The Difference in Contributing Factors and Costs Associated with Outpatient Refusal to Accept Cardiovascular Medications or Analgesics During Dispensing Process.

Background: Study looking into cardiovascular disorders (CVD) medicines or analgesics cost-saving activities during dispensing process is lacking. Aim: To determine differences in factors and costs associated with refused CVD medicines or analgesics during dispensing process Method: This study was approved by Medical Research and Ethics Committee (MREC) (Registration number: NMRR-20-177-53153(IIR)). Participants receiving CVD medicines or analgesics during dispensing process were recruited via convenience sampling technique between February and March 2020 at the Specialist Pharmacy Department of Jerantut Hospital, Malaysia. Refusal to medications and its reasons were asked based on the questionnaire developed by the researchers. Results: Overall, 175 patients participated in this survey and CVD drugs contributed toward 58.9% of the refused medicines. Those who refused CVD drugs and analgesics were significantly different in terms of gender, medications dosing frequency, refusal reasons namely side effects, medications use, intentionally skipping dose and skipping the dose when feeling well. No associations were found between forgetfulness and age with refusal to CVD drugs or painkillers. Those who refused CVD medicines had a significantly higher total daily medicines, total daily pill burden, and total number of medicines refused per prescription compared to those who refused analgesics. Cost of CVD medicines refused per prescription was significantly higher compared to analgesics, median Ringgit Malaysia (RM) 10.50 (IQR, RM 15.00) versus median RM 6.00 (IQR, 15.00), P=0.01. Conclusion: Refusal to CVD medicines and analgesics was associated with several medication’s and patient’s factors. However, higher cost-saving was observed in those refusing CVD medicines. Keywords: cardiovascular disease, analgesics, dispensing, wastage

The Effect of Cardiovascular Medications on Disease-Related Outcomes in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Multiple studies have revealed that idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) patients are more at risk for cardiovascular diseases and that many IPF patients receive cardiovascular medications like statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), and anticoagulants. Existing studies have reported divergent findings on the link between cardiovascular medications and fibrotic disease processes. The aim of this study is to synthesize the evidence on the efficacy of cardiovascular medications in IPF.Methods: We searched studies reporting the effect of cardiovascular medications on IPF in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and two Chinese databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure database and China Wanfang database). We calculated survival data, forced vital capacity (FVC) decline, and IPF-related mortality to assess the efficacy of cardiovascular medications in IPF. We also estimated statistical heterogeneity by using I2 and Cochran Q tests, and publication bias was evaluated by risk of bias tools ROBINS-I.Results: A total of 12 studies were included in the analysis. The included studies had moderate-to-serious risk of bias. Statin use was associated with a reduction in mortality (hazard ratio (HR), 0.89; 95% CI 0.83–0.97). Meta-analysis did not demonstrate any significant relationship between statin use and the FVC decline (HR, 0.86; 95% CI 0.73–1.02), ACEI/ARB use, and survival data (HR, 0.92; 95% CI 0.73–1.15) as well as anticoagulant use and survival data (HR, 1.16; 95% CI 0.62–2.19).Conclusion: Our study suggested that there is a consistent relationship between statin therapy and survival data in IPF population. However, there is currently insufficient evidence to conclude the effect of ACEI, ARB, and anticoagulant therapy on IPF population especially to the disease-related outcomes in IPF.

Beneficial Extracardiac Effects of Cardiovascular Medications

: Cardiovascular diseases are the most common cause of death worldwide, with cardiovascular medications being amongst the most common medications prescribed. These medications have diverse effects on the heart, vascular system as well as other tissues and organ systems. The extra cardiovascular effects have been found to be of use in the treatment of non-cardiovascular diseases and pathologies. Minoxidil is used to manage systemic hypertension with its well-known side effect of hirsutism used to treat alopecia and baldness. Sildenafil was originally investigated as a treatment option for systemic hypertension however its side effect of penile erection led to it be widely used for erectile dysfunction. Alpha-1 blockers such as terazosin are indicated to treat systemic hypertension but are more commonly used for benign prostatic hyperplasia and post-traumatic stress disorder. Beta blockers are the mainstay treatment for congestive heart failure and systemic hypertension but have found use to help in patients with intention tremors as well as prophylaxis of migraines. Similarly, calcium channel blockers are indicated in medical expulsion therapy for ureteric calculi in addition to their cardiovascular indications. Thiazides are commonly used for treating systemic hypertension and as diuretics. Thiazides can cause hypocalciuria and hypercalcemia. This side effect has led to thiazides being used to treat idiopathic hypercalciuria and associated nephrolithiasis. Spironolactone is commonly utilized in treating heart failure and as a diuretic for edema. It’s well described anti-androgen side effects have been used for acne vulgaris and hirsutism in polycystic ovarian syndrome. This review article discusses how the various extra-cardiovascular effects of commonly used cardiovascular medications are put to use in managing non-cardiovascular conditions.

Exploring Drugs and Vaccines Associated with Altered Risks and Severity of COVID-19: A UK Biobank Cohort Study of All ATC Level-4 Drug Categories Reveals Repositioning Opportunities

Effective therapies for COVID-19 are still lacking, and drug repositioning is a promising approach to address this problem. Here, we adopted a medical informatics approach to repositioning. We leveraged a large prospective cohort, the UK-Biobank (UKBB, N ~ 397,000), and studied associations of prior use of all level-4 ATC drug categories (N = 819, including vaccines) with COVID-19 diagnosis and severity. Effects of drugs on the risk of infection, disease severity, and mortality were investigated separately. Logistic regression was conducted, controlling for main confounders. We observed strong and highly consistent protective associations with statins. Many top-listed protective drugs were also cardiovascular medications, such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), calcium channel blocker (CCB), and beta-blockers. Some other drugs showing protective associations included biguanides (metformin), estrogens, thyroid hormones, proton pump inhibitors, and testosterone-5-alpha reductase inhibitors, among others. We also observed protective associations by influenza, pneumococcal, and several other vaccines. Subgroup and interaction analyses were also conducted, which revealed differences in protective effects in various subgroups. For example, protective effects of flu/pneumococcal vaccines were weaker in obese individuals, while protection by statins was stronger in cardiovascular patients. To conclude, our analysis revealed many drug repositioning candidates, for example several cardiovascular medications. Further studies are required for validation.

Abstract P264: Protective Effects Of Angiotensin II Inhibitors In Lebanese SARS-COV2 Hospitalized Patients

Introduction: SARS-CoV2 leads to increased Angiotensin II resulting in worsened cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcome and prognosis. ACEIs and ARBs prescribed drugs could be a crucial player in SARS-COV2 prognosis, owing that ACE2 is one SARS-CoV2 binding site and that ACE2 expression in the cardiovascular system is markedly elevated following the treatment with ACEIs and ARBs. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that hospitalized SARS-COV2 Lebanese patients with varying stages of heart failure (A through C) taking ACEIs or ARBs will exhibit an overall better cardiovascular prognosis than control patients with comparable demographics but on other cardiovascular medications. Method: Lebanese patients (N=66) classified as heart failure A-C and admitted to AUBMC for SARS-CoV2 infection were recruited as a part of an ongoing clinical study. Patients were assigned to the control group (No ACEIs or ARBs) or the study sample group (on ACEIs or ARBs). Baseline characteristics including cardiovascular, inflammatory, respiratory and overall outcomes were collected from the patients’ medical charts and analyzed. Unadjusted associations on recruited patients are presented here. Adjusted analyses will be performed when a total of 200 patients is reached. Results: The average age of patients was 69±12.42. The total average weight was 84.24±15.59 Kg and significantly higher in ACEIs/ARBs group (p=0.032). Most patients were males (48 of 66) and patients on ACEIs/ARBs medication were 38 of 66. Heart failure stage, systolic and diastolic blood pressures and heart rate were comparable on presentation between patients on ACEIs/ARBs and controls. Unadjusted analysis showed a significantly higher percentage of death (p=0.024), mechanical ventilation (p=0.05), and elevated troponin (p=0.03) in the control group. A trend towards higher percentage of elevated NT-ProBNP and high levels of peak IL-6 were observed in the control group (p = 0.088 and p=0.076 respectively). All patients had elevated CRP on admission. SARS-CoV2 treatments were comparable between the two groups. Conclusion: Higher mortality and worsened prognosis were observed in the control groups when compared to the ACEIs/ARBs group. Ongoing recruitment is currently underway to perform adjusted analyses.

Nationwide Trends in Cardiac Risk and Mortality in Patients With Incident Type 2 Diabetes: A Danish Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE Trends in cardiac risk and death have not been examined in patients with incident type 2 diabetes and no prior cardiovascular disease. Therefore, we aimed to examine trends in cardiac risk and death in relation to use of prophylactic cardiovascular medications in patients with incident type 2 diabetes without prior cardiovascular disease. <p>RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In this population-based cohort study, we included patients with incident type 2 diabetes between 1996 and 2011 through national health registries. Each patient was matched by age and sex with up to 5 persons without diabetes from the general population. All individuals were followed for 7 years.</p> <p>RESULTS We identified 209,311 patients with incident diabetes. From 1996-1999 to 2008-2011, the 7-year risk of myocardial infarction decreased from 6.9% to 2.8% (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.39, 95% CI 0.37-0.42), cardiac death from 7.1% to 1.6% (aHR 0.23, 95% CI 0.21-0.24), and all-cause death from 28.9% to 16.8% (aHR 0.68, 95% CI 0.66-0.69). Compared to the general population, 7-year risk differences decreased from 3.3% to 0.8% for myocardial infarction, from 2.7% to 0.5% for cardiac death, and from 10.6% to 6.0% for all-cause death. Use of cardiovascular medications within ±1 year of diabetes diagnosis, especially statins (5% users in 1996-1999 vs. 60% in 2008-2011), increased during the study period.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS From 1996 to 2011, Danish patients with incident type 2 diabetes and no prior cardiovascular disease experienced major reductions in cardiac risk and mortality. The risk reductions coincided with increased use of prophylactic cardiovascular medications. </p> <br> <p> </p>