Search

Purpose This study evaluated the long-term safety of roflumilast in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or chronic bronchitis using electronic healthcare databases from Germany, Norway, Sweden, and the United States (US). Patients and Methods The study population consisted of patients aged ≥40 years who had been exposed to roflumilast and a matched cohort unexposed to roflumilast. The matching was based on sex, age, calendar year of cohort entry date (2010–2011, 2012, or 2013), and a propensity score that included variables such as demographics, markers of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) severity and morbidity, and comorbidities. In comparison to the unexposed matched cohort (never use), three exposure definitions were used for the exposed matched cohort: ever use, use status (current, recent, past use), and cumulative duration of use. The main outcome was 5-year all-cause mortality. Cox regression models were used to estimate crude and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results 112,541 unexposed and 23,239 exposed patients across countries were included. Some variables remained unbalanced after matching, indicating higher COPD disease severity among the exposed patients. Adjusted HRs of 5-year all-cause mortality for “ever use” of roflumilast, compared to “never use”, were 1.12 (95% CI, 1.08–1.17) in Germany, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.92–1.08) in Norway, 0.98 (95% CI, 0.92–1.04) in Sweden, and 1.16 (95% CI, 1.12–1.20) in the US. Compared to never users, there was a decrease in 5-year mortality risk observed among “current users” in Germany (HR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.88–0.98), Norway (HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67–0.87), and Sweden (HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.73–0.88). Conclusion There was no observed increase in 5-year mortality risk with the use of roflumilast in Sweden or Norway. A small increase in 5-year mortality risk was observed in Germany and the US in the ever versus never comparison, likely due to residual confounding by indica

Rationale: Evidence on risk factors for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes among patients with COPD in relation to COVID-19 vaccination remains limited. The objectives of the present study were to characterise determinants of COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death in COPD patients in their unvaccinated state compared to when vaccinated. Methods: We included all COPD patients in the Swedish National Airway Register (SNAR). Events of COVID-19 infection (test and/or healthcare encounter), hospitalisation, ICU admission and death were identified from 1 January 2020 to 30 November 2021. Using adjusted Cox regression, associations between baseline sociodemographics, comorbidities, treatments, clinical measurements and COVID-19 outcomes, during unvaccinated and vaccinated follow-up time, were analysed. Results: The population-based COPD cohort included 87 472 patients, among whom 6771 (7.7%) COVID-19 infections, 2897 (3.3%) hospitalisations, 233 (0.3%) ICU admissions and 882 (1.0%) COVID-19 deaths occurred. During unvaccinated follow-up, risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation and death increased with age, male sex, lower education, non-married status and being foreign-born. Comorbidities increased risk of several outcomes, e.g. respiratory failure for infection and hospitalisation (adjusted hazard ratios (HR) 1.78, 95% CI 1.58–2.02 and 2.51, 2.16–2.91, respectively), obesity for ICU admission (3.52, 2.29–5.40) and cardiovascular disease for mortality (2.80, 2.16–3.64). Inhaled COPD therapy was associated with infection, hospitalisation and death. COPD severity was also associated with COVID-19, especially hospitalisation and death. Although the risk factor panorama was similar, COVID-19 vaccination attenuated HRs for some risk factors. Conclusion: This study provides population-based evidence on predictive risk factors for COVID-19 outcomes and highlights the positive implications of COVID-19 vaccination for COPD patients.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with diabetes or familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) have an increased incidence of cardiovascular diseases compared with the population, but whether this risk is exacerbated in patients with combined traits is unknown. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this Swedish nationwide, register-based cohort study, patients with diabetes were included between 2002 and 2020. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with or without phenotypic FH (≥6 points for phenotypic FH according to Dutch Lipid Clinic Network criteria) compared with general population control subjects without diabetes as reference. RESULTS: A total of 45,585 patients with type 1 diabetes (227,923 control subjects) and 655,250 patients with type 2 diabetes (655,250 control subjects) were followed for a median of 14.1 and 7.9 years, respectively. Of those, 153 and 7,197, respectively, had phenotypic FH. Compared with control subjects, patients with diabetes and phenotypic FH had higher risk of cardiovascular mortality (type 1: hazard ratio 21.3 [95% CI 14.6-31.0]; type 2: 2.40 [2.19-2.63]) and of a cardiovascular event (type 1: 15.1 [11.1-20.5]; type 2: 2.73 [2.58-2.89]). Further, patients with diabetes and phenotypic FH had higher LDL-cholesterol levels during observation (P < 0.05) and increased risk of all major cardiovascular outcomes (P < 0.0001) than patients with diabetes but without FH. The proportion receiving lipid-lowering treatment was higher in patients with phenotypic FH (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with both diabetes and phenotypic FH are more at risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes and have higher LDL-cholesterol levels despite receiving intensified lipid-lowering therapy.

Aim: To assess the comparative cardiovascular and renal effectiveness of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors versus glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists in routine clinical practice. Materials and Methods: A cohort study of nationwide registers from Sweden, Denmark, and Norway, including 87 525 new users of SGLT2 inhibitors and 63 921 new users of GLP-1 receptor agonists, was conducted using data from 2013-2018. Co-primary outcomes, analysed using an intention-to-treat exposure definition, were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiovascular death), heart failure (hospitalization or death because of heart failure), and serious renal events (renal replacement therapy, hospitalization for renal events, and death from renal causes). Results: Use of SGLT2 inhibitors versus GLP-1 receptor agonists was associated with a higher risk of MACE (adjusted incidence rate: 15.2 vs. 14.4 events per 1000 person-years; HR 1.07 [95% CI 1.01-1.15]), a similar risk of heart failure (6.0 vs. 6.0 events per 1000 person-years; HR 1.02 [0.92-1.12]), and a lower risk of serious renal events (2.9 vs. 4.0 events per 1000 person-years; HR 0.76 [0.66-0.87]). In as-treated analyses, the HR (95% CI) was 1.11 (1.00-1.24) for MACE, 0.88 (0.74-1.04) for heart failure, and 0.60 (0.47-0.77) for serious renal events. In secondary outcome analyses, use of SGLT2 inhibitors versus GLP-1 receptor agonists was not associated with statistically significant differences for the risk of myocardial infarction (HR 1.09 [95% CI 1.00-1.19]), cardiovascular death (HR 0.97 [95% CI 0.84-1.12]), death from renal causes (HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.41-1.35]), or any cause death (HR 1.01 [95% CI 0.94-1.09]), while the risk of stroke was higher (HR 1.14 [95% CI 1.03-1.26]), and the risk of renal replacement therapy (HR 0.74 [95% CI 0.56-0.97]) and hospitalization for renal events (HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.65-0.88]) were lower among users of SGLT2 inhibitors. Concl