Toward Kidney-Specific Causality Assessment Tool.

PURPOSE: Current nonspecific causality assessment tools lack the assessment of drug-induced acute kidney injury (DIAKI). We recently published an editorial letter for developing a specific causality assessment tool for DIAKI. The purpose of the present review was to suggest the possible required parameters and outline the path to developing a kidney-specific causality assessment tool (KSCAT). METHODS: A stepwise approach for developing a KSCAT is important as this will be first version of this new tool. Thus, as a first step, we performed a screening of previously published articles on nonspecific and liver-specific causality assessment tools to define possible parameters. The suggested parameters for KSCAT fall into 3 categories: (1) drug-related; (2) kidney-related; and (3) terminology. A tri-polar method was then created that consists of definitive adverse drug reactions (ADRS), terminology, and without ADRS to suggest that the new KSCAT be efficient, specific, user friendly, and less time-consuming. Finally, a pyramid model is suggested to offer the perspectives of experts in the fields of pharmacovigilance, pharmacoepidemiology, and nephrology, as well as decision makers, while developing a KSCAT. FINDINGS: Causality assessment tools, either nonspecific or organ-specific, fall into 3 categories: (1) expert judgment; (2) algorithms; and (3) probabilistic methods. None of the current causality assessment tools is sufficient for assessing the causality of kidney-related ADRs and for screening the expanded definition of ADR included in European Union Directive 2010/84/EU. IMPLICATIONS: The causal relationship between drug(s) and DIAKI may be difficult and may not be assessed appropriately with the use of nonspecific tools or approaches. The aim of this article was to reiterate the need for KSCAT development and to propose the associated steps by stating the main principles: namely, the definition of ADR, suggested parameters to be included in the KSCAT, and integration of technology. Our ultimate desire is to invite experts to develop this new tool using an interdisciplinary approach and to benefit from our review in pursuing the next steps. The development of a KSCAT should start with regular and interdisciplinary consortium meetings of experts; the tool should then be tested for its usability, specificity, and practicality; and, finally, it should be used in real-life pharmacovigilance practices, as well as in research by health authorities, regulators, decision-makers, scientists, and clinicians. A KSCAT would support the provision of reliable and reproducible measures of the relationship likelihood in suspected cases of ADR to overcome uncertainty and provide a standardized approach.

ANTIBACDUS-PAN: Antibacterial Utilization among Adult Patients Before and During COVID-19 Pandemic within 12-Months Period: A Tertiary Hospital Pharmacoepidemiology Study.

Objective: Irrational use of antibacterials is a concern during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospital pharmacoepidemiology studies are important for evaluating the rational use of medicines, especially antibacterials, during pandemics. Defined daily doses (DDD) and drug utilization 90% (DU90%) are established methods for the evaluation of drug utilization. We aimed to evaluate antibacterial utilization in a tertiary hospital setting at Koç University Hospital (KUH). Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional, descriptive study was retrospectively conducted with data extracted from KUH Inpatient Electronic Order System (CP) and was carried out for a period of one year. Antibacterial utilization of adult (aged ≥ 18 years) inpatients, who were prescribed at least one type of systemic antibacterial (ATC code J01), was evaluated using the recommended parameter DDD/100 admission and compared between 6 months before COVID-19 and during COVID-19 periods. March 11, 2020, the very first COVID-19 diagnosed case in Turkey, was set as the cutoff date of the 6-month period for the selection of the compared antibacterials using the DU90% method. Results: Finally, 3280 of 5942 and 2605 of 4942 prescriptions for pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 periods were included, respectively. Antibacterial utilization according to DDD/100 admissions increased from 193.96 to 201.26 DDD/100 admissions after the initiation of COVID-19 pandemic. The most utilized antibacterials were piperacillin and enzyme inhibitors in pre-COVID-19 period, whereas meropenem was utilized the most during COVID-19 period. Azithromycin utilization increased by 656.24%, whereas clarithromycin utilization decreased by 52.12%. Antibacterials were utilized most in general surgery department, with an increase of 17.57%. Conclusion: There is an increase in antibacterial utilization in KUH during COVID-19 pandemic, especially reserved antibacterials, which is a concern for antibacterial resistance.

Footprints of Clinical Pharmacology in Turkey: Past, Present, and Future.

Clinical pharmacology is an interdisciplinary field that encompasses all components of the relationship between drugs and humans. All clinical pharmacology professionals aim to support an improved quality of drug-oriented health services by providing teaching, research, and routine health care services that ensure more tolerable and more effective, suitable, and cost-effective use of drugs. Subsections of clinical pharmacology include clinical trials, pharmacoepidemiology and drug use, pharmacovigilance, pharmacoeconomics, the rational use of medicines, pharmacotherapy consultation, drug monitoring, counseling to authorities and industry, pharmacogenetics, and other practices. By approaching these subsections as part of 3 main aspects of clinical pharmacology-education, research, and health care-this review aims to provide local and international practitioners with detailed information about clinical pharmacology practices in Turkey and to contribute to building the network of communication and collaboration. This review also aims to play an encouraging and pioneering role for Turkey's national community and other countries that have not yet made clinical pharmacology functional in improving the quality of health services, promoting the dissemination of rational use of medicines, helping the set-up of clinical pharmacology organizations, enhancing quantity and quality of the clinical pharmacology workforce, and increasing the infrastructural facilities.

Pharmacoepidemiology of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are reversible inhibitors of cyclo-oxygenase (COX), mainly used for the symptomatic relief of pain, whether traumatic, infectious, episodic or rheumatologic. Use for the long-term relief of inflammation is waning with the emergence of specific biotherapies. Their effects are related to potency, dosage, and pharmacokinetic or galenic considerations. Adverse reactions are mostly related to COX inhibition, and to the relative COX1 and COX2 inhibition. Over the years have resulted in the withdrawal of some NSAIDs. The most common adverse reactions are: gastrointestinal (COX1) which have declined over time with the emergence of more COX1 sparing drugs and gastroprotection; renal, with an impact on renal function and sodium extraction that is associated with hypertension, heart failure exacerbation, and stress-related renal failure; allergic skin reactions; increased transaminases and acute liver injury which may be idiosyncratic or immunoallergic; increased risk of acute coronary syndromes, initially associated with high-dose long-term use of COX2 specific inhibitors in controlled clinical trials, though more recently there have been indications from poorly controlled observational studies that they could occur with most NSAIDs. Event rates in patients with no overt coronary heart disease are vanishingly low, and the real magnitude of the issue in the treatment of common pain is still unknown. Considering their purely symptomatic effects, they should be used at the lowest possible dose for the shortest possible time, based on the symptomatic relief of pain or fever.

Previous Drug Exposure in Patients Hospitalised for Acute Liver Injury: A Case-Population Study in the French National Healthcare Data System.

INTRODUCTION: Acute liver injury (ALI) is a major reason for stopping drug development or removing drugs from the market. Hospitalisation for ALI is relatively rare for marketed drugs, justifying studies in large-scale databases such as the nationwide Système National des Données de Santé (SNDS), which covers 99% of the French population. METHODS: SNDS was queried over 2010-2014 for all hospital admissions for acute toxic liver injuries not associated with a possible other cause, using a case-population approach. Exposures of interest were drugs dispensed from 7 to 60 days before date of admission. Individual drugs were analysed by their frequency (if five or more cases) and by the ratio of exposed cases to the number of exposed subjects and to exposed patient-time in the general population over the same timeframe. RESULTS: Over 5 years, 4807 cases of ALI were identified, mean age 54.5, 59% women, 76% exposed to at least one of 249 different drugs. Drugs most commonly identified were non-overdose paracetamol (31% of cases), esomeprazole or omeprazole (18%), phloroglucinol, domperidone, co-amoxiclav, furosemide, and atorvastatin (more than 250 cases each). When compared to population exposures, the highest per-person risks were observed with antimycobacterial antibiotics, with one case for 1000 or fewer users, followed by colestyramine and erythromycin (around 1/5300), antiepileptic drugs, anticoagulants, and anti-Alzheimer drugs (1/6000-1/10,000 users). When a person-time approach was considered, the drugs with the highest per-tablet risk were still the antituberculosis drugs, followed by a number of other antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: This nationwide study describes drugs associated with ALI, according to absolute population burden and per-patient and per-tablet risk. Some of these associations may be spurious, others causal, and others yet were unexpected. Systematic analysis of drug classes will look for outliers within each class that could raise signals of unexpected hepatic toxicity.

Risk of hospital admission for liver injury in users of NSAIDs and nonoverdose paracetamol: Preliminary results from the EPIHAM study.

PURPOSE: The SALT study found similar per-user risks of acute liver failure (ALF) leading to transplantation (ALFT) between NSAIDs and a threefold higher risk in nonoverdose paracetamol (NOP) users. The objective of EPIHAM was to identify the risks of hospital admission for acute liver injury (ALI) associated with NSAIDs and NOP. METHODS: Case-population study in the 1/97 sample of the French population claims database. Acute liver injury was identified from hospital discharge summaries, from 2009 to 2013. Exposure for cases was dispensing of NSAID or NOP resulting in exposure within 30 days before admission. Population exposure was the number of patients using the drugs over the study timeframe and total number of DDD dispensed. RESULTS: Of 63 cases of ALI, 13 had been exposed to NSAIDs and 24 to NOP. Events per million DDD (95% CI) ranged from 0.46 (0.09-1.34) (ketoprofen) to 1.43 (0.04-7.97) (diclofenac combinations), 0.43 (0.23-0.73) all NSAIDs combined, 0.58 (0.37-0.86) for NOP. There was no association with average duration of treatment. Per patient risk ranged from 19.5 (5.31-49.9) (ibuprofen) per million users to 37.2 (19.8-63.6) all NSAIDs combined, 58.0 (37.2-86.3) for NOP. There was a linear relationship between average treatment duration and per-user risk (R2  = 0.51, P < .05 for NSAIDs, R2  = 0.97, P < .01 for NOP). CONCLUSIONS: Risk of hospital admission for ALI with NSAIDs and NOP was similar and indicative of a dose and duration-related effect (pharmacological) effect. Acute liver injury rates were not predictive of ALFT risk.

Usage patterns of paracetamol in France.

AIMS: The aim of the present study was to describe the real-life usage patterns of paracetamol. METHODS: The Echantillon Généraliste de Bénéficiaires (EGB) database, the permanent 1/97 representative sample from the French national healthcare insurance system, was searched in 2011 to identify usage patterns, concomitant chronic diseases and use of cardiovascular medication in users prescribed single-ingredient (SP) and combination (CP) paracetamol, representing 85% of all sales. RESULTS: Of 526 108 subjects aged ≥15 years in the EGB, 268 725 (51%) had paracetamol dispensed on ≥1 occasion; of these, 207 707 (77%) were dispensed only SP and 61 018 (23%) received CP with or without SP. SP users were younger (48.3 years vs. 50.5 years), and 57% of SP users vs. 58% of CP users were female. Chronic comorbidities were more common in CP than SP users. SP users had, on average, 3.4 dispensings per year vs. 5.0 for CP users, for 36 defined daily doses (DDD, 3 g) of SP vs. 53 DDD per year for CP; 49% SP users bought 14 DDD or fewer; 15% bought >60 DDD. Use of paracetamol increased with age from about 16 DDD per year in 15-30-year-olds to over 90 DDD per year in patients above the age of 75; 53% of patients ≤60 years bought fewer than 14 DDD per year, whereas 55% of those >60 bought more than 30 DDD per year. More than half the dispensings exceeded the legal per-box limit of 8 g. CONCLUSIONS: Over 50% of the French adult population were dispensed paracetamol at least once over the course of a year, generally for short-term use. Considering recent misgivings on the real efficacy and safety of paracetamol, such widespread use might have important public health consequences.

Liver transplant associated with paracetamol overdose: results from the seven-country SALT study.

AIMS: Acute drug overdose, especially with paracetamol, may cause acute liver failure leading to registration for transplantation (ALFT). Population statistics and between-country differences for ALFT related to overdose have been poorly described. The aim of the present study was to evaluate overdose ALFT in the multi-country Study of Acute Liver Transplantation (SALT). METHODS: All adult overdose-related ALFT, with or without suicidal intent, in France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and the UK between 2005 and 2007 were identified from liver transplant registries and hospital records. These were compared with whole-country and per capita use of paracetamol. RESULTS: Six hundred cases of ALFT were identified in 52 of 57 eligible transplant centres, of which 114 involved overdose (72 intentional, 10 non-intentional, 32 uncertain). Overdose represented 20% of all-cause ALFT: Ireland 52%, UK 28%, France 18%, the Netherlands 8%, and Italy 1%. Overdose ALFT were mostly females (61%), mean age 33.6 ± 10.9 years. A total of 111 (97%) of the overdoses involved paracetamol. Event rates ranged from one ALFT for 20.7 tons of paracetamol in Ireland, to one for 1074 tons in Italy and one case in 60 million inhabitants over 3 years in Italy to one case in 286 000 inhabitants per year in Ireland. Per-country event rates for non-overdose ALFT exposed to paracetamol were between 2.5 and 4.0 per million treatment-years sold. CONCLUSIONS: Paracetamol overdose was found to represent one-sixth of all-cause ALFT. There was a 50-fold difference in Europe in the rates of paracetamol overdose ALFT, and a 200-fold difference per million inhabitants.

Causality of Drugs Involved in Acute Liver Failure Leading to Transplantation: Results from the Study of Acute Liver Transplant (SALT).

BACKGROUND: Several methods have been proposed to assess causality in drug-induced liver injury but none have been tested in the specific context of acute liver failure leading to transplantation (ALFT). OBJECTIVE: We took advantage of the Study of Acute Liver Transplant (SALT), a European case-population study of ALFT, to test different causality scales. METHODS: Causality was assessed by experts in SALT, a 7-country case-population study from 2005 to 2007 of adult otherwise unexplained ALFT, for all drugs found within 30 days prior to the date of initial symptoms of liver disease (index date), using information content, causality scales, and data circuit determined from a pilot study, Salome. RESULTS: The consensus points from Salome were to provide full data on drugs including international non-proprietary name (INN) and doses except for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and to use the World Health Organization (WHO) causality scale. In SALT, among the 9,479 identified patients, 600 (6.3%) were cases of ALFT, of which 187 had been exposed to drugs within 30 days, without overdose. In 130 (69.5%) of these the causality score was possible, probable, or highly probable. CONCLUSION: In ALFT cases, once other clinical causes have been excluded and drug exposure established within 30 days, the main discriminant characteristic for causality will be previous knowledge of possible hepatotoxicity.

Transplantation for acute liver failure in patients exposed to NSAIDs or paracetamol (acetaminophen): the multinational case-population SALT study.

BACKGROUND: Most NSAIDs are thought to be able to cause hepatic injury and acute liver failure (ALF), but the event rates of those leading to transplantation (ALFT) remain uncertain. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to estimate population event rates for NSAID-associated ALFT METHODS: This was a case-population study of ALFT in 57 eligible liver transplant centres in seven countries (France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal and the UK). Cases were all adults registered from 2005 to 2007 for a liver transplant following ALFT without identified clinical aetiology, exposed to an NSAID or paracetamol (acetaminophen) within 30 days before the onset of clinical symptoms. NSAID and paracetamol population exposures were assessed using national sales data from Intercontinental Marketing Services (IMS). Risk was estimated as the rate of ALFT per million treatment-years (MTY). RESULTS: In the 52 participating centres, 9479 patients were registered for transplantation, with 600 for ALFT, 301 of whom, without clinical aetiology, had been exposed to a drug within 30 days. Of these 301 patients, 40 had been exposed to an NSAID and 192 to paracetamol (81 of whom were without overdose). Event rates per MTY were 1.59 (95 % CI 1.1-2.2) for all NSAIDs pooled, 2.3 (95 % CI 1.2-3.9) for ibuprofen, 1.9 (95 % CI 0.8-3.7) for nimesulide, 1.6 (95 % CI 0.6-3.4) for diclofenac and 1.6 (95 % CI 0.3-4.5) for ketoprofen. For paracetamol, the event rate was 3.3 per MTY (95 % CI 2.6-4.1) without overdoses and 7.8 (95 % CI 6.8-9.0) including overdoses. CONCLUSIONS: ALF leading to registration for transplantation after exposure to an NSAID was rare, with no major difference between NSAID. Non-overdose paracetamol-exposed liver failure was twice more common than NSAID-exposed liver failure.

Methodology for a multinational case-population study on liver toxicity risks with NSAIDs: the Study of Acute Liver Transplant (SALT).

PURPOSE: The European Committee for Human Medicinal Products (CHMP) requested a multinational study with the aim to investigate the risk of acute liver failure (ALF) leading to registration for transplantation in patients exposed to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). The method of this multinational, multicentre, retrospective case-population study, named SALT (Study of Acute Liver Transplant), is documented here. METHODS: This was a multicentre, multinational retrospective case-population study performed in France, Italy, Portugal, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands and the UK. The study period was 3 years (1 January 2005-31 December 2007). Cases were patients ≥ 18 years of age with ALF at the time of registration on the transplant list for liver transplantation who had been exposed to an NSAID within 30 days preceding the initial symptoms of liver disease (index date). Exposure was defined as exposure to any NSAID. Per country rates of NSAID-exposed transplantation-registered ALF were computed as the ratio of the number of cases identified in the country to total population exposure. Overall and per-drug sales for NSAIDs and for paracetamol were obtained from Intercontinental Marketing Services (IMS) Health for all participating countries. Population exposure was measured as the defined daily dose and as estimated annual number of patients exposed (primary endpoint) with 95 % confidence intervals. RESULTS: The study protocol was approved by the CHMP. Of the 57 eligible liver transplant centres, 54 agreed to participate in the study. All national authorizations were received with relevant administrative burden, mainly due to bureaucracy. CONCLUSION: The present study created a multinational research network to estimate population-based absolute rates of drug-exposed ALF leading to registration on the transplantation list. This study design was chosen to obtain a fast response to a public health issue, namely, that of an increased risk of a rare, very serious adverse reaction. This model could be used to study other drug-related issues in ALF.

Choice of the denominator in case population studies: event rates for registration for liver transplantation after exposure to NSAIDs in the SALT study in France.

PURPOSE: The effect of denominator options on event rates was tested on the French part of the Study of Acute Liver Transplant (SALT). METHODS: SALT is a case population study of acute liver failure registered for transplantation (ALFT), exposed to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or non-overdose paracetamol, from 2005 to 2007. Population exposure was computed from the Intercontinental Medical Services' (IMS) and the French national healthcare insurance system's data as the number of defined daily doses (DDDs) sold or dispensed and the number of exposed patients. RESULTS: Nine ALFT cases were exposed to 10 NSAIDs and 49 to non-overdose paracetamol. NSAID sales ranged from 0.04 billion (niflumic acid) to 0.5 billion (ibuprofen) DDDs, amounting to 2.5 billion DDDs for all NSAIDs. The mean per-person exposure ranged from 13.1 (niflumic acid) to 43.2 (ketoprofen) DDDs, reaching 60.5 DDDs for any NSAID. The number of users ranged from 2 million (niflumic acid) to 13 million (ibuprofen), which was 26.6 million for all NSAIDs. The ALFT rates per billion DDDs ranged from 0 to 26 for individual NSAIDs and amounted to 4.6 for all NSAIDs. The ALFT rates per billion DDDs were inversely correlated with the average per-patient exposure (R(2) = 0.935, p = 0.0016). The ALFT rates per million users ranged from 0.31 to 0.49, which was 0.41 for all NSAIDs, with no difference between drugs and no effect of mean per-patient exposure (R(2) = 0.01, p = 0.9). Whether measured per DDD or per user, the event rate with paracetamol was three to five times higher than with NSAIDs. CONCLUSION: ALFT risk with NSAID seems to be user dependent rather than person-time (exposure) dependent. Choosing the wrong denominator in case population studies might give erroneous results.

Use of drugs subject to controlled prescriptions: a retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Use of drugs that may lead to abuse or dependence are subject to controlled prescriptions (CPs) in many countries, and these are closely monitored by health authorities. According to national regulations in Turkey, CPs may be red coloured (RCPs) or green coloured (GCPs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of such drugs in Istanbul. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: During the study period (01/01-31/12 2009), 502874 CPs were reported. Among these, 4000 CPs each month were randomly selected and evaluated. RESULTS: The majority of GCPs were issued to women (55.6%), while the majority of RCPs were issued to men (68.4%). GCPs were most frequently prescribed by physicians working in private hospitals (33.6%) while RCPs by physicians working in university hospitals (39.7%). GCPs were mostly prescribed by psychiatrists (37.6%) while for RCPs were child and adolescent psychiatrists (35.9%). Psycholeptics (ATC code N05) were the most prescribed controlled drugs (CDs) (43.8%). Methylphenidate (53.9%) was the mostly prescribed on RCPs and alprazolam (39.6%) was on GCPs. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that utilization of CDs shows demographical and institutional differences. These data could be of help to improve surveillance of CDs as well as to train prescribers and patients.

Administrative complexities for a European observational study despite directives harmonising requirements.

PURPOSE: For pharmacoepidemiological studies in Europe, accessing data should require only authorisation by the relevant data protections committees, as expected from the 1995 Data Protection Directive (95/46/EC). Our experience from a multinational observational study across seven European countries shows that this is certainly not the case. METHODS: The study was a multicentre, multinational, case-population study in European liver transplant centres in seven countries, retrospectively evaluating a 3-year period. Before data collection started, the procedures to obtain the necessary authorisations for the participating countries were defined. REMARKS: In France, a single opinion from a single data protection committee was enough to start the study. In Italy, Portugal, Greece and the UK, there was a national authority, but the hospitals requested the approval by their local committees/bodies irrespective of whether the authorisation of the national committee came after or before that of local ones. In Ireland, only one hospital participated, and the opinion of its ethics committee was sufficient. In the Netherlands, the opinion of the institutional review board of the local coordinating centre was necessary to obtain the opinions from the institutional review boards of the other hospitals. The information requested by the different committees and the time to obtain the approvals varied, even within the same country. CONCLUSION: This degree of complexity and disharmony, and resulting cost, was observed in a simple retrospective study. Regulators will need to be aware that these time-consuming, expensive and useless complexities must be factored in when estimating the time and cost of a study.

Are traditional NSAIDs prescribed appropriately among French elderly with osteoarthritis? Results from the CADEUS cohort.

AIM: To describe the inappropriate use of traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (tNSAIDs) in elderly subjects in the CADEUS cohort using the Beers 2003 criteria modified by recommendations from the French Medicines Agency. METHODS: Of the 23,217 subjects in the CADEUS cohort, 1,851 were ≥65 years old, had bee diagnosed with osteoarthritis (OA), and had been dispensed a tNSAID at least once in the 6 months before the index date. Data were obtained from the French national reimbursement database and from patient and prescriber questionnaires. The Beers criteria for inappropriate use were modified to include all tNSAIDs, and long-term high-dose use was defined as having been dispensed at least five dispensations for tNSAID over a 6-month period with a gap of <45 days between each dispensation and when the gap was >45 days, medicine availability >50% [i.e., defined daily dose (DDD) delivered/theoretical DDD] for the gap. RESULTS: The most frequently dispensed tNSAIDs were piroxicam (25%), diclofenac (24%), ibuprofen (18%), ketoprofen (18%), and naproxen (10%). Of the study population, 1.5% were dispensed indomethacin; 15%, two tNSAIDs; 15%, a tNSAIDs with a platelet aggregation inhibitor; 4.6%, a tNSAID with low-dose aspirin; 0.2%, a tNSAID with vitamin K antagonists. The analysis revealed that 18% of the study population were high-dose and long-term users of tNSAIDs and that 70% of these were dispensed a proton pump inhibitor. CONCLUSIONS: The most common inappropriate tNSAID dispensation was the co-prescription of two different tNSAIDs within 1 month or of a platelet aggregation inhibitor. The real-life consequences of our results need to be ascertained, and it would be interesting to update the Beers criteria.

Do statins protect against upper gastrointestinal bleeding?

AIMS: Recently, an apparent protective effect of statins against upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) was postulated in a post hoc analysis of a randomized trial. We aimed to evaluate the effect of statin use on acute nonvariceal UGB alone or in combinations with low-dose aspirin and other antithrombotic drugs. METHODS: A population-based case-control study was conducted in the County of Funen, Denmark. Cases (n = 3652) were all subjects with a first discharge diagnosis of serious UGB from a hospital during the period 1995 to 2006. Age- and gender-matched controls (10 for each case) (n = 36 502) were selected by a risk set sampling. Data on all subjects' drug exposure and past medical history were retrieved from a prescription database and from the County's patient register. Confounders were controlled by conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: The adjusted odds ratios (ORs) associating use of statins with UGB were 0.94 (0.78-1.12) for current use, 1.40 (0.89-2.20) for recent use and 1.42 (0.96-2.10) for past use. The lack of effect was consistent across most patient subgroups, different cumulative or current statin doses and different statin substances. In explorative analyses, a borderline significant protective effect was observed for concurrent users of low-dose aspirin [OR 0.43 (0.18-1.05)]. CONCLUSION: Statins do not prevent UGB, except possibly in users of low-dose aspirin.