Short-term corticosteroid use may be associated with increased risk of adverse events

2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 11-11
Author(s):  
Ruth Sander
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lene Kristine Juvet ◽  
Anna Hayman Robertson ◽  
Ida Laake ◽  
Siri Mjaaland ◽  
Lill Trogstad

BackgroundIn 2009, a new influenza A H1N1 virus emerged causing a global pandemic. A range of monovalent influenza A H1N1pdm09 vaccines with or without adjuvants were developed. After the mass vaccination campaigns safety concerns related to H1N1pdm09 vaccines were reported. More than a decade later, reported AEFIs are still under scrutiny. We performed a systematic review aiming to synthesize the evidence on the safety of the H1N1pdm09 vaccines on reported outcomes from existing systematic reviews.MethodsFour electronic databases, PubMed, EMBASE, Epistimonikos and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for articles on H1N1pdm09 vaccination published from 2009 to January 2021. Systematic reviews assessing short- or long-term adverse events after H1N1pdm09 vaccination were considered for inclusion. Data was extracted from all selected reviews. Outcomes were grouped and results from each included review were presented narratively and in tables.Results16 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. Reported outcomes were short-term events (3 reviews), fetal/pregnancy outcomes (8 reviews), Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) (4 reviews), narcolepsy (2 reviews) demyelinating diseases (1 review based on one study only) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (1 review). Short-term serious adverse events were rare, 3 cases amongst 16725 subjects in 18 randomized controlled trials (0.018%). No deaths were reported. The risks of local events were generally higher for adjuvanted vaccines as compared to unadjuvanted vaccines. Maternal H1N1pdm09 vaccination in any trimester was not associated with an increase in preterm birth, small for gestational age, congenital malformations or fetal death. For GBS, results were conflicting. The main systematic review on narcolepsy found a 5-14-fold increased risk in children, and a 2-7- fold increased risk in adults after vaccination with Pandemrix. The attributable risk of narcolepsy one year after vaccination was 1 case per 18 400 vaccine doses in children/adolescents, and 1 case per 181 000 vaccine doses in adults.ConclusionAdjuvanted vaccines had more local but not serious adverse events compared to unadjuvanted vaccines. Vaccination with Pandemrix was strongly associated with narcolepsy, particularly in children. No increased risks of pregnancy outcomes were seen after pandemic vaccination. The findings on GBS were inconclusive.


2020 ◽  
Vol 105 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Kutz ◽  
Fahim Ebrahimi ◽  
Soheila Aghlmandi ◽  
Ulrich Wagner ◽  
Miluska Bromley ◽  
...  

Abstract Context Hyponatremia has been associated with excess long-term morbidity and mortality. However, effects during hospitalization are poorly studied. Objective The objective of this work is to examine the association of hyponatremia with the risk of in-hospital mortality, 30-day readmission, and other short-term adverse events among medical inpatients. Design and Setting A population-based cohort study was conducted using a Swiss claims database of medical inpatients from January 2012 to December 2017 Patients Hyponatremic patients were 1:1 propensity-score matched with normonatremic medical inpatients. Main Outcome Measure The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause in-hospital mortality and 30-day hospital readmission. Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit (ICU) admission, intubation rate, length-of-hospital stay (LOS), and patient disposition after discharge. Results After matching, 94 352 patients were included in the cohort. Among 47 176 patients with hyponatremia, 8383 (17.8%) reached the primary outcome compared with 7994 (17.0%) in the matched control group (odds ratio [OR] 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.10], P = .001). Hyponatremic patients were more likely to be admitted to the ICU (OR 1.43 [95% CI, 1.37-1.50], P < .001), faced a 56% increase in prolonged LOS (95% CI, 1.52-1.60, P < .001), and were admitted more often to a postacute care facility (OR 1.38 [95% CI 1.34-1.42, P < .001). Of note, patients with the syndrome of inappropriate antidiuresis (SIAD) had lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56-0.80], P < .001) as compared with matched normonatremic controls. Conclusion In this study, hyponatremia was associated with increased risk of short-term adverse events, primarily driven by higher readmission rates, which was consistent among all outcomes except for decreased in-hospital mortality in SIAD patients.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ran Mo ◽  
Yan-min Yang ◽  
Li-tian Yu ◽  
Hui-qiong Tan ◽  
Jun Zhu

Objective: We aimed to evaluate the association between plasma big endothelin-1 (ET-1) at admission and short-term outcomes in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) patients.Methods: In this single-center, retrospective study, a total of 746 ADHF patients were enrolled and divided into three groups according to baseline plasma big ET-1 levels: tertile 1 (<0.43 pmol/L, n = 250), tertile 2 (between 0.43 and 0.97 pmol/L, n = 252), and tertile 3 (>0.97 pmol/L, n = 244). The primary outcomes were all-cause death, cardiac arrest, or utilization of mechanical support devices during hospitalization. Logistic regression analysis and net reclassification improvement approach were applied to assess the predictive power of big ET-1 on short-term outcomes.Results: During hospitalization, 92 (12.3%) adverse events occurred. Etiology, arterial pH, lactic acid, total bilirubin, serum creatine, serum uric acid, presence of atrial fibrillation and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels were positively correlated with plasma big ET-1 level, whereas systolic blood pressure, serum sodium, hemoglobin, albumin, and estimated glomerular filtration rate were negatively correlated. In multivariate logistic regression, tertile 3 compared with tertile 1 had a 3.68-fold increased risk of adverse outcomes [odds ratio (OR) = 3.681, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.410–9.606, p = 0.008]. However, such adverse effect did not exist between tertile 2 and tertile 1 (OR = 0.953, 95% CI 0.314–2.986, p = 0.932). As a continuous variable, big ET-1 level was significantly associated with primary outcome (OR = 1.756, 95% CI 1.413–2.183, p < 0.001). The C statistic of baseline big ET-1 was 0.66 (95% CI 0.601–0.720, p < 0.001). Net reclassification index (NRI) analysis showed that big ET-1 provided additional predictive power when combining it to NT-proBNP (NRI = 0.593, p < 0.001).Conclusion: Elevated baseline big ET-1 is an independent predictor of short-term adverse events in ADHF patients and may provide valuable information for risk stratification.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marian S. McDonagh ◽  
Jesse Wagner ◽  
Azrah Y. Ahmed ◽  
Rongwei Fu ◽  
Benjamin Morasco ◽  
...  

Objectives. To evaluate the evidence on benefits and harms of cannabinoids and similar plant-based compounds to treat chronic pain. Data sources. Ovid® MEDLINE®, PsycINFO®, Embase®, the Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS® databases, reference lists of included studies, submissions received after Federal Register request were searched to July 2021. Review methods. Using dual review, we screened search results for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of patients with chronic pain evaluating cannabis, kratom, and similar compounds with any comparison group and at least 1 month of treatment or followup. Dual review was used to abstract study data, assess study-level risk of bias, and rate the strength of evidence. Prioritized outcomes included pain, overall function, and adverse events. We grouped studies that assessed tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and/or cannabidiol (CBD) based on their THC to CBD ratio and categorized them as high-THC to CBD ratio, comparable THC to CBD ratio, and low-THC to CBD ratio. We also grouped studies by whether the product was a whole-plant product (cannabis), cannabinoids extracted or purified from a whole plant, or synthetic. We conducted meta-analyses using the profile likelihood random effects model and assessed between-study heterogeneity using Cochran’s Q statistic chi square and the I2 test for inconsistency. Magnitude of benefit was categorized into no effect or small, moderate, and large effects. Results. From 2,850 abstracts, 20 RCTs (N=1,776) and 7 observational studies (N=13,095) assessing different cannabinoids were included; none of kratom. Studies were primarily short term, and 75 percent enrolled patients with a variety of neuropathic pain. Comparators were primarily placebo or usual care. The strength of evidence (SOE) was low, unless otherwise noted. Compared with placebo, comparable THC to CBD ratio oral spray was associated with a small benefit in change in pain severity (7 RCTs, N=632, 0 to10 scale, mean difference [MD] −0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.95 to −0.19, I2=28%; SOE: moderate) and overall function (6 RCTs, N=616, 0 to 10 scale, MD −0.42, 95% CI −0.73 to −0.16, I2=24%). There was no effect on study withdrawals due to adverse events. There was a large increased risk of dizziness and sedation and a moderate increased risk of nausea (dizziness: 6 RCTs, N=866, 30% vs. 8%, relative risk [RR] 3.57, 95% CI 2.42 to 5.60, I2=0%; sedation: 6 RCTs, N=866, 22% vs. 16%, RR 5.04, 95% CI 2.10 to 11.89, I2=0%; and nausea: 6 RCTs, N=866, 13% vs. 7.5%, RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.78, I2=0%). Synthetic products with high-THC to CBD ratios were associated with a moderate improvement in pain severity, a moderate increase in sedation, and a large increase in nausea (pain: 6 RCTs, N=390 to 10 scale, MD −1.15, 95% CI −1.99 to −0.54, I2=39%; sedation: 3 RCTs, N=335, 19% vs. 10%, RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.63, I2=0%; nausea: 2 RCTs, N=302, 12% vs. 6%, RR 2.19, 95% CI 0.77 to 5.39; I²=0%). We found moderate SOE for a large increased risk of dizziness (2 RCTs, 32% vs. 11%, RR 2.74, 95% CI 1.47 to 6.86, I2=0%). Extracted whole-plant products with high-THC to CBD ratios (oral) were associated with a large increased risk of study withdrawal due to adverse events (1 RCT, 13.9% vs. 5.7%, RR 3.12, 95% CI 1.54 to 6.33) and dizziness (1 RCT, 62.2% vs. 7.5%, RR 8.34, 95% CI 4.53 to 15.34). We observed a moderate improvement in pain severity when combining all studies of high-THC to CBD ratio (8 RCTs, N=684, MD −1.25, 95% CI −2.09 to −0.71, I2=50%; SOE: moderate). Evidence on whole-plant cannabis, topical CBD, low-THC to CBD, other cannabinoids, comparisons with active products, and impact on use of opioids was insufficient to draw conclusions. Other important harms (psychosis, cannabis use disorder, and cognitive effects) were not reported. Conclusions. Low to moderate strength evidence suggests small to moderate improvements in pain (mostly neuropathic), and moderate to large increases in common adverse events (dizziness, sedation, nausea) and study withdrawal due to adverse events with high- and comparable THC to CBD ratio extracted cannabinoids and synthetic products in short-term treatment (1 to 6 months). Evidence for whole-plant cannabis, and other comparisons, outcomes, and PBCs were unavailable or insufficient to draw conclusions. Small sample sizes, lack of evidence for moderate and long-term use and other key outcomes, such as other adverse events and impact on use of opioids during treatment, indicate that more research is needed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-236
Author(s):  
Kevin I. Kashanchi ◽  
Alireza K. Nazemi ◽  
David E. Komatsu ◽  
Edward D. Wang

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 963-971 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Durfey ◽  
Brian Lehnhof ◽  
Andrew Bergeson ◽  
Shayla Durfey ◽  
Victoria Leytin ◽  
...  

Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad A Sherbini ◽  
James M Gwinnutt ◽  
Kimme L Hyrich ◽  
Suzanne M M Verstappen ◽  

Abstract Background/Aims  Methotrexate (MTX) is the most common treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The prevalence of adverse events (AEs) associated with MTX treatment for RA have been studied extensively, but there are limited data on the predictors of these AEs. This study aims to summarise the prevalence rates of MTX AEs, including gastrointestinal (GI), neurological, mucocutaneous, and elevated alanine transaminase (ALT) enzyme, and to identify baseline demographic and clinical predictors of these AEs. Methods  The Rheumatoid Arthritis Medication Study (RAMS) is a UK multi-centre prospective cohort study of patients with RA starting MTX for the first time. Relevant demographic, medication, clinical and disease related data were collected at baseline. AEs were reported at six and twelve months follow-ups. The prevalence rates of AEs were calculated based on the proportions of patients who reported having had an AE within one year of follow-up. The associations between candidate baseline predictors and AEs were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Results  A total of 2,089 patients were included with a mean age of 58.4 (standard deviation: 13.5) years, 1390 (66.5%) were women. 1,814 and 1,579 patients completed the 6 and 12 months follow-up visits, respectively. The prevalence rates of the AEs within one year of follow-up were: GI = 777 (40.6%), mucocutaneous = 441 (23.1%), neurological = 487 (25.5%), elevated ALT (> upper limit of normal [ULN]) = 286 (15.5%). Younger age and being a woman were associated with increased risk of GI AEs, (age: OR 0.97 per year increase in age, 95% CI 0.98, 1.00; male sex: OR 0.58 vs female, 95% CI 0.46, 0.74) (Table 1). Higher baseline Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score was an independent predictor of GI, mucocutaneous, and neurological AEs. Furthermore, having ALT >1xULN at baseline or history of diabetes was associated with increased risk of subsequent ALT elevation during the study follow-up. Conclusion  In patients with RA starting MTX, GI AEs were the most commonly reported AEs during the first year of follow-up. The identified predictors of AEs may facilitate discussions between clinicians and patients prior to commencing MTX, and may lead to increased adherence and consequently improved effectiveness. Disclosure  A.A. Sherbini: None. J.M. Gwinnutt: Grants/research support; BMS. K.L. Hyrich: Member of speakers’ bureau; Abbvie. Grants/research support; Pfizer, UCB, BMS. S.M.M. Verstappen: Consultancies; Celltrion. Member of speakers’ bureau; Pfizer. Grants/research support; BMS.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. iii329-iii329
Author(s):  
Minako Sugiyama ◽  
Takayuki Hashimoto ◽  
Takashi Mori ◽  
Kazuya Hara ◽  
Yukayo Terashita ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND To reduce treatment-related adverse events in pediatric and young-adult patients with brain tumors, proton beam radiotherapy (PBT) has recently been performed instead of conventional X-ray radiotherapy. However, whether PBT is as effective as X-ray radiotherapy has not been sufficiently investigated, especially in patients receiving whole-ventricular irradiation. METHODS We report a retrospective observation of 15 patients with intracranial germ cell tumors (GCT), who received PBT at our institution from April 2014 to September 2019. We evaluated their clinical course, short-term adverse events, and prognosis. RESULTS/ CONCLUSION Fifteen patients (9 males and 6 females; median age 13 years) who received PBT following induction chemotherapy were analyzed. Nine patients received 23.4–27.0 GyE of whole-ventricular irradiation due to GCT in the pituitary gland, pineal body, or hypothalamic area. Three patients received 23.4 GyE of whole-brain irradiation: one of them had boost irradiation for basal ganglia. Three patients received 30.6 GyE of craniospinal irradiation (CSI). Six of the 15 patients experienced nausea (grade 2, according to the CTCAE version 4.0). Four patients, including two who received CSI, showed myelosuppression: decrease in white blood cell count, lymphocyte cell count, and neutrophil count (grade 3). No other severe short-term adverse events of >grade 2 was observed in any of the patients. At a median follow-up of 21 months (2-62 months) after irradiation. all patients are alive without recurrence. Our results may be encouraging and further investigations with a larger scale is warranted.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 54.1-54
Author(s):  
S. Benamar ◽  
C. Lukas ◽  
C. Daien ◽  
C. Gaujoux-Viala ◽  
L. Gossec ◽  
...  

Background:Polypharmacy is steadily increasing in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). They may interfere with treatment response and the occurrence of serious adverse events. Medications taken by a patient may reflect active comorbidities, whereas comorbidity indices usually used include past or current diseases.Objectives:To evaluate whether polypharmarcy is associated with treatment response and adverse events in an early RA cohort and to establish whether polypharmacy could represent a substitute of comorbidities.Methods:We used data from the French cohort ESPOIR, including 813 patients with early onset arthritis. Patients included the current study had to start their first disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) within 24 months of inclusion in the cohort. Disease activity data were collected at one, five and ten years from the initiation of the first DMARD. For each patient, treatments were collected at baseline and at five years. Medications count included all specialties other than background RA therapy, analgesics/NSAIDs and topicals. Polypharmacy was defined as a categorical variable based on the median and tertiles of distribution in the cohort. Treatment response was assessed by achieving DAS28 ESR remission (REM) at 1 year, 5 years and 10 years from the initiation of the first DMARD. The occurrence of severe adverse events (SAE) was measured by the occurrence of severe infection, hospitalization, or death during the 10-year follow-up. The association between patient’s characteristics and achievement of REM and occurrence of SAE were tested in univariate analysis. A logistic regression model was used to evaluate associations between polypharmacy and REM at 1 year, 5 years and 10 years (we used baseline polypharmacy for the 1-year analysis and five years polypharmacy for the 5- and 10-years analyses). Multivariate adjustment was made for age, sex, BMI, duration of disease, initial DAS28 ESR, initial HAQ, smoking status, rheumatic disease comorbidity index (RDCI).Results:The proportion of patients who achieved REM one year after the initiation of the first DMARD was 32.1% in the polypharmacy according to the median group (patients taken ≥2 medication) versus 67.9% in the non-polypharmacy group (p=0.07). At 5 years after the first DMARD, the proportion of patients with REM was 45.0% in the polypharmacy group versus 56.3% in the non-polypharmacy group (p=0.03). At 10 years the proportion of patients with REM was 32.5% in the polypharmacy group versus 67.5% (p=0.06). Patients who take greater or equal to 2 medications had a 40% lower probability of achieving REM (OR = 0.60 [0.38-0.94] p = 0.03) at 5 years from the first DMARD (if RDCI index was not included in the model). At 10 years, patients receiving multiple medications had a 43% lower probability of achieving REM (OR = 0.57 [0.34-0.94] p = 0.02). SAE incidence was 61 per 1000 patient-years. For patients who developed SAE all causes 71.4% where in the polypharmacy group versus 57.8% were in the non-polypharmacy group (p = 0.03; univariate analysis). These results are no longer significant after adjustment for comorbidities indices.Conclusion:In this early RA cohort, polypharmacy is associated with a poorer treatment response and increased risk of adverse events. Polypharmacy may represent a good substitute of comorbidities for epidemiological studies.Acknowledgements:We are grateful to Nathalie Rincheval (Montpellier) who did expert monitoring and data management and all theinvestigators who recruited and followed the patients (F. Berenbaum, Paris-Saint Antoine; MC. Boissier, Paris-Bobigny; A. Cantagrel, Toulouse; B. Combe, Montpellier; M. Dougados, Paris-Cochin; P. Fardellone and P. Boumier, Amiens; B. Fautrel, Paris-La Pitié; RM. Flipo, Lille; Ph. Goupille, Tours; F. Liote, Paris- Lariboisière; O. Vittecoq, Rouen; X. Mariette, Paris-Bicêtre; P. Dieude, Paris Bichat; A. Saraux, Brest; T. Schaeverbeke, Bordeaux; and J. Sibilia, Strasbourg).The work reported on in the manuscript did not benefit from any financial support. The ESPOIR cohort is sponsored by the French Society for Rheumatology. An unrestricted grant from Merck Sharp and Dohme (MSD) was allocated for the first 5 years. Two additional grants from INSERM were obtained to support part of the biological database. Pfizer, Abbvie, Lilly and more recently Fresenius and Biogen also supported the ESPOIR cohort.Disclosure of Interests:Soraya Benamar: None declared, Cédric Lukas Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, UCB, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Novartis and Roche-Chugai, Claire Daien Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Abivax, BMS, MSD, Roche, Chugai, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Lilly, Consultant of: AbbVie, Abivax, BMS, MSD, Roche, Chugai, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Lilly, Cécile Gaujoux-Viala Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Medac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche-Chugai, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Medac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Roche-Chugai, UCB, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Laure Gossec Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis et UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis et UCB, Anne-Christine Rat Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Lilly, Consultant of: Pfizer, Lilly, Bernard Combe Speakers bureau: AbbVie; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Gilead; Janssen; Lilly; Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; and Sanofi;, Consultant of: AbbVie; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Gilead; Janssen; Lilly; Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; and Sanofi;, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche-Chugai., Jacques Morel Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, Médac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Lilly, Médac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Pfizer, UCB, Grant/research support from: BMS, Pfizer


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document