Use of proton pump inhibitors and risk of ischemic events in the general population

Physicians' perceptions and awareness of adverse effects of proton pump inhibitors and impact on prescribing patterns

Background: Heightened scrutiny surrounds the inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) due to concerns regarding potential serious adverse effects (AEs). Understanding the impact of these AEs on real-world practice is crucial. This study aimed to assess physicians' perceptions, experiences, awareness, and beliefs regarding published data on potential AEs associated with PPIs. Additionally, it sought to determine alterations in PPI prescribing patterns resulting from these AEs, explore attitudes towards PPI use, and ascertain recommendations for PPI use in clinical scenarios with varying levels of risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). Method: A quantitative, cross-sectional study utilized a self-administered questionnaire, inviting 282 physicians from 55 primary healthcare centers and 334 internal medicine physicians from seven governmental hospitals to participate. Results: With a response rate of 87.8% (541/616), 74% (95% CI: 70.2-77.7) of respondents were somewhat or very familiar with published data on PPI AEs. Among the familiar, 69.5% (CI: 65.2-73.5) had somewhat or very much changed their PPI prescribing patterns. General concerns about AEs when prescribing PPIs were reported by 62% (CI: 56.7-65.1). Respondents displayed awareness of a median (IQR) of 15 (9) different AEs associated with long-term PPI use, including osteoporosis or osteopenia (90.2%), hypomagnesemia (81.5%), vitamin B12 deficiency (80.6%), and bone fracture (80.0%). Respondents believed that PPIs elevate the risk for a median (IQR) of 7 (6) different AEs, with osteoporosis or osteopenia (81.8%) being the most common, followed by hypomagnesemia (67.1%), and vitamin B12 deficiency (62.3%). The most common strategies for PPI de-escalation were PPI discontinuation (61%) and using PPI on-demand/as-needed (57.9%). The majority (87.4%) agreed or strongly agreed that PPI overuse is prevalent in Kuwait and 78.2% emphasized the necessity for large-scale education on rational PPI use for medical staff and the public. In the UGIB prevention scenarios, 43.6% recommended appropriately the PPI discontinuation in the minimal-risk scenario, while 56% recommended appropriately the PPI continuation in the high-risk scenario. Associations and comparative analyses revealed predictors influencing physicians' practices and attitudes toward PPI usage. Conclusion: These findings lay the foundation for future research and targeted interventions aimed at optimizing PPI prescribing practices and ensuring patient safety.

Proton Pump Inhibitor Use and the Risk of Cardiovascular Complications and Death in Older Adults with Diabetes: A Population-Based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The unfavorable effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes and mortality was reported in the general population. We investigated the impact of PPIs on CV outcomes and total mortality in older people with diabetes mellitus (DM) for whom evidence is missing.

METHODS

Using administrative health databases of the Lombardy Region, we analyzed the risk of myocardial infarction (MI), ischemic stroke and total mortality in individuals with DM (≥65 years of age) exposed to PPIs in 2015 and followed up to 2021. The outcomes were analyzed using a multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model to compute hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). HRs between PPI users and non-users were also estimated in selected subgroups. A sensitivity analysis was also performed in a 1:1 propensity score matching population.

RESULTS

A total of 284,068 patients were included in the analysis (49.4% PPI users, 50.6% non-PPI users). A higher prevalence of comorbidities and medications was reported in PPI users as compared with non-users. During a median follow-up of 6.7 years, the use of PPIs was associated with a higher risk for ischemic stroke (HR 1.14, 95% CI 95% 1.08-1.20), MI (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.31-1.41) and total mortality (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.22-1.26). These risks were higher in PPI users regardless of the PPI type. Among sexes, previous CV diseases, and insulin subgroups, the use of PPIs was correlated with a statistically significant increased risk of ischemic stroke in men, in individuals without a history of CV disease, and in those who were not treated with insulin. A significantly higher risk of MI was associated with PPIs for all subgroups, as well as for total mortality, with the exception of patients with a previous history of CV diseases. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the results of the unmatched cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirmed an increased risk of CV events and all-cause mortality in a large population of older adults with DM exposed to PPIs. This could have an important impact on public health and costs for National Health Service, therefore a regular assessment of PPI appropriateness is recommended, particularly in this population.

The State of Use and Utility of Negative Controls in Pharmacoepidemiologic Studies

Uses of real-world data in drug safety and effectiveness studies are often challenged by various sources of bias. We undertook a systematic search of the published literature through September 2020 to evaluate the state of use and utility of negative controls to address bias in pharmacoepidemiologic studies. Two reviewers independently evaluated study eligibility and abstracted data. Our search identified 184 eligible studies for inclusion. Cohort studies (115, 63%) and administrative data (114, 62%) were, respectively, the most common study design and data type used. Most studies used negative control outcomes (91, 50%), and for most studies the target source of bias was unmeasured confounding (93, 51%). We identified 4 utility domains of negative controls: 1) bias detection (149, 81%), 2) bias correction (16, 9%), 3) P-value calibration (8, 4%), and 4) performance assessment of different methods used in drug safety studies (31, 17%). The most popular methodologies used were the 95% confidence interval and P-value calibration. In addition, we identified 2 reference sets with structured steps to check the causality assumption of the negative control. While negative controls are powerful tools in bias detection, we found many studies lacked checking the underlying assumptions. This article is part of a Special Collection on Pharmacoepidemiology.

Association between regular proton pump inhibitors use and cardiovascular outcomes: A large prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed for gastroesophageal reflux disease and peptic ulcer disease. However, the association between the regular PPIs use and the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes remains unclear. We aimed to determine whether regular proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) use is associated with an altered incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the general population.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 459,207 participants (mean [SD] age, 56.2 [8.1] years) from the UK Biobank study without prevalent CVD who enrolled between 2006 and 2010 and were followed until 2018. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for incident CVD and its components (coronary heart disease [CHD], stroke, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and venous thromboembolism) were obtained using Cox proportional hazards models with adjustment for potential confounding factors, including demographic factors, lifestyle behaviors, prevalent comorbidities, and clinical indicators for PPIs use.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period, we recorded 26,346 incident CVD events (including 13,749 CHD events, 4144 stroke events, 5812 atrial fibrillation events, 1159 heart failure events, and 4206 venous thromboembolism events). The fully adjusted HRs (and 95% CIs) associated with PPIs users compared to nonusers were 1.44 (95% CI 1.39-1.50) for incident CVD, 1.65 (95% CI 1.57-1.74) for CHD, 1.21 (95% CI 1.09-1.33) for stroke, 1.17 (95% CI 1.08-1.28) for atrial fibrillation, 1.61 (95% CI 1.37-1.89) for heart failure, and 1.36 (95% CI 1.24-1.50) for venous thromboembolism.

CONCLUSIONS

Regular PPIs use was associated with higher risk of CVD outcomes. Clinicians should therefore exercise caution when prescribing PPIs.

Are Proton Pump Inhibitors Contributing in Emerging New Hypertensive Population?

Balancing the therapeutic advantages of a medicine with its possible risks and side effects is an important part of medical practice and drug regulation. When a drug is designed to treat a particular disease or medical condition ends up causing additional risks or side effects that lead to the development of other serious health problems, it can have detrimental consequences for patients. This article explores the correlation between persistent proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and hypertension, a common cardiovascular ailment. While PPIs are beneficial in treating various gastrointestinal problems, their availability without a prescription has resulted in self-medication and long-term use without medical monitoring. Recent findings have revealed a link between long-term PPI usage and increased cardiovascular risks, particularly hypertension. This study investigates the intricate mechanisms underlying PPI's effects, focusing on potential pathways contributing to hypertension, such as endothelial dysfunction, disruption of nitric oxide bioavailability, vitamin B deficiency, hypocalcemia, and hypomagnesemia. The discussion explains how long-term PPI use can disrupt normal endothelial function, vascular control, and mineral balance, eventually leading to hypertension. The article emphasizes the significance of using PPIs with caution and ongoing research to better understand the implications of these medications on cardiovascular health.

Proton pump inhibitor use: systematic review of global trends and practices

PURPOSE

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) reduce acid secretion in the stomach and rank as one of the most widely used acid-suppressing medicines globally. While PPIs are safe in the short-term, emerging evidence shows risks associated with long-term use. Current evidence on global PPI use is scarce. This systematic review aims to evaluate global PPI use in the general population.

METHODS

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts were systematically searched from inception to 31 March 2023 to identify observational studies on oral PPI use among individuals aged ≥ 18 years. PPI use was classified by demographics and medication factors (dose, duration, and PPI types). The absolute numbers of PPI users for each subcategory were summed and expressed as a percentage.

RESULTS

The search identified data from 28 million PPI users in 23 countries from 65 articles. This review indicated that nearly one-quarter of adults use a PPI. Of those using PPIs, 63% were less than 65 years. 56% of PPI users were female, and "White" ethnicities accounted for 75% of users. Nearly two-thirds of users were on high doses (≥ defined daily dose (DDD)), 25% of users continued PPIs for > 1 year, and 28% of these continued for > 3 years.

CONCLUSION

Given the widespread use PPIs and increasing concern regarding long-term use, this review provides a catalyst to support more rational use, particularly with unnecessary prolonged continuation. Clinicians should review PPI prescriptions regularly and deprescribe when there is no appropriate ongoing indication or evidence of benefit to reduce health harm and treatment cost.

Proton pump inhibitors and gastroprotection in patients treated with antithrombotic drugs: A cardiologic point of view

Aspirin, other antiplatelet agents, and anticoagulant drugs are used across a wide spectrum of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. A concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is often prescribed in these patients, as gastrointestinal complications are relatively frequent. On the other hand, a potential increased risk of cardiovascular events has been suggested in patients treated with PPIs; in particular, it has been discussed whether these drugs may reduce the cardiovascular protection of clopidogrel, due to pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic interactions through hepatic metabolism. Previously, the concomitant use of clopidogrel and omeprazole or esomeprazole has been discouraged. In contrast, it remains less known whether PPI use may affect the clinical efficacy of ticagrelor and prasugrel, new P2Y12 receptor antagonists. Current guidelines recommend PPI use in combination with antiplatelet treatment in patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, including advanced age, concurrent use of anticoagulants, steroids, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection. In patients taking oral anticoagulant with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, PPIs could be recommended, even if their usefulness deserves further data. H. pylori infection should always be investigated and treated in patients with a history of peptic ulcer disease (with or without complication) treated with antithrombotic drugs. The present review summarizes the current knowledge regarding the widespread combined use of platelet inhibitors, anticoagulants, and PPIs, discussing consequent clinical implications.

Proton pump inhibitor usage is associated with higher all-cause mortality and CV events in peritoneal dialysis patients

OBJECTIVES

A long period of inappropriate proton pump inhibitors (PPI) treatment has been proved to be associated with adverse prognosis in general population and hemodialysis patients. This study was conducted to clarify the impact of PPI usage on mortality and adverse cardiovascular (CV) events in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients.

METHODS AND DESIGN

This is a retrospective study. A total of 905 patients were enrolled from two PD centers, including 211 patients on PPI treatment and 618 patients not on PPIs. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to identify the incidence of adverse outcomes. Multivariate Cox regression models and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were applied to analyze hazard ratios (HRs) for adverse outcomes.

RESULTS

During follow-up, 162 deaths and 102 CV events were recorded. Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated all-cause mortality (log-rank test p = .018) and CV events (log-rank test p = .024) were significantly higher in PPI usage group. Multivariate Cox regression models and IPTW showed that PPI usage was an indicator for all-cause mortality (HR = 1.35, 95%CI = 1.09-1.67, p = .006) and CV events (HR = 1.78, 95%CI = 1.35-2.32, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

PPI usage is associated with higher all-cause mortality and CV events in PD patients. Clinicians are supposed to be more careful when using PPI and need to master the indications more rigorously in patients receiving PD treatment.

The long-term risk for myocardial infarction or stroke after proton pump inhibitor therapy (2008-2018)

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are well tolerated in the short term but have recently been associated with increased long-term cardiovascular risk in observational studies.

AIMS

To evaluate long-term risks of myocardial infarction (MI) and ischaemic stroke (IS) associated with PPI vs H₂ -receptor antagonist (H₂ RA) therapy in adults without pre-existing cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease METHODS: Using administrative claims data (2008-2018), we emulated a target trial comparing MI and IS risks in new users of PPIs vs H₂ RAs. Treatment was identified using dispensed prescriptions. MI and IS were defined using hospital discharge codes. Inverse probability weighting was used to adjust for confounding, and Cox models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). Survival curves were estimated using weighted Kaplan-Meier estimators.

RESULTS

We identified 1 143 948 new users of PPIs and 36 229 new users of H₂ RAs who were free of prevalent cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease. The mean follow-up time was 6.2 years for PPI initiators and 5.3 years for H₂ RA initiators. After 10 years, the HRs for MI and IS were 0.96 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.80-1.16) and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.89-1.08), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis of claims data of a large German health insurer did not provide evidence that PPI therapy increased the risk of MI or IS in the first decade after treatment initiation.

Proton Pump Inhibitors: Exploring Cardiovascular Complications and Prescription Protocol

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most extensively prescribed medications internationally for gastroesophageal reflux disease treatment and the prevention of gastrointestinal bleeding. Their efficiency, ease of availability, and low side effect profile offer several advantages over other treatment modalities. Long-term use and inappropriate prescribing habits have increased the presence of this class of drugs, prompting several studies to reassess their adverse effects. This article explored the possibility of a relationship between PPIs and cardiovascular adverse effects while highlighting the current prescription guidelines for PPIs. We further examined the need for more research into the etiology of PPI-related cardiovascular adverse effects and strategies to alleviate these risks.

Gastroprotection in patients on antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy: a position paper of National Association of Hospital Cardiologists (ANMCO) and the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists and Endoscopists (AIGO)

Aspirin and P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists are widely used across the spectrum of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. Gastrointestinal complications, including ulcer and bleeding, are relatively common during antiplatelet treatment and, therefore, concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is often prescribed. However, potential increased risk of cardiovascular events has been suggested for PPIs, and, in recent years, it has been discussed whether these drugs may reduce the cardiovascular protection by aspirin and, even more so, clopidogrel. Indeed, pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies suggested an interaction through hepatic CYP2C19 between PPIs and clopidogrel, which could translate into clinical inefficacy, leading to higher rates of cardiovascular events. The FDA and the EMA sent a warning in 2010 discouraging the concomitant use of clopidogrel with omeprazole or esomeprazole. In addition, whether the use of PPIs may affect the clinical efficacy of the new P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists, ticagrelor and prasugrel, remains less known. According to current guidelines, PPIs in combination with antiplatelet treatment are recommended in patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, including advanced age, concurrent use of anticoagulants, steroids or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and Helicobacter pylori infection. Like vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), DOACs can determine gastrointestinal bleeding. Results from both randomized clinical trials and observational studies suggest that high-dose dabigatran (150 mg bid), rivaroxaban and high-dose edoxaban (60 mg daily) are associated with a higher risk of GI bleeding as compared with apixaban and warfarin. In patients taking oral anticoagulant with GI risk factor, PPI could be recommended, even if usefulness of PPIs in these patients deserves further data. Helicobacter pylori should always be searched, and treated, in patients with history of peptic ulcer disease (with or without complication). Given the large number of patients treated with antithrombotic drugs and PPIs, even a minor reduction of platelet inhibition or anticoagulant effect potentially carries a considerable clinical impact. The present joint statement by ANMCO and AIGO summarizes the current knowledge regarding the widespread use of platelet inhibitors, anticoagulants, and PPIs in combination. Moreover, it outlines evidence supporting or opposing drug interactions between these drugs and discusses consequent clinical implications.

Adverse Effects Associated with Proton Pump Inhibitor Use

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) marked a before and after in the management of gastric acid-related disorders since their introduction to the market in 1989. Due to a novel, highly effective mechanism of action blocking the last converging step of gastric acid secretion by parietal cells and very few and mostly tolerable side effects, these drugs quickly displaced other pharmacological compounds such as H2 antagonists as the first treatment choice for peptic ulcer disease, gastroesophageal ulcers, Zollinger-Ellison syndrome, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated ulcers, and eradication of Helicobacter pylori, leading to an exponential increase in their prescription up to now. However, widespread PPI use has led to emerging evidence of long-term adverse effects not described previously, including increased risk of kidney, liver, and cardiovascular disease, dementia, enteroendocrine tumors of the gastrointestinal tract, susceptibility to respiratory and gastrointestinal infections, and impaired absorption of nutrients. Although the evidence published thus far has not established strong correlations, it has been relevant enough to raise new questions about PPIs' safety profile and reconsideration of their clinical indications. Hence, the aim of this review is to evaluate the association between PPI use and the risk of serious adverse effects given increasing concerns about the overuse of PPIs in the general population.

Use of proton pump inhibitors in dialysis patients: a double-edged sword?

Large cohort-based studies have shown that proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are linked to rare but multiple and varied secondary events when used in the general population. Although clinicians accept the negative effects of PPIs on renal function, there is a lack of available data regarding the potential consequences of their use by dialysis patients in whom the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding is quite high. This review aims to highlight the risks and benefits of PPIs use in dialysis patients. To summarize, the benefit on the reduction of high digestive bleeding seems certain, but without any beneficial impact on overall survival. The impact on quality of life seems to be significant. The data on the occurrence of peritonitis during PPIs treatment are very contradictory. There is evidence regarding the occurrence of hypomagnesaemia in haemodialysis patients with PPIs; which may lead to increase bone fragility. New data show an increased cardiovascular risk and even a risk of death linked to the use of PPIs on dialysis. Several mechanisms of IPP toxicity are advanced to explain these findings.

Proton pump inhibitors and cardiovascular adverse effects: Real or surreal worries?

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most widely prescribed agents, either for treatment or prophylaxis of gastrointestinal (GI) disease, that are often administered for prolonged or chronic use. Patients with cardiovascular (CV) disease frequently receive PPIs for prophylaxis against GI bleeding due to common use of antithrombotic drugs. Over the last several years there is a growing number of reports associating chronic PPI use with a variety of serious CV and non-CV adverse effects. In this context, PPI use has been independently associated with an increased risk of CV morbidity (myocardial infarction, stroke, other CV events) and mortality. However, the critique remains that these data do not largely derive from randomized controlled trials. On the other hand, in certain conditions, the benefits of PPIs may outweigh the risks of adverse CV effects. As the indications for prolonged, particularly lifelong, prophylactic use of PPIs are not compelling and in the light of evidence of serious CV and other adverse effects, clinicians have to reconsider such long-term use of these drugs. Importantly, histamine 2 blockers have not been found to be associated with increased CV risk and thus may be an alternative therapeutic option in certain patients. These issues are amply discussed together with the potential mechanisms of these pleiotropic and off-target effects of PPIs, which are also depicted in an illustrative schema; data are also presented on differential effects of specific agents involved, alternative modes of therapy available, and relevant current guidelines on this issue.