Comparative safety and effectiveness of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and thiazides and thiazide-like diuretics under strict monotherapy.

Previous work comparing safety and effectiveness outcomes for new initiators of angiotensin converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and thiazides demonstrated more favorable outcomes for thiazides, although cohort definitions allowed for addition of a second antihypertensive medication after a week of monotherapy. Here, we modify the monotherapy definition, imposing exit from cohorts upon addition of another antihypertensive medication. We determine hazard ratios (HR) for 55 safety and effectiveness outcomes over six databases and compare results to earlier findings. We find, for all primary outcomes, statistically significant differences in effectiveness between ACEi and thiazides were not replicated (HRs: 1.11, 1.06, 1.12 for acute myocardial infarction, hospitalization with heart failure and stroke, respectively). While statistical significance is similarly lost for several safety outcomes, the safety profile of thiazides remains more favorable. Our results indicate a less striking difference in effectiveness of thiazides compared to ACEi and reflect some sensitivity to the monotherapy cohort definition modification.

Comparative Effectiveness of Second-line Antihyperglycemic Agents for Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Large-scale, Multinational, Federated Analysis of the LEGEND-T2DM Study.

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.

Prevalence of potentially harmful multidrug interactions on medication lists of elderly ambulatory patients.

BACKGROUND: It has been hypothesized that polypharmacy may increase the frequency of multidrug interactions (MDIs) where one drug interacts with two or more other drugs, amplifying the risk of associated adverse drug events (ADEs). The main objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of MDIs in medication lists of elderly ambulatory patients and to identify the medications most commonly involved in MDIs that amplify the risk of ADEs. METHODS: Medication lists stored in the electronic health record (EHR) of 6,545 outpatients ≥60 years old were extracted from the enterprise data warehouse. Network analysis identified patients with three or more interacting medications from their medication lists. Potentially harmful interactions were identified from the enterprise drug-drug interaction alerting system. MDIs were considered to amplify the risk if interactions could increase the probability of ADEs. RESULTS: MDIs were identified in 1.3 % of the medication lists, the majority of which involved three interacting drugs (75.6 %) while the remainder involved four (15.6 %) or five or more (8.9 %) interacting drugs. The average number of medications on the lists was 3.1 ± 2.3 in patients with no drug interactions and 8.6 ± 3.4 in patients with MDIs. The prevalence of MDIs on medication lists was greater than 10 % in patients prescribed bupropion, tramadol, trazodone, cyclobenzaprine, fluoxetine, ondansetron, or quetiapine and greater than 20 % in patients prescribed amiodarone or methotrexate. All MDIs were potentially risk-amplifying due to pharmacodynamic interactions, where three or more medications were associated with the same ADE, or pharmacokinetic, where two or more drugs reduced the metabolism of a third drug. The most common drugs involved in MDIs were psychotropic, comprising 35.1 % of all drugs involved. The most common serious potential ADEs associated with the interactions were serotonin syndrome, seizures, prolonged QT interval and bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: An identifiable number of medications, the majority of which are psychotropic, may be involved in MDIs in elderly ambulatory patients which may amplify the risk of serious ADEs. To mitigate the risk, providers will need to pay special attention to the overlapping drug-drug interactions which result in MDIs.