Purpose Statins are among the most prevalent medications prescribed and associated with adverse events that may prompt additional treatment (i.e., a prescribing cascade). No comprehensive assessment of statin‐related prescribing cascades has been performed to our knowledge. Methods We utilized sequence symmetry analysis to iteratively screen prescribing sequences of all therapeutic classes (“marker” classes) based on Level 4 Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical codes among adult statin initiators, using IBM Marketscan commercial and Medicare supplemental claims databases (2005–2019). Order of initiation and secular trend‐adjusted sequence ratios were calculated for each statin‐marker class dyad, among marker class initiators ±90 days of statin initiation. Among signals classified as prescribing cascades, we calculated naturalistic number needed to harm (NNTH) within 1 year as the inverse of the excess risk among exposed. Results We identified 2 265 519 statin initiators (mean ± SD age, 56.4 ± 12.0 years; 48.7% women; 7.5% with cardiovascular disease). Simvastatin (34.4% of statin initiators) and atorvastatin (33.9%) were the most commonly initiated statins. We identified 160 significant statin‐marker class dyad signals, of which 35.6% (n = 57) were classified as potential prescribing cascades. Of the top 25 strongest signals (lowest NNTH), 12 were classified as potential prescribing cascades, including osmotically acting laxatives (NNTH, 44, 95% CI 43–46), opioids + non‐opioid combination analgesics (81, 95% CI 74–91), and first‐generation cephalosporins (204, 95% CI 175–246). Conclusions Using high‐throughput sequence symmetry analysis screening, we identified previously known prescribing cascades as well as potentially new prescribing cascades based on known and unknown statin‐related adverse events.

No abstract

Background Knowledge of real‐world antihypertensive use is limited to prevalent hypertension, limiting our understanding of how treatment evolves and its contribution to persistently poor blood pressure control. We sought to characterize antihypertensive initiation among new users. Methods and Results Using Medicaid and Medicare data from the OneFlorida+ Clinical Research Consortium, we identified new users of ≥1 first‐line antihypertensives (angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor, calcium channel blocker, angiotensin receptor blocker, thiazide diuretic, or β‐blocker) between 2013 and 2021 among adults with diagnosed hypertension, and no antihypertensive fill during the prior 12 months. We evaluated initial antihypertensive regimens by class and drug overall and across study years and examined variation in antihypertensive initiation across demographics (sex, race, and ethnicity) and comorbidity (chronic kidney disease, diabetes, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease). We identified 143 054 patients initiating 188 995 antihypertensives (75% monotherapy; 25% combination therapy), with mean age 59 years and 57% of whom were women. The most commonly initiated antihypertensive class overall was angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (39%) followed by β‐blockers (31%), calcium channel blockers (24%), thiazides (19%), and angiotensin receptor blockers (11%). With the exception of β‐blockers, a single drug accounted for ≥75% of use of each class. β‐blocker use decreased (35%–26%), and calcium channel blocker use increased (24%–28%) over the study period, while initiation of most other classes remained relatively stable. We also observed significant differences in antihypertensive selection across demographic and comorbidity strata. Conclusions These findings indicate that substantial variation exists in initial antihypertensive prescribing, and there remain significant gaps between current guideline recommendations and real‐world implementation in early hypertension care.

Introduction: Early treatment for hypertension (HTN) portends better outcomes. However, few real-world studies have assessed initial antiHTN regimens and how they differ by baseline blood pressure (BP). We sought to compare initial treatment patterns, stratified by BP, between Medicaid and Medicare recipients. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of adults with newly-treated HTN in the One Florida+ Consortium(2012-2020) who had linked claims-EHR data from the treatment initiation visit. Eligible patients were Floridians with Medicaid or Medicare aged ≥18 years, with diagnosed HTN, who filled ≥1 first-line antiHTN class with no evidence of anti HTN fills during the year prior (in which continuous insurance enrollment was required). Baseline BP was categorized per current HTN guidelines, and logistic regression was used to estimate age-adjusted odds of combination vs. monotherapy, per 10 mmHg increase in systolic BP (SBP) or diastolic BP (DBP). Results: We included 2,902 patients (47% Medicaid, 53% Medicare); mean age was 44 (Medicaid) and 67 yrs(Medicare); 60% (64% and 56%, respectively) were women and 42% (57% and 29%, respectively) were Black. Initial antiHTN classes were similar comparing cohorts: ACEI, ARB and thiazide initiation varied little by BP category, in contrast to CCBs and β-blockers (Figure, panels A-B). In age-adjusted analyses, use of initial combination therapy was 40% more likely (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.11, 1.76) among Medicare recipients and inversely related to BP category (panels C-D) among Medicare patients, in which each 10mmHg greater SBP (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88, 0.97) and DBP (OR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.75, 0.90) had lower odds of combination therapy. Among Medicaid recipients, only SBP associated with combination therapy (OR1.11; 95% CI, 1.03, 1.20). Conclusions: We observed similar initial class patterns among Medicaid & Medicare recipients across baseline BP, but differential use of combination therapy was less likely at higher baseline BP in Medicare recipients, which contrasts current guidance.