Therapie · 2017
[Fibrates and risk of venous thromboembolism: Case/no-case study in French pharmacovigilance database].
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Humbert Xavier, Dolladille Charles, Sassier Marion, Valnet-Rabier Marie-Blanche, Vial Thierry, Guitton Emmanuelle, Page Annabelle, Sole Elodie, Auriche Pascal, Coquerel Antoine, Alexandre Joachim, Fedrizzi Sophie
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Several studies have investigated the occurrence of venous thromboembolic events (phlebitis and pulmonary embolism) [VTE] and fibrates. Fibrates could be associated with VTE although published data are contradictory. The objective of this study is to confirm the link between VTE and fibrates.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective disproportionality analysis (case/non-case method) from observations recorded consecutively in the French pharmacovigilance database between 1985 and 2016. Cases were defined as embolic and thrombotic events, thrombophlebitis; Non-cases were other adverse events reported over the same period. We measured the disproportionality of exposure to each fibrate among cases and no-cases. The analysis was validated with a positive control (drospirenone) and a negative control (paracetamol).
RESULTS: We compared 19,436 cases (including 161 mentioning fibrates) to 563,310 non-cases (including 3228 fibrates). Reports of VTE were significantly associated with fenofibrate (ROR=1.83; 95% CI=[1.53; 2.2]) but not with other fibrates: bézafibrate (ROR=0.44; 95% CI=[0.2; 0.99]), ciprofibrate (ROR=1.15; 95% CI=[0.76; 1.73]) and gemfibrozil (ROR=0.91; 95% CI=[0.45; 1.84]).
CONCLUSION: With this study, we confirm the link between VTE and fenofibrate. It is therefore advisable to remain cautious when prescribing fenofibrate, in particular in case of past history of VTE and to declare systematically any venous thromboembolic adverse events observed with these drugs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective disproportionality analysis (case/non-case method) from observations recorded consecutively in the French pharmacovigilance database between 1985 and 2016. Cases were defined as embolic and thrombotic events, thrombophlebitis; Non-cases were other adverse events reported over the same period. We measured the disproportionality of exposure to each fibrate among cases and no-cases. The analysis was validated with a positive control (drospirenone) and a negative control (paracetamol).
RESULTS: We compared 19,436 cases (including 161 mentioning fibrates) to 563,310 non-cases (including 3228 fibrates). Reports of VTE were significantly associated with fenofibrate (ROR=1.83; 95% CI=[1.53; 2.2]) but not with other fibrates: bézafibrate (ROR=0.44; 95% CI=[0.2; 0.99]), ciprofibrate (ROR=1.15; 95% CI=[0.76; 1.73]) and gemfibrozil (ROR=0.91; 95% CI=[0.45; 1.84]).
CONCLUSION: With this study, we confirm the link between VTE and fenofibrate. It is therefore advisable to remain cautious when prescribing fenofibrate, in particular in case of past history of VTE and to declare systematically any venous thromboembolic adverse events observed with these drugs.