Nikolaos Papadopoulos, Eleni Arvaniti, Theodoros Angelopoulos, Konstantinos Tziomalos, Manuel Suarez Tembra, Jose Luis Diaz, Sophie De Niet, Stéphanie Da Silva, John Doupis
{"title":"一项为期 3 年的欧洲观察性队列比较研究:在实际临床实践中,普伐他汀 40 毫克/非诺贝特 160 毫克固定剂量组合与单用他汀类药物的安全性比较:POSE 研究。","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":"{\"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}","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
摘要
背景和目的:该研究旨在提供有价值的普伐他汀 40 毫克/非诺贝特 160 毫克固定组合的长期安全性真实数据,并与中等强度他汀类药物单药治疗进行比较:POSE研究是一项观察性比较研究,在三个欧洲国家进行。对接受或计划接受普伐他汀40毫克/非诺贝特160毫克或中等强度他汀类药物单药治疗的患者进行了为期3年的评估。主要安全性终点包括肾脏或泌尿系统疾病、肌肉骨骼或结缔组织疾病、肝胆疾病和心血管事件的发生率:研究对象包括3075名接受过血脂异常治疗的患者,其中47%患有糖尿病,56%患有高血压,61%患有心血管疾病。在3年的随访中,普伐他汀40毫克/非诺贝特160毫克组与他汀类药物组的安全事件发生率差异无统计学意义(RR = 1.366 [95% CI = 0.967-1.929])。最常发生的事件是肌肉骨骼和结缔组织疾病(普伐他汀40毫克/非诺贝特160毫克组的AR=0.030,他汀组的AR=0.024)、肾脏和泌尿系统疾病(AR=0.019 vs. 0.016,分别为0.019和0.016)以及糖尿病恶化(0.021 vs. 0.014)。大多数事件发生在第一年,然后在 3 年内发生率有所下降。在心血管事件方面,治疗组之间没有发现明显的统计学差异(RR = 1.209 [95% CI = 0.596-2.453]),长期随访也没有发现新的信号:这项研究表明,在常规临床实践中,普伐他汀40毫克/非诺贝特160毫克的固定组合具有令人放心的长期安全性,与中等强度的他汀类药物单药治疗相比,3年随访期间的事件发生率较低且相似。
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.
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.