ABSTRACT
Background: While statin therapy is the preferred treatment for hyperlipidemia, literature supports the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) lowering effects associated with red yeast rice, berberine, and Silybum marianum. Dietary supplements may be perceived as a more affordable alternative to prescription medication. Objective: We determined cost-effectiveness of generic pravastatin versus single-ingredient dietary supplements in relation to LDL lowering effect. Methods: Data from meta-analyses and systematic reviews was extracted to calculate pooled weighted mean LDL differences amongst generic pravastatin and single ingredient dietary supplements. The effect was then divided by average 30-day costs and compared amongst agents. Results: The greatest difference was seen in pravastatin 40 mg [MD -57.88 mg/dL (95%CI: - 64.80 to -50.96)], followed by pravastatin 10 mg [MD -41.30 mg/dL (95%CI: 63.30 to - 19.40)], red yeast rice [MD -25.39 (95%CI: -32.98 to -17.81)], berberine [MD -15.13 (95%CI: -21.78 to -8.48)], and Silybum marianum [MD -9.51 mg/dL (95%CI: -22.13 to - 0.10)]. were divided by mean difference to calculate cost per mg/dL reduction in LDL. Cost-effectiveness was greatest for pravastatin 10 mg [$0.66/mg/dL LDL reduction (range: $0.39 to $1.13)], followed by pravastatin 40 mg [$0.74/mg/dL LDL reduction (range: $0.66 to $0.84)], berberine [$0.81/mg/dL LDL reduction (range: $0.56 to $1.44)], red yeast rice [$0.84/mg/dL reduction (range: $0.67 to $1.13)], and Silybum marianum [$0.88/mg/dL LDL reduction (range: $0.38 to $82.02)]. Conclusion: Pravastatin is most cost-effective in each scenario whether or not prescription insurance is utilized.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: While glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have become increasingly prescribed, use is often inhibited by the gastrointestinal adverse effects that patients must endure. Nausea, vomiting, and cholelithiasis are most commonly associated with use, with little to no data or labeling reflecting risk of appendicitis or associated symptoms. Appendicitis etiology is theorized to develop secondary to obstruction of the vermiform via infection or fecalith causing an increase in intraluminal pressure. It is hypothesized that given the aforementioned gastrointestinal effects associated with GLP-1 RAs, patients taking such agents may be more at risk for developing this acute condition. Patient Case: We describe a case of a 48-year-old woman who presented to the emergency department several months after being initiated on Ozempic (semaglutide). This report aims to analyze the potential secondary adverse effects that may result from GLP-1 RA use. Her examination was positive for focal abdominal tenderness and leukocytosis along with imaging suggestive of appendicitis. Her acute condition ultimately required an appendectomy. Discussion: While minimal data are available to suggest significant causation between GLP-1 RAs and appendicitis, a literature and database search revealed that instances may be more common than previously thought. Conclusion: Trial results and adverse event reporting systems report an infrequent incidence in patients using these medications, but this report aims to contribute to the literature describing this potential adverse event.
ABSTRACT
Background Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with an increased incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF), hypertension, diabetes, heart failure, coronary heart disease, stroke, and death. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular AF (NVAF) patients with concomitant OSA. Methods This was an analysis of electronic health record (EHR) data from November 2010 to December 2021. We included adults with NVAF and OSA at baseline, newly initiated on rivaroxaban or warfarin, and with ≥12 months of prior EHR activity. Patients with valvular disease, alternative indications for oral anticoagulation, or who were pregnant were excluded. The incidence rates of developing stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) and bleeding-related hospitalization were evaluated. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using propensity score-overlap weighted proportional hazards regression. Multiple sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed. Results We included 21,940 rivaroxaban (20.1% at the 15 mg dose) and 38,213 warfarin (time-in-therapeutic range = 47.3 ± 28.3%) patients. Rivaroxaban was found to have similar hazard of SSE compared to warfarin (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.82-1.03). Rivaroxaban was associated with a reduced rate of bleeding-related hospitalizations (HR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.78-0.92) versus warfarin, as well as reductions in intracranial (HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.62-0.94) and extracranial (HR = 0.89, 95%CI = 0.81-0.97) bleeding. Upon sensitivity analysis restricting the population to men with a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc score ≥2 or women with a score ≥3, rivaroxaban was associated with a significant 33% risk reduction in SSE and 43% reduction in the risk of bleeding-related hospitalization. No significant interaction for the SSE or bleeding-related hospitalization outcomes was observed upon subgroup analyses. Conclusion Among patients with NVAF and OSA, rivaroxaban had similar SSE risk versus warfarin but was associated with reductions in any intracranial and extracranial bleeding-related hospitalizations. Rivaroxaban was associated with significant reductions in SSE and bleeding-related hospitalizations when the study population was restricted to patients with a moderate-to-high risk of SSE. These data should provide prescribers with additional confidence in selecting rivaroxaban in NVAF patients who have OSA at the time of anticoagulation initiation.
