4.5 Article

Tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist use and heart failure in elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis

期刊

AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL
卷 156, 期 2, 页码 336-341

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2008.02.025

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAMS NIH HHS [K24 AR002123, K24 AR002123-08] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Clinical trials have shown that tumor necrosis factor-a antagonists (TNFAs) confer little benefit, and some may cause potential harm in advanced heart failure (HF). Although TNFAs had significant benefits in treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA), little is known whether the drugs pose an increased risk of HF in older patients with RA. Methods A cohort study was conducted using data from Medicare and drug benefit programs in 2 states (1994-2004). We identified patients with RA aged >= 65 who received TNFA or methotrexate (MTX). The cohort was divided into patients with and without previous HE We considered demographic variables, cardiovascular risk factors, RA severity-related measures, and other comorbidities. The primary end point was hospitalization with HF. We used stratified Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate the adjusted effect of TNFAs on HF hospitalization. Results The cohort consisted of 1,002 TNFA users and 5,593 MTX users. There were 59 HF admissions during 1,680 person-years of TNFA use and 227 HF admissions during 10,623 person-years of MTX use. Comparing TNFA with MTX users, the adjusted hazard ratio for HF hospitalization was 1.70 (95% confidence interval 1.07-2.69). We found similar results in patients with and without previous HE Among patients with previous HF, the adjusted hazard ratio for death was 4.19 (95% confidence interval 1.48-11.89). Conclusions TNFAs may increase the risk of both first hospitalization and exacerbation of HF in elderly patients with RA. The potential for residual confounding in our study cannot be ruled out; larger and more detailed studies are needed to confirm the findings.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据