Comparing the Effect of Combining Exercise with Rosuvastatin versus Atorvastatin on Lipid Profile and Functional Capacity: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Statins and exercise are recommended for managing hypercholesterolemia. However, statin types may vary in their interaction with exercise. We compared rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin combination with exercise on lipid profile and functional capacity. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using data from a 12-week cardiovascular rehabilitation program between 2014 and 2016. Statin use was determined through prescriptions, and the average exercise minutes/week were computed from exercise logs. The outcomes were changes in total cholesterol, low- and high-density lipoproteins (LDL and HDL), triglycerides, and functional capacity (6-minute walk test (6MWT)). Directed acyclic graphs were used to identify potential confounders, accounted for using multiple linear regression modeling. RESULTS: The cohort included 282 patients from 106 atorvastatin and 176 rosuvastatin users. The average exercise minutes/week was 109.4 ± 66.1 among atorvastatin and 106.7 ± 49.1 among rosuvastatin users. Interaction models suggested that a higher number of exercise minutes/week were more favorable among atorvastatin users on total cholesterol and LDL (0.004, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.008 and 0.004, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.007, respectively) but did not reach significance for HDL and triglycerides. Rosuvastatin use was associated with greater increases in 6MWT; however, we observed no between-group differences in interaction estimates by the type of statin used. CONCLUSION: Rosuvastatin use could blunt the beneficial effect of exercise on LDL and total cholesterol compared to atorvastatin. No significant differences were observed in triglycerides, HDL, and functional capacity levels. Additional studies are warranted with randomized treatments and larger samples. Healthcare providers should continue prescribing statins alongside recommending exercise modalities, with a careful follow-up for rosuvastatin users.

Association Between Metformin Adherence and All-Cause Mortality Among New Users of Metformin: A Nested Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Metformin presents better survival rates than other oral antidiabetics in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. However, these benefits may be dampened by inadequate treatment adherence. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the relationship between adherence level to metformin therapy and all-cause mortality over 10 years in incident metformin users. METHODS: A nested case-control study was conducted using a large cohort of beneficiaries of the Quebec public drug insurance plan, aged 45 to 85 years, who initiated metformin between 2000 and 2009. Each case of all-cause death during follow-up was matched with up to 10 controls. Adherence to metformin was measured using the medication possession ratio (MPR). Conditional logistic regression models were used to estimate rate ratios (RRs) for mortality between adherent (MPR ≥ 80%) and nonadherent patients (MPR < 80%). Subgroup analyses were conducted according to age (45-64 and 65-85 years) and comedication use (antihypertensive/cardiovascular drugs and statins). RESULTS: The cohort included 82 720 incident metformin users, followed up for 2.4 [0.8-4.4] years (median [interquartile range]) and 4747 cases of all-cause deaths. Analyses revealed decreased mortality risks after long-term adherence to metformin. Specifically, RRs were 0.84 (95% CI = [0.71-0.98]) and 0.69 [0.57-0.85] after 4 to 6 and ≥6 years of adherence to metformin, respectively. Survival benefits of long-term adherence (≥4 years) were also observed across most subgroups and particularly in patients using neither antihypertensive/cardiovascular drugs nor statins (0.57 [0.41-0.77]). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term adherence to metformin is associated with decreased risks of all-cause mortality in incident metformin users. Further research should investigate whether survival benefits vary according to the comorbidity burden of patients.

Persistence and adherence to oral antidiabetics: a population-based cohort study.

AIMS: A population-based cohort study design was used to estimate persistence rate, re-initiation rate after discontinuation, and adherence level among incident users of oral antidiabetics (OADs), and to investigate predictors of non-persistence and non-adherence. METHODS: Incident OAD users were identified using healthcare databases of residents covered by the public drug insurance plan of the Province of Quebec, Canada. Patients initiated OAD therapy between January 2000 and October 2009 and were aged 45-85 years at cohort entry. Persistence rate, re-initiation after discontinuation, and adherence level were assessed over 2 years. Predictors of non-persistence and non-adherence were analyzed using Cox and logistic regression models, respectively. RESULTS: The cohort included 160,231 incident OAD users at entry. One year after OAD initiation, persistence rate was 51 % and adherence level 67 %. Among those deemed non-persistent, 80.6 % re-initiated OAD therapy within 12 months of discontinuation; a proportion increasing with primary persistence duration. The 1-year persistence rate varied according to OAD classes; being the highest for thiazolidinediones (62 %) and the lowest for alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (30 %). The likelihood for non-persistence was 39-54 % higher when drug copayments were required. Conversely, OAD discontinuation was least likely for patients with schizophrenia [hazard ratio 0.70 (95 % CI 0.67-0.73)], dyslipidemia [0.85 (0.84-0.87)], anticoagulation [0.86 (0.83-0.88)], hypertension [0.87 (0.85-0.88)], and ≥7 medications [0.90 (0.88-0.91)]. Predictors of non-adherence were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Non-persistence and non-adherence to OAD therapy were common, although re-initiation rate was high. OAD classes, drug copayments, comorbidities and co-medications may help identifying those who were more likely to benefit from counseling.