Comparative cardiovascular safety of strontium ranelate and bisphosphonates: a multi-database study in 5 EU countries by the EU-ADR Alliance

Strontium ranelate use, compared with oral bisphosphonates, is not associated with increased risk of AMI in patients with no contraindications for SR use. However, current strontium ranelate (compared with current bisphosphonate) appears associated with 25-30% excess risk of VTE and 35% excess risk of CVDeath.

INTRODUCTION

Evaluate the risk of cardiac and thromboembolic events among new users of SR and oral BPs without contraindications for SR.

METHODS

We conducted three multi-national, multi-database (Aarhus-Denmark, HSD-Italy, IPCI-Netherlands, SIDIAP-Spain, THIN-UK) case-control studies nested within a cohort of new users of SR/BP. We matched cases of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), venous thromboembolism (VTE), and cardiovascular death (CVDeath), up to 10 controls on gender, year of birth, index date, and country. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) according to current SR vs current BP use and current vs past SR use, adjusting for potential confounders. Data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

No excess risk of AMI (5477 cases/54,674 controls) was found with current SR vs current BP (OR 0.89 (95%CI 0.70, 1.12)) nor with current vs past SR use (0.71(0.56, 0.91)). For VTE (5614 cases/6036 controls), an excess risk was found with current SR compared with current BP use, 1.24 (0.96, 1.61), and current vs past SR use, 1.30 (1.04, 1.62). For CVDeath (3019 cases/29,871 controls), an increased risk was seen with current SR vs current BP use, 1.35 (1.02, 1.80), but not with current vs past SR use (0.68 (0.48, 0.96)).

CONCLUSION

In patients without contraindications for SR, we found no evidence of an increased risk of AMI but a 25-30% excess risk of VTE and a 35% excess risk of CVDeath with current SR vs current BP users. This is despite a reduction in risk in CVDeath with current vs past SR users. The latter disparity could still be partially explained by cessation of preventative therapies in end-of-life or residual confounding by indication.

SAT0134 COMPARATIVE RISK OF CANCER ASSOCIATED WITH FIRST-LINE DMARDS USE IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: REAL WORLD EVIDENCE FROM THE OHDSI NETWORK

Background:

Conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) are recommended as first line treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, but limited information exists on the comparative risk of cancer associated with their use.

Objectives:

To compare the risk of incident overall (excluding non-melanoma skin) and site-specific cancers (colorectal, lung, lymphoma, leukaemia) associated with first-line use of csDMARDs in patients with RA.

Methods:

We conducted a multinational cohort study informed by data from 7 healthcare databases including claims and electronic medical records from 4 countries (SIDIAP-Spain, MDCR-US Optum-US, CCAE-US, IQVIA AMBEMR-US, IQVIA-Germany, THIN-UK) part of the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) network. All patients aged ≥18 years who initiated methotrexate (MTX), hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), sulphasalazine (SSZ), or leflunomide (LEF) as first-line monotherapy after a diagnosis of RA between 2005 to 2018 were eligible. Individuals with a prior diagnosis of another inflammatory arthropathy or cancer, or <1 year of follow-up were excluded. Patients were followed from 1-year after treatment initiation to the earliest of incident cancer, loss to follow-up, or 5-years. Cox proportional-hazard models for MTX against each other csDMARD were performed after propensity score stratification. A large set of negative control outcomes were analysed to calibrate hazard ratios (cHRs). Estimates were pooled where homogeneity across sources was adequate (I2<0.4).

Results:

Across the databases, 127,547 RA patients initiating csDMARD therapy were included in the analyses (MTX: 73,996, HCL: 36,381 SSZ: 9,383 LEF: 7,787). The pooled incidence rate of overall cancer for MTX was 22.8 per 1,000 person years. The pooled summary and source-specific estimated cHRs for overall cancer are shown below in Figure 1. While little difference was seen for HCQ and SSZ compared to MTX, LEF was consistently associated with a reduced cancer risk: pooled cHR (95% CI) 0.67 (0.59 to 0.76) and cHRs ranged from 0.53 (0.36 to 0.80) in CCAE-US to 0.84 (0.58 to 1.22) in SIDIAP-Spain. There were insufficient cases to look site-specific cancers within data sources, although pooled results suggest little risk difference in leukemia, lymphoma, colorectal, or lung cancers.

Figure 1.

Calibrated hazard ratios (cHRs) of overall cancer risk with their respective confidence intervals (95%CI) by study database. Database estimates not reported where adequate covariate balance not attained. Meta-analysis results not reported where I2>0.4.

Conclusion:

Compared to MTX users, patients treated with LEF had a lower risk of overall cancer. Risk of four specific cancers did not differ by first line csDMARD exposure.

Disclosure of Interests: :

Talita Duarte-Salles: None declared, Martina Recalde: None declared, James Weaver Shareholder of: J&J Shares, Grant/research support from: Full-time employment salary from Janssen, Consultant of: Janssen employee, Employee of: Janssen, Paid instructor for: Janssen employee, have instructed at conferences, Speakers bureau: Janssen employee, have spoken at conferences, Edward Burn: None declared, Karine Marinier Employee of: Servier, Yesika Díaz: None declared, Ben Illingens: None declared, David Vizcaya Employee of: Bayer, Katerina Chatzidionysiou Consultant of: AbbVie, Pfizer, Lilly., Patrick Ryan: None declared, Daniel Prieto-Alhambra Grant/research support from: Professor Prieto-Alhambra has received research Grants from AMGEN, UCB Biopharma and Les Laboratoires Servier, Consultant of: DPA’s department has received fees for consultancy services from UCB Biopharma, Speakers bureau: DPA’s department has received fees for speaker and advisory board membership services from Amgen

SAT0131 CARDIO- AND CEREBROVASCULAR RISK WITH CONVENTIONAL SYNTHETIC DISEASE-MODIFYING ANTIRHEUMATIC DRUGS (CSDMARDS) IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS (RA): A REAL-WORLD COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT

Background:

RA is associated with an increased cardiovascular (CV) risk. csDMARDs are first-line treatments for RA and can mitigate this risk, but limited data exist on their CV effects. Previous trials have reported protective effects for methotrexate (MTX) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), but no similar data exist on sulfasalazine (SSZ) or leflunomide (LEF).

Objectives:

To assess the comparative effect of csDMARDs on the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke in RA patients

Methods:

Data from 6 claims/electronic health records databases across Germany, US, and UK, all mapped to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) common data model. A cohort study was conducted including patients ≥18 years old, with first RA diagnosis in 2005-2019, initiating csDMARD monotherapy with MTX, HCQ, SSZ, or LEF. Those with a prior diagnosis of other inflammatory arthritis or <1 year prior follow-up were excluded. Patients were followed until first outcome, death, loss of or 5 years follow-up. Propensity score stratification was used, and hazard ratios (HR) estimated for HCQ, SSZ and LEF compared to MTX in each dataset using Cox regression. HR were calibrated (cHR) for residual confounding using negative control outcomes. Estimates were pooled where I2for heterogeneity <0.4. Intention to treat and an on treatment analyses are reported.

Results:

145,248 patients were included (MTX: 73,996, HCQ: 49,752, SSZ: 12,256, LEF: 9,244). Pooled rates of MI and stroke for MTX were 7.64 and 10.26 per 1,000 person years respectively. Detailed estimate cHRs are shown in Figure 1 for the intention to treat analysis. MI risk with SSZ and LEF was comparable to MTX. Risk of stroke was similar between LEF and MTX, but reduced for HCQ and SSZ compared to MTX, with pooled cHR (95% CI) 0.86 (0.78 to 0.95) and 0.71 (0.52 to 0.98) for HCQ and SSZ respectively. Similar results were found for “on treatment” analyses.

Figure 1.

Calibrated hazard ratios (cHRs) for MI and stroke

Conclusion:

Overall, all four csDMARDs had similar effects on MI risk. HCQ and SSZ use were associated with a decreased risk of stroke compared to MTX. The observed differences may be attributable to differential effects on the atherosclerotic process, differential disease control, or both.

Database estimates not reported where adequate covariate balance not attained. Meta-analysis results not reported where I2>0.4. MEDICARE did not pass diagnostics for SSZ and LEF analyses. cHR: calibrated Hazard Ratio; CI: Confidence Interval; MTX: Methotrexate; HCQ: Hydroxychloroquine; SSZ: sulphasalazine; LEF: Leflunomide; THIN: The Health Improvement Network (UK); Optum: Optum de-identified Clinformatics Datamart (US); MDCR: Medicare (US); GERMANY: IQVIA Disease Analyzer EMR (Germany); CCAE: IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters (US); AMBEMR: IQVIA Ambulatory EMR (US)

Database estimates not reported where adequate covariate balance not attained. Meta-analysis results not reported where I2>0.4. MEDICARE did not pass diagnostics for SSZ and LEF analyses. cHR: calibrated Hazard Ratio; CI: Confidence Interval; MTX: Methotrexate; HCQ: Hydroxychloroquine; SSZ: sulphasalazine; LEF: Leflunomide; THIN: The Health Improvement Network (UK); Optum: Optum de-identified Clinformatics Datamart (US); MDCR: Medicare (US); GERMANY: IQVIA Disease Analyzer EMR (Germany); CCAE: IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters (US); AMBEMR: IQVIA Ambulatory EMR (US)

Disclosure of Interests: :

Albert Prats-Uribe: None declared, Ben Illingens: None declared, David Vizcaya Employee of: Bayer, James Weaver Shareholder of: J&J Shares, Grant/research support from: Full-time employment salary from Janssen, Consultant of: Janssen employee, Employee of: Janssen, Paid instructor for: Janssen employee, have instructed at conferences, Speakers bureau: Janssen employee, have spoken at conferences, Edward Burn: None declared, Ruta Sawant Shareholder of: AbbVie, Employee of: AbbVie, Karine Marinier Employee of: Servier, Patrick Ryan: None declared, Daniel Prieto-Alhambra Grant/research support from: Professor Prieto-Alhambra has received research Grants from AMGEN, UCB Biopharma and Les Laboratoires Servier, Consultant of: DPA’s department has received fees for consultancy services from UCB Biopharma, Speakers bureau: DPA’s department has received fees for speaker and advisory board membership services from Amgen

Correction to: Impact of risk minimisation measures on the use of strontium ranelate in Europe: a multi-national cohort study in 5 EU countries by the EU-ADR Alliance

The original version of this article, published on 26 November 2019 contained a mistake.

Impact of risk minimisation measures on the use of strontium ranelate in Europe: a multi-national cohort study in 5 EU countries by the EU-ADR Alliance

INTRODUCTION

In May 2013 and March 2014, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) issued two decisions restricting the use of strontium ranelate (SR). These risk minimisation measures (RMM) introduced new contraindications and limited the indications of SR therapy. The EMA required an assessment of the impact of RMMs on the use of SR in Europe. Methods design: multi-national, multi-database cohort Setting: electronic medical record databases based on hospital (Denmark) and primary care provenance (Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, UK).

PARTICIPANTS

the database source populations were included for population-based analyses, and SR users for patient-level analyses.

INTERVENTION

New RMMs included contraindications (ischaemic heart disease, peripheral arterial disease, cerebrovascular disease, uncontrolled hypertension) and restricted SR indication to severe osteoporosis with initiation by experienced physician and not as first line anti-osteoporosis therapy.

METHODS

Prevalence and incidence rates of SR use in the population; prevalence of contraindications and restricted indications in SR users, plus 1-year therapy persistence. Drug use measures were calculated in three periods for comparison: reference (2004 to May 2013), transition (June 2013 to March 2014) and assessment (from April 2014 to end 2016).

RESULTS

The study population included 143 million person-years(PY) of follow-up and 76,141 incident episodes of SR treatment. Average monthly prevalence rates of SR use dropped by 86.4% from 62.6/10,000 PY (95 CI 62.4-62.9) in the reference to 8.5 (8.5-8.6) in the assessment period. Similarly, the incidence rate of SR use fell by 97.3% from 7.4/10,000 PY (7.4-7.4) to 0.2 (0.2-0.2) between the reference and assessment period. The prevalence of any contraindication decreased, whilst the prevalence of restricted indications increased in these periods. One-year persistence decreased in the assessment compared with reference period.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates a substantial impact of the regulatory action to restrict use of SR in Europe: SR utilisation overall decreased strongly. The proportion of patients fulfilling the restricted indications, without contraindications, increased after the proposed RMMs.