Propoxyphene and the risk of out-of-hospital death.
ABSTRACT: The opioid analgesic propoxyphene was withdrawn from the US market in 2010, motivated by concerns regarding fatality in overdose and adverse cardiac effects, including prolongation of the QT interval. These concerns were based on case reports, summary vital statistics, and surrogate endpoint studies.Using the linked Tennessee Medicaid database (1992-2007), we conducted a retrospective cohort study that compared risk of sudden cardiac, medication toxicity, and total out-of-hospital death for propoxyphene users with that for comparable nonusers of any prescribed opioid analgesic and users of hydrocodone, an opioid with similar indications. Cohort members had 1,873,500 propoxyphene prescriptions, 1,873,500 matched nonuser control periods, and 936,750 matched hydrocodone prescriptions.Current propoxyphene users had no increased risk for sudden cardiac death (versus nonusers: hazard ratio [HR] = 1.00 [0.81-1.23]; versus current hydrocodone users: HR = 0.91 [0.68-1.21]) but did have increased risk for medication toxicity deaths (versus nonusers: HR = 1.85 [1.07-3.19], p = 0.027; versus current hydrocodone users: HR = 2.10 [0.87-5.10], p = 0.100). Because toxicity deaths were a small proportion of study deaths, total out-of-hospital mortality differed by less than 10% between the study groups and was not significantly elevated for propoxyphene (versus nonusers: HR = 1.09 [0.95-1.25]; versus current hydrocodone users: HR = 1.06 [0.87-1.29] ).Our findings support the concern that propoxyphene has greater toxicity in overdose but do not provide evidence that it increases the risk of sudden cardiac death.
Project description:<h4>Objective</h4>Experts cautioned that patients affected by the November 2010 withdrawal of the opioid analgesic propoxyphene might receive riskier prescriptions. To explore this, we compared drug receipts and outcomes among propoxyphene users before and aftermarket withdrawal.<h4>Study design</h4>Using OptumLabs data, we studied 3 populations: commercial, Medicare Advantage (MA) aged (age 65+?y) and MA disabled (age below 65?y) enrollees. The exposed enrollees received propoxyphene in the 3 months before market withdrawal (n=13,622); historical controls (unexposed) received propoxyphene 1 year earlier (n=9971). Regression models estimated daily milligrams morphine equivalent (MME), daily prescription acetaminophen dose, potentially toxic acetaminophen doses, nonopioid prescription analgesics receipt, emergency room visits, and diagnosed falls, motor vehicle accidents, and hip fractures.<h4>Principal findings</h4>Aged MA enrollees illustrate the experience of all 3 populations examined. Following the market withdrawal, propoxyphene users in the exposed cohort experienced an abrupt decline of 69% in average daily MME, compared with a 14% decline in the unexposed. Opioids were discontinued by 34% of the exposed cohort and 18% of the unexposed. Tramadol and hydrocodone were the most common opioids substituted for propoxyphene. The proportion of each group receiving ?4?g of prescription acetaminophen per day decreased from 12% to 2% in the exposed group but increased from 6% to 8% among the unexposed. Adverse events were rare and not significantly different in exposed versus unexposed groups.<h4>Conclusions</h4>After propoxyphene market withdrawal, many individuals experienced abrupt discontinuation of opioids. Policymakers might consider supporting appropriate treatment transitions and monitoring responses following drug withdrawals.
Project description:Our aim is to determine if propoxyphene withdrawal from the US market was associated with opioid continuation, continued chronic opioid use, and secondary propoxyphene-related adverse events (emergency department visits, opioid-related events, and acetaminophen toxicity).Medical service use and pharmacy data from 19/11/08 to 19/11/11 were collected from the national Veterans Healthcare Administration healthcare databases. A quasi-experimental pre-post retrospective cohort design utilizing a historical comparison group provided the study framework. Logistic regression controlling for baseline covariates was used to estimate the effect of propoxyphene withdrawal.There were 24,328 subjects (policy affected n?=?10,747; comparison n?=?13,581) meeting inclusion criteria. In the policy-affected cohort, 10.6% of users ceased using opioids, and 26.6% stopped chronic opioid use compared with 3.8% and 13.5% in the historical comparison cohort, respectively. Those in the policy-affected cohort were 2.7 (95%CI: 2.5-2.8) and 3.2 (95%CI: 2.9-3.6) times more likely than those in the historical comparison cohort to discontinue chronic opioid and any opioid use, respectively. Changes in adverse events and Emergency Department (ED) visits were not different between policy-affected and historical comparison cohorts (p?>?0.05).The withdrawal of propoxyphene-containing products resulted in rapid and virtually complete elimination in propoxyphene prescribing in the veterans population; however, nearly 90% of regular users of propoxyphene switched to an alternate opioid, and three quarters continued to use opioids chronically.
Project description:BACKGROUND & AIMS:Many patients with gastroparesis are prescribed opioids for pain control, but indications for opioid prescriptions and the relationship of opioid use to gastroparesis manifestations are undefined. We characterized associations of use of potent vs weaker opioids and presentations of diabetic and idiopathic gastroparesis. METHODS:We collected data on symptoms, gastric emptying, quality of life, and health care resource use from 583 patients with gastroparesis (>10% 4-h scintigraphic retention) from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Gastroparesis Consortium, from January 2007 through November 2016. Patients completed medical questionnaires that included questions about opioid use. The opioid(s) were categorized for potency relative to oral morphine. Symptom severities were quantified by Patient Assessment of Upper Gastrointestinal Disorders Symptoms questionnaires. Subgroup analyses compared patients on potent vs weaker opioids and opioid effects in diabetic vs idiopathic etiologies. RESULTS:Forty-one percent of patients were taking opioids; 82% of these took potent agents (morphine, hydrocodone, oxycodone, methadone, hydromorphone, buprenorphine, or fentanyl). Abdominal pain was the reason for prescription for 61% of patients taking opioids. Mean scores for gastroparesis, nausea/vomiting, bloating/distention, abdominal pain, and constipation scores were higher in opioid users (P ? .05). Opioid use was associated with greater levels of gastric retention, worse quality of life, increased hospitalization, and increased use of antiemetic and pain modulator medications compared with nonusers (P ? .03). Use of potent opioids was associated with worse gastroparesis, nausea/vomiting, upper abdominal pain, and quality-of-life scores, and more hospitalizations compared with weaker opioids (tapentadol, tramadol, codeine, or propoxyphene) (P ? .05). Opioid use was associated with larger increases in gastric retention in patients with idiopathic vs diabetic gastroparesis (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS:Opioid use is prevalent among patients with diabetic or idiopathic gastroparesis, and is associated with worse symptoms, delays in gastric emptying, and lower quality of life, as well as greater use of resources. Potent opioids are associated with larger effects than weaker agents. These findings form a basis for studies to characterize adverse outcomes of opioid use in patients with gastroparesis and to help identify those who might benefit from interventions to prevent opioid overuse.
Project description:Carfilzomib was approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma in 2012 and since then there have been concerns for cardiovascular toxicity from its use. With this study, we aim to further study the hazards and underlying risk factors for cardiovascular adverse events associated with carfilzomib. This study was conducted using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data set of multiple myeloma from 2001 to 2015. Data were analyzed for hazards ratio of cardiovascular adverse events between carfilzomib users and nonusers. We identified 7330 patients with multiple myeloma of whom 815 were carfilzomib users. Carfilzomib users had a statistically significant hazard ratio of 1.41 with p < 0.0001 for all cardiovascular adverse events as compared to nonusers. Carfilzomib use was significantly associated with increased risk of heart failure (HR 1.47, p = 0.0002), ischemic heart disease (HR 1.45, p = 0.0002), and hypertension (HR 3.33, p < 0.0001), whereas there was no association between carfilzomib use and cardiac conduction disorders (arrhythmia and heart blocks). Carfilzomib users were at higher risk of new-onset edema (HR 5.09, p < 0.0001), syncope (HR 4.27, p < 0.0001), dyspnea (HR 1.33, p < 0.0001), and chest pain (HR 1.18, p < 0.0001) as compared to carfilzomib nonusers. Age above 75 years, preexisting cardiovascular disease, obesity, and twice a week carfilzomib schedule were significant risk factors associated with cardiovascular adverse events in carfilzomib users. The median time of the onset for all cardiovascular adverse events was 3.1 months. This study has identified a significantly higher likelihood of cardiovascular adverse events in elderly Medicare patients receiving carfilzomib.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. This study is the first to report the association of hydroxychloroquine (an antirheumatic medication that has been associated with decreased risk of diabetes, a less atherogenic lipid profile, and antithrombotic properties) with CVD in RA.<h4>Methods and results</h4>A retrospective incident RA cohort from January 1, 2001, to October 31, 2013, excluding patients with CVD prior to RA diagnosis, was constructed. Patients were categorized as hydroxychloroquine users versus nonusers and were allowed to contribute time to either group according to hydroxychloroquine exposure. The primary outcome was adjudicated incident CVD defined as a composite of coronary artery disease, stroke, transient ischemic attack, sudden cardiac death, and peripheral artery disease with arterial revascularization procedure. The secondary outcome was a composite of incident coronary artery disease, stroke, and transient ischemic attack. Cox time-varying regression models were used to estimate the association between hydroxychloroquine exposure and development of CVD, after adjusting for propensity score and relevant confounders, including demographics, CVD-related comorbidities, RA severity, and activity indicators and medications. We included 1266 RA patients, 547 hydroxychloroquine users, and 719 nonusers. During the observation period, 102 CVD events occurred, 3 in hydroxychloroquine users and 99 in nonusers. The fully adjusted Cox model showed a hazard ratio of 0.28 (95% CI 0.12-0.63, P=0.002) for incident CVD and 0.30 (95% CI 0.13-0.68, P=0.004) for incident composite coronary artery disease, stroke, and transient ischemic attack for hydroxychloroquine users versus nonusers, respectively.<h4>Conclusion</h4>In this hypothesis-generating study, hydroxychloroquine use was associated with a 72% decrease in the risk of incident CVD in RA patients. If these preliminary results are confirmed in larger studies, our findings may be used as a rationale for a randomized study of hydroxychloroquine use for primary prevention of CVD in RA or nonrheumatic high-risk patients.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To estimate the cost-effectiveness to the US Veterans Health Administration (VA) of the use of complementary and integrative health (CIH) approaches by younger Veterans with chronic musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) pain. PERSPECTIVE:VA healthcare system. METHODS:We used a propensity score-adjusted hierarchical linear modeling (HLM), and 2010-2013 VA administrative data to estimate differences in VA healthcare costs, pain intensity (0-10 numerical rating scale), and opioid use between CIH users and nonusers. We identified CIH use in Veterans' medical records through Current Procedural Terminology, VA workload tracking, and provider-type codes. RESULTS:We identified 30,634 younger Veterans with chronic MSD pain as using CIH and 195,424 with no CIH use. CIH users differed from nonusers across all baseline covariates except the Charlson comorbidity index. They also differed on annual pre-CIH-start healthcare costs ($10,729 versus $5,818), pain (4.33 versus 3.76), and opioid use (66.6% versus 54.0%). The HLM results indicated lower annual healthcare costs (-$637; 95% CI: -$1,023, -$247), lower pain (-0.34; -0.40, -0.27), and slightly higher (less than a percentage point) opioid use (0.8; 0.6, 0.9) for CIH users in the year after CIH start. Sensitivity analyses indicated similar results for three most-used CIH approaches (acupuncture, chiropractic care, and massage), but higher costs for those with eight or more CIH visits. CONCLUSIONS:On average CIH use appears associated with lower healthcare costs and pain and slightly higher opioid use in this population of younger Veterans with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Given the VA's growing interest in the use of CIH, further, more detailed analyses of its impacts are warranted.
Project description:To compare the oral abuse potential of hydrocodone extended-release (ER) tablet developed with CIMA ® Abuse-Deterrence Technology with that of hydrocodone immediate release (IR).Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study.One study site in the United States; adult nondependent, recreational opioid users.After confirming their ability to tolerate and discriminate hydrocodone IR 45?mg from placebo, eligible participants were randomized to receive each of the following oral treatments once: finely crushed placebo, hydrocodone IR 45-mg powder, intact hydrocodone ER 45-mg tablet, and finely crushed hydrocodone ER 45-mg tablet. Primary pharmacodynamic measure was "at the moment" drug liking. Secondary measures included overall drug liking, drug effects (e.g., balance, positive, negative, sedative), pupillometry, pharmacokinetics, and safety.Mean maximum effect (E max ) for "at the moment" drug liking was significantly lower for intact (53.9) and finely crushed hydrocodone ER (66.9) vs. hydrocodone IR (85.2; P? < ? 0.001). Drug liking for intact hydrocodone ER was comparable to placebo (E max : 53.9 vs. 53.2). Secondary measures were consistent with these results, indicating that positive, negative, and sedative drug effects were diminished with intact and crushed hydrocodone ER tablet vs. hydrocodone IR. The 72-hour plasma concentration-time profile for each treatment mimicked its respective "at the moment" drug-liking-over-time profile. Incidence of adverse events was lower with intact hydrocodone ER (53%) vs. hydrocodone IR (79%) and finely crushed hydrocodone ER (73%).The oral abuse potential of hydrocodone ER (intact and finely crushed) was significantly lower than hydrocodone IR in healthy, nondependent, recreational opioid users. Hydrocodone ER was generally well tolerated.
Project description:To assess the intranasal abuse potential of hydrocodone extended-release (ER) tablets developed with CIMA Abuse-Deterrence Technology compared with hydrocodone powder and hydrocodone bitartrate ER capsules (Zohydro ER, original formulation [HYD-OF]).Single-dose, randomized, double-blind, quadruple-dummy, active- and placebo-controlled, crossover study.One US site.Healthy, adult, nondependent, recreational opioid users.Subjects able to tolerate intranasal hydrocodone and discriminate hydrocodone from placebo were eligible for study enrollment. Eligible participants randomly received intranasal hydrocodone ER, intranasal hydrocodone powder, intranasal HYD-OF, intact oral hydrocodone ER, and placebo. Coprimary pharmacodynamic end points were a maximum effect on "at the moment" Drug Liking visual analog scale and Overall Drug Liking visual analog scale. Pharmacokinetics and safety were assessed.Mean maximum effect for "at the moment" Drug Liking was significantly (P?<?0.01) lower for intranasal hydrocodone ER (72.8) compared with hydrocodone powder (80.2) and HYD-OF (83.2). Similar results were observed for Overall Drug Liking maximum effect (68.5 vs 77.1 and 79.8, respectively; P?<?0.01). Secondary end points, including balance of effects and positive, sedative, and other effects, were consistent with these results. Intranasal treatments showed significantly greater effects vs placebo, while intact oral hydrocodone ER was similar to placebo. For each treatment, plasma concentration-time profiles paralleled "at the moment" Drug Liking over time. Incidences of adverse events for intranasal treatments were 52% for hydrocodone ER, 53% for hydrocodone powder, and 61% for HYD-OF.The statistically significant differences between hydrocodone ER vs hydrocodone powder and HYD-OF for the primary drug liking end points indicate a lower intranasal abuse potential with hydrocodone ER in healthy, nondependent, recreational opioid users.
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To examine how an October 2014 Drug Enforcement Administration policy reclassified hydrocodone product from schedule III to II has affected older adults, who are among the largest consumers of prescription opioids in the United States. DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study. SETTING:United States. PARTICIPANTS:A 20% sample of Medicare Part D beneficiaries aged 65 and older from 2013 through 2015 (> 2,500,000 beneficiaries each year) MEASUREMENTS: From January 2013 to December 2015, we calculated the monthly prevalence of opioid prescriptions and the prevalence of individuals who received prescriptions for a 90-day supply or longer (prolonged), as well as hospitalizations related to opioid toxicity in 2013 and 2015. RESULTS:From 2013 to 2015, the proportion of Medicare Part D enrollees who received a hydrocodone prescription in a year decreased from 21.9% to 18.3%. Monthly rates for hydrocodone prescriptions declined significantly in 2014. The risk of receiving prolonged opioid prescriptions decreased by approximately 7% in the multivariable analyses comparing 2015 to 2013 (prevalence ratio=0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.93-0.94). Medicare enrollees with an original entitlement because of disability or with Medicaid eligibility had smaller decreases in prolonged prescriptions and, unexpectedly, small increases in high-dose prescriptions. Opioid-related hospitalizations did not change significantly, but opioid-related hospitalizations without a documented opioid prescription increased (odds ratio=1.24, 95% CI=1.03-1.50). CONCLUSION:The 2014 change in hydrocodone from schedule III to schedule II was associated with modest decreases in rates of opioid use in the elderly. The unexpected increase in opioid-related hospitalizations without documented opioid prescriptions may represent an increase in illegal use.
Project description:Epidemiological studies have linked domperidone use with serious cardiac arrhythmias, including sudden cardiac death, but data on age, dose, and duration of use are limited.The aim of this study was to assess the risk of out-of-hospital sudden cardiac death associated with domperidone use versus proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), metoclopramide, or non-use of all three medications, and to evaluate the risk of sudden cardiac death in relation to age and domperidone dose.This was a population-based case-control study nested in a cohort of subjects aged ?2 years in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink with one or more prescriptions for domperidone, any PPI, or metoclopramide from 2005 to 2011. Out-of-hospital sudden cardiac death was assessed by linkage with Hospital Episode Statistics and death certificates. Controls were matched on age, sex, and medical practice. The risk of sudden cardiac death in domperidone users versus risk in users of PPIs or metoclopramide was evaluated with multivariable conditional logistic regression; case-crossover analysis addressed possible residual confounding.From the study cohort (n = 681,104), 3239 sudden cardiac death cases were matched to 12,572 controls. The adjusted odds ratio (95 % confidence interval) for sudden cardiac death with current use of domperidone alone was 1.71 (0.92-3.18) versus non-use of study medications, 1.26 (0.68-2.34) versus current PPI use, and 0.40 (0.17-0.94) current metoclopramide use. The adjusted odds ratio (95 % confidence interval) relative to exposure to no study drug for domperidone >30 mg/day (eight cases, five controls) was 3.20 (0.59-17.3) and 1.65 (0.89-3.07) for age ?61 years (27 cases, 49 controls). The odds ratio (95 % confidence interval) was 3.17 (1.72-5.83) for within-person periods of domperidone use versus non-use in the case-crossover analysis.Compared with non-use of any study drug, current domperidone use was associated with sudden cardiac death in nested case-control and case-crossover analyses, with a suggestion of higher risk in older persons and users of higher daily doses.