1. |
- Ericson, Lisa, et al.
(author)
-
Opioid rotation in patients initiated on oxycodone or morphine : a register study.
- 2013
-
In: Journal of Pain Research. - 1178-7090. ; 6, s. 379-86
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- PURPOSE: Strong opioids are recommended for the treatment of moderate to severe pain. However, some patients do not achieve a successful treatment outcome due to intolerable adverse events and/or inadequate analgesia, thus may benefit from switching to another opioid, a procedure known as "opioid rotation." The type of opioid at treatment initiation may influence the risk of opioid rotation and the objective of this study was to assess such rotation after treatment initiation with two alternative treatments, controlled-release (CR) oxycodone versus CR morphine in patients suffering from non-cancer pain.METHOD: The study reported here was a real-life study based on Swedish register data: the Prescribed Drug, National Patient, and Cause of Death registers. The captured data cover the entire Swedish population treated in specialist care. A statistical analysis plan was agreed and signed before data were accessed.RESULTS: Data from 50,223 cases were included in the analyses. The risk of rotation was 19% higher in patients initiating treatment with morphine compared with oxycodone (hazard ratio 1.19; 95% confidence interval 1.11-1.27; P < 0.001), after adjusting for such baseline variables that were both significantly correlated with the outcome variable (time to rotation) and significantly different between the groups; age at index date, osteoarthritis and number of pain-related drugs.CONCLUSION: Patients with non-cancer pain who initiated treatment with CR morphine had a higher risk of opioid rotation than patients initiated with CR oxycodone.
|
|
2. |
|
|
3. |
- Tschiderer, Lena, et al.
(author)
-
Age at menopause and the risk of stroke : observational and mendelian randomization analysis in 204 244 postmenopausal women
- 2023
-
In: Journal of the American Heart Association. - : American Heart Association Inc.. - 2047-9980. ; 12:18
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Observational studies have shown that women with an early menopause are at higher risk of stroke compared with women with a later menopause. However, associations with stroke subtypes are inconsistent, and the causality is unclear.METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed data of the UK Biobank and EPIC-CVD (European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition-Cardiovascular Diseases) study. A total of 204 244 postmenopausal women without a history of stroke at baseline were included (7883 from EPIC-CVD [5292 from the subcohort], 196 361 from the UK Biobank). Pooled mean baseline age was 58.9 years (SD, 5.8), and pooled mean age at menopause was 47.8 years (SD, 6.2). Over a median follow-up of 12.6 years (interquartile range, 11.8–13.3), 6770 women experienced a stroke (5155 ischemic strokes, 1615 hemorrhagic strokes, 976 intracerebral hemorrhages, and 639 subarachnoid hemorrhages). In multivariable adjusted observational Cox regression analyses, the pooled hazard ratios per 5 years younger age at menopause were 1.09 (95% CI, 1.07–1.12) for stroke, 1.09 (95% CI, 1.06–1.13) for ischemic stroke, 1.10 (95% CI, 1.04–1.16) for hemorrhagic stroke, 1.14 (95% CI, 1.08–1.20) for intracerebral hemorrhage, and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.84–1.20) for subarachnoid hemorrhage. When using 2-sample Mendelian randomization analysis, we found no statistically significant association between genetically proxied age at menopause and risk of any type of stroke.CONCLUSIONS: In our study, earlier age at menopause was related to a higher risk of stroke. We found no statistically significant association between genetically proxied age at menopause and risk of stroke, suggesting no causal relationship.
|
|
4. |
- Voss, Erica A, et al.
(author)
-
Contextualising adverse events of special interest to characterise the baseline incidence rates in 24 million patients with COVID-19 across 26 databases: a multinational retrospective cohort study.
- 2023
-
In: EClinicalMedicine. - 2589-5370. ; 58
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Adverse events of special interest (AESIs) were pre-specified to be monitored for the COVID-19 vaccines. Some AESIs are not only associated with the vaccines, but with COVID-19. Our aim was to characterise the incidence rates of AESIs following SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients and compare these to historical rates in the general population.A multi-national cohort study with data from primary care, electronic health records, and insurance claims mapped to a common data model. This study's evidence was collected between Jan 1, 2017 and the conclusion of each database (which ranged from Jul 2020 to May 2022). The 16 pre-specified prevalent AESIs were: acute myocardial infarction, anaphylaxis, appendicitis, Bell's palsy, deep vein thrombosis, disseminated intravascular coagulation, encephalomyelitis, Guillain- Barré syndrome, haemorrhagic stroke, non-haemorrhagic stroke, immune thrombocytopenia, myocarditis/pericarditis, narcolepsy, pulmonary embolism, transverse myelitis, and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia. Age-sex standardised incidence rate ratios (SIR) were estimated to compare post-COVID-19 to pre-pandemic rates in each of the databases.Substantial heterogeneity by age was seen for AESI rates, with some clearly increasing with age but others following the opposite trend. Similarly, differences were also observed across databases for same health outcome and age-sex strata. All studied AESIs appeared consistently more common in the post-COVID-19 compared to the historical cohorts, with related meta-analytic SIRs ranging from 1.32 (1.05 to 1.66) for narcolepsy to 11.70 (10.10 to 13.70) for pulmonary embolism.Our findings suggest all AESIs are more common after COVID-19 than in the general population. Thromboembolic events were particularly common, and over 10-fold more so. More research is needed to contextualise post-COVID-19 complications in the longer term.None.
|
|