Nicorandil-induced ulcerations: a 10-year observational study of all cases spontaneously reported to the French pharmacovigilance network

Nicorandil-induced ulcers remain often poorly recognised, with a late diagnosis and an inadequate management. We aimed to provide a clinical overview of the 148 spontaneously reported cases of nicorandil-induced ulcers to the French pharmacovigilance network between 2005 and 2014 and to complete this picture with worldwide published cases over the same period. Spontaneously reported nicorandil-induced ulcers were mainly mucosal (oral and anal) with a previous trauma in 23·0% of patients, revealed by a severe complication in 12·8% of cases. The mean cumulative dose of nicorandil was higher in serious cases. The median delay between the start of nicorandil use and the onset of the ulcer was 23·4 months, and after the ulcer was diagnosed, the median time to incriminate nicorandil was still 3·3 months, being shorter for mucosal ulcerations than for cutaneous ulcerations (5·2 versus 14·0 months, P = 0·001). The anatomic distribution in the 199 published cases differed slightly, but delays were similar. The hypothesis of mechanism becomes more precise, leaving no doubt about the necessity to discontinue the treatment. Practitioners need to be aware that nicorandil-induced ulcers can occur in many locations, possibly multiple and complicated, and should be simply managed by discontinuing treatment with no further reintroduction of nicorandil.

Use of nicorandil is Associated with Increased Risk for Gastrointestinal Ulceration and Perforation- A Nationally Representative Population-based study

Nicorandil is a vasodilatory drug used to relieve angina symptoms. Several healthcare products regulatory agencies have issued a warning associating the use of nicorandil and gastrointestinal (GI) ulceration. We aimed to evaluate the association between use of nicorandil and GI ulceration/perforation. A population-based cohort study involving 1 million randomly sampled participants in Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database was carried out. We estimated the association between use of nicorandil and GI ulceration/perforation by a Cox proportional hazards regression model. A nicorandil-specific propensity score (PS) was also created for adjustment of 75 covariates and matching. 25.8% (183/710) of nicorandil-treated patients developed new GI ulcer events and 1.6% (20/1254) developed new GI perforation events in the three-year follow-up period, as compared to 9.3% (61,281/659,081) and 0.3% (2,488/770,537) in the general population comparator cohort. Patients treated with nicorandil were at significantly increased risk of GI ulcer (PS adjusted hazard ratio 1.43, 95% CI, 1.23 to 1.65, 6848 excess cases per 100,000 person years) or GI perforation (aHR 1.60, 95% CI 1.02–2.51, 315 excess cases per 100,000 person years) compared with the nicorandil unexposed population. Our finding may warn the clinicians to weigh the overall risk-benefit balance of nicorandil treatment in patients.

Risk of skin ulcerations associated with oral nicorandil therapy: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Although healthcare products regulatory agencies have issued warnings on risk of ulceration associated with the use of nicorandil, a population-based study has not been carried out.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relationship between use of nicorandil and skin ulceration.

METHODS

We carried out a population-based study using a cohort of 1 million people assembled from Taiwan's national health insurance database. The association between nicorandil use and skin ulcers was estimated by a Cox proportional hazards regression model adjusting for a nicorandil-specific propensity score (PS) comprising of 86 potential predictors (c-statistic = 0·91).

RESULTS

The prospective cohort was longitudinally followed from January 2005 to December 2009, during which 1268 new users of nicorandil and 771 136 nonusers were identified. A higher frequency of skin ulcers (29 of 1268; 2·3%) was observed for users of nicorandil compared with nonusers (3231 of 771 136; 0·4%). Compared with nonusers, the crude hazard ratio (HR) associating nicorandil use with skin ulcers was 5·52 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3·82-7·95] and the PS-adjusted HR was 1·85 (95% CI 1·27-2·69). A risk period analysis showed that the risk of skin ulceration among users of nicorandil was greatest in the first year. Subgroup analysis found that the interaction term reached statistical significance (P < 0·05) for age and diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of nicorandil was found to be associated with an increased risk for skin ulceration, especially in the first year after incident exposure. We suggest that regulatory agencies re-evaluate the risk for skin ulceration associated with use of nicorandil.

Diverticular fistulation is associated with nicorandil usage

INTRODUCTION

We observed that a number of patients presenting to our clinic with diverticular fistulation were taking nicorandil for angina. Recognised side effects of nicorandil include gastrointestinal and genital ulceration. The aim of our study was to determine whether nicorandil is an aetiological agent in diverticular fistulation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a case-control study of patients with diverticular disease related enteric fistulae. Two patient groups were identified: a study group of patients with diverticular fistulae, and a control group with uncomplicated diverticular disease. The proportion of patients who had ever used nicorandil was compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 153 case notes were analysed, 69 patients with fistulae and 84 control patients with uncomplicated diverticular disease. Female to male ratio in both groups was 2:1. The mean age was 71 years in the fistula group and 69 years in the control diverticular disease group (P = ns). Of those with colonic fistulae, 16% were taking nicorandil compared with 2% of the control group (odds ratio 7.8; 95% confidence interval 1.5-39.1; P = 0.008). There was no significant difference in rates of ischaemic heart disease between fistula and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Nicorandil is associated with fistula formation in diverticular disease.

Diverticular fistulation is associated with nicorandil usage

INTRODUCTION

We observed that a number of patients presenting to our clinic with diverticular fistulation were taking nicorandil for angna. Recognised side effects of nicorandil include gastrointestinal and genital ulceration. The aim of our study was to determine whether nicorandil is an aetiological agent in diverticular fistulation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a case-control study of patients with diverticular disease related enteric fistulae. Two patient groups were identified: a study group of patients with diverticular fistulae, and a control group with uncomplicated diverticular disease. The proportion of patients who had ever used nicorandil was compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 153 case notes were analysed, 69 patients with fistulae and 84 control patients with uncomplicated diverticular disease. Female to male ratio in both groups was 2:1. The mean age was 71 years in the fistula group and 69 years in the control diverticular disease group (P = ns). Of those with colonic fistulae, 16% were taking nicorandil compared with 2% of the control group (odds ratio 7.8; 95% confidence interval 1.5–39.1; P = 0.008). There was no significant difference in rates of ischaemic heart disease between fistula and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Nicorandil is associated with fistula formation in diverticular disease.