Pharmacy data could be collected for a large proportion of our cohort. For chronically used drugs pharmacy data generally agrees well with questionnaires. However, for drugs used for shorter periods, as needed, or also available over-the-counter, the agreement is not so good. Pharmacy data can be a valuable source of drug information in epidemiological studies.

No abstract

To cite this article: van Vlijmen EFW, Wiewel-Verschueren S, Monster TBM, Meijer K. Combined oral contraceptives, thrombophilia and the risk of venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thromb Haemost 2016; 14: 1393-403. Essentials• We performed a meta-analysis on thrombosis risk in thrombophilic oral contraceptive (COC)-users.• The results support discouraging COC-use in women with a natural anticoagulant deficiency.• Contrary, additive risk of factor V Leiden (FVL) or prothrombin-G20210A (PT) mutation is modest.• Women with a FVL/PT-mutation as single risk factor can use COCs if alternatives are not tolerated. The cohort studies showed that absolute VTE risk was far higher in COC-users with severe thrombophilia than in those with mild thrombophilia (4.3 to 4.6 vs. 0.49 to 2.0 per 100 pill-years, respectively), and these differences in absolute risks were also noted in non-affected women (0.48 to 0.7 vs. 0.19 to 0.0), but with the caveat that absolute risks were estimated in relatives of thrombophilic patients with VTE (i.e. with a positive family history). Conclusion: These results support discouraging COC-use in women with severe hereditary thrombophilia. By contrast, additive VTE risk of mild thrombophilia is modest. When no other risk factors are present, (e.g. family history) COCs can be offered to these women when reliable alternative contraceptives are not tolerated.

Old sulphonylureas have been linked with adverse cardiovascular effects; however, data on the clinical implications are sparse. We examined the association between use of sulphonylureas and other antidiabetic drugs and the risk and case fatality rate (CFR) of myocardial infarction (MI) in a population-based case-control and follow-up study, respectively. A total of 6738 cases of first-time MI and 67,374 age- and gender-matched population controls were identified from the Hospital Discharge Registry and the Civil Registration System of North Jutland County, Denmark, in the period 1994 through 2002. Prescriptions for antidiabetic drugs before the index date were retrieved from a prescription database. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) of MI (case-control study) and 30-day CFR (follow-up study) associated with antidiabetic drug use adjusted for possible confounding factors and using nondiabetic subjects as the reference group. The risk of MI appeared higher among users of old sulphonylureas (adjusted OR, 2.07; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.81-2.37) than among users of new sulphonylureas (adjusted OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.01-1.84). The adjusted ORs among users of nonsulphonylurea oral antidiabetic drugs, insulin, and patients with diabetes not receiving pharmacotherapy were 1.38 (95% CI, 0.90-2.11), 2.56 (95% CI, 2.16-3.03), and 3.51 (95% CI, 2.92-4.22), respectively. The overall 30-day CFR was 24.6%, but varied between 9.5% and 37.0% among the different categories. New sulphonylureas may be associated with a lower risk of MI than old sulphonylureas. Furthermore, the 30-day CFR may vary according to type of antidiabetic drug. These differences indicate the need for further examination of the cardiovascular safety of antidiabetic drugs.