i3 Drug Safety, Waltham, Massachusetts 02451, USA.
Clin Ther. 2009 Nov;31(11):2665-77. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.11.003.
The thiazolidinediones (TZDs), including rosiglitazone maleate and pioglitazone hydrochloride, are commonly prescribed in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Although recent meta-analyses suggest there is an increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI) among rosiglitazone users, these findings were not supported by data from other studies.
The goal of this research was to compare the risk of MI, coronary revascularization (CR), and sudden death in patients who began rosiglitazone therapy versus those who began pioglitazone therapy.
This was a retrospective cohort study using information from a large health care database (with data available on approximately 14 million individuals). All initiators of rosiglitazone or pioglitazone from July 1, 2000, through March 31, 2007, for whom the first dispensing followed >or=6 months of health plan membership and the member's 18th birthday were identified. The propensity score method was used to create matched cohorts of patients in 3 treatment groups: TZD monotherapy, dual therapy (a TZD plus another antidiabetic agent), and TZD therapy with concomitant insulin. Follow-up continued to a change in treatment regimen, defined as regimen switch (ie, the addition of any antidiabetic agent to an existing regimen) or regimen stop (ie, the discontinuation of any component of the therapeutic regimen). Three outcomes that represent coronary heart disease were assessed for this analysis: MI, CR, and sudden death. The proportional hazards model, stratified by therapeutic regimen, was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs of coronary heart disease risk associated with use of rosiglitazone relative to pioglitazone.
Among 47,501 matched pairs of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone users, 72,104 (75.9%) were receiving TZD monotherapy, 17,822 (18.8%) were receiving dual therapy, and 5076 (5.3%) were receiving TZD therapy with insulin. Mean follow-up was 9.6 months with regimen switch as the censoring event and 8.4 months with regimen stop as the censoring event. For MI, the HR was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.12-1.62) through regimen switch and 1.41 (95% CI, 1.13-1.75) through regimen stop. For the composite outcome of MI, CR, and/or sudden death, the HR was 1.09 (95% CI, 0.97-1.22) through regimen switch and 1.12 (95% CI, 0.98-1.27) through regimen stop.
In this retrospective cohort analysis, MI was more common in users of rosiglitazone than in users of pioglitazone. The incidence of a combined end point of MI, CR, and/or sudden death in patients receiving rosiglitazone was not significantly different from that in patients receiving pioglitazone.
噻唑烷二酮类药物(TZDs),包括马来酸罗格列酮和盐酸吡格列酮,常用于 2 型糖尿病患者。尽管最近的荟萃分析表明罗格列酮使用者心肌梗死(MI)的风险增加,但其他研究的数据并未支持这些发现。
本研究旨在比较开始罗格列酮治疗与开始吡格列酮治疗的患者发生 MI、冠状动脉血运重建(CR)和猝死的风险。
这是一项使用大型医疗保健数据库信息的回顾性队列研究(约有 1400 万人的数据可用)。所有于 2000 年 7 月 1 日至 2007 年 3 月 31 日开始罗格列酮或吡格列酮治疗的患者均符合条件,其首次配药时间距健康计划成员资格和成员 18 岁生日均>或=6 个月。采用倾向评分法为 3 个治疗组创建匹配队列:TZD 单药治疗、联合治疗(TZD 加另一种抗糖尿病药物)和 TZD 联合胰岛素治疗。随访继续至治疗方案改变,定义为方案转换(即,将任何抗糖尿病药物添加到现有方案中)或方案停止(即,停止治疗方案的任何组成部分)。该分析评估了 3 个代表冠心病的结局:MI、CR 和猝死。采用按治疗方案分层的比例风险模型估计使用罗格列酮与吡格列酮相关的冠心病风险的风险比(HR)和 95%置信区间(CI)。
在 47501 对匹配的罗格列酮和吡格列酮使用者中,72104 人(75.9%)正在接受 TZD 单药治疗,17822 人(18.8%)正在接受联合治疗,5076 人(5.3%)正在接受 TZD 联合胰岛素治疗。平均随访时间为 9.6 个月,方案转换为截尾事件,8.4 个月为方案停止为截尾事件。对于 MI,方案转换时的 HR 为 1.35(95%CI,1.12-1.62),方案停止时的 HR 为 1.41(95%CI,1.13-1.75)。对于 MI、CR 和/或猝死的复合结局,方案转换时的 HR 为 1.09(95%CI,0.97-1.22),方案停止时的 HR 为 1.12(95%CI,0.98-1.27)。
在这项回顾性队列分析中,罗格列酮使用者的 MI 比吡格列酮使用者更常见。接受罗格列酮治疗的患者发生 MI、CR 和/或猝死的复合终点的发生率与接受吡格列酮治疗的患者无显著差异。