A European, Observational, 3-Year Cohort Comparative Study on the Safety of the Fixed Dose Combination Pravastatin 40 mg/Fenofibrate 160 mg vs. Statin Alone in Real Clinical Practice: The POSE Study.
Nikolaos Papadopoulos, Eleni Arvaniti, Theodoros Angelopoulos, Konstantinos Tziomalos, Manuel Suarez Tembra, Jose Luis Diaz, Sophie De Niet, Stéphanie Da Silva, John Doupis
{"title":"A European, Observational, 3-Year Cohort Comparative Study on the Safety of the Fixed Dose Combination Pravastatin 40 mg/Fenofibrate 160 mg vs. Statin Alone in Real Clinical Practice: The POSE Study.","authors":"Nikolaos Papadopoulos, Eleni Arvaniti, Theodoros Angelopoulos, Konstantinos Tziomalos, Manuel Suarez Tembra, Jose Luis Diaz, Sophie De Niet, Stéphanie Da Silva, John Doupis","doi":"10.1002/pds.70047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>The aim of the study was to provide valuable real-world long-term safety data of the fixed pravastatin 40 mg/fenofibrate 160 mg combination in comparison of monotherapy with statins of moderate intensity.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>POSE study was an observational, comparative study conducted in three European countries. Patients treated or planned to be treated with pravastatin 40 mg/fenofibrate 160 mg or with a moderate-intensity statin in monotherapy were assessed over 3 years. The main safety endpoints included the incidence of renal or urinary disorder, musculoskeletal or connective tissue disorder, hepatobiliary disorder and cardiovascular events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 3075 patients treated for dyslipidaemia, with diabetes mellitus (47%), hypertension (56%) and/or established cardiovascular disease (61%). Over the 3 years of follow-up, the difference in incidence rate of safety events between the pravastatin 40 mg/fenofibrate 160 mg group and the statin group was not statistically significant (RR = 1.366 [95% CI = 0.967-1.929]). The most frequently occurring events were musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders (AR = 0.030 in the pravastatin 40 mg/fenofibrate 160 mg group and 0.024 in the statin group), renal and urinary disorders (AR = 0.019 vs. 0.016, respectively) and aggravated diabetes mellitus (0.021 vs. 0.014). Most events occurred during the first year, then incidence decreased over the 3-year period. No statistically significant difference was observed between treatment groups regarding the cardiovascular events (RR = 1.209 [95% CI = 0.596-2.453]) and no new signal emerged from the long-term follow-up.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrates a reassuring long-term safety profile of the fixed pravastatin 40 mg/fenofibrate 160 mg combination in routine clinical practice, with low and similar incidence of events over the 3 years follow-up compared to a monotherapy with statins of moderate intensity.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"33 11","pages":"e70047"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70047","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and purpose: The aim of the study was to provide valuable real-world long-term safety data of the fixed pravastatin 40 mg/fenofibrate 160 mg combination in comparison of monotherapy with statins of moderate intensity.
Materials and methods: POSE study was an observational, comparative study conducted in three European countries. Patients treated or planned to be treated with pravastatin 40 mg/fenofibrate 160 mg or with a moderate-intensity statin in monotherapy were assessed over 3 years. The main safety endpoints included the incidence of renal or urinary disorder, musculoskeletal or connective tissue disorder, hepatobiliary disorder and cardiovascular events.
Results: The study included 3075 patients treated for dyslipidaemia, with diabetes mellitus (47%), hypertension (56%) and/or established cardiovascular disease (61%). Over the 3 years of follow-up, the difference in incidence rate of safety events between the pravastatin 40 mg/fenofibrate 160 mg group and the statin group was not statistically significant (RR = 1.366 [95% CI = 0.967-1.929]). The most frequently occurring events were musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders (AR = 0.030 in the pravastatin 40 mg/fenofibrate 160 mg group and 0.024 in the statin group), renal and urinary disorders (AR = 0.019 vs. 0.016, respectively) and aggravated diabetes mellitus (0.021 vs. 0.014). Most events occurred during the first year, then incidence decreased over the 3-year period. No statistically significant difference was observed between treatment groups regarding the cardiovascular events (RR = 1.209 [95% CI = 0.596-2.453]) and no new signal emerged from the long-term follow-up.
Conclusions: This study demonstrates a reassuring long-term safety profile of the fixed pravastatin 40 mg/fenofibrate 160 mg combination in routine clinical practice, with low and similar incidence of events over the 3 years follow-up compared to a monotherapy with statins of moderate intensity.
期刊介绍:
The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report.
Particular areas of interest include:
design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology;
comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world;
methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology;
assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy;
patterns of drug utilization;
relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines;
evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.