Primary Care and Infectious Disease Provider Adherence to HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Prescribing and Monitoring Recommendations.

This study aimed to compare primary care (PC) and infectious diseases (ID) provider adherence to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) prescribing and monitoring parameters outlined in Centers for Disease Control/Department of Health and Human Services (CDC/DHHS) guidelines. This retrospective cohort analysis from 2017 to 2022 used prescription and laboratory order data to identify patients prescribed PrEP by PC or ID providers. Primary endpoints assessed were adherence to baseline and follow-up HIV monitoring recommendations in the 12 months following the initial PrEP prescription. Secondary endpoints included appropriate PrEP prescription order quantities (≤ 90-day supply), appropriate renal function monitoring, and identification of factors independently associated with follow-up HIV monitoring adherence. Of the 324 eligible patients identified, 112 received PrEP from an ID specialist and 212 from a PC provider. Patients prescribed PrEP from an ID specialist were more likely to have appropriately completed baseline HIV monitoring (OR = 2.56, 95% CI 1.20, 5.47), follow-up HIV monitoring (OR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.08, 3.05), and renal function monitoring (OR = 2.81, 95% CI 1.69, 4.68); The ID group was also more likely to have PrEP prescriptions appropriately authorized for a days' supply of ≤ 90 days (OR = 4.41, 95% CI 2.60, 7.48). Patients receiving PrEP care from ID specialists had better adherence to all assessed PrEP prescribing and monitoring recommendations compared to those receiving care from PC providers.

Description of patient questions received by clinical pharmacists in the Nudge Study.

PURPOSE: The Nudge Study is a patient level-randomized trial testing different text message medication refill reminders sent to patients assigned to 4 arms: (1) usual care, (2) generic text, (3) optimized text, and (4) optimized text plus chatbot. This report describes the frequency and types of patient questions sent to clinical pharmacists (CPs) following text reminders. METHODS: Patients were enrolled from Denver Health and Hospital Authority (DHHA) and Veterans Affairs Eastern Colorado Health Care System (VA ECHCS) from October 1, 2019, through May 30, 2021. Included patients responded to at least 1 text or interactive voice response (IVR) message. Patients were dichotomized as those who posed at least 1 question to a CP and those who posed no questions. RESULTS: Of the 6,325 patients enrolled in an intervention arm, 3,323 (52.5%) responded to at least 1 text or IVR message, and among those responding, 305 (9.2%) responded with a pharmacist question. Patient factors associated with submitting a CP question included age (45-74 years), enrollment from DHHA, and receipt of the optimized text or optimized text plus chatbot message versus the generic text. Questions to CP were in the following categories: medication related (48.2%), refill logistics (38.4%), cost (9.2%), and other (17.7%). CONCLUSION: In a text messaging intervention focused on medication refills, there were few questions directed to the CP. Patients assigned to receive optimized texts were more likely to have questions. We hypothesize that this may suggest greater patient engagement regarding their condition, resulting in more questions.

Evaluation of Loop Diuretic Dosing Following Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor Initiation in Patients With Heart Failure.

Introduction: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) have demonstrated cardiovascular benefits in patients with heart failure, many of which take loop diuretics. There are no evidence-based recommendations identifying which patients may require loop diuretic dose decreases or how to adjust loop diuretic doses when SGLT2is are initiated. Objectives: The main objective of this study was to investigate the frequency and degree of adjustments in loop diuretic doses after SGLT2i initiation in patients with heart failure. Methods: In this retrospective evaluation, patients seen in the UCHealth system with a diagnosis of heart failure who were prescribed a loop diuretic before initiation of SGLT2i were identified. We described loop diuretic dose changes at the time of SGLT2i initiation, at 6 months after initiation, and at 1 year after initiation. We also described de-escalation of maintenance medications that can contribute to hypotension at these time points. Data were evaluated using descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 100 patients were included. Loop diuretic dose was reduced empirically upon SGLT2i initiation in 2.0% of patients. Reduction of loop diuretic dose within the first 6 months of starting an SGLT2i occurred in 8.0% of patients. From baseline to 12 months after starting SGLT2i therapy, 14.0% of patients had loop diuretic dose reduction. Conclusions: Most of our patients with HF did not have change in loop diuretic dose after initiation of an SGLT2i. In patients who did have loop diuretic dose reduction, most occurred within 6 months after starting SGLT2i therapy rather than empirically at time of initiation.

Medications Associated with Occurrence of Urinary Tract Infections in Patients with Diabetes, Heart Failure or Both.

BACKGROUND: Evidence broadly identifying medications newly-initiated prior to the occurrence of a urinary tract infection (UTI) in patients with diabetes, heart failure, or both of these conditions is lacking. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to broadly assess medication filling patterns and incidence of UTIs to identify medications or medication classes most frequently initiated prior to UTI occurrence. METHODS: This retrospective study utilizing a national claims database examined medications commonly initiated in the six months preceding a UTI in patients with diabetes and/or heart failure. Patients with a new diagnosis of UTI, a diagnosis of diabetes and/or heart failure, continuous enrollment in the database for at least 12 months prior to the index UTI occurrence, and who initiated at least one new medication in the 6 months preceding the index UTI were evaluated. RESULTS: 12,744 patients met criteria: 10,626 (83.4%) had a diagnosis of diabetes, 838 (6.6%) had a diagnosis of heart failure, and 1,280 (10.0%) had diagnoses for both. Opioids were the most commonly filled medication class among all three groups. Medications from the SGLT2i class were the twelfth, eleventh, and eighteenth most common medications filled prior to the index UTI for all patients, patients with diabetes, and patients with diabetes and heart failure, respectively. CONCLUSION: Opioids were by far the most commonly initiated medication class in the 6 months prior to UTI incidence in patients with diabetes and/or heart failure. SGLT2i medications were not commonly initiated in the 6 months prior to the occurrence of a UTI.

Clinical conundrums involving statin drug-drug interactions.

Statins are the cornerstone of pharmacologic therapy for the prevention and treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. While they are generally considered safe, statins can be affected by drug-drug interactions (DDIs) that increase their systemic exposure increasing the risk for statin-associated muscle symptoms. These interactions are primarily mediated through metabolizing enzymes such as cytochrome P450 isoenzymes and membrane-bound drug transporting proteins including P-glycoprotein and organic ion transporting polypeptide. Recognition and avoidance of clinically significant statin DDIs is important to ensure their safe use. Conversely, concern over statin DDIs that are not clinically significant may lead to inappropriate underutilization or avoidance of statins in patients who would benefit from them. While many statin DDIs are well-characterized, we present several others that are less-well-established which may warrant clinical attention.

NLA scientific statement on statin intolerance: a new definition and key considerations for ASCVD risk reduction in the statin intolerant patient.

Although statins are generally well tolerated, statin intolerance is reported in 5-30% of patients and contributes to reduced statin adherence and persistence, as well as higher risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes. This Scientific Statement from the National Lipid Association was developed to provide an updated definition of statin intolerance and to inform clinicians and researchers about its identification and management. Statin intolerance is defined as one or more adverse effects associated with statin therapy which resolves or improves with dose reduction or discontinuation and can be classified as a complete inability to tolerate any dose of a statin or partial intolerance with inability to tolerate the dose necessary to achieve the patient-specific therapeutic objective. To classify a patient as having statin intolerance, a minimum of two statins should have been attempted, including at least one at the lowest approved daily dosage. This Statement acknowledges the importance of identifying modifiable risk factors for statin intolerance and recognizes the possibility of a "nocebo" effect (patient expectation of harm resulting in perceived side effects). To identify a tolerable statin regimen it is recommended that clinicians consider using several different strategies (e.g., different statin, dose, and/or dosing frequency). Non-statin therapy may be required for patients who cannot reach therapeutic objectives with lifestyle and maximal tolerated statin therapy. If so, therapies with outcomes data from randomized trials showing reduced cardiovascular events are favored. In high and very high risk patients who are statin intolerant, clinicians should consider initiating non-statin therapy while additional attempts are made to identify a tolerable statin in order to limit the time of exposure to elevated levels of atherogenic lipoproteins.

Lipoprotein(a) and ethnicities.

The initial studies focusing on lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and its role in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were conducted exclusively in Whites. Subsequently, multiple large-scale, independent investigations have established clear race/ethnic differences in plasma Lp(a) concentration and population distribution over the last four decades. Blacks have the highest Lp(a) level of all race/ethnic groups studied followed by South Asians, Whites, Hispanics and East Asians. The mechanisms underlying these differences have been sought and genetics plays an important role in providing insights into the observed differences. The association of elevated Lp(a) level with cardiovascular disease risk in different race/ethnic groups has also been studied. These studies show that, in general, elevated Lp(a) level is associated with cardiovascular risk in all groups. However, given race/ethnic differences in Lp(a) level and distribution, finding an appropriate Lp(a) threshold that predicts risk, meaningfully categorizes risk among individuals, and guides preventive therapy use has been challenging. In this review, we discuss the available evidence regarding race/ethnic differences in Lp(a) and the underlying mechanisms. Additionally, the association of Lp(a) with cardiovascular risk in various race/ethnic groups and the nuances of identifying the appropriate Lp(a) threshold are discussed. The key points on Lp(a) and ethnicities are described in Box 1.

JCL Roundtable. The lipidology team.

Clinical lipidology practice works best when implemented by a health care team. The 3 discussants for this JCL Roundtable are National Lipid Association leaders representing essential areas on the team - Registered Dietitian Nutritionist, Advanced Practice Provider, and Clinical Pharmacist. The team approach has been shown more effective than traditional sole provider management for controlling chronic asymptomatic conditions like hypercholesterolemia. Teams also fit better as health care transitions away from fee-for-service into value-based reimbursement. It's worth noting that medicine and even surgery were never entirely solo endeavors. Here we discuss a more expansive team model, which began in the U.S. more than 2 decades ago in the Veterans Administration and certain managed care organizations such as Kaiser Permanente. These health care organizations place themselves at risk, comprising both normative and financial risk, for maintaining their patients' health. Academic medical centers and private health care groups increasingly are adopting the at-risk model and medical teams. Electronic health records facilitate the transition. Team members include not only licensed professionals like our discussants, but also medical assistants, front desk staff, and schedulers. All share decision making and responsibility. Ideally the patient becomes the central member, not merely the focal point, of the team. We explore specific roles within the lipidology team, and we identify continuing barriers to implementation.

Evaluation of the Clinical Impact of Thromboprophylaxis in Patients With COVID-19 Following Hospital Discharge.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding the incidence of thromboembolism post-hospital discharge among COVID-19 patients. Guidelines addressing the role of extended thromboprophylaxis for COVID-19 patients are limited and conflicting. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence of post-discharge thromboembolic and bleeding events and the role of thromboprophylaxis among COVID-19 patients. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of hospitalized patients with symptomatic COVID-19 infection who were discharged from a University of Colorado Health (UCHealth) hospital between March 1, 2020, and October 31, 2020. The primary outcome was objectively confirmed thromboembolism within 35 days post-discharge. The main secondary outcome was the incidence of bleeding events within 35 days post-discharge. Outcomes were compared between those who received extended prophylaxis and those who did not. RESULTS: A total of 1171 patients met the study criteria. A total of 13 (1.1%) of patients had a documented thromboembolic event and 10 (0.9%) patients had a documented bleeding event within 35 days post-discharge. None of the 132 patients who received extended prophylaxis had a thromboembolic event compared to 13 of 1039 who did not receive extended prophylaxis (0 and 1.3%, respectively; P = .383). The incidence of bleeding was higher among patients who received extended prophylaxis compared to those who did not (3.0% vs 0.6%, P = .019). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These results suggest that post-discharge extended prophylaxis may be beneficial for select COVID-19 patients, while carefully weighing the risk of bleeding. Application of our findings may assist institutions in development of thromboprophylaxis protocols for discharged COVID-19 patients.

Global think tank on the clinical considerations and management of lipoprotein(a): The top questions and answers regarding what clinicians need to know.

Evidence from Mendelian randomization studies suggest that lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) has a causal role in the development of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. However, guidelines and consensus statement recommendations vary regarding how clinicians should incorporate Lp(a) into patient care. To provide practical answers to key questions pertaining to Lp(a) that clinicians will find useful when assessing and treating patients, a global think tank was convened. Representatives from seven national and international stakeholder organizations answered questions that were focused on: Lp(a) measurement; ethnic, gender, and age considerations; factoring Lp(a) into risk assessment; and current and emerging treatment options for elevated Lp(a). This manuscript summarizes the finding from this global think tank. Areas requiring further investigation were identified, and the need to standardize reporting of Lp(a) levels to ensure harmonization and comparability across laboratories and research studies is emphasized.

Factors associated with antihypertensive monotherapy among US adults with treated hypertension and uncontrolled blood pressure overall and by race/ethnicity, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2013-2018.

BACKGROUND: Treating hypertension with antihypertensive medications combinations, rather than one medication (ie, monotherapy), is underused in the United States, particularly in certain race/ethnic groups. Identifying factors associated with monotherapy use despite uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) overall and within race/ethnic groups may elucidate intervention targets in under-treated populations. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES; 2013-2014 through 2017-2018). We included participants age ≥20 years with hypertension, taking at least one antihypertensive medication, and uncontrolled BP (systolic BP [SBP] ≥ 140 mmHg or diastolic BP [DBP] ≥ 90 mmHg). Demographic, clinical, and healthcare-access factors associated with antihypertensive monotherapy were determined using multivariable-adjusted Poisson regression. RESULTS: Among 1,597 participants with hypertension and uncontrolled BP, age- and sex- adjusted prevalence of monotherapy was 42.6% overall, 45.4% among non-Hispanic White, 31.9% among non-Hispanic Black, 39.6% among Hispanic, and 50.9% among non-Hispanic Asian adults. Overall, higher SBP was associated with higher monotherapy use, while older age, having a healthcare visit in the previous year, higher body mass index, and having heart failure were associated with lower monotherapy use. CONCLUSION: Clinical and healthcare-access factors, including a healthcare visit within the previous year and co-morbid conditions were associated with a higher likelihood of combination antihypertensive therapy.

Direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in patients with single or double antibody-positive antiphospholipid syndrome.

Warfarin is recognized as the standard treatment for thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS); however, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) represent appealing therapeutic alternatives given their lack of monitoring and limited drug interactions. A few randomized controlled trials comparing rivaroxaban with warfarin showed an increased risk of recurrent thromboembolism, specifically arterial thrombosis, in patients with high risk forms of APS such as those that are triple antibody positive. We conducted a single-center, retrospective cohort study of all patients within our health system from 2015 to 2020 with a diagnosis of APS (single or double antibody positive) and history of venous thromboembolism. We sought to compare the proportion of patients with a recurrent thrombosis when prescribed a DOAC versus warfarin. Among 96 patients included, 57 were prescribed warfarin and 39 were prescribed a DOAC (90% rivaroxaban). The proportion of patients with a recurrent thromboembolism was almost three times higher in the DOAC group (15.4%) compared to the warfarin group (5.3%), although this was not statistically significant (p = 0.15). Major bleeding was not different between groups. Our findings suggest that rivaroxaban may pose an increased risk for recurrent thromboembolism in low risk APS patients that are single or double-antibody positive compared to warfarin. Results of our study should be cautiously applied to DOACs besides rivaroxaban given their small representation in this study.

High-Intensity Statins Benefit High-Risk Patients: Why and How to Do Better.

Review of the US and European literature indicates that most patients at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD are not treated with high-intensity statins, despite strong clinical-trial evidence of maximal statin benefit. High-intensity statins are recommended for 2 categories of patients: those with ASCVD (secondary prevention) and high-risk patients without clinical ASCVD. Most patients with ASCVD are candidates for high-intensity statins, with a goal for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction of 50% or greater. A subgroup of patients with ASCVD are at very high risk and can benefit by the addition of nonstatin drugs (ezetimibe with or without bile acid sequestrant or bempedoic acid and/or a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor). High-risk primary prevention patients are those with severe hypercholesterolemia, diabetes with associated risk factors, and patients aged 40 to 75 years with a 10-year risk for ASCVD of 20% or greater. In patients with a 10-year risk of 7.5% to less than 20%, coronary artery calcium scoring is an option; if the coronary artery calcium score is 300 or more Agatston units, the patient can be up-classified to high risk. If high-intensity statin treatment is not tolerated in high-risk patients, a reasonable approach is to combine a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe. In very high-risk patients, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels substantially and hence reduce risk as well.

Pharmacists' Utilization of Non-HDL-C Levels in Managing Patients With Lipid Disorders.

Background: Since 2013 there have been cholesterol guideline changes impacting pharmacists' clinical practice in managing lipid disorders. For more than a decade, cholesterol management was based on the National Cholesterol Education Program Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol Adult Treatment Panel III guideline, highlighting non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) as a secondary target in persons with triglycerides ≥200 mg/dL, after low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal attainment. The 2013 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline differed from the traditional management of dyslipidemia, in part no longer emphasizing the utilization of non-HDL-C levels. Objective: To measure pharmacists' attitudes and behavior regarding utilization of non-HDL-C level calculation before and after the inception of the 2013 ACC/AHA cholesterol guideline. Methods: Pharmacists in the American College of Clinical Pharmacy ambulatory care listserv participated in an electronic survey in November 2013, before the inception of the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline, and again in October 2018. Results: We collected 391 usable responses from participants; 212 responses in 2013 and 179 responses in 2018. The before and after comparison revealed that respondents in 2013 reported significantly higher frequency of calculating non-HDL-C levels (mean = 1.88, SD = 0.80) than respondents in 2018 (mean = 1.66, SD = 0.79) (P ≤ .001). Also, the frequency that non-HDL-C level calculation alters decisions regarding course of treatment was lower in the 2018 (mean = 3.50, SD = 1.06) in comparison with 2013 (mean = 3.77, SD = 0.88) (P ≤ .05). Furthermore, pharmacists were more favorable toward the inclusion of non-HDL-C level calculation in 2018 (mean = 3.77, SD = 1.05) than in 2013 (mean = 3.13, SD = 1.33) (P ≤ .001). Conclusion and Relevance: Clinical pharmacists' utilization of non-HDL-C levels in the clinical management of patients with hypercholesterolemia has decreased, highlighting the need for further education on the importance of evaluating non-HDL-C levels in the very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease population.

Bridging health disparities: a national survey of ambulatory care pharmacists in underserved areas.

BACKGROUND: There is a shortage of primary care medical providers, particularly in rural communities and communities of racial and ethnic minority groups. Clinical pharmacists can help fill gaps in care among these vulnerable populations. OBJECTIVE: To identify characteristics of ambulatory care pharmacists that pursue and maintain employment within underserved areas. METHODS: An original survey was distributed nationwide to ambulatory care clinical pharmacists in underserved settings. Respondent characteristics were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of the 111 completed surveys, a majority of respondents were White, non-Hispanic, female, with English as their only spoken language. A majority of pharmacists completed a clinical experience or specialized training focused on underserved care prior to their position. The top three motivators for pharmacists accepting their clinical position as well as staying at their job were passion for caring for underserved populations, the presence of a faculty appointment, or the freedom and flexibility of advanced clinical roles. CONCLUSIONS: With a large majority of our respondents identifying as White and unilingual, there remains a large opportunity to increase diversity in the clinical pharmacy ambulatory care workforce caring for underserved populations. There is an observed correlation between early experiential or specialized training in underserved care and pharmacists pursuing employment in these areas. Thus, one potential long-term strategy to diversify and grow the ambulatory care clinical pharmacist workforce in underserved settings is for clinical practice sites to partner with colleges of pharmacy to recruit and maintain quality individuals who can meet the needs of diverse patient populations as well as expand student and resident training opportunities in underserved settings.

Retrospective cohort study of statin prescribing for primary prevention among people living with HIV.

OBJECTIVE: To compare statin prescribing rates between intermediate-risk people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; PLWH) and intermediate-risk patients without a diagnosis of HIV for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study . Electronic health record data were used to identify a cohort of PLWH aged 40-75 years with a calculated 10-year ASCVD risk between 7.5%-19.9% as determined by the Pooled Cohort Equation (PCE). A matched cohort of primary prevention non-HIV patients was identified. The primary outcome was the proportion of PLWH who were prescribed statin therapy compared to patients who were not living with HIV and were prescribed statin therapy. RESULTS: 81 patients meeting study criteria in the PLWH cohort were matched to 81 non-HIV patients. The proportion of patients prescribed statins was 33.0% and 30.9% in the PLWH and non-HIV cohorts, respectively (p = 0.74).Conclusion and relevance: This study evaluated statin prescribing in PLWH for primary prevention of ASCVD as described in the 2018 AHA/ACC/Multisociety guideline. Rates of statin prescribing were similar, yet overall low, among intermediate-risk primary prevention PLWH compared to those not diagnosed with HIV.

Bridging health disparities: a national survey of ambulatory care pharmacists in underserved areas

Background: There is a shortage of primary care medical providers, particularly in rural communities and communities of racial and ethnic minority groups. Clinical pharmacists can help fill gaps in care among these vulnerable populations. Objective: To identify characteristics of ambulatory care pharmacists that pursue and maintain employment within underserved areas. Methods: An original survey was distributed nationwide to ambulatory care clinical pharmacists in underserved settings. Respondent characteristics were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Of the 111 completed surveys, a majority of respondents were White, non-Hispanic, female, with English as their only spoken language. A majority of pharmacists completed a clinical experience or specialized training focused on underserved care prior to their position. The top three motivators for pharmacists accepting their clinical position as well as staying at their job were passion for caring for underserved populations, the presence of a faculty appointment, or the freedom and flexibility of advanced clinical roles. Conclusions: With a large majority of our respondents identifying as White and unilingual, there remains a large opportunity to increase diversity in the clinical pharmacy ambulatory care workforce caring for underserved populations. There is an observed correlation between early experiential or specialized training in underserved care and pharmacists pursuing employment in these areas. Thus, one potential long-term strategy to diversify and grow the ambulatory care clinical pharmacist workforce in underserved settings is for clinical practice sites to partner with colleges of pharmacy to recruit and maintain quality individuals who can meet the needs of diverse patient populations as well as expand student and resident training opportunities in underserved settings (AU)

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and risk for genitourinary infections in older adults with type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although landmark clinical trials have demonstrated an increased risk for genitourinary infection (GUI) after initiation of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) therapy that led to an FDA label warning, real world findings have been inconsistent and evidence specifically in older adults is lacking. The objective of the study was to examine the incidence of GUI in patients aged 65 years or older initiated on SGLT2i compared with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1-RA) therapy at a large academic health system. METHODS: A retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted using electronic health records of patients aged 65 years and older with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Patients newly initiated on SGLT2i or GLP1-RA therapy with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ⩾30 mL/min per 1.73 m² and active within the health system for at least 1 year prior to initiation were included. We compared the incidence of inpatient, emergency room, or outpatient diagnosis of GUI (bacterial and mycotic) within 6 months of SGLT2i or GLP1-RA initiation. A chi-square or Fisher's exact test were used to analyze between-group differences for categorical variables, while a t-test was used for continuous variables. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the impact of confounding variables on the primary outcome. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-three patients were initiated on SGLT2i therapy and 341 patients newly initiated on GLP1-RA therapy. After adjusting for differences in age, A1c, body mass index, eGFR, race and sex, there was no statistically significant difference in GUI incidence within 6 months of SGLT2i versus GLP1-RA initiation (3.8% versus 6.5%, adjusted hazard ratio: 0.784, 95% confidence interval 0.260-2.367). CONCLUSION: We found no increased risk of composite GUI within 6 months of initiating SGLT2i compared with GLP1-RA therapy. These real-world data in older adults add to previous findings, which suggest no increased risk of urinary tract infection with SGLT2i initiation. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: A class of antidiabetic medications and risk for genitourinary infections in older adults with type 2 diabetesOlder adults with type 2 diabetes often benefit from a class of antidiabetic medications known as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) which help to lower blood glucose, decrease risk for cardiovascular disease and prevent kidney disease progression. However, there is concern that these medications may increase risk for urinary tract infections and/or genital fungal infections in older adults based on clinical trial evidence. Our study evaluated the real-world occurrence of these safety events in patients aged 65 years or older who were newly started on these medications. We compared these patients with a group of patients newly started on an alternative class of antidiabetic agents which are not expected to increase risk for infections, known as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RA). In our study, we included 133 patients who started an SGLT2i and 341 patients who started a GLP1-RA at a large teaching hospital. We evaluated the occurrence of infection up to 6 months after initiation of these mediations. We found no significant difference in infection rate between these two groups. We conclude in the study that the use of SGLT2i in older adults was not associated with increased risk for urinary tract infections or genital fungal infections when compared with GLP1-RA use.