Risk of cardiovascular events appeared high beyond the first year post-MI, indicating a need for prolonged surveillance, particularly in patients with additional risk factors.

BackgroundOveruse of short-acting β2-agonists (SABA) may indicate poor asthma control and adverse health outcomes. Contemporary population-based data on use, risk factors and impact of SABA (over)use on asthma exacerbations and mortality are scarce, prompting initiation of the global SABINA (SABA use IN Asthma) programme.MethodsBy linking data from Swedish national registries, asthma patients aged 12–45 years with two or more collections of drugs for obstructive lung disease during 2006–2014 were included. SABA overuse was defined as collection of more than two SABA canisters in a 1-year baseline period following inclusion. SABA use was grouped into 3–5, 6–10 and ≥11 canisters per baseline-year. Cox regression was used to examine associations between SABA use and exacerbation (hospitalisations and/or oral corticosteroid claims) and mortality.ResultsThe analysis included 365 324 asthma patients (mean age 27.6 years; 55% female); average follow-up was 85.4 months. 30% overused SABA, with 21% collecting 3–5 canisters per year, 7% collecting 6–10 canisters per year and 2% collecting ≥11 canisters per year. Increasing number of collected SABA canisters was associated with increased risk of exacerbation, as follows. 3–5 canisters: hazard ratio (HR) 1.26 (95% CI 1.24–1.28); 6–10 canisters: 1.44 (1.41–1.46); and ≥11 canisters: 1.77 (1.72–1.83), compared to two or fewer canisters per year. Higher SABA use was associated with incrementally increased mortality risk (2564 deaths observed), as follows. 3–5 canisters: HR 1.26 (95% CI 1.14–1.39); 6–10 canisters 1.67 (1.49–1.87); and ≥11 canisters: 2.35 (2.02–2.72) compared to two or fewer canisters per year.ConclusionOne-third of asthma patients in Sweden collected three or more SABA canisters annually. SABA overuse was associated with increased risks of exacerbation and mortality. These findings emphasise that monitoring of SABA usage should be key in improving asthma management.

AimsTo assess the international validity of using hospital record data to compare long-term outcomes in heart attack survivors.Methods and resultsWe used samples of national, ongoing, unselected record sources to assess three outcomes: cause death; a composite of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and all-cause death; and hospitalized bleeding. Patients aged 65 years and older entered the study 1 year following the most recent discharge for acute MI in 2002–11 [n = 54 841 (Sweden), 53 909 (USA), 4653 (England), and 961 (France)]. Across each of the four countries, we found consistent associations with 12 baseline prognostic factors and each of the three outcomes. In each country, we observed high 3-year crude cumulative risks of all-cause death (from 19.6% [England] to 30.2% [USA]); the composite of MI, stroke, or death [from 26.0% (France) to 36.2% (USA)]; and hospitalized bleeding [from 3.1% (France) to 5.3% (USA)]. After adjustments for baseline risk factors, risks were similar across all countries [relative risks (RRs) compared with Sweden not statistically significant], but higher in the USA for all-cause death [RR USA vs. Sweden, 1.14 (95% confidence interval 1.04–1.26)] and hospitalized bleeding [RR USA vs. Sweden, 1.54 (1.21–1.96)].ConclusionThe validity of using hospital record data is supported by the consistency of estimates across four countries of a high adjusted risk of death, further MI, and stroke in the chronic phase after MI. The possibility that adjusted risks of mortality and bleeding are higher in the USA warrants further study.

Although angiotensin receptor blockers have different receptor binding properties no comparative studies with cardiovascular disease (CVD) end points have been performed within this class of drugs. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that there are blood pressure independent CVD-risk differences between losartan and candesartan treatment in patients with hypertension without known CVD. Seventy-two primary care centres in Sweden were screened for patients who had been prescribed losartan or candesartan between the years 1999 and 2007. Among the 24 943 eligible patients, 14 100 patients were diagnosed with hypertension and prescribed losartan (n=6771) or candesartan (n=7329). Patients were linked to Swedish national hospitalizations and death cause register. There was no difference in blood pressure reduction when comparing the losartan and candesartan groups during follow-up. Compared with the losartan group, the candesartan group had a lower adjusted hazard ratio for total CVD (0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77–0.96, P=0.0062), heart failure (0.64, 95% CI 0.50–0.82, P=0.0004), cardiac arrhythmias (0.80, 95% CI 0.65–0.92, P=0.0330), and peripheral artery disease (0.61, 95% CI 0.41–0.91, P=0.0140). No difference in blood pressure reduction was observed suggesting that other mechanisms related to different pharmacological properties of the drugs may explain the divergent clinical outcomes.

BackgroundPatterns and determinants of long‐term oral corticosteroid (OCS) use in asthma and related morbidity and mortality are not well‐described. In a nationwide asthma cohort in Sweden, we evaluated the patterns and determinants of OCS use and risks of OCS‐related morbidities and mortality.MethodsData for 217 993 asthma patients (aged ≥ 6 years) in secondary care were identified between 2007 and 2014 using Swedish national health registries. OCS use at baseline was categorized: regular users (≥5 mg/d/y; n = 3299; 1.5%); periodic users (>0 but <5 mg/d/y; n = 49 930; 22.9%); and nonusers (0 mg/d/y; n = 164 765; 75.6%). Relative risks of becoming a regular OCS user and for morbidity and mortality were analysed using multivariable Cox regression.ResultsAt baseline, 24% of asthma patients had used OCS during the last year and 1.5% were regular users. Of those not using OCS at baseline, 26% collected at least one OCS prescription and 1.3% became regular OCS users for at least 1 year during the median follow‐up of 5.3 years. Age at asthma diagnosis, increasing GINA severity and Charlson Comorbidity Index were associated with regular OCS use. Compared to periodic and non‐OCS use, regular use was associated with increased incidence of OCS‐related morbidities and greater all‐cause mortality, adjusted HR 1.34 (95% CI 1.24‐1.45).ConclusionsOral corticosteroids use is frequent for asthma patients, and many are regular users. Regular OCS use is associated with increased risk of morbidity and mortality. These findings indicate that there is a need of other treatment options for patients with severe asthma who are using regular OCS.