Search

Background: In March 2018, the European pregnancy prevention programme for oral retinoids was updated as part of risk minimisation measures (RMM), emphasising their contraindication in pregnant women.Objective: To measure the impact of the 2018 revision of the RMMs in Europe by assessing the utilisation patterns of isotretinoin, alitretinoin and acitretin, contraceptive measures, pregnancy testing, discontinuation, and pregnancy occurrence concomitantly with a retinoid prescription.Methods: An interrupted time series (ITS) analysis to compare level and trend changes after the risk minimisation measures implementation was conducted on a cohort of females of childbearing age (12–55 years of age) from January 2010 to December 2020, derived from six electronic health data sources in four countries: Denmark, Netherlands, Spain, and Italy. Monthly utilisation figures (incidence rates [IR], prevalence rates [PR] and proportions) of oral retinoids were calculated, as well as discontinuation rates, contraception coverage, pregnancy testing, and rates of exposed pregnancies to oral retinoids, before and after the 2018 RMMs.Results: From 10,714,182 females of child-bearing age, 88,992 used an oral retinoid at any point during the study period (mean age 18.9–22.2 years old). We found non-significant level and trend changes in incidence or prevalence of retinoid use in females of child-bearing age after the 2018 RMMs. The reason of discontinuation was unknown in >95% of cases. Contraception use showed a significant increase trend in Spain; for other databases this information was limited. Pregnancy testing was hardly recorded thus was not possible to model ITS analyses. After the 2018 RMM, rates of pregnancy occurrence during retinoid use, and start of a retinoid during a pregnancy varied from 0.0 to 0.4, and from 0.2 to 0.8, respectively.Conclusion: This study shows a limited impact of the 2018 RMMs on oral retinoids utilisation patterns among females of child-bearing age in four European countries. Pregnancies still occur during retinoid use, and oral retinoids are still prescribed to pregnant women. Contraception and pregnancy testing information was limited in most databases. Regulators, policymakers, prescribers, and researchers must rethink implementation strategies to avoid any pregnancy becoming temporarily related to retinoid use.

Background: Estimates of the association between COVID-19 vaccines and myo-/pericarditis risk vary widely across studies due to scarcity of events, especially in age- and sex-stratified analyses.Methods: Population-based cohort study with nested self-controlled risk interval (SCRI) using healthcare data from five European databases. Individuals were followed from 01/01/2020 until end of data availability (31/12/2021 latest). Outcome was first myo-/pericarditis diagnosis. Exposures were first and second dose of Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Janssen COVID-19 vaccines. Baseline incidence rates (IRs), and vaccine- and dose-specific IRs and rate differences were calculated from the cohort The SCRI calculated calendar time-adjusted IR ratios (IRR), using a 60-day pre-vaccination control period and dose-specific 28-day risk windows. IRRs were pooled using random effects meta-analysis.Findings: Over 35 million individuals (49·2% women, median age 39–49 years) were included, of which 57·4% received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Baseline incidence of myocarditis was low. Myocarditis IRRs were elevated after vaccination in those aged < 30 years, after both Pfizer vaccine doses (IRR = 3·3, 95%CI 1·2-9.4; 7·8, 95%CI 2·6-23·5, respectively) and Moderna vaccine dose 2 (IRR = 6·1, 95%CI 1·1-33·5). An effect of AstraZeneca vaccine dose 2 could not be excluded (IRR = 2·42, 95%CI 0·96-6·07). Pericarditis was not associated with vaccination.Interpretation: mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines and potentially AstraZeneca are associated with increased myocarditis risk in younger individuals, although absolute incidence remains low. More data on children (≤ 11 years) are needed.

Objective: Despite the continuous update of clinical guidelines, little is known about the real-world management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who survived a stroke. We aimed to assess patterns of therapeutic management of stroke survivors with AF and clinical outcomes using data from routine practice in a large population-based cohort.Methods: A population-based retrospective cohort study of all patients with AF who survived a stroke, from January 2010 to December 2017 in the Valencia region, Spain (n = 10,986), was carried out. Treatment strategies and mean time to treatment initiation are described. Temporal trends are shown by the management pattern during the study period. Factors associated with each pattern (including no treatment) vs. oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment were identified using logistic multivariate regression models. Incidence rates of clinical outcomes (mortality, stroke/TIA, GI bleeding, and ACS) were also estimated by the management pattern.Results: Among stroke survivors with AF, 6% were non-treated, 23% were prescribed antiplatelets (APT), 54% were prescribed OAC, and 17% received OAC + APT at discharge. Time to treatment was 8.0 days (CI 7.6–8.4) for APT, 9.86 (CI 9.52–10.19) for OAC, and 16.47 (CI 15.86–17.09) for OAC + APT. Regarding temporal trends, management with OAC increased by 20%, with a decrease of 50% for APT during the study period. No treatment and OAC + APT remained relatively stable. The strongest predictor of no treatment and APT treatment was having the same management strategy pre-stroke. Those treated with APT had the highest rates of GI bleeding and recurrent stroke/TIA, and untreated patients showed the highest rates of mortality.Conclusion: In this large population-based cohort using real-world data, nearly 30% of AF patients who suffered a stroke were untreated or treated with APT, which overall is not recommended. Treatment was started within 2 weeks as recommended, except for OAC + APT, which was started later. The strong association of APT treatment or non-treatment with the same treatment strategy before stroke occurrence suggests a strong therapeutic inertia and opposes recommendations. Patients under these two strategies had the highest rates of adverse outcomes. An inadequate prescription poses a great risk on patients with AF and stroke; thus monitoring their management is necessary and should be setting-specific.