Prenatal exposure to pregabalin, birth outcomes and neurodevelopment - a population-based cohort study in four Nordic countries.

INTRODUCTION: Pregabalin is an antiepileptic drug frequently prescribed to pregnant women. Risks of adverse birth and postnatal neurodevelopmental outcomes following prenatal exposure to pregabalin are uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between prenatal exposure to pregabalin and the risks of adverse birth and postnatal neurodevelopmental outcomes. METHODS: This study was conducted using population-based registries in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden (2005-2016). We compared pregabalin exposure against no exposure to antiepileptics and against active comparators lamotrigine and duloxetine. We obtained pooled propensity score-adjusted estimates of association using fixed-effect and Mantel-Haenszel (MH) meta-analyses. RESULTS: The total number of pregabalin-exposed births was 325/666,139 (0.05%) in Denmark, 965/643,088 (0.15%) in Finland, 307/657,451 (0.05%) in Norway, and 1275/1,152,002 (0.11%) in Sweden. The adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) following pregabalin exposure versus no exposure were 1.14 (0.98-1.34) for major congenital malformations and 1.72 (1.02-2.91) for stillbirth, which attenuated to 1.25 (0.74-2.11) in MH meta-analysis. For the remaining birth outcomes, the aPRs were close to or attenuated toward unity in analyses using active comparators. Adjusted hazard ratios (95% CI) contrasting prenatal pregabalin exposure versus no exposure were 1.29 (1.03-1.63) for ADHD and attenuated when using active comparators, 0.98 (0.67-1.42) for autism spectrum disorders, and 1.00 (0.78-1.29) for intellectual disability. CONCLUSIONS: Prenatal exposure to pregabalin was not associated with low birth weight, preterm birth, small for gestational age, low Apgar score, microcephaly, autism spectrum disorders, or intellectual disability. On the basis of the upper value of the 95% confidence interval, increased risks greater than 1.8 were unlikely for any major congenital malformation and ADHD. For stillbirth and most groups of specific major congenital malformations, the estimates attenuated in MH meta-analysis.

Empagliflozin is associated with lower risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in routine care in East Asia: Results from the EMPRISE study.

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: The EMPA-REG OUTCOME® trial demonstrated benefits of empagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i), on cardiovascular, renal outcomes and all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease. The EMPRISE study program evaluates how these effects translate in a broad population of patients with type 2 diabetes in routine clinical care across countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included patients ≥18 years with type 2 diabetes initiating empagliflozin or any dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) from large administrative databases in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. Propensity score-matched (1:1) 'as-treated' analyses comparing the risk of cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality between empagliflozin and DPP-4i use were performed in each country. Pooled hazard ratios (pHR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed using random effects meta-analysis models comparing both empagliflozin and SGLT2i with DPP-4i use, respectively. Intention-to-treat and subgroup analyses in patients with/without cardiovascular disease and in patients receiving 10 mg empagliflozin were performed. RESULTS: The study included 28,712 and 70,233 matched patient pairs for empagliflozin/DPP-4i and SGLT2i/DPP-4i analyses, respectively. The risk of composite outcomes including (i) hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) and all-cause mortality was lower with empagliflozin (pHR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.86) and SGLT2i (0.71, 0.65-0.77); (ii) combined myocardial infarction, stroke, and all-cause mortality was also lower with empagliflozin (0.74, 0.61-0.88) and SGLT2i (0.69, 0.60-0.78) compared to DPP-4i. The intention-to-treat and three subgroup analyses were consistent with results of the main analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that both empagliflozin and SGLT2i compared with DPP-4i are associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in routine clinical care in East Asia.

Metformin in pregnancy and risk of abnormal growth outcomes at birth: a register-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: We previously reported an increased risk of being small for gestational age (SGA) and a decreased risk of being large for gestational age (LGA) after in utero exposure to metformin compared with insulin exposure. This follow-up study investigated if these observations remain when metformin exposure (henceforth, metformin cohort) is compared with non-pharmacological antidiabetic treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM; naïve cohort), instead of insulin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS : This was a Finnish population register-based cohort study from singleton children born during 2004-2016. Birth outcomes from metformin cohort (n=3964) and the naïve cohort (n=82 675) were used in the main analyses. Additional analyses were conducted in a subcohort, restricting the metformin cohort to children of mothers with GDM only (n=2361). Results were reported as inverse probability of treatment weighted OR (wOR), with the naïve cohort as reference. RESULTS  : No difference was found for the outcome of SGA between the cohorts in the main analyses (wOR 0.97, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.27) or in the additional analyses (wOR 1.01, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.37). No difference between the cohorts was found for the risk of LGA (wOR 0.91, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.11) in the main analyses but a decreased risk was observed in the additional analyses (wOR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.92). CONCLUSIONS : This follow-up study found no increase in the risk of SGA or LGA after in utero exposure to metformin, compared with drug-naïve GDM. The decreased risk of LGA in mothers with GDM may suggest residual confounding. The lack of increased SGA risk aligns with findings from studies using metformin in non-diabetic pregnancies. In contrast, lower birth weight and increased SGA birth risk were observed in GDM pregnancies for metformin versus insulin. Metformin should be avoided with emerging growth restriction in utero. The interplay of intrauterine hyperglycemia and pharmacological treatments needs further assessment.

Metformin in pregnancy and risk of adverse long-term outcomes: a register-based cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to investigate if maternal pregnancy exposure to metformin is associated with increased risk of long-term and short-term adverse outcomes in the child. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS : This register-based cohort study from Finland included singleton children born 2004-2016 with maternal pregnancy exposure to metformin or insulin (excluding maternal type 1 diabetes): metformin only (n=3967), insulin only (n=5273) and combination treatment (metformin and insulin; n=889). The primary outcomes were long-term offspring obesity, hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, diabetes, hypertension, polycystic ovary syndrome, and challenges in motor-social development. In a sensitivity analysis, the primary outcomes were investigated only among children with maternal gestational diabetes. Secondary outcomes were adverse outcomes at birth. Analyses were conducted using inverse- probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), with insulin as reference. RESULTS  : Exposure to metformin or combination treatment versus insulin was not associated with increased risk of long-term outcomes in the main or sensitivity analyses. Among the secondary outcomes, increased risk of small for gestational age (SGA) was observed for metformin (IPTW-weighted OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.34); increased risk of large for gestational age, preterm birth and hypoglycemia was observed for combination treatment. No increased risk was observed for neonatal mortality, hyperglycemia, or major congenital anomalies. CONCLUSIONS : This study found no increased long-term risk associated with pregnancy exposure to metformin (alone or in combination with insulin), compared with insulin. The increased risk of SGA associated with metformin versus insulin suggests caution in pregnancies with at-risk fetal undernutrition. The increased risks of adverse outcomes at birth associated with combination treatment may reflect confounding by indication or severity.

Risk of death associated with new benzodiazepine use among persons with Alzheimer disease: A matched cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the risk of death associated with new benzodiazepine and related drug (BZDR) use in a nationwide cohort of persons with Alzheimer disease (AD). METHODS: The register-based MEDALZ cohort, including all community-dwelling Finns diagnosed with AD during 2005 to 2011 (n = 70 718), was used. Clinically verified AD diagnoses were obtained from the Special Reimbursement Register. Drug use periods were modeled from BZDR purchases, derived from the Prescription Register. To study new users, persons who had any BZDR use during the year preceding the AD diagnosis were excluded. For each person initiating BZDR use (n = 10 380), 2 nonusers (n = 20 760) were matched on age, gender, and time since AD diagnosis. The outcome was 180-day mortality, and BZDR use was compared with nonuse with Cox regression. Multivariable analyses were adjusted for Charlson comorbidity index, socioeconomic position, hip fractures, psychiatric disorders, substance abuse, stroke, and other psychotropic drug use. RESULTS: During the follow-up, 5 excess deaths per 100 person-years occurred during BZDR use in comparison to nonuse, and mortality rates were 13.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.2-14.5) and 8.5 (95% CI, 7.9-9.1), respectively. Benzodiazepine and related drug use was associated with an increased risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.4 [95% CI, 1.2-1.6]), and the association was significant from the initiation of use. Benzodiazepine use was associated with an increased risk of death, whereas benzodiazepine-related drug use was not. CONCLUSIONS: Benzodiazepine and related drug use was associated with an increased risk of death in persons with AD. Our results support treatment guidelines stating that nonpharmacological approaches should be the first-line option for symptomatic treatment of AD.

Risk of Hip Fracture in Benzodiazepine Users With and Without Alzheimer Disease.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between benzodiazepine and related drug (BZDR) use and hip fracture as well as postfracture mortality and duration of hospital stay in community-dwellers with and without Alzheimer disease (AD). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The register-based Medication Use and Alzheimer's disease (MEDALZ) study, including all community-dwelling persons diagnosed with AD in Finland during 2005-2011 (n = 70,718) and their matched comparison persons without AD. PARTICIPANTS: Persons without BZDR use during the year preceding the AD diagnosis or the corresponding matching date as well as persons without history of hip fracture were included in this study. MEASUREMENTS: We investigated the risk of hip fracture associated with BZDR use compared with nonuse separately in persons with and without AD. Further, we investigated the association between BZDR use during hip fracture and 1-year mortality as well as longer than a 4-month hospital stay after hip fracture. Associations were reported as hazard ratios and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: BZDR use was associated with an increased risk of hip fracture in persons with and without AD (adjusted hazard ratio 1.4 [95% CI 1.2-1.7] and 1.6 [95% CI 1.3-1.9], respectively). BZDR use during hip fracture was associated with longer than 4-month postfracture hospital stay in persons with AD [adjusted odds ratio 1.9 (95% CI 1.3-2.8)] but not in comparison persons. One-year mortality was not associated with BZDR use during hip fracture. CONCLUSIONS: Higher threshold in prescribing BZDRs for neuropsychiatric symptoms might decrease the hip fracture rate and affect the length of hospital stay in persons with AD.

The Incidence of Benzodiazepine and Related Drug Use in Persons with and without Alzheimer's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepines and related drugs (BZDR) are occasionally used to treat certain symptoms of Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the risks related to BZDR use are high in older persons. Although frequent BZDR use has been reported in persons with AD, no previous study has focused specifically on the incidence of BZDR use in this population. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the incidence of BZDR use in persons with and without AD during a five-year follow-up. METHODS: The Finnish nationwide, register-based MEDALZ cohort includes all AD cases who received a clinically verified AD diagnosis in 2005-2011 (n = 70,718) and their matched comparison persons. Incidence of BZDR, including benzodiazepines (lorazepam, oxazepam, temazepam, alprazolam, chlordiazepoxide, diazepam, and nitrazepam) and Z-drugs (zolpidem and zopiclone), use was investigated in the cohort from two years before to three years after the diagnosis of AD. Further, initial BZDRs were investigated. RESULTS: The incidence of BZDR use was higher in persons with AD starting from 12 months before the diagnosis and peaked at six months after the diagnosis of AD (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 2.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.5-2.8). Benzodiazepines were more frequently initiated by persons with AD, with the incidence peaking at six months after the diagnosis (IRR = 4.5, 95% CI = 4.1-4.9) and remaining over three times higher than in comparison persons until three years after the diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Early symptomatic treatment with BZDRs is contrary to AD treatment guidelines. As BZDRs impair cognition, the observed early treatment with BZDRs may complicate the monitoring of AD treatment effectiveness.

Potentially inappropriate medication use in older people with cancer: prevalence and correlates.

OBJECTIVES: Potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use has been associated with an increase in adverse drug events, hospitalization and mortality. This study investigated the prevalence and factors associated with PIM use in patients presenting to a medical oncology outpatient clinic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients (n=385) aged ≥ 70 years referred to a medical oncology outpatient clinic between January 2009 and July 2010 completed a structured data collection instrument. The instrument assessed medication use, diagnoses, self-reported falls in the previous six months, pain (10-point visual analog scale [VAS]) and distress (10-point VAS). Frailty was defined using exhaustion, weight loss, Karnofsky Performance Scale, instrumental activities of daily living and physical function. PIM use was defined by the Beers Criteria. Logistic regression was used to compute odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for factors associated with PIM use. RESULTS: In total, 26.5% (n=102) of the sample used ≥1 PIM. The five most prevalent classes of PIMs were benzodiazepines (n=34, 8.8%), tricyclic antidepressants (n=16, 4.2%), alpha-adrenoreceptor antagonists (prazosin) (n=15, 3.9%), propulsives (metoclopramide) (n=15, 3.9%) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (n=14, 3.6%). In multivariate analyses, PIM use was associated with age 75-79 years (OR 1.83; 95%CI 1.02-3.26) compared to age 70-74 years, using ≥ 5 medications (OR 4.10; 95%CI 2.26-7.44) compared to <5 medications and being frail (OR 3.05; 95%CI 1.18-7.87) compared to being robust. CONCLUSION: More than one quarter of older people with cancer used one or more PIMs, and this was associated with being frail compared to being robust.