-
BMC Medicine Jul 2022Previous findings on the associations of thiazide use with skin cancers were conflicting. This study aimed to examine the associations of individual thiazide use with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Previous findings on the associations of thiazide use with skin cancers were conflicting. This study aimed to examine the associations of individual thiazide use with skin cancer risk, differentiated by subtypes of skin cancers, geographic regions, and cumulative doses of individual thiazides.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant studies on January 5, 2022, scanned the references of included studies, and consulted experts. We included case-control and cohort studies or randomized trials reporting the associations of individual thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics use with skin cancers. Non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) and melanoma were analysed separately. A random-effects model meta-analysis was conducted for pooled odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) for skin cancers related to individual thiazide use.
RESULTS
We included 15, 5, and 5 case-control or cohort studies reporting the risk for skin cancers associated with hydrochlorothiazide, bendroflumethiazide, and indapamide use, respectively, with 17,848,313 participants. The meta-analysis showed associations of hydrochlorothiazide use with increased risk of NMSC (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.08-1.24; HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.04-1.54), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.06-1.65; HR 1.61, 95% CI 0.97-2.67), and melanoma (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.20; HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.93-1.14). The increased risks for SCC were associated with high cumulative doses of hydrochlorothiazide (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.43-4.57; HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.00-1.45). Hydrochlorothiazide use was associated with different subtypes of melanoma including superficial spreading (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.05-1.33), nodular (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.08-1.39), and lentigo maligna melanoma (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.08-1.65). Various cumulative doses of hydrochlorothiazide were associated with increased odds for melanoma. However, the associations of hydrochlorothiazide use with increased risk of NMSC and melanoma only appeared in non-Asian countries. No meaningful increase in the risk for skin cancers was associated with bendroflumethiazide and indapamide.
CONCLUSIONS
Hydrochlorothiazide is associated with an increased risk for NMSC (especially SCC) and melanoma in non-Asian countries, whereas bendroflumethiazide and indapamide are not associated with a meaningful risk for skin cancers. Healthcare professionals and patients should be informed of the different risk profiles of skin cancers associated with different thiazides, cumulative doses, and regions.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42021234317 .
Topics: Bendroflumethiazide; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Humans; Hydrochlorothiazide; Indapamide; Melanoma; Skin Neoplasms; Thiazides
PubMed: 35794547
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-022-02419-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2017Hypertension is an important risk factor for adverse cardiovascular events including stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure and renal failure. The main goal of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Hypertension is an important risk factor for adverse cardiovascular events including stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure and renal failure. The main goal of treatment is to reduce these events. Systematic reviews have shown proven benefit of antihypertensive drug therapy in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality but most of the evidence is in people 60 years of age and older. We wanted to know what the effects of therapy are in people 18 to 59 years of age.
OBJECTIVES
To quantify antihypertensive drug effects on all-cause mortality in adults aged 18 to 59 years with mild to moderate primary hypertension. To quantify effects on cardiovascular mortality plus morbidity (including cerebrovascular and coronary heart disease mortality plus morbidity), withdrawal due adverse events and estimate magnitude of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) lowering at one year.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials up to January 2017: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized trials of at least one year' duration comparing antihypertensive pharmacotherapy with a placebo or no treatment in adults aged 18 to 59 years with mild to moderate primary hypertension defined as SBP 140 mmHg or greater or DBP 90 mmHg or greater at baseline, or both.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The outcomes assessed were all-cause mortality, total cardiovascular (CVS) mortality plus morbidity, withdrawals due to adverse events, and decrease in SBP and DBP. For dichotomous outcomes, we used risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) and a fixed-effect model to combine outcomes across trials. For continuous outcomes, we used mean difference (MD) with 95% CI and a random-effects model as there was significant heterogeneity.
MAIN RESULTS
The population in the seven included studies (17,327 participants) were predominantly healthy adults with mild to moderate primary hypertension. The Medical Research Council Trial of Mild Hypertension contributed 14,541 (84%) of total randomized participants, with mean age of 50 years and mean baseline blood pressure of 160/98 mmHg and a mean duration of follow-up of five years. Treatments used in this study were bendrofluazide 10 mg daily or propranolol 80 mg to 240 mg daily with addition of methyldopa if required. The risk of bias in the studies was high or unclear for a number of domains and led us to downgrade the quality of evidence for all outcomes.Based on five studies, antihypertensive drug therapy as compared to placebo or untreated control may have little or no effect on all-cause mortality (2.4% with control vs 2.3% with treatment; low quality evidence; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.13). Based on 4 studies, the effects on coronary heart disease were uncertain due to low quality evidence (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.19). Low quality evidence from six studies showed that drug therapy may reduce total cardiovascular mortality and morbidity from 4.1% to 3.2% over five years (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.91) due to reduction in cerebrovascular mortality and morbidity (1.3% with control vs 0.6% with treatment; RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.64). Very low quality evidence from three studies showed that withdrawals due to adverse events were higher with drug therapy from 0.7% to 3.0% (RR 4.82, 95% CI 1.67 to 13.92). The effects on blood pressure varied between the studies and we are uncertain as to how much of a difference treatment makes on average.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Antihypertensive drugs used to treat predominantly healthy adults aged 18 to 59 years with mild to moderate primary hypertension have a small absolute effect to reduce cardiovascular mortality and morbidity primarily due to reduction in cerebrovascular mortality and morbidity. All-cause mortality and coronary heart disease were not reduced. There is lack of good evidence on withdrawal due to adverse events. Future trials in this age group should be at least 10 years in duration and should compare different first-line drug classes and strategies.
Topics: Adult; Antihypertensive Agents; Bendroflumethiazide; Blood Pressure; Cause of Death; Coronary Disease; Humans; Hypertension; Methyldopa; Middle Aged; Myocardial Infarction; Patient Dropouts; Propranolol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke; Young Adult
PubMed: 28813123
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008276.pub2 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Feb 2019The aims of the current review were to compare the efficacy of monotherapy with bendroflumethiazide vs. indapamide on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, blood pressure,... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
The aims of the current review were to compare the efficacy of monotherapy with bendroflumethiazide vs. indapamide on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, blood pressure, need for intensification of treatment and treatment withdrawal. Two authors independently screened the results of a literature search, assessed the risk of bias and extracted relevant data. Randomized clinical trials of hypertensive patients of at least a 1-year duration were included. When there was disagreement, a third reviewer was consulted. Risk ratio (RR) and mean differences were used as measures of effect. Two trials comparing bendroflumethiazide against placebo, one comparing indapamide with placebo and three of short duration directly comparing indapamide and Bendroflumethiazide, were included. No statistically significant difference was found between indapamide and bendroflumethiazide for all deaths [RR 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57, 1.18], cardiovascular deaths (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.55, 1.20), noncardiovascular deaths (0.81; 95% CI 0.54, 1.22), coronary events (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.30, 1.79) or all cardiovascular events (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.67, 1.18). Indapamide performed worse for stroke (RR 2.21; 95% CI 1.19, 4.11), even though a reduction in RR compared with placebo was observed in both groups. There was no statistically or clinically significant difference between indapamide and bendroflumethiazide in blood pressure reduction (mean absolute difference <1 mmHg). The present review highlights a lack of studies to answer the review question but also a lack of evidence of superiority of one drug over the other. Therefore, there is a clear need for new studies directly comparing the effect of these drugs on the outcomes of interest.
Topics: Bendroflumethiazide; Blood Pressure; Coronary Artery Disease; Diuretics; Humans; Hypertension; Indapamide; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30312512
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.13787 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Apr 2015Hyponatraemia is one of the major adverse effects of thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics and the leading cause of drug-induced hyponatraemia requiring hospital... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
Hyponatraemia is one of the major adverse effects of thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics and the leading cause of drug-induced hyponatraemia requiring hospital admission. We sought to review and analyze all published cases of this important condition.
METHODS
Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science and PubMed electronic databases were searched to identify all relevant articles published before October 2013. A proportions meta-analysis was undertaken.
RESULTS
One hundred and two articles were identified of which 49 were single patient case reports. Meta-analysis showed that mean age was 75 (95% CI 73, 77) years, 79% were women (95% CI 74, 82) and mean body mass index was 25 (95% CI 20, 30) kg m(-2) . Presentation with thiazide-induced hyponatraemia occurred a mean of 19 (95% CI 8, 30) days after starting treatment, with mean trough serum sodium concentration of 116 (95% CI 113, 120) mm and serum potassium of 3.3 (95% CI 3.0, 3.5) mm. Mean urinary sodium concentration was 64 mm (95% CI 47, 81). The most frequently reported drugs were hydrochlorothiazide, indapamide and bendroflumethiazide.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients with thiazide-induced hyponatraemia were characterized by advanced age, female gender, inappropriate saliuresis and mild hypokalaemia. Low BMI was not found to be a significant risk factor, despite previous suggestions. The time from thiazide initiation to presentation with hyponatraemia suggests that the recommended practice of performing a single investigation of serum biochemistry 7-14 days after thiazide initiation may be insufficient or suboptimal. Further larger and more systematic studies of thiazide-induced hyponatraemia are required.
Topics: Age Factors; Drug Monitoring; Female; Humans; Hyponatremia; Male; Sex Factors; Sodium Chloride Symporter Inhibitors
PubMed: 25139696
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.12499