Quantifying the real life risk profile of inhaled corticosteroids in COPD by record linkage analysis

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), especially when prescribed in combination with long-acting β(2) agonists have been shown to improve COPD outcomes. Although there is consistent evidence linking ICS with adverse effects such as pneumonia, the complete risk profile is unclear with conflicting evidence on any association between ICS and the incidence or worsening of existing diabetes, cataracts and fractures. We investigated this using record linkage in a Dundee COPD population. METHODS: A record linkage study linking COPD and diabetes datasets with prescription, hospitalisation and mortality data via a unique Community Health Index (CHI) number. A Cox regression model was used to determine the association between ICS use and new diabetes or worsening of existing diabetes and hospitalisations for pneumonia, fractures or cataracts after adjusting for potential confounders. A time dependent analysis of exposure comparing time on versus off ICS was used to take into account patients changing their exposure status during follow-up and to prevent immortal time bias. RESULTS: 4305 subjects (3243 exposed to ICS, total of 17,229 person-years of exposure and 1062 non exposed, with a follow-up of 4,508 patient-years) were eligible for the study. There were 239 cases of new diabetes (DM) and 265 cases of worsening DM, 550 admissions for pneumonia, 288 hospitalisations for fracture and 505 cataract related admissions. The hazard ratio for the association between cumulative ICS and outcomes were 0.70 (0.43-1.12), 0.57 (0.24-1.37), 1.38 (1.09-1.74), 1.08 (0.73-1.59) and 1.42 (1.07-1.88) after multivariate analysis respectively. CONCLUSION: The use of ICS in our cohort was not associated with new onset of diabetes, worsening of existing diabetes or fracture hospitalisation. There was however an association with increased cataracts and pneumonia hospitalisations

Proton pump inhibitors and the risk of pneumonia: A comparison of cohort and self-controlled case series designs

Background: To compare the results of a new-user cohort study design and the self-controlled case series (SCCS) design using the risk of hospitalisation for pneumonia in those dispensed proton pump inhibitors compared to those unexposed as a case study. Methods: The Australian Government Department of Veterans’ Affairs administrative claims database was used. Exposure to proton pump inhibitors and hospitalisations for pneumonia were identified over a 4 year study period 01 Jul 2007 -30 Jun 2011. The same inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to both studies, however, the SCCS study included subjects with a least one hospitalisation for pneumonia. Results: There were 105,467 subjects included in the cohort study and 6775 in the SCCS. Both studies showed an increased risk of hospitalisations for pneumonia in the three defined risk periods following initiation of proton pump inhibitors compared to baseline. With the highest risk in the first 1 to 7 days (Cohort RR, 3.24; 95% CI (2.50, 4.19): SCCS: RR, 3.07; 95% CI (2.69, 3.50)). Conclusions: This study has shown that the self-controlled case series method produces similar risk estimates to a new-users cohort study design when applied to the association of proton pump inhibitors and pneumonia. Exposure to a proton pump inhibitor increases the likelihood of being admitted to hospital for pneumonia, with the risk highest in the first week of treatment.Emmae N Ramsay, Nicole L Pratt, Philip Ryan and Elizabeth E Roughea

A comparison of pharmacoepidemiological study designs in medication use and traffic safety research

In order to explore how the choice of different study designs could influence the risk estimates, a case–crossover and case–time–control study were carried out and their outcomes were compared with those of a traditional case–control study design that evaluated the association between the exposure to psychotropic medications and the risk of having a motor vehicle accident (MVA). A record-linkage database availing data for 3,786 cases and 18,089 controls during the period 2000–2007 was used. The study designs (i.e., case–crossover and case–time–control) were derived from published literature, and the following psychotropic medicines were examined: antipsychotics, anxiolytics, hypnotics and sedatives, and antidepressants, stratified in the two groups selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and other antidepressants. Moreover, in order to further investigate the effects of frequency of psychoactive medication exposure on the outcomes of the case–crossover analysis, the data were also stratified by the number of defined daily doses (DDDs) and days of medication use in the 12 months before the motor vehicle accident. Three-thousand seven-hundred fifty-two cases were included in this second part of the case–crossover analysis. The case–crossover design did not show any statistically significant association between psychotropic medication exposure and MVA risk [e.g., SSRIs—Adj. OR = 1.00 (95 % CI: 0.69–1.46); Anxiolytics—Adj. OR = 0.95 (95 % CI: 0.68–1.31)]. The case–time–control design only showed a borderline statistically significant increased traffic accident risk in SSRI users [Adj. OR = 1.16 (95 % CI: 1.01–1.34)]. With respect to the stratifications by the number of DDDs and days of medication use, the analyses showed no increased traffic accident risk associated with the exposure to the selected medication groups [e.g., SSRIs, <20 DDDs—Adj. OR = 0.65 (95 % CI: 0.11–3.87); SSRIs, 16–150 days—Adj. OR = 0.55 (95 % CI: 0.24–1.24)]. In contrast to the above-mentioned results, our recent case–control study found a statistically significant association between traffic accident risk and exposure to anxiolytics [Adj. OR = 1.54 (95 % CI: 1.11–2.15)], and SSRIs [Adj. OR = 2.03 (95 % CI: 1.31–3.14)]. Case–crossover and case–time–control analyses produced different results than those of our recent case–control study (i.e., case–crossover and case–time–control analyses did not show any statistically significant association whereas the case–control analysis showed an increased traffic accident risk in anxiolytic and SSRI users). These divergent results can probably be explained by the differences in the study designs. Given that the case–crossover design is only appropriate for short-term exposures and the case–time–control design is an elaboration of this latter, it can be concluded that, probably, these two approaches are not the most suitable ones to investigate the relation between MVA risk and psychotropic medications, which, on the contrary, are often use chronically

Efficacy in asthma of once-daily treatment with fluticasone furoate: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Fluticasone furoate (FF) is a novel long-acting inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). This double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized study evaluated the efficacy and safety of FF 200 mcg or 400 mcg once daily, either in the morning or in the evening, and FF 200 mcg twice daily (morning and evening), for 8 weeks in patients with persistent asthma.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Asthma patients maintained on ICS for ≥ 3 months with baseline morning forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) 50-80% of predicted normal value and FEV₁reversibility of ≥ 12% and ≥ 200 ml were eligible. The primary endpoint was mean change from baseline FEV₁at week 8 in pre-dose (morning or evening [depending on regimen], pre-rescue bronchodilator) FEV₁.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 545 patients received one of five FF treatment groups and 101 patients received placebo (intent-to-treat population). Each of the five FF treatment groups produced a statistically significant improvement in pre-dose FEV₁compared with placebo (p < 0.05). FF 400 mcg once daily in the evening and FF 200 mcg twice daily produced similar placebo-adjusted improvements in evening pre-dose FEV₁at week 8 (240 ml vs. 235 ml). FF 400 mcg once daily in the morning, although effective, resulted in a smaller improvement in morning pre-dose FEV₁than FF 200 mcg twice daily at week 8 (315 ml vs. 202 ml). The incidence of oral candidiasis was low (0-4%) and UC excretion was comparable with placebo for all FF groups.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>FF at total daily doses of 200 mcg or 400 mcg was significantly more effective than placebo. FF 400 mcg once daily in the evening had similar efficacy to FF 200 mcg twice daily and all FF regimens had a safety tolerability profile generally similar to placebo. This indicates that inhaled FF is an effective and well tolerated once-daily treatment for mild-to-moderate asthma.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00398645">NCT00398645</a></p

Metabolic Effects Associated with ICS in Patients with COPD and Comorbid Type 2 Diabetes: A Historical Matched Cohort Study

Background Management guidelines for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) recommend that inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are prescribed to patients with the most severe symptoms. However, these guidelines have not been widely implemented by physicians, leading to widespread use of ICS in patients with mild-to-moderate COPD. Of particular concern is the potential risk of worsening diabetic control associated with ICS use. Here we investigate whether ICS therapy in patients with COPD and comorbid type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has a negative impact on diabetic control, and whether these negative effects are dose-dependent. Methods and Findings This was a historical matched cohort study utilising primary care medical record data from two large UK databases. We selected patients aged >= 40 years with COPD and T2DM, prescribed ICS (n = 1360) or non-ICS therapy (n = 2642) between 2008 and 2012. The primary endpoint was change in HbA(1c) between the baseline and outcome periods. After 1:1 matching, each cohort consisted of 682 patients. Over the 12-18-month outcome period, patients prescribed ICS had significantly greater increases in HbA1c values compared with those prescribed non-ICS therapies; adjusted difference 0.16% (95% confidence interval [Cl]: 0.05-0.27%) in all COPD patients, and 0.25% (95% Cl: 0.10-0.40%) in mild-to-moderate COPD patients. Patients in the ICS cohort also had significantly more diabetes-related general practice visits per year and received more frequent glucose strip prescriptions, compared with those prescribed non-ICS therapies. Patients prescribed higher cumulative doses of ICS (> 250 mg) had greater odds of increased HbA(1c) and/or receiving additional antidiabetic medication, and increased odds of being above the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) target for HbA1c levels, compared with those prescribed lower cumulative doses ( Conclusion For patients with COPD and comorbid T2DM, ICS therapy may have a negative impact on diabetes control. Patients prescribed higher cumulative doses of ICS may be at greater risk of diabetes progression

The effect of cigarette smoke exposure on the development of inflammation in lungs, gut and joints of TNFΔARE mice

The inflammatory cytokine TNF-alpha is a central mediator in many immune-mediated diseases, such as Crohn's disease (CD), spondyloarthritis (SpA) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Epidemiologic studies have shown that cigarette smoking (CS) is a prominent common risk factor in these TNF-dependent diseases. We exposed TNF Delta ARE mice; in which a systemic TNF-alpha overexpression leads to the development of inflammation; to 2 or 4 weeks of air or CS. We investigated the effect of deregulated TNF expression on CS-induced pulmonary inflammation and the effect of CS exposure on the initiation and progression of gut and joint inflammation. Upon 2 weeks of CS exposure, inflammation in lungs of TNF Delta ARE mice was significantly aggravated. However, upon 4 weeks of CS-exposure, this aggravation was no longer observed. TNF Delta ARE mice have no increases in CD4+ and CD8+ T cells and a diminished neutrophil response in the lungs after 4 weeks of CS exposure. In the gut and joints of TNF Delta ARE mice, 2 or 4 weeks of CS exposure did not modulate the development of inflammation. In conclusion, CS exposure does not modulate gut and joint inflammation in TNF Delta ARE mice. The lung responses towards CS in TNF Delta ARE mice however depend on the duration of CS exposure

Determinants of initial inhaled corticosteroid use in patients with GOLD A/B COPD:a retrospective study of UK general practice

Initial use of inhaled corticosteroid therapy is common in patients with Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) A or B chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, contrary to GOLD guidelines. We investigated UK prescribing of inhaled corticosteroid therapy in these patients, to identify predictors of inhaled corticosteroid use in newly diagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. A cohort of newly diagnosed GOLD A/B chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients was identified from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (June 2005–June 2015). Patients were classified by prescribed treatment, with those receiving inhaled corticosteroid-containing therapy compared with those receiving long-acting bronchodilators without inhaled corticosteroid. In all, 29,815 patients with spirometry-confirmed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were identified. Of those prescribed maintenance therapy within 3 months of diagnosis, 63% were prescribed inhaled corticosteroid-containing therapy vs. 37% prescribed non-inhaled corticosteroid therapy. FEV1% predicted, concurrent asthma diagnosis, region, and moderate exacerbation were the strongest predictors of inhaled corticosteroid use in the overall cohort. When concurrent asthma patients were excluded, all other co-variates remained significant predictors. Other significant predictors included general practitioner practice, younger age, and co-prescription with short-acting bronchodilators. Trends over time showed that initial inhaled corticosteroid prescriptions reduced throughout the study, but still accounted for 47% of initial prescriptions in 2015. These results suggest that inhaled corticosteroid prescribing in GOLD A/B patients is common, with significant regional variation that is independent of FEV1% predicted

Dose patterns in commercially insured subjects chronically exposed to opioids: a large cohort study in the United States

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Little data exist on how opioid doses vary with the length of exposure among chronic opioid users.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>To characterize the change in the dosage of opioids over time, a retrospective cohort study using the PharMetrics database for the years 1999 through 2008 was conducted. Individuals exposed to opioids in 2000 who had 2 opioid dispensings at least 6 months apart and were opioid naive (did not receive any opioid 6 month before their exposure in 2000) were included. The date of the first dispensing in 2000 was defined as the index date and the dispensing had to be for a strong and full agonist opioid. All opioid doses were converted to oral morphine equivalent doses. Exposure was classified as continuous or intermittent. Mean, median, interquartile range, and 95^thpercentile of opioid dose over 6-month periods, as well as the percentage of subjects who ever received a high or very high opioid dose, were calculated.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Among the 48,986 subjects, the mean age was 44.5 years and 54.5% were women. Intermittent exposure was observed in 99% of subjects; continuous exposure was observed in 1% of subjects. The mean duration of exposure for the subjects who were continuously exposed to opioids was 477 days. In subjects with no cancer diagnosis who were continuously exposed to opioids, the mean, 25^th, 50^th, and 75^thpercentile of dose was stable during the first 2 years of use, but the 95^thpercentile increased. Seven percent of them were exposed to doses of 180 mg or more of morphine at some point.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Dose escalation is uncommon in subjects with intermittent exposure to opioids. For subjects with continuous exposure to opioids who have cancer, doses rise substantially with time. For those without cancer, doses remain relatively stable for the first 2 years of use, but subsequently increase. Seven percent of subjects with no cancer diagnosis will be exposed to daily doses of 180 mg or more of morphine equivalent at some point.</p