Evidence Hub

Using Medicare Data to Assess the Proarrhythmic Risk of Non-Cardiac Treatment Drugs that Prolong the QT Interval in Older Adults: An Observational Cohort Study

Fung KW, Baye F, Kapusnik-Uner J, McDonald CJ

Drugs - real world outcomes, 2021

6 citations

Abstract

Introduction: Serious cardiac arrhythmias caused by QT-prolonging drugs are difficult to predict based on physiological measurement and pre-approval clinical trials. Post-marketing surveillance and monitoring are important to generate safety data.

Objectives: To assess whether an observational study using Medicare claims data can detect the arrhythmogenic risk of QT-prolonging drugs.

Methods: We identified 17 QT-prolonging drugs with known risk of torsades des pointes (TdP) that were not used to treat cardiac arrhythmias. Amoxicillin and four serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) were used as controls. De-identified claims data of 1.2 million Medicare beneficiaries were accessed. Two separate Cox regressions were done for short-term and chronic-use drugs. The primary outcome was a composite of ventricular arrhythmias and/or sudden death, identified by ICD diagnostic codes. We explored the independent effect of each study drug on the outcomes. Other covariates included patient demographics, comorbidities, and known risk factors for drug-induced cardiac arrhythmia.

Results: We were able to detect increased risk in 14 of 17 study drugs (82.3%), and none of the control drugs. Among the fluoroquinolones, ciprofloxacin was the safest. Azithromycin and clarithromycin were relatively safe compared to erythromycin. Compared to SNRIs, both citalopram and escitalopram had increased risk, more so with escitalopram than citalopram. Comorbidities associated with increased…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free