Ruth E Costello1, Belay B Yimer1, Polly Roads1, Meghna Jani1,2, William G Dixon1,2. 1. Centre for Epidemiology Versus Arthritis, Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester. 2. Department of Rheumatology, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Patients with RA are frequently treated with glucocorticoids (GCs), but evidence is conflicting about whether GCs are associated with hypertension. The aim of this study was to determine whether GCs are associated with incident hypertension in patients with RA. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of patients with incident RA and without hypertension was identified from UK primary care electronic medical records (Clinical Practice Research Datalink). GC prescriptions were used to determine time-varying GC use, dose and cumulative dose, with a 3 month attribution window. Hypertension was identified through either: blood pressure measurements >140/90 mmHg, or antihypertensive prescriptions and a Read code for hypertension. Unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models were fitted to determine whether there was an association between GC use and incident hypertension. RESULTS: There were 17 760 patients in the cohort. A total of 7421 (42%) were prescribed GCs during follow-up. The incident rate of hypertension was 64.1 per 1000 person years (95% CI: 62.5, 65.7). The Cox proportional hazards model indicated that recent GC use was associated with a 17% increased hazard of hypertension (hazard ratio 1.17; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.24). When categorized by dose, only doses above 7.5 mg were significantly associated with hypertension. Cumulative dose did not indicate a clear pattern. CONCLUSION: Recent GC use was associated with incident hypertension in patients with RA, in particular doses ≥7.5 mg were associated with hypertension. Clinicians need to consider cardiovascular risk when prescribing GCs, and ensure blood pressure is regularly monitored and treated where necessary.
OBJECTIVES:Patients with RA are frequently treated with glucocorticoids (GCs), but evidence is conflicting about whether GCs are associated with hypertension. The aim of this study was to determine whether GCs are associated with incident hypertension in patients with RA. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of patients with incident RA and without hypertension was identified from UK primary care electronic medical records (Clinical Practice Research Datalink). GC prescriptions were used to determine time-varying GC use, dose and cumulative dose, with a 3 month attribution window. Hypertension was identified through either: blood pressure measurements >140/90 mmHg, or antihypertensive prescriptions and a Read code for hypertension. Unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models were fitted to determine whether there was an association between GC use and incident hypertension. RESULTS: There were 17 760 patients in the cohort. A total of 7421 (42%) were prescribed GCs during follow-up. The incident rate of hypertension was 64.1 per 1000 person years (95% CI: 62.5, 65.7). The Cox proportional hazards model indicated that recent GC use was associated with a 17% increased hazard of hypertension (hazard ratio 1.17; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.24). When categorized by dose, only doses above 7.5 mg were significantly associated with hypertension. Cumulative dose did not indicate a clear pattern. CONCLUSION: Recent GC use was associated with incident hypertension in patients with RA, in particular doses ≥7.5 mg were associated with hypertension. Clinicians need to consider cardiovascular risk when prescribing GCs, and ensure blood pressure is regularly monitored and treated where necessary.
Authors: M C van der Goes; J W G Jacobs; M Boers; T Andrews; M A M Blom-Bakkers; F Buttgereit; N Caeyers; M Cutolo; J A P Da Silva; L Guillevin; J R Kirwan; J Rovensky; G Severijns; S Webber; R Westhovens; J W J Bijlsma Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2010-08-06 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Naomi B Klarenbeek; Sjoerd M van der Kooij; Tineke J W Huizinga; Yvonne P M Goekoop-Ruiterman; Harry M J Hulsmans; Michiel V van Krugten; Irene Speyer; Jeska K de Vries-Bouwstra; Pit J S M Kerstens; Tom W J Huizinga; Ben A C Dijkmans; Cornelia F Allaart Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: H A Capell; R Madhok; J A Hunter; D Porter; E Morrison; J Larkin; E A Thomson; R Hampson; F W Poon Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: V F Panoulas; K M J Douglas; A Stavropoulos-Kalinoglou; G S Metsios; P Nightingale; M D Kita; M S Elisaf; G D Kitas Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: Audrey S L Low; Deborah P M Symmons; Mark Lunt; Louise K Mercer; Chris P Gale; Kath D Watson; William G Dixon; Kimme L Hyrich Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Stephen R Pye; Thérèse Sheppard; Rebecca M Joseph; Mark Lunt; Nadyne Girard; Jennifer S Haas; David W Bates; David L Buckeridge; Tjeerd P van Staa; Robyn Tamblyn; William G Dixon Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Antonio Naranjo; Tuulikki Sokka; Miguel A Descalzo; Jaime Calvo-Alén; Kim Hørslev-Petersen; Reijo K Luukkainen; Bernard Combe; Gerd R Burmester; Joe Devlin; Gianfranco Ferraccioli; Alessia Morelli; Monique Hoekstra; Maria Majdan; Stefan Sadkiewicz; Miguel Belmonte; Ann-Carin Holmqvist; Ernest Choy; Recep Tunc; Aleksander Dimic; Martin Bergman; Sergio Toloza; Theodore Pincus Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2008-03-06 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: Fabiola Atzeni; Javier Rodríguez-Carrio; Călin D Popa; Michael T Nurmohamed; Gabriella Szűcs; Zoltán Szekanecz Journal: Nat Rev Rheumatol Date: 2021-04-08 Impact factor: 20.543