...
首页> 外文期刊>Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety >Comparative effectiveness and safety of antiplatelet drugs in patients with diabetes mellitus and acute coronary syndrome
【24h】

Comparative effectiveness and safety of antiplatelet drugs in patients with diabetes mellitus and acute coronary syndrome

机译:糖尿病患者和急性冠状动脉综合征患者抗血小板药物的比较效果和安全性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose Comparative outcomes of treatment with antiplatelet drugs in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and co-morbid diabetes mellitus (DM) are not well studied. Methods We performed a cohort study using US commercial claims data (2009-2015) and conducted the following pairwise comparisons in ACS patients with DM: prasugrel vs clopidogrel, ticagrelor vs clopidogrel, and prasugrel vs ticagrelor. Outcomes of interest included (1) a composite effectiveness endpoint including myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or inpatient mortality; (2) a composite safety endpoint including major bleeding events requiring hospitalization; and (3) pneumonia hospitalizations as a negative control endpoint. We used calendar time-specific propensity score matching to account for confounding and applied Cox proportional hazard models to calculate hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results Comparative risk of the effectiveness endpoint was lower among prasugrel initiators compared to clopidogrel initiators (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.99, N = 7011 matched pairs), but no different between ticagrelor and clopidogrel (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.76-1.37, N = 3013 pairs) or prasugrel and ticagrelor (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.58-1.18, N = 2207 pairs). Bleeding risk was higher among prasugrel initiators when compared to clopidogrel initiators within the first month of treatment (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.03-3.35); no other comparison indicated any difference. No differences in the negative control outcomes were noted after PS matching for all comparisons, indicating adequate confounding control. Conclusions Prasugrel was associated with superior cardiovascular outcomes and a higher risk of short-term bleeding compared to clopidogrel in patients with ACS and DM. Comparative outcomes were similar between ticagrelor and clopidogrel or prasugrel and ticagrelor.
机译:目的对急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)和副病态糖尿病患者抗血小板药物治疗的比较结果并未得到很好的研究。方法采用美国商业索赔数据(2009-2015)进行了队列研究,并在ACS患者DM中进行了以下成对比较:PRASUGREL VS CLOPIDogrel,TICAGRELOR VS CLOPIDOGRER和PRASUGREL VS TICAGRELOR。感兴趣的结果包括(1)复合有效性终点,包括心肌梗死,缺血性卒中或住院死亡率; (2)复合安全终点,包括需要住院的主要出血事件; (3)肺炎住院治疗作为消极对照端点。我们使用日历时间特异性倾销得分匹配,以考虑混淆和应用的Cox比例危险模型,以计算95%置信区间(CI)的危险比(HR)。结果与氯吡格雷引发剂(HR 0.82,95%CI 0.68-0.99,N = 7011匹配对)相比,普拉布雷引发剂的有效性终点的比较风险降低,但TicagreloLor和Clopidogrel(HR 1.02,95%CI 0.76 - 1.37,n = 3013对)或普拉沙拉和滴黄素(HR 0.83,95%CI 0.58-1.18,n = 2207对)。在治疗的第一个月内的氯吡格雷引发剂(HR 1.85,95%CI 1.03-3.35)相比,普拉布雷引发剂中出血风险较高;没有其他比较表明任何差异。在PS匹配的所有比较后,在PS匹配后没有发现阴性控制结果的差异,表明充分的混杂控制。结论普拉布雷与ACS和DM患者的氯吡格雷相比,普拉苏格林与卓越的心血管结果和较高的短期出血风险较高。 Ticagreler和Clopidogrel或普拉布雷和TiCagreloR之间的比较结果类似。

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