Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Translational Center for Excellence for Neuroepidemiology and Neurological Outcomes Research, Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Center for Pharmacoepidemiology Research and Training, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Center for Pharmacoepidemiology Research and Training, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Biomed Pharmacother. 2021 Jul;139:111559. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2021.111559. Epub 2021 Apr 10.
In a previous drug-drug interaction (DDI) screening study intended to generate hypotheses, clopidogrel + either eszopiclone or zolpidem (vs. clopidogrel alone) were associated with serious bleeding.
To confirm or refute these DDI signals and examine associations with other hypnotics in an independent population of United States Medicaid beneficiaries METHODS: We employed a bi-directional self-controlled case series design in eligible individuals concomitantly exposed to one of 12 hypnotics (precipitants, exposures of interest) plus either clopidogrel (the object drug) or pravastatin (the negative control object drug). The outcome was hospital presentation with serious bleeding. Using conditional Poisson regression, we calculated confounder-adjusted rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals for serious bleeding during clopidogrel + precipitant use (vs. clopidogrel alone). To distinguish a DDI from a precipitant's inherent effect on bleeding, we divided effect measures by the adjusted RR for the corresponding pravastatin + precipitant pair to obtain ratios of RR (RRRs).
Among 23,194 users of clopidogrel and 3824 of pravastatin who experienced serious bleeding during an active prescription for one of these agents, confounder-adjusted RRRs for serious bleeding were 6.63 (0.39-113.01) and 0.77 (0.53-1.11) with eszopiclone and zolpidem, respectively, whereas confounder-adjusted RRRs for other hypnotics ranged from 0.18 (0.04-0.85) for triazolam to 1.79 (0.16-20.44) for zaleplon. Statistical imprecision therefore precluded us from confirming or refuting these prior signals with eszopiclone and zolpidem.
While we could not confirm or refute previously identified DDI signals, numerically elevated RRRs for serious bleeding with several clopidogrel + hypnotic pairs warrant further examination.
在之前一项旨在产生假说的药物相互作用(DDI)筛选研究中,氯吡格雷+依佐匹克隆或唑吡坦(与氯吡格雷单独使用相比)与严重出血有关。
在一个美国医疗补助受益人的独立人群中确认或反驳这些 DDI 信号,并检查与其他催眠药物的关联。
我们在同时暴露于 12 种催眠药物(引发剂,感兴趣的暴露)之一的合格个体中使用了双向自我对照病例系列设计,加上氯吡格雷(目标药物)或普伐他汀(阴性对照目标药物)。结果是因严重出血而住院就诊。使用条件泊松回归,我们计算了在氯吡格雷+引发剂使用期间(与氯吡格雷单独使用相比)严重出血的混杂因素调整后的率比(RR)和 95%置信区间。为了将 DDI 与引发剂对出血的固有影响区分开来,我们将效应量除以相应的普伐他汀+引发剂对的调整后 RR,以获得 RR 的比值(RRR)。
在 23194 名氯吡格雷使用者和 3824 名普伐他汀使用者中,有 23194 名在一种药物的活性处方期间经历了严重出血,在 eszopiclone 和 zolpidem 中,严重出血的混杂因素调整后 RRR 分别为 6.63(0.39-113.01)和 0.77(0.53-1.11),而其他催眠药物的混杂因素调整后 RRR 范围从 triazolam 的 0.18(0.04-0.85)到 zaleplon 的 1.79(0.16-20.44)。因此,统计上的不精确性使我们无法确认或反驳 eszopiclone 和 zolpidem 之前的信号。
虽然我们无法确认或反驳先前发现的 DDI 信号,但氯吡格雷+几种催眠药物对严重出血的 RRR 数值升高需要进一步检查。