Dataset Information

Trends in survival of Swedish men and women with heart failure from 1987 to 2014: a population-based case-control study.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

To compare trends in short-term and long-term survival of patients with heart failure (HF) compared with controls from the general population.

Methods and results

We used data from the Swedish National Inpatient Registry to identify all patients aged ≥18 years with a first recorded diagnosis of HF between 1 January 1987 and 31 December 2014 and compared them with controls matched on age and sex from the Total Population Register. We included 702 485 patients with HF and 1 306 183 controls. In patients with HF aged 18-64 years, short-term (29 days to 6 months) and long-term mortality (>11 years) decreased from 166 and 76.6 per 1000 person-years in 1987 to 2000 to 99.6 and 49.4 per 1000 person-years, respectively, in 2001 to 2014. During the same period, mortality improved marginally, in those aged ≥65 years: short-time mortality from 368.8 to 326.2 per 1000 person-years and long-term mortality from 219.6 to 193.9 per 1000 person-years. In 1987-2000, patients aged <65 years had more than three times higher risk of dying at 29 days to 6 months, with an hazard ratio (HR) of 3.66 [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.46-3.87], compared with controls (P < 0.0001) but substantially higher in 2001-2014 with an HR of 11.3 (95% CI 9.99-12.7, P < 0.0001). HRs for long-term mortality (6-10 and >11 years) increased moderately from 2.49 (95% CI 2.41-2.57) and 3.16 (95% CI 3.07-3.24) in 1987-2000 to 4.35 (95% CI 4.09-4.63) and 4.11 (95% CI 3.49-4.85) in 2001-2014, largely because survival among controls improved more than that among patients with HF (P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Absolute survival improved in HF patients aged <65 years, but only marginally so in those aged ≥65 years. Compared with controls, both short-term and long-term relative risk of dying increased, especially in younger patients with HF.

SUBMITTER: Bjorck L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8788029 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Studies evidenced that reduction in cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality in diabetic patients can be attributed to improvements in major CVD risk factors and evidence-based treatments. Furthermore, studies showed that the relative risk of CVD mortality associated with diabetes compared with non-diabetes is stronger in women than in men. Hence, we aimed to examine trends in CVD risk factors and intervention measures by sex and diabetic status.Analysis of 5 distinct cross-sectional National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, 1988-1994, 1999-2002, 2003-2006, 2007-2010, and 2010-2014. Since detailed information on nontraditional risk factors such as sleep apnea was not available in each NHANES survey, traditional CVD risk factors including obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidemia were assessed in the study. To assess whether changes throughout the 27-year period differed by diabetes status, a logistic regression analysis was utilized to examine potential interaction effects between survey and diabetes. The similar process was repeated for sex.Means of all risk factors except body mass index and waist circumference decreased and the prevalence of antihypertensive and lipid-lowering medication use increased over time among diabetic and non-diabetic men and women. For both men and women, survey?×?diabetes status interaction terms for changes in HDL-cholesterol and triglyceride levels were not statistically significant, while the prevalence of antihypertensive and lipid-lowering medication use increased more in diabetic than in non-diabetic persons (all P?<?0.001). For women, survey?×?diabetes status interaction terms indicated that compared with the first survey, total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, and non-HDL-cholesterol fallen more in diabetic than in non-diabetic persons (all P?<?0.001). In the diabetic state, men experienced similar changes in means of all CVD risk factors and the prevalence of antihypertensive and lipid-lowering medication use as women (all P for interactions between survey and sex were >0.01).The major traditional CVD risk factors in diabetic men decreased to the same extent that they did for non-diabetic men. The magnitude of changes in the favorable trends in diabetic women was of similar or greater compared with those among non-diabetic women. Diabetic women had as good an improvement in CVD risk factors as diabetic men.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the use of special expedited development and review pathways at the US Food and Drug Administration over the past two decades.DesignCohort study.SettingFDA approved novel therapeutics between 1987 and 2014.PopulationPublicly available sources provided each drug's year of approval, their innovativeness (first in class versus not first in class), World Health Organization Anatomic Therapeutic Classification, and which (if any) of the FDA's four primary expedited development and review programs or designations were associated with each drug: orphan drug, fast track, accelerated approval, and priority review.Main outcome measuresLogistic regression models evaluated trends in the proportion of drugs associated with each of the four expedited development and review programs. To evaluate the number of programs associated with each approved drug over time, Poisson models were employed, with the number of programs as the dependent variable and a linear term for year of approval. The difference in trends was compared between drugs that were first in class and those that were not.ResultsThe FDA approved 774 drugs during the study period, with one third representing first in class agents. Priority review (43%) was the most prevalent of the four programs, with accelerated approval (9%) the least common. There was a significant increase of 2.6% per year in the number of expedited review and approval programs granted to each newly approved agent (incidence rate ratio 1.026, 95% confidence interval 1.017 to 1.035, P<0.001), and a 2.4% increase in the proportion of drugs associated with at least one such program (odds ratio 1.024, 95% confidence interval 1.006 to 1.043, P=0.009). Driving this trend was an increase in the proportion of approved, non-first in class drugs associated with at least one program for drugs (P=0.03 for interaction).ConclusionsIn the past two decades, drugs newly approved by the FDA have been associated with an increasing number of expedited development or review programs. Though expedited programs should be strictly limited to drugs providing noticeable clinical advances, this trend is being driven by drugs that are not first in class and thus potentially less innovative.