Impact of proton pump inhibitor treatment on gastrointestinal bleeding associated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use among post-myocardial infarction patients taking antithrombotics: nationwide study

Study question What is the effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in post-myocardial infarction patients taking antithrombotics and treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)? Methods This was a nationwide cohort study based on linked administrative registry data from all hospitals in Denmark between 1997 and 2011. The study included patients aged 30 years and over admitted with a first myocardial infarction who survived at least 30 days after discharge. The association between PPIs and risk of gastrointestinal bleeding according to NSAID plus antithrombotic therapy was estimated using adjusted time dependent Cox regression models. Study answer and limitations The use of PPIs was independently associated with decreased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in post-myocardial infarction patients taking antithrombotics and treated with NSAIDs. Of 82 955 post-myocardial infarction patients (mean age 67.4 years, 64% (n=53 070) men), all of whom were taking single or dual antithrombotic therapy, 42.5% (n=35 233) filled at least one prescription for NSAIDs and 45.5% (n=37 771) received PPIs. Over a mean follow-up of 5.1 years, 3229 gastrointestinal bleeds occurred. The crude incidence rates of bleeding (events/100 person years) on NSAID plus antithrombotic therapy were 1.8 for patients taking PPIs and 2.1 for those not taking PPIs. The adjusted risk of bleeding was lower with PPI use (hazard ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.95) regardless of antithrombotic treatment regimen, type of NSAID, and type of PPI used. The main limitation of the study is its observational non-randomised design. The results suggest that PPI treatment probably has a beneficial effect regardless of underlying gastrointestinal risk and that when NSAIDs cannot be avoided in post-myocardial infarction patients, physicians might prescribe a PPI as well. The study does not clarify whether PPIs might be safely omitted in specific subgroups of patients with a low risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. What this study adds In post-myocardial infarction patients, bleeding complications have been associated with both antithrombotic and NSAID treatment. Concurrent use of PPIs was independently associated with a decreased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding in post-myocardial infarction patients taking antithrombotics and NSAID, regardless of antithrombotic treatment regimen, type of NSAID, and type of PPI used. Funding, competing interests, data sharing AMSO has received a grant from the Danish Council of Independent Research (grant 12-132760). GHG is supported by an unrestricted research scholarship from the Novo Nordisk Foundation

Use of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs That Elevate Cardiovascular Risk: An Examination of Sales and Essential Medicines Lists in Low-, Middle-, and High-Income Countries

PMCID: PMC3570554This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

Dabigatran use in Danish atrial fibrillation patients in 2011: a nationwide study

OBJECTIVE: Dabigatran was recently approved for anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF); data regarding real-world use, comparative effectiveness and safety are sparse. DESIGN: Pharmacoepidemiological cohort study. METHODS/SETTINGS: From nationwide registers, we identified patients with an in-hospital or outpatient-clinic AF diagnosis who claimed a prescription of dabigatran 110 or 150 mg, or vitamin K antagonist (VKA), between 22 August and 31 December 2011. HRs of thromboembolic events (ischaemic stroke, transitory ischaemic attack and peripheral artery embolism) and bleedings were estimated using Cox regression analyses in all patients and stratified by previous VKA use. RESULTS: Overall, 1612 (3.1%) and 1114 (2.1%) patients claimed a prescription of dabigatran 110 and 150 mg, and 49640 (94.8%) of VKA. Patients treated with dabigatran 150 mg were younger with less comorbidity than those treated with dabigatran 110 mg and VKA, as were VKA naïve patients compared with previous VKA users. Recommendations set by the European Medicine Agency (EMA) for dabigatran were met in 90.3% and 55.5% of patients treated with 110 and 150 mg. Patients treated with 150 mg dabigatran, who did not fulfil the recommendations by EMA, were >80 years, patients with liver or kidney disease, patients with previous bleeding. Compared with VKA, the thromboembolic risk associated with dabigatran 110 and 150 mg was HR 3.52 (1.40 to 8.84) and 5.79 (1.81 to 18.56) in previous VKA users, and HR 0.95(0.47 to 1.91) and 1.14(0.60 to 2.16) in VKA naïve patients. Bleeding risk was increased in previous VKA users receiving dabigatran 110 mg, but not in patients with 150 mg dabigatran, nor in the VKA naïve users. CONCLUSIONS: Deviations from the recommended use of dabigatran were frequent among patients treated with 150 mg. With cautious interpretation, dabigatran use in VKA naïve patients seems safe. Increased risk of thromboembolism and bleeding with dabigatran among previous VKA users was unexpected and may reflect patient selection and ‘drug switching’ practices

Prescriptions for selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and risk of breast cancer in a population-based case-control study

INTRODUCTION. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) prevent the growth of mammary tumours in animal models. Two population-based case-control studies suggest a reduced risk of breast cancer associated with selective cyclooxygenase-2 (sCox-2) inhibitor use, but data regarding the association between breast cancer occurrence and use of non-selective NSAIDs are conflicting. METHODS. We conducted a population-based case-control study using Danish healthcare databases to examine if use of NSAIDs, including sCox-2 inhibitors, was associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer. We included 8,195 incident breast cancer cases diagnosed in 1991 through 2006 and 81,950 population controls. RESULTS. Overall, we found no reduced breast cancer risk in ever users (>2 prescriptions) of sCox-2 inhibitors (odds ratio (OR) = 1.08, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 0.99, 1.18), aspirin (OR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.90-1.07), or non-selective NSAIDs OR = 1.04, (95% CI = 0.98, 1.10)). Recent use (>2 prescriptions within two years of index date) of sCox-2 inhibitors, aspirin, or non-selective NSAIDs was likewise not associated with breast cancer risk (Ors = 1.06 (95% CI = 0.96, 1.18), 0.96 (95% CI = 0.87, 1.06) and 0.99 (95% CI = 0.85, 1.16), respectively). Risk estimates by duration (<10, 10 to 15, 15+ years) or intensity (low/medium/high) of NSAID use were also close to unity. Regardless of intensity, shorter or long-term NSAID use was not significantly associated with breast cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS. Overall, we found no compelling evidence of a reduced risk of breast cancer associated with use of sCox-2 inhibitors, aspirin, or non-selective NSAIDs.Karen Elise Jensen Foundatio

2023 ESC Guidelines for the management of endocarditis

Cardiolog

Effect of sitagliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the long-term effect on cardiovascular events of adding sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, we assigned 14,671 patients to add either sitagliptin or placebo to their existing therapy. Open-label use of antihyperglycemic therapy was encouraged as required, aimed at reaching individually appropriate glycemic targets in all patients. To determine whether sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo, we used a relative risk of 1.3 as the marginal upper boundary. The primary cardiovascular outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 3.0 years, there was a small difference in glycated hemoglobin levels (least-squares mean difference for sitagliptin vs. placebo, -0.29 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.32 to -0.27). Overall, the primary outcome occurred in 839 patients in the sitagliptin group (11.4%; 4.06 per 100 person-years) and 851 patients in the placebo group (11.6%; 4.17 per 100 person-years). Sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.09; P<0.001). Rates of hospitalization for heart failure did not differ between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.20; P = 0.98). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of acute pancreatitis (P = 0.07) or pancreatic cancer (P = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease, adding sitagliptin to usual care did not appear to increase the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, hospitalization for heart failure, or other adverse events