Gianluca Trifirò1, Maria de Ridder2, Janet Sultana2, Alessandro Oteri2, Peter Rijnbeek2, Serena Pecchioli2, Giampiero Mazzaglia2, Irene Bezemer2, Edeltraut Garbe2, Tania Schink2, Elisabetta Poluzzi2, Trine Frøslev2, Mariam Molokhia2, Igor Diemberger2, Miriam C J M Sturkenboom2. 1. Department of Medical Informatics (Trifirò, de Ridder, Sultana, Oteri, Rijnbeek, Sturkenboom), Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morpho-functional Imaging (Trifirò), and Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine (Sultana), University of Messina, Messina, Italy; Health Search, Italian College of General Practitioners (Pecchioli, Mazzaglia), Florence, Italy; PHARMO Institute for Drug Outcomes Research (Bezemer), Utrecht, Netherlands; Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS GmbH (Garbe, Schink), Bremen, Germany; Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (Poluzzi), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy; Department of Clinical Epidemiology (Frøslev), Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences (Molokhia), King's College, London, United Kingdom; Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine (Diemberger), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy trifirog@unime.it. 2. Department of Medical Informatics (Trifirò, de Ridder, Sultana, Oteri, Rijnbeek, Sturkenboom), Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morpho-functional Imaging (Trifirò), and Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine (Sultana), University of Messina, Messina, Italy; Health Search, Italian College of General Practitioners (Pecchioli, Mazzaglia), Florence, Italy; PHARMO Institute for Drug Outcomes Research (Bezemer), Utrecht, Netherlands; Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS GmbH (Garbe, Schink), Bremen, Germany; Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (Poluzzi), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy; Department of Clinical Epidemiology (Frøslev), Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; Department of Primary Care and Public Health Sciences (Molokhia), King's College, London, United Kingdom; Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine (Diemberger), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are conflicting findings from observational studies of the arrhythrogenic potential of azithromycin. Our aim was to quantify the association between azithromycin use and the risk of ventricular arrhythmia. METHODS: We conducted a nested case-control study within a cohort of new antibiotic users identified from a network of 7 population-based health care databases in Denmark, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom for the period 1997-2010. Up to 100 controls per case were selected and matched by age, sex and database. Recency of antibiotic use and type of drug (azithromycin was the exposure of interest) at the index date (occurrence of ventricular arrhythmia) were identified. We estimated the odds of ventricular arrhythmia associated with current azithromycin use relative to current amoxicillin use or nonuse of antibiotics (≥ 365 d without antibiotic exposure) using conditional logistic regression, adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: We identified 14 040 688 new antibiotic users who met the inclusion criteria. Ventricular arrhythmia developed in 12 874, of whom 30 were current azithromycin users. The mean age of the cases and controls was 63 years, and two-thirds were male. In the pooled data analyses across databases, azithromycin use was associated with an increased risk of ventricular arrhythmia relative to nonuse of antibiotics (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-2.86). This increased risk disappeared when current amoxicillin use was the comparator (adjusted OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.48-1.71). Database-specific estimates and meta-analysis confirmed results from the pooled data analysis. INTERPRETATION: Current azithromycin use was associated with an increased risk of ventricular arrhythmia when compared with nonuse of antibiotics, but not when compared with current amoxicillin use. The decreased risk with an active comparator suggests significant confounding by indication.
BACKGROUND: There are conflicting findings from observational studies of the arrhythrogenic potential of azithromycin. Our aim was to quantify the association between azithromycin use and the risk of ventricular arrhythmia. METHODS: We conducted a nested case-control study within a cohort of new antibiotic users identified from a network of 7 population-based health care databases in Denmark, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom for the period 1997-2010. Up to 100 controls per case were selected and matched by age, sex and database. Recency of antibiotic use and type of drug (azithromycin was the exposure of interest) at the index date (occurrence of ventricular arrhythmia) were identified. We estimated the odds of ventricular arrhythmia associated with current azithromycin use relative to current amoxicillin use or nonuse of antibiotics (≥ 365 d without antibiotic exposure) using conditional logistic regression, adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: We identified 14 040 688 new antibiotic users who met the inclusion criteria. Ventricular arrhythmia developed in 12 874, of whom 30 were current azithromycin users. The mean age of the cases and controls was 63 years, and two-thirds were male. In the pooled data analyses across databases, azithromycin use was associated with an increased risk of ventricular arrhythmia relative to nonuse of antibiotics (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-2.86). This increased risk disappeared when current amoxicillin use was the comparator (adjusted OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.48-1.71). Database-specific estimates and meta-analysis confirmed results from the pooled data analysis. INTERPRETATION: Current azithromycin use was associated with an increased risk of ventricular arrhythmia when compared with nonuse of antibiotics, but not when compared with current amoxicillin use. The decreased risk with an active comparator suggests significant confounding by indication.
Authors: Jean Luc Pasquié; Prashanthan Sanders; Mélèze Hocini; Li Fern Hsu; Christophe Scavée; Pierre Jais; Yoshihide Takahashi; Martin Rotter; Fréderic Sacher; Jacques Victor; Jacques Clémenty; Michel Haïssaguerre Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2004-11
Authors: Eric M Mortensen; Ethan A Halm; Mary Jo Pugh; Laurel A Copeland; Mark Metersky; Michael J Fine; Christopher S Johnson; Carlos A Alvarez; Christopher R Frei; Chester Good; Marcos I Restrepo; John R Downs; Antonio Anzueto Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-06-04 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Paul Avillach; Preciosa M Coloma; Rosa Gini; Martijn Schuemie; Fleur Mougin; Jean-Charles Dufour; Giampiero Mazzaglia; Carlo Giaquinto; Carla Fornari; Ron Herings; Mariam Molokhia; Lars Pedersen; Annie Fourrier-Réglat; Marius Fieschi; Miriam Sturkenboom; Johan van der Lei; Antoine Pariente; Gianluca Trifirò Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2012-09-06 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Linnea A Polgreen; Benjamin N Riedle; Joseph E Cavanaugh; Saket Girotra; Barry London; Mary C Schroeder; Philip M Polgreen Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2018-04-21 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Jennifer Pillay; Ainsley Moore; Prinon Rahman; Gabriel Lewin; Donna Reynolds; John Riva; Guyléne Thériault; Brett Thombs; Brenda Wilson; Joan Robinson; Amanda Ramdyal; Geneviéve Cadieux; Robin Featherstone; Anne N Burchell; Jo-Anne Dillon; Ameeta Singh; Tom Wong; Marion Doull; Greg Traversy; Susan Courage; Tara MacGregor; Cydney Johnson; Ben Vandermeer; Lisa Hartling Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2018-12-26
Authors: Timothy J Kopper; Katelyn E McFarlane; William M Bailey; Michael B Orr; Bei Zhang; John C Gensel Journal: Front Cell Neurosci Date: 2019-11-06 Impact factor: 5.505