Literature DB >> 34331322

Comparative Safety of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors and Sudden Cardiac Arrest and Ventricular Arrhythmia: Population-Based Cohort Studies.

Ghadeer K Dawwas1,2, Sean Hennessy1,2,3, Colleen M Brensinger2, Rajat Deo1,4, Warren B Bilker1,2, Samantha E Soprano1,2, Neil Dhopeshwarkar1,2, James H Flory1,5, Zachary T Bloomgarden6, Christina L Aquilante7, Stephen E Kimmel8, Charles E Leonard1,2.   

Abstract

In vivo studies suggest that arrhythmia risk may be greater with less selective dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, but evidence from population-based studies is missing. We aimed to compare saxagliptin, sitagliptin, and linagliptin with regard to risk of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA)/ventricular arrhythmia (VA). We conducted high-dimensional propensity score (hdPS) matched, new-user cohort studies. We analyzed Medicaid and Optum Clinformatics separately. We identified new users of saxagliptin, sitagliptin (both databases), and linagliptin (Optum only). We defined SCA/VA outcomes using emergency department and inpatient diagnoses. We identified and then controlled for confounders via a data-adaptive, hdPS approach. We generated marginal hazard ratios (HRs) via Cox proportional hazards regression using a robust variance estimator while adjusting for calendar year. We identified the following matched comparisons: saxagliptin vs. sitagliptin (23,895 vs. 96,972) in Medicaid, saxagliptin vs. sitagliptin (48,388 vs. 117,383) in Optum, and linagliptin vs. sitagliptin (36,820 vs. 78,701) in Optum. In Medicaid, use of saxagliptin (vs. sitagliptin) was associated with an increased rate of SCA/VA (adjusted HR (aHR), 2.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24-3.25). However, in Optum data, this finding was not present (aHR, 0.79, 95% CI 0.41-1.51). Further, we found no association between linagliptin (vs. sitagliptin) and SCA/VA (aHR, 0.65, 95% CI 0.36-1.17). We found discordant results regarding the association between SCA/VA with saxagliptin compared with sitagliptin in two independent datasets. It remains unclear whether these findings are due to heterogeneity of treatment effect in the different populations, chance, or unmeasured confounding.
© 2021 The Authors. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2021 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34331322      PMCID: PMC9450482          DOI: 10.1002/cpt.2381

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther        ISSN: 0009-9236            Impact factor:   6.903


  43 in total

1.  Balance diagnostics after propensity score matching.

Authors:  Zhongheng Zhang; Hwa Jung Kim; Guillaume Lonjon; Yibing Zhu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-01

2.  Sensitivity Analysis in Observational Research: Introducing the E-Value.

Authors:  Tyler J VanderWeele; Peng Ding
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 3.  Do DPP-4 Inhibitors Cause Heart Failure Events by Promoting Adrenergically Mediated Cardiotoxicity? Clues From Laboratory Models and Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Milton Packer
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 17.367

4.  Drug-Induced Arrhythmias: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Authors:  James E Tisdale; Mina K Chung; Kristen B Campbell; Muhammad Hammadah; Jose A Joglar; Jacinthe Leclerc; Bharath Rajagopalan
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2020-09-15       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  The use of propensity score methods with survival or time-to-event outcomes: reporting measures of effect similar to those used in randomized experiments.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  The quality of Medicaid and Medicare data obtained from CMS and its contractors: implications for pharmacoepidemiology.

Authors:  Charles E Leonard; Colleen M Brensinger; Young Hee Nam; Warren B Bilker; Geralyn M Barosso; Margaret J Mangaali; Sean Hennessy
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Corrigendum: Physiology and Pharmacology of DPP-4 in Glucose Homeostasis and the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes.

Authors:  Carolyn F Deacon
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2019-05-03       Impact factor: 5.555

8.  Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 independent cardiac dysfunction links saxagliptin to heart failure.

Authors:  Chintan N Koyani; Ewald Kolesnik; Gerald Wölkart; Niroj Shrestha; Susanne Scheruebel; Christopher Trummer; Klaus Zorn-Pauly; Astrid Hammer; Petra Lang; Helga Reicher; Heinrich Maechler; Klaus Groschner; Bernd Mayer; Peter P Rainer; Harald Sourij; Wolfgang Sattler; Ernst Malle; Brigitte Pelzmann; Dirk von Lewinski
Journal:  Biochem Pharmacol       Date:  2017-08-30       Impact factor: 6.100

Review 9.  Nonclinical and clinical pharmacology evidence for cardiovascular safety of saxagliptin.

Authors:  Pia S Pollack; Kristina D Chadwick; David M Smith; Martin Billger; Boaz Hirshberg; Nayyar Iqbal; David W Boulton
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diabetol       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 9.951

10.  Saxagliptin but Not Sitagliptin Inhibits CaMKII and PKC via DPP9 Inhibition in Cardiomyocytes.

Authors:  Chintan N Koyani; Christopher Trummer; Niroj Shrestha; Susanne Scheruebel; Benjamin Bourgeois; Ioanna Plastira; Sandra Kickmaier; Harald Sourij; Peter P Rainer; Tobias Madl; Wolfgang Sattler; Brigitte Pelzmann; Ernst Malle; Dirk von Lewinski
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2018-11-14       Impact factor: 4.566

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.