Key result
ACEI/ARB-related adverse drug reaction consultations were associated with an increased risk of subsequent cardiovascular events in both primary (HR 1.22) and secondary (HR 1.13) prevention cohorts.
Why the study?
Adverse drug reactions related to ACEIs and ARBs may negatively affect treatment outcomes, but their impact on CVD events and mortality was unclear.
Does an ACEI/ARB-related adverse drug reaction consultation increase the risk of subsequent cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in patients taking ACEIs/ARBs?
Cohort (n=1,471,906)
Yes
Does an ACEI/ARB-related adverse drug reaction consultation increase the risk of subsequent cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in patients taking ACEIs/ARBs?
Patients experiencing ACEI/ARB-related adverse drug reactions have a significantly higher risk of subsequent cardiovascular events and mortality, highlighting the need for close monitoring and careful treatment management.
BACKGROUND: Adverse drug reaction (ADR) related to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) may negatively affect patients' treatment outcomes. AIM: To investigate the impact of ACEIs/ARBs-related ADR consultation on cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and all-cause mortality. DESIGN AND SETTING: Propensity score-matched cohort study of ACEIs/ARBs between 2004 and 2019 using UK IQVIA medical research data. METHOD: ADR consultations were identified using standardised designated codes. Propensity scores were calculated based on comorbidities, concomitant medications, frailty, and polypharmacy. Cox's proportional hazard regression model was used to compare the outcomes between patients in ADR and non-ADR groups. In the secondary analysis, treatment- pattern changes following the ADR were examined and the subsequent outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Among 1 471 906 eligible users of ACEIs/ARBs, 13 652 (0.93%) patients had ACEIs/ARBs- related ADR consultation in primary care. Patients with ACEIs/ARBs-related ADR consultation had an increased risk of subsequent CVD events and all- cause mortality in both primary prevention (CVD events: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05 to 1.43; all-cause mortality: aHR 1.14, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.27) and secondary prevention cohorts (CVD events: aHR 1.13, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.21; all-cause mortality: aHR 1.15, 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.21). Half (50.19%) of patients with ADR continued to use ACEIs/ARBs, and these patients had a reduced risk of mortality (aHR 0.88, 95% CI = 0.82 to 0.95) compared with those who discontinued using ACEIs/ARBs. CONCLUSION: This study provides information on the burden of ADR on patients and the health system. The findings call for additional monitoring and treatment strategies for patients affected by ADR to mitigate the risks of adverse clinical outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Insani et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in ACEI/ARB users (hypertension, chronic kidney disease, heart failure) (n=1,471,906). ACEI/ARB-related adverse drug reactions consultation vs. ACEI/ARB users without ADRs consultation was evaluated on First composite CVD events (myocardial infarction, stroke/TIA) in the primary prevention cohort (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.05-1.43). ACEI/ARB-related adverse drug reaction consultations were associated with an increased risk of subsequent cardiovascular events in both primary (HR 1.22) and secondary (HR 1.13) prevention cohorts.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:
More from British Journal of General Practice