefit in patients with DM outweigh the harm. However, the effects of concurrent use of other medications that similarly increase blood glucose level, such as thiazide diuretics, are not well studied. This study aimed to evaluate the association of concurrent use of thiazide diuretics and statins on DM progression, cardiovascular and renal outcomes, and death in patients with DM. This is a retrospective cohort study of Veterans with DM who initiated statins between 2003 and 2015. The cohort comprised thiazide users (concomitantly used thiazides and statins for ≥6 months) and active comparators (concomitantly used calciun channel blockers [CCB] but not thiazides and statins for ≥6 months). We excluded patients who were <18 years old, with chronic kidney disease stage 4 or worse, or used loop diuretics. We propensity-score-matched comparison groups on 99 baseline characteristics including demographics, healthcare utilization, co-morbidities, cardiovascular and co-morbidity scores, vital signs, laboratory data, and medication class usage. Outcomes were: (1) DM progression (new insulin initiation, increase in the number of glucose-lowering medication classes, and hyperglycemic episodes); (2) kidney disease progression (doubling of serum creatinine, incidence of chronic kidney disease stage 5, initiation of renal replacement therapy, and incidence of diabetic nephropathy); (3) cardiovascular outcomes (acute myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiac arrest); and (4) total mortality. From 297,967 statin users (228,509 Thiazide-statin users and 69,458 active comparators), we successfully matched 67,614 pairs. In comparison to active comparators, thiazide-statin users had increased risk of DM progression (65.6% in CCB group vs 68.1% in thiazide group; odds ratio [OR]: 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09 to 1.15), decreased risk of kidney progression (16.9% in CCB group vs 16.5 in thiazide group; OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.94 to 0.99), decreased risk of cardiovascular outcomes (15.7% in CCB group vs 14.6% in thiazide group; OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.89 to 0.95), and similar risk of total mortality (19.7% in each group; OR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.98 to 1.03). This study attempted to answer an important clinical question whether thiazide diuretics should be discontinued or substituted upon statin initiation. Our results showed that concurrent use of statin and thiazides in patients with DM was associated with DM progression but with less kidney progression and cardiovascular outcomes and no difference in mortality. Clinicians should closely monitor DM control when thiazides and statins are used concurrently.

Significance of Chronic Kidney Disease on Morbidity and Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

Background: Patients with comorbid illnesses are at risk for worse outcomes with a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19). Our research examined patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) to establish whether it remains an independent risk factor for mortality and morbidity in patients with COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using an electronic patient database in 2020. An observational dataset from 149 hospitals comprising a United States-based health system (HCA Healthcare) was analyzed. Hospitalized patients (N=11 086), aged 18 and above, with a COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction positive result between January 1, 2020, and September 1, 2020, were included in the initial data set.Primary outcomes were in-hospital death or discharge to hospice in patients with COVID-19. Secondary outcomes were individual components of the primary outcome including intensive care unit (ICU) admission, ventilator dependency, development of acute kidney injury (AKI), and in-hospital death. Baseline patient characteristics were recorded, including demographic variables and comorbidities. Results: A total of 11 086 patients were included in the analysis. The study group included patients with CKD (5543 patients). Patients in the control group (5543 patients) were propensity matched for age, race, sex, and ethnicity. The primary outcome of in-hospital death or discharge to hospice was observed in 20.96% of patients with CKD compared to 11.91% of the control group with an odds ratio of 1.58 (confidence interval 1.37-1.80). ICU admission was required for 37.20% of patients in the CKD group and 21.63% of patients in the control group (P < .001). Ventilator dependency was found in 14.41% of patients in the CKD group and 8.59% of patients in the control group (P < .01). Development of AKI was seen in 5.65% of patients in the CKD group and 2.90% of patients in the control group (P < .01). A logistic regression model confirmed an independent association between underlying CKD and in-hospital death or discharge to hospice in patients with COVID-19. Conclusion: Our study confirms an independent association between underlying CKD and poor outcomes among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, including in-hospital death or discharge to hospice.

Reporting potential conflicts of interest among authors of professional medical societies' guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Limited attention is directed to the potential conflicts of interest (COI) of the authors of practice guidelines writing groups of professional medical societies (PMS) and industry. The objective of this study was to report the proportion of authors with potential COI among guidelines writing groups of PMS. METHODS: A systematic search in PubMed to identify practice guidelines of a convenience sample of 12 publicly known PMS for a period of 3 years. The authors' disclosures of COI were reviewed for the identified guidelines. RESULTS: We identified 126 guidelines, of which 107 (85%) reported authors' disclosures of COI and 19 (15%) did not. With the exception of the US Preventive Services Task Force, all of the reviewed guidelines writing groups of PMS had potential COI to some extent. The maximum percentage of authors with potential COI varied among PMS from 25% to 100%. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial variation of percentage of authors with potential COI exists among guidelines writing groups of different PMS. Several practice guidelines of PMS fail to include the disclosures of potential COI in their published guidelines. We made several suggestions to promote the transparency of potential COI in clinical practice guidelines.

Reasoning and evidence-based medicine: common pitfalls.

It is impossible to answer every potential clinical question through randomized controlled trials. Hence, assumptions, rational thinking, logic, and reasoning are used in making recommendations; however, these methods may interfere with the judicious application of evidence-based medicine and, as discussed in this article, may result in logical fallacies. We also explain how we may incorporate recommendations based on assumptions and rational thinking in patient care. Extrapolations of study content and confusing association with causation are common pitfalls in the application of the evidence-based medicine process. Personal bias can be another barrier in the adoption of evidence-based medicine. It can be difficult to modify personal bias despite the evidence; keeping up with the medical literature in a busy practice can be daunting.