Background: Women with a history of certain pregnancy complications are at higher risk for cardiovascular (CVD) disease. However, most clinical guidelines only recommend postpartum follow-up of those with a history of preeclampsia, gestational diabetes mellitus, or preterm birth. This systematic review was undertaken to determine if there is an association between a broader array of pregnancy complications and the future risk of CVD. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE (via Ovid), CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from inception to September 22, 2017, for observational studies of the association between the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, placental abruption, preterm birth, gestational diabetes mellitus, low birth weight, small-for-gestational-age birth, stillbirth, and miscarriage and subsequent CVD. Likelihood ratio meta-analyses were performed to generate pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% intrinsic confidence intervals (ICI). Results: Our systematic review included 83 studies (28 993 438 patients). Sample sizes varied from 250 to 2 000 000, with a median follow-up of 7.5 years postpartum. The risk of CVD was highest in women with gestational hypertension (OR 1.7; 95% ICI, 1.3–2.2), preeclampsia (OR 2.7; 95% ICI, 2.5–3.0), placental abruption (OR 1.8; 95% ICI, 1.4–2.3), preterm birth (OR 1.6; 95% ICI, 1.4–1.9), gestational diabetes mellitus (OR 1.7; 95% ICI, 1.1–2.5), and stillbirth (OR 1.5; 95% ICI, 1.1–2.1). A consistent trend was seen for low birth weight and small-for-gestational-age birth weight but not for miscarriage. Conclusions: Women with a broader array of pregnancy complications, including placental abruption and stillbirth, are at increased risk of future CVD. The findings support the need for assessment and risk factor management beyond the postpartum period.

In pharmacoepidemiology, routinely collected data from electronic health records (including primary care databases, registries, and administrative healthcare claims) are a resource for research evaluating the real world effectiveness and safety of medicines. Currently available guidelines for the reporting of research using non-randomised, routinely collected data—specifically the REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely collected health Data (RECORD) and the Strengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statements—do not capture the complexity of pharmacoepidemiological research. We have therefore extended the RECORD statement to include reporting guidelines specific to pharmacoepidemiological research (RECORD-PE). This article includes the RECORD-PE checklist (also available on www.record-statement.org) and explains each checklist item with examples of good reporting. We anticipate that increasing use of the RECORD-PE guidelines by researchers and endorsement and adherence by journal editors will improve the standards of reporting of pharmacoepidemiological research undertaken using routinely collected data. This improved transparency will benefit the research community, patient care, and ultimately improve public health.

ObjectiveTo determine whether the use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), compared with use of angiotensin receptor blockers, is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer.DesignPopulation based cohort study.SettingUnited Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink.ParticipantsA cohort of 992 061 patients newly treated with antihypertensive drugs between 1 January 1995 and 31 December 2015 was identified and followed until 31 December 2016.Main outcome measuresCox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals of incident lung cancer associated with the time varying use of ACEIs, compared with use of angiotensin receptor blockers, overall, by cumulative duration of use, and by time since initiation.ResultsThe cohort was followed for a mean of 6.4 (SD 4.7) years, generating 7952 incident lung cancer events (crude incidence 1.3 (95% confidence interval 1.2 to 1.3) per 1000 person years). Overall, use of ACEIs was associated with an increased risk of lung cancer (incidence rate 1.6 v 1.2 per 1000 person years; hazard ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.29), compared with use of angiotensin receptor blockers. Hazard ratios gradually increased with longer durations of use, with an association evident after five years of use (hazard ratio 1.22, 1.06 to 1.40) and peaking after more than 10 years of use (1.31, 1.08 to 1.59). Similar findings were observed with time since initiation.ConclusionsIn this population based cohort study, the use of ACEIs was associated with an increased risk of lung cancer. The association was particularly elevated among people using ACEIs for more than five years. Additional studies, with long term follow-up, are needed to investigate the effects of these drugs on incidence of lung cancer.

No abstract

Background: The association between aromatase inhibitors and cardiovascular outcomes among women with breast cancer is controversial. Given the discrepant findings from randomized controlled trials and observational studies, additional studies are needed to address this safety concern. Methods: We conducted a population-based cohort study using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to the Hospital Episode Statistics and Office for National Statistics databases. The study population consisted of women newly diagnosed with breast cancer initiating hormonal therapy with aromatase inhibitors or tamoxifen between April 1, 1998, and February 29, 2016. We usedCox proportional hazards models with inverse probability of treatment and censoring weighting to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs comparing new users of aromatase inhibitors with new users of tamoxifen for each of the study outcomes (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, heart failure, and cardiovascular mortality). Results: The study population consisted of 23 525 patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer, of whom 17 922 initiated treatment with either an aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen (8139 and 9783, respectively). The use of aromatase inhibitors was associated with a significantly increased risk of heart failure (incidence rate, 5.4 versus 1.8 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.14–3.03]) and cardiovascular mortality (incidence rate, 9.5 versus 4.7 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.11–2.04]) compared with the use of tamoxifen. Aromatase inhibitors were associated with elevated HRs, but with CIs including the null value, for myocardial infarction (incidence rate, 3.9 versus 1.8 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.37 [95% CI, 0.88–2.13]) and ischemic stroke (incidence rate, 5.6 versus 3.2 per 1000 person-years; HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.82–1.72]). Conclusions: In this population-based study, aromatase inhibitors were associated with increased risks of heart failure and cardiovascular mortality compared with tamoxifen. There were also trends toward increased risks, although nonsignificant, of myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. The increased risk of cardiovascular events associated with aromatase inhibitors should be balanced with their favorable clinical benefits compared with tamoxifen.

ObjectiveTo assess whether adding or switching to sulfonylureas is associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular death, all cause mortality, and severe hypoglycaemia, compared with remaining on metformin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes.DesignPopulation based cohort study.SettingGeneral practices contributing data to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.ParticipantsPatients with type 2 diabetes initiating metformin monotherapy between 1998 and 2013.Main outcome measuresUsing the prevalent new-user cohort design we matched 1:1 patients adding or switching to sulfonylureas with those remaining on metformin monotherapy on high-dimensional propensity score, haemoglobin A1c, and number of previous metformin prescriptions. The two groups were compared using Cox proportional hazards models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the study outcomes.ResultsAmong 77 138 metformin initiators, 25 699 added or switched to sulfonylureas during the study period. During a mean follow-up of 1.1 years, sulfonylureas were associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (incidence rate 7.8 v 6.2 per 1000 person years, hazard ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.56), all cause mortality (27.3 v 21.5, 1.28, 1.15 to 1.44), and severe hypoglycaemia (5.5 v 0.7, 7.60, 4.64 to 12.44) compared with continuing metformin monotherapy. There was a trend towards increased risks of ischaemic stroke (6.7 v 5.5, 1.24, 0.99 to 1.56) and cardiovascular death (9.4 v 8.1, 1.18, 0.98 to 1.43). Compared with adding sulfonylureas, switching to sulfonylureas was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (hazard ratio 1.51, 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 2.24) and all-cause mortality (1.23, 1.00 to 1.50). No differences were observed for ischaemic stroke, cardiovascular death, or severe hypoglycaemia.ConclusionsSulfonylureas as second line drugs are associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, all cause mortality, and severe hypoglycaemia, compared with remaining on metformin monotherapy. Continuing metformin when introducing sulfonylureas appears to be safer than switching.

BACKGROUND Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may exacerbate COVID-19 and worsen associated outcomes by upregulating the enzyme that SARS-CoV-2 binds to enter cells. To our knowledge, no study has examined the association between NSAID use and the risk of COVID-19-related outcomes. METHODS We conducted a cohort study using South Korea’s nationwide healthcare database, which contains data of all subjects who received a test for COVID-19 (n=69,793) as of April 8, 2020. We identified adults hospitalized with COVID-19, where cohort entry was the date of hospitalization. NSAIDs users were those prescribed NSAIDs in the 7 days before and including cohort entry and non-users were those not prescribed NSAIDs during this period. Our primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation use, and sepsis; our secondary outcomes were cardiovascular complications and acute renal failure. We conducted logistic regression analysis to estimate odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using inverse probability of treatment weighting to minimize confounding. RESULTS Of 1,824 adults hospitalized with COVID-19 (mean age 49.0 years; female 59%), 354 were NSAIDs users and 1,470 were non-users. Compared with non-use, NSAIDs use was associated with increased risks of the primary composite outcome (OR 1.54 [95% CI 1.13-2.11]) but insignificantly associated with cardiovascular complications (1.54 [0.96-2.48]) or acute renal failure (1.45 [0.49-4.14]). CONCLUSION While awaiting the results of confirmatory studies, we suggest NSAIDs be used with caution among patients with COVID-19 as the harms associated with their use may outweigh their benefits in this population.

IMPORTANCE Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) for smoking cessation remain controversial. OBJECTIVE To evaluate e-cigarettes with individual counseling for smoking cessation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A randomized clinical trial enrolled adults motivated to quit smoking from November 2016 to September 2019 at 17 Canadian sites (801 individuals screened; 274 ineligible and 151 declined). Manufacturing delays resulted in early termination (376/486 participants, 77% of target). Outcomes through 24 weeks (March 2020) are reported. INTERVENTIONS Randomization to nicotine e-cigarettes (n = 128), nonnicotine e-cigarettes (n = 127), or no e-cigarettes (n = 121) for 12 weeks. All groups received individual counseling. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end point was point prevalence abstinence (7-day recall, biochemically validated using expired carbon monoxide) at 12 weeks, changed from 52 weeks following early termination. Participants missing data were assumed to be smoking. The 7 secondary end points, examined at multiple follow-ups, were point prevalence abstinence at other follow-ups, continuous abstinence, daily cigarette consumption change, serious adverse events, adverse events, dropouts due to adverse effects, and treatment adherence. RESULTS Among 376 randomized participants (mean age, 52 years; 178 women [47%]), 299 (80%) and 278 (74%) self-reported smoking status at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively. Point prevalence abstinence was significantly greater for nicotine e-cigarettes plus counseling vs counseling alone at 12 weeks (21.9% vs 9.1%; risk difference [RD], 12.8 [95% CI, 4.0 to 21.6]) but not 24 weeks (17.2% vs 9.9%; RD, 7.3 [95% CI,). Point prevalence abstinence for nonnicotine e-cigarettes plus counseling was not significantly different from counseling alone at 12 weeks (17.3% vs 9.1%; RD, 8.2 [95% CI, -0.1 to 16.6]), but was significantly greater at 24 weeks (20.5% vs 9.9%; RD, 10.6 [95% CI, 1.8 to 19.4]). Adverse events were common (nicotine e-cigarette with counseling: 120 [94%]; nonnicotine e-cigarette with counseling: 118 [93%]; counseling only: 88 [73%]), with the most common being cough (64%) and dry mouth (53%).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among adults motivated to quit smoking, nicotine e-cigarettes plus counseling vs counseling alone significantly increased point prevalence abstinence at 12 weeks. However, the difference was no longer significant at 24 weeks, and trial interpretation is limited by early termination and inconsistent findings for nicotine and nonnicotine e-cigarettes, suggesting further research is needed.