Search

Purpose: Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) exposure has been linked to increased skin cancer in Caucasian (white) populations, especially squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), but not basal cell carcinoma (BCC). This study aimed to evaluate and compare skin cancer risks associated with HCTZ- and other antihypertensives use., Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. We identified patients aged 20 years and older, newly receiving antihypertensive medications between 2004 and 2015. We calculated the medication possession ratio (MPR) for the first 2 years of treatment to determine patient eligibility and treatment classification, whereby only patients with MPR above 80% were included. These were subsequently categorized by the type of antihypertensives they received, namely HCTZ, other thiazide diuretics, non-thiazide diuretics or non-diuretic antihypertensives. Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate skin cancer risks, and these were then classified as SCC or BCC., Results: Our study included 41 086, 27 402, 19 613, and 856 782 patients receiving HCTZ, other thiazide diuretics, non-thiazide diuretics, and non-diuretic antihypertensives, respectively. We found BCC risks were similar when comparing HCTZ with other thiazides (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.54-1.33), non-thiazide diuretics (0.93; 0.51-1.67), and non-diuretic antihypertensives (0.91; 0.66-1.26). We observed a higher SCC risk in the HCTZ group, compared to other thiazides (1.24; 0.74-2.08), non-thiazide diuretics (1.32; 0.70-2.51), and non-diuretic antihypertensives (1.23; 0.87-1.73), although the confidence intervals (CIs) were wide and crossed the null., Conclusions: We concluded that skin cancer need not be of major concern to physicians when prescribing antihypertensives for an Asian population., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To assess risk of anaphylaxis among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are initiating therapy with a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), with a focus on those starting lixisenatide therapy., Research Design and Methods: A cohort study was conducted in three large, U.S. claims databases (2017-2021). Adult (aged ≥18 years) new users of a GLP-1 RA who had type 2 diabetes mellitus and ≥6 months enrollment in the database before GLP-1 RA initiation (start of follow-up) were included. GLP-1 RAs evaluated were lixisenatide, an insulin glargine/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination (FRC), exenatide, liraglutide or insulin degludec/liraglutide FRC, dulaglutide, and semaglutide (injectable and oral). The first anaphylaxis event during follow-up was identified using a validated algorithm. Incidence rates (IRs) and 95% CIs were calculated within each medication cohort. The unadjusted IR ratio (IRR) comparing anaphylaxis rates in the lixisenatide cohort with all other GLP-1 RAs combined was analyzed post hoc., Results: There were 696,089 new users with 456,612 person-years of exposure to GLP-1 RAs. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, and use of other prescription medications in the 6 months before the index date were similar across medication cohorts. IRs (95% CIs) per 10,000 person-years were 1.0 (0.0-5.6) for lixisenatide, 6.0 (3.6-9.4) for exenatide, 5.1 (3.7-7.0) for liraglutide, 3.9 (3.1-4.8) for dulaglutide, and 3.6 (2.6-4.9) for semaglutide. The IRR (95% CI) for the anaphylaxis rate for the lixisenatide cohort compared with the pooled other GLP-1 RA cohort was 0.24 (0.01-1.35)., Conclusions: Anaphylaxis is rare with GLP-1 RAs. Lixisenatide is unlikely to confer higher risk of anaphylaxis than other GLP-1 RAs., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)