1 / 19

Impact of NRTI and PI Exposure on Risk of Myocardial Infarction

This case-control study evaluates the association between the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and exposure to specific NRTIs and PIs. Data was collected from HIV-infected patients enrolled in the French Hospital Database on HIV. The study findings suggest a higher risk of MI with recent exposure to abacavir and cumulative exposure to protease inhibitors.

fvictoria
Download Presentation

Impact of NRTI and PI Exposure on Risk of Myocardial Infarction

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. www.ccde.fr Impact of Specific NRTI and PI Exposure on the Risk of Myocardial InfarctionA Case-Control Study Nested within the French Hospital Database on HIVANRS CO4 S Lang, M Mary-Krause, L Cotte, J Gilquin, M Partisani, A Simon, F Boccara, D Costagliola Unité 943

  2. Background - I Risk of myocardial infarction and exposure to protease inhibitors RR (95% CI) = 1.16 (1.10 –1.23) Cumulative exposure to protease inhibitors (Pis) has been associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction but the role of specific protease inhibitors has not been reported Mary-Krause M et al., AIDS 2003; 17: 2479 - 2486 D:A:D Study Group, Friis-Møller N et al., N Engl J Med 2007; 356:1723-1735

  3. Background - II Risk of myocardial infarction according to exposure to abacavir D:A:D Study Patients with MI n = 517 Recent exposure to abacavir was associated with a higher risk of MI RR (95% CI) = 1.94 (1.48 –2.55) SMART Study Patients with MI n = 19 Current useof abacavir was associated with an increased risk of MI HR (95% CI) = 4.3 (1.4 –13.0) Interactions with CVD risk factors were in the opposite direction in the two studies In these 2 studies, exposure to abacavir showed signals which were not completely concordant D:A:D study group, Sabin CA, et al., Lancet 2008; 371: 1417-26 The SMART/Insight and the D:A:D study groups, Lundgren JD et al., AIDS 2008; 22: F17-F24

  4. Objectives • In a nested case-control study within the French Hospital Database on HIV, to evaluate the association between the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and • cumulative to specific NRTIs • recent (current or within last 6 months) and past exposure (>6 months ago) to specific NRTIs • cumulative exposure to specific PIs

  5. 289 cases Cases • Over 115000 HIV-infected patients have been enrolled into the FHDH between 1989 and 2006 • Patients with a first MIprospectively reported between January 2000 and December 2006 were included • Only definite or probable MI cases validated by a cardiologist (FB) according to the ASC/ESC criteria* were eligible • Out of the 418 cases identified, 129 were excluded • 45 had incomplete medical records • 36 MIs occurred before the study period • 2 cases of MI were undated • 4 cases of MI occurred before the diagnosis of HIV infection • 6 cases had a MI before being enrolled in the cohort • 36 cases did not have a confirmed MI * Luepker R et al., Circulation 2003; 108: 2543-2549

  6. 884 controls Controls • HIV-infected patients with no history of MI, followed at the time of MI diagnosis of the corresponding case • Matched for • Age at diagnosis of MI +3 years • Sex • Clinical center • Matching based on these factors yields similar results in a nested case-control study to those obtained with the cohort approach used in our first study on the risk of MI * • For each validated case, up to five matched controls randomly selected with replacement from the database • Cases eligible as control up to the time of the diagnosis of MI • 3 cases with 1 control, 11 with 2, 246 with 3, 24 with 4 and 5 with 5 controls * Guiguet M et al., Pharmacoepid Drug Saf, 2008; 17: 468-474

  7. Methods • Data collected for cases and controls • Cardiovascular risk factors • Smoking, family history, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes • Treatments for lipid, metabolic and hypertensive disorders • BMI, current IV drug use • Validation of HIV data recorded in the database • CD4 cell count, current (within 3 months of MI) and nadir • CD4/CD8 ratio (within 3 months of MI) • Plasma HIV-1 RNA (within 3 months of MI) • ART treatment history • Stage C (AIDS) before MI

  8. Analyses - I • Several conditional logistic regression models were constructed • A first model including cumulative exposure to each ART • A second model including cumulative exposure to each ART and exposure to each NRTI as a three-class variable: • no exposure • last use > 6 months (past) • ongoing exposure or interruption < 6 months (current/recent) • In these models, potential confounders which affected the association between any ART and the risk of MI by at least 10% in any of the models were included from • Age, smoking, family history of CHD, BMI, hypertension, intravenous drug use • CD4 cell nadir, plasma HIV-1 RNA, CD4 cell count, CD4/CD8 cells ratio within 3 months before MI and AIDS before MI

  9. Analyses - II • Odds Ratios (OR) are reported only for NRTIs and PIs with at least 100 exposed patients • AZT, ddI, ddC, d4T, 3TC, ABC, TNF • SQV, IDV, NFV, LPV, APV/fAPV • although cumulative exposures to FTC, EFV, NVP, ATV and TPV were also accounted for in the analyses

  10. Characteristics

  11. Exposure to abacavir and risk of MI - I Model 1

  12. Exposure to abacavir and risk of MI - II Model 1 Model 2 For abacavir, there was evidence of an interaction between recent/past and cumulative exposure, while no such effect was observed for any other NRTI • A final model including exposure to abacavir as a five-class variable and cumulative exposure to all other ART was constructed • no exposure • exposure <= 1 year and last use <= 6 months prior to the MI (current/recent) • exposure <= 1 year and last use > 6 months prior to the MI (past) • exposure > 1 year and last use <= 6 months prior to the MI (current/recent) • exposure > 1 year and last use > 6 months prior to the MI (past)

  13. Exposure to abacavir and other NRTIs and risk of MI - III Final model No interaction was found between exposure to abacavir and numbers of CV risk factors on the risk of MI (p = 0.384) Similar results were observed when restricting the analysis to patients with first ART after inclusion in the cohort

  14. Exposure to PIs and risk of MI Final model Final model combining all PIs but SQV Similar results were observed when restricting the analysis to patients with first ART after inclusion in the cohort

  15. Interpretation - IExposure to abacavir and risk of MI • We found a signal slightly different from those of the D:A:D study and of the SMART Study • only early exposure toabacavir was associated with an increased risk of MI • no interaction between exposure to abacavir and CV risk factors on the risk of MI

  16. Interpretation - IIExposure to other NRTIs and risk of MI Trends towards an increased risk of MI by cumulative exposure to AZT and to d4T were evidenced In line with the original hypothesis in the D:A:D study These associations deserve additional evaluations in independent studies No signal was evidenced for the other NRTIs, including ddI and TNF

  17. Interpretation - III Exposure to PIs and risk of MI • In our study the association between the risk of MI and cumulative exposure to PI was in concordance with that observed in the D:A:D study • Increased riskfor all studied PIs, but saquinavir • Significant in specific analyses for lopinavir/r and amprenavir/fos-amprenavir +/-r • Unlikely explained by selection biases and confounding • After 10 years of exposure, the risk would be increased by 4.4

  18. Acknowledgments - I • We thank the study team without whom it would have been impossible to complete the study in time • Lydie Béniguel, Sandra Firmin, Sophie Pakianather, Serge Rodrigues, Selma Trabelsi, Sarah William-Faltaos • We are grateful to the following colleagues who read and provided comments on the analysis plan • S Evans, M Hernán, C Sabin and I Weller • A special thank to Rob Murphy • The study was funded by ANRS

  19. www.ccde.fr Acknowledgments - II • Clinical Epidemiology Group of the FHDH • Scientific committeeS Abgrall, F Barin, M Bentata, E Billaud, F Boué, C Burty, A Cabié, D Costagliola, L Cotte, P De Truchis, X Duval, C Duvivier, P Enel, L Fredouille-Heripret, J Gasnault, C Gaud, J Gilquin, S Grabar, C Katlama, MA Khuong, JM Lang, AS Lascaux, O Launay, A Mahamat, M Mary-Krause, S Matheron, JL Meynard, J Pavie, G Pialoux, F Pilorgé, I Poizot-Martin, C Pradier, J Reynes, E Rouveix, A Simon, P Tattevin, H Tissot-Dupont, JP Viard, N Viget • DMI2 coordinating centre French Ministry of Health (V Salomon), Technical Hospitalisation Information Agency, ATIH (N Jacquemet) • Statistical analysis centreU943 INSERM and UPMC (S Abgrall, D Costagliola, S Grabar, M Guiguet, E Lanoy, L Lièvre, M Mary-Krause, H Selinger-Leneman), INSERM-Transfert (JM Lacombe, V Potard) • Clinical centres • Paris area Ambroise Paré, Antoine Béclère, Avicenne, Bichat-Claude Bernard, Cochin, Henri Mondor, HEGP, Jean Verdier, Kremlin Bicêtre, Laennec, Lariboisière, Louis Mourier, Necker-adultes, Pasteur, Paul Brousse, Pitié Salpêtrière, Raymond Poincaré, Rothschild, Saint-Antoine, Saint-Denis, Saint-Joseph, Saint-Louis, Tenon • Outside Paris areaAix en Provence, Antibes, Arles, Avignon, Belfort, Besançon, Caen, Clermont-Ferrand, Digne les Bains, Dijon, Gap, Grenoble, Lyon , Marseille, Martigues, Montpellier, Mulhouse, Nancy, Nantes, Nice, Nîmes, Reims, Rennes, Rouen, Saint-Etienne, Strasbourg, Toulon, Toulouse, Tourcoing, Tours • Overseas Guadeloupe, Guyane, La Réunion, Martinique, Saint-Martin

More Related