| 1. |
- Lane, J. C. E., et al.
(författare)
-
Risk of hydroxychloroquine alone and in combination with azithromycin in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a multinational, retrospective study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Lancet Rheumatology. - : Elsevier BV. - 2665-9913. ; 2:11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Hydroxychloroquine, a drug commonly used in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, has received much negative publicity for adverse events associated with its authorisation for emergency use to treat patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. We studied the safety of hydroxychloroquine, alone and in combination with azithromycin, to determine the risk associated with its use in routine care in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Methods In this multinational, retrospective study, new user cohort studies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis aged 18 years or older and initiating hydroxychloroquine were compared with those initiating sulfasalazine and followed up over 30 days, with 16 severe adverse events studied. Self-controlled case series were done to further establish safety in wider populations, and included all users of hydroxychloroquine regardless of rheumatoid arthritis status or indication. Separately, severe adverse events associated with hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin (compared with hydroxychloroquine plus amoxicillin) were studied. Data comprised 14 sources of claims data or electronic medical records from Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, the UK, and the USA. Propensity score stratification and calibration using negative control outcomes were used to address confounding. Cox models were fitted to estimate calibrated hazard ratios (HRs) according to drug use. Estimates were pooled where the I-2 value was less than 0.4. Findings The study included 956 374 users of hydroxychloroquine, 310 350 users of sulfasalazine, 323 122 users of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin, and 351 956 users of hydroxychloroquine plus amoxicillin. No excess risk of severe adverse events was identified when 30-day hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine use were compared. Selfcontrolled case series confirmed these findings. However, long-term use of hydroxychloroquine appeared to be associated with increased cardiovascular mortality (calibrated HR 1.65 [95% CI 1.12-2.44]). Addition of azithromycin appeared to be associated with an increased risk of 30-day cardiovascular mortality (calibrated HR 2.19 [95% CI 1.22-3.95]), chest pain or angina (1.15 [1.05-1.26]), and heart failure (1.22 [1.02-1.45]). Interpretation Hydroxychloroquine treatment appears to have no increased risk in the short term among patients with rheumatoid arthritis, but in the long term it appears to be associated with excess cardiovascular mortality. The addition of azithromycin increases the risk of heart failure and cardiovascular mortality even in the short term. We call for careful consideration of the benefit-risk trade-off when counselling those on hydroxychloroquine treatment. Copyright (c) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
|
|
| 2. |
- Morales, Daniel R, et al.
(författare)
-
Renin-angiotensin system blockers and susceptibility to COVID-19: an international, open science, cohort analysis.
- 2021
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Digital health. - 2589-7500. ; 3:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have been postulated to affect susceptibility to COVID-19. Observational studies so far have lacked rigorous ascertainment adjustment and international generalisability. We aimed to determine whether use of ACEIs or ARBs is associated with an increased susceptibility to COVID-19 in patients with hypertension.In this international, open science, cohort analysis, we used electronic health records from Spain (Information Systems for Research in Primary Care [SIDIAP]) and the USA (Columbia University Irving Medical Center data warehouse [CUIMC] and Department of Veterans Affairs Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership [VA-OMOP]) to identify patients aged 18 years or older with at least one prescription for ACEIs and ARBs (target cohort) or calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics (THZs; comparator cohort) between Nov 1, 2019, and Jan 31, 2020. Users were defined separately as receiving either monotherapy with these four drug classes, or monotherapy or combination therapy (combination use) with other antihypertensive medications. We assessed four outcomes: COVID-19 diagnosis; hospital admission with COVID-19; hospital admission with pneumonia; and hospital admission with pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute kidney injury, or sepsis. We built large-scale propensity score methods derived through a data-driven approach and negative control experiments across ten pairwise comparisons, with results meta-analysed to generate 1280 study effects. For each study effect, we did negative control outcome experiments using a possible 123 controls identified through a data-rich algorithm. This process used a set of predefined baseline patient characteristics to provide the most accurate prediction of treatment and balance among patient cohorts across characteristics. The study is registered with the EU Post-Authorisation Studies register, EUPAS35296.Among 1355349 antihypertensive users (363785 ACEI or ARB monotherapy users, 248915 CCB or THZ monotherapy users, 711799 ACEI or ARB combination users, and 473076 CCB or THZ combination users) included in analyses, no association was observed between COVID-19 diagnosis and exposure to ACEI or ARB monotherapy versus CCB or THZ monotherapy (calibrated hazard ratio [HR] 0·98, 95% CI 0·84-1·14) or combination use exposure (1·01, 0·90-1·15). ACEIs alone similarly showed no relative risk difference when compared with CCB or THZ monotherapy (HR 0·91, 95% CI 0·68-1·21; with heterogeneity of >40%) or combination use (0·95, 0·83-1·07). Directly comparing ACEIs with ARBs demonstrated a moderately lower risk with ACEIs, which was significant with combination use (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·79-0·99) and non-significant for monotherapy (0·85, 0·69-1·05). We observed no significant difference between drug classes for risk of hospital admission with COVID-19, hospital admission with pneumonia, or hospital admission with pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute kidney injury, or sepsis across all comparisons.No clinically significant increased risk of COVID-19 diagnosis or hospital admission-related outcomes associated with ACEI or ARB use was observed, suggesting users should not discontinue or change their treatment to decrease their risk of COVID-19.Wellcome Trust, UK National Institute for Health Research, US National Institutes of Health, US Department of Veterans Affairs, Janssen Research & Development, IQVIA, South Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare Republic, Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, and European Health Data and Evidence Network.
|
|
| 3. |
- Coenen Schimke, J. M., et al.
(författare)
-
A quantitative PCR measurement of messenger RNA expression of IGF-I, IGF-II and IGFBP-5 in human skeletal muscle
- 1999
-
Ingår i: Growth Hormone & IGF Research. - : Elsevier. - 1096-6374 .- 1532-2238. ; 9:3, s. 179-186
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Insulin-like growth factor-I and -II (IGF-I and IGF-II) and their binding proteins are important components in growth promotion and tissue maintenance. We determined the presence of IGF-I, -II, and binding protein 5 (IGFBP-5) gene expression in human skeletal muscle and that mRNA abundance is not altered by nutrients and insulin. In the first protocol, (control) subjects were given water. In the second protocol, half of these subjects drank Polycose (carbohydrate) and the remaining subjects drank equal calories as a mixed meal. Quadriceps muscle biopsies were taken at 10 h. A semi-quantitative polymerase chain reaction was designed to measure gene expression. IGF-I, IGF-II and IGFBP-5 mRNA are present in adult human skeletal muscle, but no significant changes between meal groups were observed for IGF-I, IGF-II or IGFBP-5 mRNA levels, indicating that the expression of these genes are not altered acutely by nutrients and insulin.
|
|
| 4. |
- Rajwa, Pawel, et al.
(författare)
-
Research protocol for an observational health data analysis on the adverse events of systemic treatment in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer : big data analytics using the PIONEER platform
- 2024
-
Ingår i: European Urology Open Science. - : Elsevier. - 2666-1691 .- 2666-1683. ; 63, s. 81-88
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Combination therapies in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), which include the addition of an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor and/or docetaxel to androgen deprivation therapy, have been a game changer in the management of this disease stage. However, these therapies come with their fair share of toxicities and side effects. The goal of this observational study is to report drug-related adverse events (AEs), which are correlated with systemic combination therapies for mHSPC. Determining the optimal treatment option requires large cohorts to estimate the tolerability and AEs of these combination therapies in “real-life” patients with mHSPC, as provided in this study. We use a network of databases that includes population-based registries, electronic health records, and insurance claims, containing the overall target population and subgroups of patients defined by unique certain characteristics, demographics, and comorbidities, to compute the incidence of common AEs associated with systemic therapies in the setting of mHSPC. These data sources are standardised using the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model. We perform the descriptive statistics as well as calculate the AE incidence rate separately for each treatment group, stratified by age groups and index year. The time until the first event is estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method within each age group. In the case of episodic events, the anticipated mean cumulative counts of events are calculated. Our study will allow clinicians to tailor optimal therapies for mHSPC patients, and they will serve as a basis for comparative method studies.
|
|
