...
首页> 外文期刊>Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety >A retrospective evaluation of congestive heart failure and myocardial ischemia events in 14,237 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus enrolled in 42 short-term, double-blind, randomized clinical studies with rosiglitazone.
【24h】

A retrospective evaluation of congestive heart failure and myocardial ischemia events in 14,237 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus enrolled in 42 short-term, double-blind, randomized clinical studies with rosiglitazone.

机译:回顾性评估罗格列酮在42项短期,双盲,随机临床研究中纳入的14237例2型糖尿病患者的14237例充血性心力衰竭和心肌缺血事件。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

PURPOSE: Retrospectively investigate potential associations between rosiglitazone and congestive heart failure (CHF) and, separately, events of myocardial ischemia. METHODS: Data from 14 237 individuals in 42 short-term, double-blind, randomized studies of rosiglitazone versus placebo or active diabetes medications were analyzed across seven treatment comparisons using an exact logistic regression model, adjusted for number of major cardiovascular risk factors and duration of exposure. RESULTS: CHF incidence ranged 0-1.27% (SAEs) and 0.12-2.42% (all AEs) with rosiglitazone versus 0.07-0.75% (SAEs) and 0.25-1.36% (all AEs) with control. Higher odds ratios (95%CI) were observed for CHF SAEs with sulfonylurea- and insulin-containing combinations: rosiglitazone monotherapy versus placebo, 0.25 (<0.01-4.75); rosiglitazone monotherapy versus sulfonylurea/metformin monotherapy, 0.23 (<0.01-2.14); sulfonylurea + rosiglitazone versus sulfonylurea monotherapy, 0.95 (0.01-75.20); metformin + rosiglitazone versus metformin monotherapy, 0.60 (0.00-8.28); metformin + rosiglitazone versus metformin + sulfonylurea, 1.04 (0.39-2.86); sulfonylurea + metformin + rosiglitazone versus sulfonylurea + metformin, 3.15 (0.35-150.52); insulin + rosiglitazone versus insulin monotherapy, 1.63 (0.52-6.01). Myocardial ischemia incidence ranged 0.75-1.40% (SAEs) and 1.49-2.77% (all AEs) with rosiglitazone versus 0.21-2.04% (SAEs) and 0.56-2.38% (all AEs) with control. Each comparison had an OR >1, with wide confidence intervals generally including unity. With data pooling, more events of myocardial ischemia were observed with rosiglitazone (2.00%) versus control (1.53%) (HR 1.30, 95%CI 1.004-1.69). CONCLUSIONS: CHF incidence may be greater when rosiglitazone is combined with sulfonylureas or insulin. When data were pooled, more events of myocardial ischemia were observed with rosiglitazone versus control. Final results from RECORD will allow a more rigorous evaluation of the cardiovascular safety profile.
机译:目的:回顾性研究罗格列酮与充血性心力衰竭(CHF)之间的潜在关联,以及心肌缺血事件。方法:采用精确的逻辑回归模型,对7项治疗比较进行了42项罗格列酮与安慰剂或活性糖尿病药物的短期,双盲,随机研究的14237名患者的数据进行了分析,并根据主要心血管危险因素的数量和持续时间进行了调整曝光。结果:罗格列酮的CHF发生率范围为0-1.27%(SAE)和0.12-2.42%(所有AE),而对照组为0.07-0.75%(SAE)和0.25-1.36%(所有AE)。含磺酰脲和胰岛素组合的CHF SAE观察到较高的优势比(95%CI):罗格列酮单药治疗与安慰剂比较为0.25(<0.01-4.75);罗格列酮单药治疗与磺脲类/二甲双胍单药治疗0.23(<0.01-2.14);磺酰脲+罗格列酮与磺酰脲单药治疗,0.95(0.01-75.20);二甲双胍+罗格列酮vs二甲双胍单药治疗,0.60(0.00-8.28);二甲双胍+罗格列酮与二甲双胍+磺酰脲1.04(0.39-2.86);磺酰脲+二甲双胍+罗格列酮vs磺酰脲+二甲双胍,3.15(0.35-150.52);胰岛素+罗格列酮vs胰岛素单一疗法1.63(0.52-6.01)。罗格列酮组的心肌缺血发生率为0.75-1.40%(SAE)和1.49-2.77%(所有AE),而对照组为0.21-2.04%(SAE)和0.56-2.38%(所有AE)。每个比较的OR均大于1,且具有较大的置信区间,通常包括1。通过数据汇总,罗格列酮(2.00%)比对照组(1.53%)观察到更多的心肌缺血事件(HR 1.30,95%CI 1.004-1.69)。结论:罗格列酮与磺脲类药物或胰岛素联合使用时,CHF的发生率可能更高。汇总数据后,与对照组相比,罗格列酮观察到更多的心肌缺血事件。 RECORD的最终结果将允许对心血管安全性进行更严格的评估。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号