Pioglitazone use in Australia and the United Kingdom following drug safety advisories on bladder cancer risk: An interrupted time series study

Purpose: National regulators in Australia and the United Kingdom issued safety advisories on the association between pioglitazone use and bladder cancer in July 2011. The Australian advisory noted that males were at higher risk of bladder cancer than females, while the UK advisory highlighted a new recommendation, suggest careful consideration in the elderly due to increasing risk with age. This study examined whether these differences in the advisories had different age- and sex-based impacts in each country. Methods: Interrupted time series analysis was used to compare pioglitazone use (prescriptions/100000 population) in Australia and the United Kingdom for the 24 months before and 11 months after the July 2011 safety advisories (study period July 2009–June 2012). Separate models were used to compare use by sex and age group (≥65 years vs. <65 years) in each country. Results: Pioglitazone use fell in Australia (17%) and the United Kingdom (24%) following the safety advisories. Use of pioglitazone fell more for males (18%) than females (16%) in Australia, and more for females (25%) than males (23%) in the United Kingdom; however, neither difference was statistically significant (Australia p = 0.445, United Kingdom p = 0.462). Pioglitazone use fell to a similar extent among older people than younger people in the United Kingdom (23% vs. 26%, p = 0.354), and did not differ between age groups in Australia (both 18%, p = 0.772). Conclusions: The results indicate that differences in the Australian and UK safety advisories resulted in substantial reductions in pioglitazone use at the population level in both countries, however, differences by sub-groups were not observed

Low Rates of Both Lipid-Lowering Therapy Use and Achievement of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Targets in Individuals at High-Risk for Cardiovascular Disease across Europe

Aims To analyse the treatment and control of dyslipidaemia in patients at high and very high cardiovascular risk being treated for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in Europe. Methods and Results Data were assessed from the European Study on Cardiovascular Risk Prevention and Management in Usual Daily Practice (EURIKA, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00882336), which included a randomly sampled population of primary CVD prevention patients from 12 European countries (n = 7641). Patients’ 10-year risk of CVD-related mortality was calculated using the Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) algorithm, identifying 5019 patients at high cardiovascular risk (SCORE 5% and/or receiving lipid-lowering therapy), and 2970 patients at very high cardiovascular risk (SCORE 10% or with diabetes mellitus). Among high-risk individuals, 65.3% were receiving lipid-lowering therapy, and 61.3% of treated patients had uncontrolled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels ( 2.5 mmol/L). For very-high-risk patients (uncontrolled LDL-C levels defined as 1.8 mmol/L) these figures were 49.5% and 82.9%, respectively. Excess 10-year risk of CVD-related mortality (according to SCORE) attributable to lack of control of dyslipidaemia was estimated to be 0.72%and 1.61% among high-risk and very-high-risk patients, respectively. Among high-risk individuals with uncontrolled LDL-C levels, only 8.7% were receiving a high-intensity statin (atorvastatin 40 mg/day or rosuvastatin 20 mg/day). Among veryhigh- risk patients, this figure was 8.4%. Conclusions There is a considerable opportunity for improvement in rates of lipid-lowering therapy use and achievement of lipid-level targets in high-risk and very-high-risk patients being treated for primary CVD prevention in EuropeWriting support was provided by Oxford PharmaGenesis Ltd, Oxford, UK, and was funded by AstraZenec

Persistence with Statins and Onset of Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Population-Based Cohort Study

In a retrospective cohort study, Gabriel Chodick and colleagues find a significant association between persistence with statin therapy and reduced risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis, but only a modest decrease in risk of osteoarthritis

Changes in Drug Utilization during a Gap in Insurance Coverage: An Examination of the Medicare Part D Coverage Gap

Jennifer Polinski and colleagues estimated the effect of the "coverage gap" during which US Medicare beneficiaries are fully responsible for drug costs and found that the gap was associated with a doubling in discontinuing essential medications

Bone Loss in Diabetes: Use of Antidiabetic Thiazolidinediones and Secondary Osteoporosis

Clinical evidence indicates that bone status is affected in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Regardless of normal or even high bone mineral density, T2DM patients have increased risk of fractures. One class of antidiabetic drugs, thiazolidinediones (TZDs), causes bone loss and further increases facture risk, placing TZDs in the category of drugs causing secondary osteoporosis. Risk factors for development of TZD-induced secondary osteoporosis are gender (women), age (elderly), and duration of treatment. TZDs exert their antidiabetic effects by activating peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ (PPAR-γ) nuclear receptor, which controls glucose and fatty acid metabolism. In bone, PPAR-γ controls differentiation of cells of mesenchymal and hematopoietic lineages. PPAR-γ activation with TZDs leads to unbalanced bone remodeling: bone resorption increases and bone formation decreases. Laboratory research evidence points toward a possible separation of unwanted effects of PPAR-γ on bone from its beneficial antidiabetic effects by using selective PPAR-γ modulators. This review also discusses potential pharmacologic means to protect bone from detrimental effects of clinically used TZDs (pioglitazone and rosiglitazone) by using combinational therapy with approved antiosteoporotic drugs, or by using lower doses of TZDs in combination with other antidiabetic therapy. We also suggest a possible orthopedic complication, not yet supported by clinical studies, of delayed fracture healing in T2DM patients on TZD therapy

Influence of drug safety advisories on drug utilisation: an international interrupted time series and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between regulatory drug safety advisories and changes in drug utilisation. DESIGN: We conducted controlled, interrupted times series analyses with administrative prescription claims data to estimate changes in drug utilisation following advisories. We used random-effects meta-analysis with inverse-variance weighting to estimate the average postadvisory change in drug utilisation across advisories. STUDY POPULATION: We included advisories issued in Canada, Denmark, the UK and the USA during 2009-2015, mainly concerning drugs in common use in primary care. We excluded advisories related to over-the-counter drugs, drug-drug interactions, vaccines, drugs used primarily in hospital and advisories with co-interventions within ±6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in drug utilisation, defined as actual versus predicted percentage change in the number of prescriptions (for advisories without dose-related advice), or in the number of defined daily doses (for dose-related advisories), per 100 000 population. RESULTS: Among advisories without dose-related advice (n=20), the average change in drug utilisation was -5.83% (95% CI -10.93 to -0.73; p=0.03). Advisories with dose-related advice (n=4) were not associated with a statistically significant change in drug utilisation (-1.93%; 95% CI -17.10 to 13.23; p=0.80). In a post hoc subgroup analysis of advisories without dose-related advice, we observed no statistically significant difference between the change in drug utilisation following advisories with explicit prescribing advice, such as a recommendation to consider the risk of a drug when prescribing, and the change in drug utilisation following advisories without such advice. CONCLUSIONS: Among safety advisories issued on a wide range of drugs during 2009-2015 in 4 countries (Canada, Denmark, the UK and the USA), the association of advisories with changes in drug utilisation was variable, and the average association was modest