RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Multiple treatment options are recommended for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) by clinical guidelines. This study aimed to explore SLE treatment patterns as there is limited real-world data of SLE medication utilisation, especially in childhood-onset SLE (cSLE). METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal cohort study using five routinely collected healthcare databases from four European countries (United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Spain). We described the characteristics of adult and paediatric patients at time of SLE diagnosis. We calculated the percentage of patients commencing SLE treatments in the first month and year after diagnosis, reported number of prescriptions, starting dose, cumulative dose, and duration of each treatment, and characterised the line of therapy. RESULTS: We characterised 11,255 patients with a first diagnosis of SLE and included 5718 in our medication utilisation analyses. The majority of adult SLE patients were female (range 80-88 %), with median age of 49 to 54 years at diagnosis. In the paediatric cohort (n = 378), 66-83 % of SLE patients were female, with median age of 12 to 16 years at diagnosis. Hydroxychloroquine and glucocorticoids were common first-line treatments in both adults and children, with second-line treatments including mycophenolate mofetil and methotrexate. Few cases of monoclonal antibody use were seen in either cohort. Initial glucocorticoid dosing in paediatric patients was often higher than in adults. CONCLUSION: Treatment choices for adult SLE patients across four European countries were in line with recent therapeutic consensus guidelines. High glucocorticoid prescriptions in paediatric patients suggests the need for steroid-sparing treatment alternatives and paediatric specific guidelines.
RESUMEN
Patients with cancer were excluded from pivotal randomized clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccine products, and available observational evidence on vaccine effectiveness (VE) focused mostly on mild, and not severe COVID-19, which is the ultimate goal of vaccination for high-risk groups. Here, using primary care electronic health records from Catalonia, Spain (SIDIAP), we built two large cohorts of vaccinated and matched control cancer patients with a primary vaccination scheme (n = 184,744) and a booster (n = 108,534). Most patients received a mRNA-based product in primary (76.2%) and booster vaccination (99.9%). Patients had 51.8% (95% CI 40.3%-61.1%) and 58.4% (95% CI 29.3%-75.5%) protection against COVID-19 hospitalization and COVID-19 death respectively after full vaccination (two-doses) and 77.9% (95% CI 69.2%-84.2%) and 80.2% (95% CI 63.0%-89.4%) after booster. Compared to primary vaccination, the booster dose provided higher peak protection during follow-up. Calibration of VE estimates with negative outcomes, and sensitivity analyses with slight different population and COVID-19 outcomes definitions provided similar results. Our results confirm the role of primary and booster COVID-19 vaccination in preventing COVID-19 severe events in patients with cancer and highlight the need for the additional dose in this population.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Neoplasias , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/inmunología , COVID-19/epidemiología , España/epidemiología , Neoplasias/inmunología , Masculino , Femenino , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Adulto , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Vacunación , Inmunización Secundaria , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano de 80 o más AñosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: An updated time-trend analysis of anti-dementia drugs (ADDs) is lacking. The aim of this study is to assess the incident rate (IR) of ADD in individuals with dementia using real-world data. SETTING: Primary care data (country/database) from the UK/CPRD-GOLD (2007-20), Spain/SIDIAP (2010-20) and the Netherlands/IPCI (2008-20), standardised to a common data model. METHODS: Cohort study. Participants: dementia patients ≥40 years old with ≥1 year of previous data. Follow-up: until the end of the study period, transfer out of the catchment area, death or incident prescription of rivastigmine, galantamine, donepezil or memantine. Other variables: age/sex, type of dementia, comorbidities. Statistics: overall and yearly age/sex IR, with 95% confidence interval, per 100,000 person-years (IR per 105 PY (95%CI)). RESULTS: We identified a total of (incident anti-dementia users/dementia patients) 41,024/110,642 in UK/CPRD-GOLD, 51,667/134,927 in Spain/SIDIAP and 2,088/17,559 in the Netherlands/IPCI.In the UK, IR (per 105 PY (95%CI)) of ADD decreased from 2007 (30,829 (28,891-32,862)) to 2010 (17,793 (17,083-18,524)), then increased up to 2019 (31,601 (30,483 to 32,749)) and decrease in 2020 (24,067 (23,021-25,148)). In Spain, IR (per 105 PY (95%CI)) of ADD decreased by 72% from 2010 (51,003 (49,199-52,855)) to 2020 (14,571 (14,109-15,043)). In the Netherlands, IR (per 105 PY (95%CI)) of ADD decreased by 77% from 2009 (21,151 (14,967-29,031)) to 2020 (4763 (4176-5409)). Subjects aged ≥65-79 years and men (in the UK and the Netherlands) initiated more frequently an ADD. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of dementia remains highly heterogeneous. Further consensus in the pharmacological management of patients living with dementia is urgently needed.
Asunto(s)
Demencia , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Demencia/tratamiento farmacológico , Demencia/epidemiología , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Persona de Mediana Edad , Países Bajos/epidemiología , Bases de Datos Factuales , Factores de Tiempo , Nootrópicos/uso terapéutico , España/epidemiología , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Factores de Edad , Utilización de Medicamentos/tendencias , Utilización de Medicamentos/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To study the association between COVID-19 vaccination and the risk of post-COVID-19 cardiac and thromboembolic complications. METHODS: We conducted a staggered cohort study based on national vaccination campaigns using electronic health records from the UK, Spain and Estonia. Vaccine rollout was grouped into four stages with predefined enrolment periods. Each stage included all individuals eligible for vaccination, with no previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccine at the start date. Vaccination status was used as a time-varying exposure. Outcomes included heart failure (HF), venous thromboembolism (VTE) and arterial thrombosis/thromboembolism (ATE) recorded in four time windows after SARS-CoV-2 infection: 0-30, 31-90, 91-180 and 181-365 days. Propensity score overlap weighting and empirical calibration were used to minimise observed and unobserved confounding, respectively.Fine-Gray models estimated subdistribution hazard ratios (sHR). Random effect meta-analyses were conducted across staggered cohorts and databases. RESULTS: The study included 10.17 million vaccinated and 10.39 million unvaccinated people. Vaccination was associated with reduced risks of acute (30-day) and post-acute COVID-19 VTE, ATE and HF: for example, meta-analytic sHR of 0.22 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.29), 0.53 (0.44 to 0.63) and 0.45 (0.38 to 0.53), respectively, for 0-30 days after SARS-CoV-2 infection, while in the 91-180 days sHR were 0.53 (0.40 to 0.70), 0.72 (0.58 to 0.88) and 0.61 (0.51 to 0.73), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination reduced the risk of post-COVID-19 cardiac and thromboembolic outcomes. These effects were more pronounced for acute COVID-19 outcomes, consistent with known reductions in disease severity following breakthrough versus unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Tromboembolia Venosa , Humanos , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiología , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiología , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevención & control , Estudios de Cohortes , SARS-CoV-2 , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/epidemiología , VacunaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A growing body of evidence has reported positive associations between long-term exposure to air pollution and poor COVID-19 outcomes. Inconsistent findings have been reported for short-term air pollution, mostly from ecological study designs. Using individual-level data, we studied the association between short-term variation in air pollutants [nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter with a diameter of <2.5 µm (PM2.5) and a diameter of <10 µm (PM10) and ozone (O3)] and hospital admission among individuals diagnosed with COVID-19. METHODS: The COVAIR-CAT (Air pollution in relation to COVID-19 morbidity and mortality: a large population-based cohort study in Catalonia, Spain) cohort is a large population-based cohort in Catalonia, Spain including 240 902 individuals diagnosed with COVID-19 in the primary care system from 1 March until 31 December 2020. Our outcome was hospitalization within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. We used individual residential address to assign daily air-pollution exposure, estimated using machine-learning methods for spatiotemporal prediction. For each pandemic wave, we fitted Cox proportional-hazards models accounting for non-linear-distributed lagged exposure over the previous 7 days. RESULTS: Results differed considerably by pandemic wave. During the second wave, an interquartile-range increase in cumulative weekly exposure to air pollution (lag0_7) was associated with a 12% increase (95% CI: 4% to 20%) in COVID-19 hospitalizations for NO2, 8% (95% CI: 1% to 16%) for PM2.5 and 9% (95% CI: 3% to 15%) for PM10. We observed consistent positive associations for same-day (lag0) exposure, whereas lag-specific associations beyond lag0 were generally not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests positive associations between NO2, PM2.5 and PM10 and hospitalization risk among individuals diagnosed with COVID-19 during the second wave. Cumulative hazard ratios were largely driven by exposure on the same day as hospitalization.
Asunto(s)
Contaminantes Atmosféricos , Contaminación del Aire , COVID-19 , Ozono , Humanos , España/epidemiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Dióxido de Nitrógeno/efectos adversos , Dióxido de Nitrógeno/análisis , Prueba de COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , Contaminación del Aire/efectos adversos , Contaminación del Aire/análisis , Contaminantes Atmosféricos/efectos adversos , Contaminantes Atmosféricos/análisis , Material Particulado/efectos adversos , Material Particulado/análisis , Ozono/efectos adversos , Ozono/análisis , Hospitalización , Hospitales , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales/efectos adversos , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales/análisisRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of knowledge on how patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are globally treated in the real world, especially with regard to the initial pharmacological treatment of newly diagnosed patients and the different treatment trajectories. This knowledge is important to monitor and improve clinical practice. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study aims to characterise treatments using data from four claims (drug dispensing) and four electronic health record (EHR; drug prescriptions) databases across six countries and three continents, encompassing 1.3 million patients with asthma or COPD. We analysed treatment trajectories at drug class level from first diagnosis and visualised these in sunburst plots. RESULTS: In four countries (USA, UK, Spain and the Netherlands), most adults with asthma initiate treatment with short-acting ß2 agonists monotherapy (20.8%-47.4% of first-line treatments). For COPD, the most frequent first-line treatment varies by country. The largest percentages of untreated patients (for asthma and COPD) were found in claims databases (14.5%-33.2% for asthma and 27.0%-52.2% for COPD) from the USA as compared with EHR databases (6.9%-15.2% for asthma and 4.4%-17.5% for COPD) from European countries. The treatment trajectories showed step-up as well as step-down in treatments. CONCLUSION: Real-world data from claims and EHRs indicate that first-line treatments of asthma and COPD vary widely across countries. We found evidence of a stepwise approach in the pharmacological treatment of asthma and COPD, suggesting that treatments may be tailored to patients' needs.
Asunto(s)
Asma , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica , Adulto , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Administración por Inhalación , Broncodilatadores/uso terapéutico , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/uso terapéutico , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/diagnóstico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/epidemiología , Asma/diagnóstico , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Asma/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Obesity is considered by many as a lifestyle choice rather than a chronic progressive disease. The Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) SOPHIA (Stratification of Obesity Phenotypes to Optimize Future Obesity Therapy) project is part of a momentum shift aiming to provide better tools for the stratification of people with obesity according to disease risk and treatment response. One of the challenges to achieving these goals is that many clinical cohorts are siloed, limiting the potential of combined data for biomarker discovery. In SOPHIA, we have addressed this challenge by setting up a federated database building on open-source DataSHIELD technology. The database currently federates 16 cohorts that are accessible via a central gateway. The database is multi-modal, including research studies, clinical trials, and routine health data, and is accessed using the R statistical programming environment where statistical and machine learning analyses can be performed at a distance without any disclosure of patient-level data. We demonstrate the use of the database by providing a proof-of-concept analysis, performing a federated linear model of BMI and systolic blood pressure, pooling all data from 16 studies virtually without any analyst seeing individual patient-level data. This analysis provided similar point estimates compared to a meta-analysis of the 16 individual studies. Our approach provides a benchmark for reproducible, safe federated analyses across multiple study types provided by multiple stakeholders.
RESUMEN
Background: SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) and GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RAs) reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, their effectiveness relative to each other and other second-line antihyperglycemic agents is unknown, without any major ongoing head-to-head trials. Methods: Across the LEGEND-T2DM network, we included ten federated international data sources, spanning 1992-2021. We identified 1,492,855 patients with T2DM and established cardiovascular disease (CVD) on metformin monotherapy who initiated one of four second-line agents (SGLT2is, GLP1-RAs, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor [DPP4is], sulfonylureas [SUs]). We used large-scale propensity score models to conduct an active comparator, target trial emulation for pairwise comparisons. After evaluating empirical equipoise and population generalizability, we fit on-treatment Cox proportional hazard models for 3-point MACE (myocardial infarction, stroke, death) and 4-point MACE (3-point MACE + heart failure hospitalization) risk, and combined hazard ratio (HR) estimates in a random-effects meta-analysis. Findings: Across cohorts, 16·4%, 8·3%, 27·7%, and 47·6% of individuals with T2DM initiated SGLT2is, GLP1-RAs, DPP4is, and SUs, respectively. Over 5·2 million patient-years of follow-up and 489 million patient-days of time at-risk, there were 25,982 3-point MACE and 41,447 4-point MACE events. SGLT2is and GLP1-RAs were associated with a lower risk for 3-point MACE compared with DPP4is (HR 0·89 [95% CI, 0·79-1·00] and 0·83 [0·70-0·98]), and SUs (HR 0·76 [0·65-0·89] and 0·71 [0·59-0·86]). DPP4is were associated with a lower 3-point MACE risk versus SUs (HR 0·87 [0·79-0·95]). The pattern was consistent for 4-point MACE for the comparisons above. There were no significant differences between SGLT2is and GLP1-RAs for 3-point or 4-point MACE (HR 1·06 [0·96-1·17] and 1·05 [0·97-1·13]). Interpretation: In patients with T2DM and established CVD, we found comparable cardiovascular risk reduction with SGLT2is and GLP1-RAs, with both agents more effective than DPP4is, which in turn were more effective than SUs. These findings suggest that the use of GLP1-RAs and SGLT2is should be prioritized as second-line agents in those with established CVD. Funding: National Institutes of Health, United States Department of Veterans Affairs.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Factors that shape individuals' vulnerability to the effects of air pollution on COVID-19 severity remain poorly understood. We evaluated whether the association between long-term exposure to ambient NO2, PM2.5, and PM10 and COVID-19 hospitalisation differs by age, sex, individual income, area-level socioeconomic status, arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. METHODS: We analysed a population-based cohort of 4,639,184 adults in Catalonia, Spain, during 2020. We fitted Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for several potential confounding factors and evaluated the interaction effect between vulnerability indicators and the 2019 annual average of NO2, PM2.5, and PM10. We evaluated interaction on both additive and multiplicative scales. RESULTS: Overall, the association was additive between air pollution and the vulnerable groups. Air pollution and vulnerability indicators had a synergistic (greater than additive) effect for males and individuals with low income or living in the most deprived neighbourhoods. The Relative Excess Risk due to Interaction (RERI) was 0.21, 95 % CI, 0.15 to 0.27 for NO2 and 0.16, 95 % CI, 0.11 to 0.22 for PM2.5 for males; 0.13, 95 % CI, 0.09 to 0.18 for NO2 and 0.10, 95 % CI, 0.05 to 0.14 for PM2.5 for lower individual income and 0.17, 95 % CI, 0.12 to 0.22 for NO2 and 0.09, 95 % CI, 0.05 to 0.14 for PM2.5 for lower area-level socioeconomic status. Results for PM10 were similar to PM2.5. Results on multiplicative scale were inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term exposure to air pollution had a larger synergistic effect on COVID-19 hospitalisation for males and those with lower individual- and area-level socioeconomic status.
Asunto(s)
Contaminantes Atmosféricos , Contaminación del Aire , COVID-19 , Masculino , Adulto , Humanos , Contaminantes Atmosféricos/efectos adversos , Contaminantes Atmosféricos/análisis , Material Particulado/efectos adversos , Material Particulado/análisis , Dióxido de Nitrógeno/análisis , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales/efectos adversos , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales/análisis , COVID-19/epidemiología , Contaminación del Aire/efectos adversos , Contaminación del Aire/análisis , HospitalizaciónRESUMEN
Purpose: Few studies have examined how the absolute risk of thromboembolism with COVID-19 has evolved over time across different countries. Researchers from the European Medicines Agency, Health Canada, and the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration established a collaboration to evaluate the absolute risk of arterial (ATE) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the 90 days after diagnosis of COVID-19 in the ambulatory (eg, outpatient, emergency department, nursing facility) setting from seven countries across North America (Canada, US) and Europe (England, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Spain) within periods before and during COVID-19 vaccine availability. Patients and Methods: We conducted cohort studies of patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting from the seven specified countries. Patients were followed for 90 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. The primary outcomes were ATE and VTE over 90 days from diagnosis date. We measured country-level estimates of 90-day absolute risk (with 95% confidence intervals) of ATE and VTE. Results: The seven cohorts included 1,061,565 patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting before COVID-19 vaccines were available (through November 2020). The 90-day absolute risk of ATE during this period ranged from 0.11% (0.09-0.13%) in Canada to 1.01% (0.97-1.05%) in the US, and the 90-day absolute risk of VTE ranged from 0.23% (0.21-0.26%) in Canada to 0.84% (0.80-0.89%) in England. The seven cohorts included 3,544,062 patients with COVID-19 during vaccine availability (beginning December 2020). The 90-day absolute risk of ATE during this period ranged from 0.06% (0.06-0.07%) in England to 1.04% (1.01-1.06%) in the US, and the 90-day absolute risk of VTE ranged from 0.25% (0.24-0.26%) in England to 1.02% (0.99-1.04%) in the US. Conclusion: There was heterogeneity by country in 90-day absolute risk of ATE and VTE after ambulatory COVID-19 diagnosis both before and during COVID-19 vaccine availability.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Although vaccines have proved effective to prevent severe COVID-19, their effect on preventing long-term symptoms is not yet fully understood. We aimed to evaluate the overall effect of vaccination to prevent long COVID symptoms and assess comparative effectiveness of the most used vaccines (ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2). METHODS: We conducted a staggered cohort study using primary care records from the UK (Clinical Practice Research Datalink [CPRD] GOLD and AURUM), Catalonia, Spain (Information System for Research in Primary Care [SIDIAP]), and national health insurance claims from Estonia (CORIVA database). All adults who were registered for at least 180 days as of Jan 4, 2021 (the UK), Feb 20, 2021 (Spain), and Jan 28, 2021 (Estonia) comprised the source population. Vaccination status was used as a time-varying exposure, staggered by vaccine rollout period. Vaccinated people were further classified by vaccine brand according to their first dose received. The primary outcome definition of long COVID was defined as having at least one of 25 WHO-listed symptoms between 90 and 365 days after the date of a PCR-positive test or clinical diagnosis of COVID-19, with no history of that symptom 180 days before SARS-Cov-2 infection. Propensity score overlap weighting was applied separately for each cohort to minimise confounding. Sub-distribution hazard ratios (sHRs) were calculated to estimate vaccine effectiveness against long COVID, and empirically calibrated using negative control outcomes. Random effects meta-analyses across staggered cohorts were conducted to pool overall effect estimates. FINDINGS: A total of 1 618 395 (CPRD GOLD), 5 729 800 (CPRD AURUM), 2 744 821 (SIDIAP), and 77 603 (CORIVA) vaccinated people and 1 640 371 (CPRD GOLD), 5 860 564 (CPRD AURUM), 2 588 518 (SIDIAP), and 302 267 (CORIVA) unvaccinated people were included. Compared with unvaccinated people, overall HRs for long COVID symptoms in people vaccinated with a first dose of any COVID-19 vaccine were 0·54 (95% CI 0·44-0·67) in CPRD GOLD, 0·48 (0·34-0·68) in CPRD AURUM, 0·71 (0·55-0·91) in SIDIAP, and 0·59 (0·40-0·87) in CORIVA. A slightly stronger preventative effect was seen for the first dose of BNT162b2 than for ChAdOx1 (sHR 0·85 [0·60-1·20] in CPRD GOLD and 0·84 [0·74-0·94] in CPRD AURUM). INTERPRETATION: Vaccination against COVID-19 consistently reduced the risk of long COVID symptoms, which highlights the importance of vaccination to prevent persistent COVID-19 symptoms, particularly in adults. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Vacuna BNT162 , Estudios de Cohortes , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/uso terapéutico , Estonia , Síndrome Post Agudo de COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , España , Reino Unido/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Real-world data (RWD) offers a valuable resource for generating population-level disease epidemiology metrics. We aimed to develop a well-tested and user-friendly R package to compute incidence rates and prevalence in data mapped to the observational medical outcomes partnership (OMOP) common data model (CDM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We created IncidencePrevalence, an R package to support the analysis of population-level incidence rates and point- and period-prevalence in OMOP-formatted data. On top of unit testing, we assessed the face validity of the package. To do so, we calculated incidence rates of COVID-19 using RWD from Spain (SIDIAP) and the United Kingdom (CPRD Aurum), and replicated two previously published studies using data from the Netherlands (IPCI) and the United Kingdom (CPRD Gold). We compared the obtained results to those previously published, and measured execution times by running a benchmark analysis across databases. RESULTS: IncidencePrevalence achieved high agreement to previously published data in CPRD Gold and IPCI, and showed good performance across databases. For COVID-19, incidence calculated by the package was similar to public data after the first-wave of the pandemic. CONCLUSION: For data mapped to the OMOP CDM, the IncidencePrevalence R package can support descriptive epidemiological research. It enables reliable estimation of incidence and prevalence from large real-world data sets. It represents a simple, but extendable, analytical framework to generate estimates in a reproducible and timely manner.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Manejo de Datos , Humanos , Incidencia , Prevalencia , Bases de Datos Factuales , COVID-19/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Ranitidine, a histamine H2-receptor antagonist (H2RA), is indicated in the management of gastric acid-related disorders. In 2020, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) recommended suspension of all ranitidine-containing medicines in the European Union (EU) due to the presence of N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) impurities, which were considered to be carcinogenic. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of regulatory intervention on use patterns of ranitidine-containing medicines and their therapeutic alternatives. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to study drug utilisation patterns of ranitidine and report discernible trends in treatment discontinuation and switching to alternative medications. METHODS: This retrospective, population-based cohort study was conducted using primary care records from six European countries between 2017 and 2023. To explore drug utilisation patterns, we calculated (1) incident use of ranitidine, other H2RAs, and other alternative drugs for the treatment of gastric ulcer and/or gastric bleeding; (2) ranitidine discontinuation; and (3) switching from ranitidine to alternative drugs (H2RAs, proton-pump inhibitors [PPIs], and other medicinal products for acid-related disorders). RESULTS: During the study period, 385,273 new ranitidine users were observed, with most users being female and aged 18-74 years. Ranitidine was the most commonly prescribed H2RA in the pre-referral period (September 2017-August 2019), with incidence rates between 0.8 and 9.0/1000 person years (PY). A steep decline to 0.3-3.8/1000 PY was observed in the referral period (September 2019-March 2020), eventually dropping to 0.0-0.4/1000 PY in the post-referral period (April 2020-March 2022). Switching from ranitidine to alternative drugs increased in the post-referral period, with the majority of patients switching to PPIs. Discontinuation of ranitidine use ranged from 270 to 380/1000 users in 2017 and decreased over time. CONCLUSIONS: Ranitidine was commonly used prior to referral, but it was subsequently discontinued and replaced primarily with PPIs.
Asunto(s)
Antagonistas de los Receptores H2 de la Histamina , Ranitidina , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Ranitidina/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios de Cohortes , Antagonistas de los Receptores H2 de la Histamina/efectos adversos , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/efectos adversos , Utilización de MedicamentosRESUMEN
Persistent symptoms following the acute phase of COVID-19 present a major burden to both the affected and the wider community. We conducted a cohort study including over 856,840 first COVID-19 cases, 72,422 re-infections and more than 3.1 million first negative-test controls from primary care electronic health records from Spain and the UK (Sept 2020 to Jan 2022 (UK)/March 2022 (Spain)). We characterised post-acute COVID-19 symptoms and identified key symptoms associated with persistent disease. We estimated incidence rates of persisting symptoms in the general population and among COVID-19 patients over time. Subsequently, we investigated which WHO-listed symptoms were particularly differential by comparing their frequency in COVID-19 cases vs. matched test-negative controls. Lastly, we compared persistent symptoms after first infections vs. reinfections.Our study shows that the proportion of COVID-19 cases affected by persistent post-acute COVID-19 symptoms declined over the study period. Risk for altered smell/taste was consistently higher in patients with COVID-19 vs test-negative controls. Persistent symptoms were more common after reinfection than following a first infection. More research is needed into the definition of long COVID, and the effect of interventions to minimise the risk and impact of persistent symptoms.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Síndrome Post Agudo de COVID-19 , Humanos , Estudios de Cohortes , COVID-19/epidemiología , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , ReinfecciónRESUMEN
Objective: Developing accurate phenotype definitions is critical in obtaining reliable and reproducible background rates in safety research. This study aims to illustrate the differences in background incidence rates by comparing definitions for a given outcome. Materials and Methods: We used 16 data sources to systematically generate and evaluate outcomes for 13 adverse events and their overall background rates. We examined the effect of different modifications (inpatient setting, standardization of code set, and code set changes) to the computable phenotype on background incidence rates. Results: Rate ratios (RRs) of the incidence rates from each computable phenotype definition varied across outcomes, with inpatient restriction showing the highest variation from 1 to 11.93. Standardization of code set RRs ranges from 1 to 1.64, and code set changes range from 1 to 2.52. Discussion: The modification that has the highest impact is requiring inpatient place of service, leading to at least a 2-fold higher incidence rate in the base definition. Standardization showed almost no change when using source code variations. The strength of the effect in the inpatient restriction is highly dependent on the outcome. Changing definitions from broad to narrow showed the most variability by age/gender/database across phenotypes and less than a 2-fold increase in rate compared to the base definition. Conclusion: Characterization of outcomes across a network of databases yields insights into sensitivity and specificity trade-offs when definitions are altered. Outcomes should be thoroughly evaluated prior to use for background rates for their plausibility for use across a global network.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Individual case reports are the main asset in pharmacovigilance signal management. Signal validation is the first stage after signal detection and aims to determine if there is sufficient evidence to justify further assessment. Throughout signal management, a prioritization of signals is continually made. Routinely collected health data can provide relevant contextual information but are primarily used at a later stage in pharmacoepidemiological studies to assess communicated signals. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the feasibility and utility of analysing routine health data from a multinational distributed network to support signal validation and prioritization and to reflect on key user requirements for these analyses to become an integral part of this process. METHODS: Statistical signal detection was performed in VigiBase, the WHO global database of individual case safety reports, targeting generic manufacturer drugs and 16 prespecified adverse events. During a 5-day study-a-thon, signal validation and prioritization were performed using information from VigiBase, regulatory documents and the scientific literature alongside descriptive analyses of routine health data from 10 partners of the European Health Data and Evidence Network (EHDEN). Databases included in the study were from the UK, Spain, Norway, the Netherlands and Serbia, capturing records from primary care and/or hospitals. RESULTS: Ninety-five statistical signals were subjected to signal validation, of which eight were considered for descriptive analyses in the routine health data. Design, execution and interpretation of results from these analyses took up to a few hours for each signal (of which 15-60 minutes were for execution) and informed decisions for five out of eight signals. The impact of insights from the routine health data varied and included possible alternative explanations, potential public health and clinical impact and feasibility of follow-up pharmacoepidemiological studies. Three signals were selected for signal assessment, two of these decisions were supported by insights from the routine health data. Standardization of analytical code, availability of adverse event phenotypes including bridges between different source vocabularies, and governance around the access and use of routine health data were identified as important aspects for future development. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses of routine health data from a distributed network to support signal validation and prioritization are feasible in the given time limits and can inform decision making. The cost-benefit of integrating these analyses at this stage of signal management requires further research.
Asunto(s)
Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos , Farmacovigilancia , Humanos , Sistemas de Registro de Reacción Adversa a Medicamentos , Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos/epidemiología , Bases de Datos Factuales , Países BajosRESUMEN
Objective: To assess the uptake of second line antihyperglycaemic drugs among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are receiving metformin. Design: Federated pharmacoepidemiological evaluation in LEGEND-T2DM. Setting: 10 US and seven non-US electronic health record and administrative claims databases in the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics network in eight countries from 2011 to the end of 2021. Participants: 4.8 million patients (≥18 years) across US and non-US based databases with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had received metformin monotherapy and had initiated second line treatments. Exposure: The exposure used to evaluate each database was calendar year trends, with the years in the study that were specific to each cohort. Main outcomes measures: The outcome was the incidence of second line antihyperglycaemic drug use (ie, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, and sulfonylureas) among individuals who were already receiving treatment with metformin. The relative drug class level uptake across cardiovascular risk groups was also evaluated. Results: 4.6 million patients were identified in US databases, 61 382 from Spain, 32 442 from Germany, 25 173 from the UK, 13 270 from France, 5580 from Scotland, 4614 from Hong Kong, and 2322 from Australia. During 2011-21, the combined proportional initiation of the cardioprotective antihyperglycaemic drugs (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors) increased across all data sources, with the combined initiation of these drugs as second line drugs in 2021 ranging from 35.2% to 68.2% in the US databases, 15.4% in France, 34.7% in Spain, 50.1% in Germany, and 54.8% in Scotland. From 2016 to 2021, in some US and non-US databases, uptake of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors increased more significantly among populations with no cardiovascular disease compared with patients with established cardiovascular disease. No data source provided evidence of a greater increase in the uptake of these two drug classes in populations with cardiovascular disease compared with no cardiovascular disease. Conclusions: Despite the increase in overall uptake of cardioprotective antihyperglycaemic drugs as second line treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus, their uptake was lower in patients with cardiovascular disease than in people with no cardiovascular disease over the past decade. A strategy is needed to ensure that medication use is concordant with guideline recommendations to improve outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We investigated the association between body mass index (BMI) and obesity-related cancer risk among individuals with/without incident hypertension (HTN), type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and cardiovascular disease (CVD) and the joint associations of overweight/obesity (BMI ≥25 kg/m2 ) and each cardiometabolic condition with obesity-related cancer risk METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort (n = 1,774,904 individuals aged ≥40 years and free of cancer and cardiometabolic conditions at baseline) study between 2010 and 2018 with electronic health records from Spain. Our main outcome measures were hazard ratios (HRs) for incident obesity-related cancers and relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI). RESULTS: A total of 38,082 individuals developed obesity-related cancers after a median of 8 years of follow-up. The positive association between BMI and obesity-related cancer risk was similar among individuals free of cardiometabolic conditions (hazard ratio, HR per 5 kg/m2 : 1.08, 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.06-1.10) and with incident HTN (1.05, 1.01-1.08). The association among those with incident T2DM was null (0.98, 0.93-1.03). There was a positive additive interaction between overweight/obesity and CVD (relative excess risk due to interaction [RERI]: 0.19 [0.09, 0.30]), meaning that the combined association was 0.19 more than the sum of the individual associations. In contrast, a RERI of -0.24 (-0.28, -0.20) was observed for the combined association between overweight/obesity and T2DM. CONCLUSIONS: Public health strategies to reduce overweight can help prevent cancer cases among the general population and individuals with incident HTN/CVD. Further, weight-loss interventions seem to lead to a greater cancer risk reduction among individuals with CVD.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Cardiovasculares , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Hipertensión , Neoplasias , Humanos , Índice de Masa Corporal , Sobrepeso/complicaciones , Sobrepeso/epidemiología , España/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Estudios de Cohortes , Factores de Riesgo , Obesidad/complicaciones , Obesidad/epidemiología , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/epidemiología , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/etiología , Hipertensión/epidemiología , Neoplasias/etiología , Neoplasias/complicacionesRESUMEN
Purpose: The primary aim of this work was to convert the Information System for Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP) from Catalonia, Spain, to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model (CDM). Our second aim was to provide a descriptive analysis of COVID-19-related outcomes among the general population. Patients and Methods: We mapped patient-level data from SIDIAP to the OMOP CDM and we performed more than 3,400 data quality checks to assess its readiness for research. We established a general population cohort as of the 1st March 2020 and identified outpatient COVID-19 diagnoses or tested positive for, hospitalised with, admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with, died with, or vaccinated against COVID-19 up to 30th June 2022. Results: After verifying the high quality of the transformed dataset, we included 5,870,274 individuals in the general population cohort. Of those, 604,472 had either an outpatient COVID-19 diagnosis or positive test result, 58,991 had a hospitalisation, 5,642 had an ICU admission, and 11,233 died with COVID-19. A total of 4,584,515 received a COVID-19 vaccine. People who were hospitalised or died were more commonly older, male, and with more comorbidities. Those admitted to ICU with COVID-19 were generally younger and more often male than those hospitalised and those who died. Conclusion: We successfully transformed SIDIAP to the OMOP CDM. From this dataset, a general population cohort of 5.9 million individuals was identified and their COVID-19-related outcomes over time were described. The transformed SIDIAP database is a valuable resource that can enable distributed network research in COVID-19 and beyond.