Risk of acute liver injury associated with use of antibiotics. Comparative cohort and nested case-control studies using two primary care databases in Europe.


Brauer, R; Douglas, I; Garcia Rodriguez, LA; Downey, G; Huerta, C; de Abajo, F; Bate, A; Feudjo Tepie, M; de Groot, MC; Schlienger, R; Reynolds, R; Smeeth, L; Klungel, O; Ruigómez, A; (2015) Risk of acute liver injury associated with use of antibiotics. Comparative cohort and nested case-control studies using two primary care databases in Europe. Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 25 Suppl 1. pp. 29-38. ISSN 1053-8569 DOI: 10.1002/pds.3861

Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)

Abstract

To assess the impact of varying study designs, exposure and outcome definitions on the risk of acute liver injury (ALI) associated with antibiotic use. The source population comprised of patients registered in two primary care databases, in the UK and in Spain. We identified a cohort consisting of new users of antibiotics during the study period (2004-2009) and non-users during the study period or in the previous year. Cases with ALI were identified within this cohort and classified as definite or probable, based on recorded medical information. The relative risk (RR) of ALI associated with antibiotic use was computed using Poisson regression. For the nested case-control analyses, up to five controls were matched to each case by age, sex, date and practice (in CPRD) and odds ratios (OR) were computed with conditional logistic regression. The age, sex and year adjusted RRs of definite ALI in the current antibiotic use periods was 10.04 (95% CI: 6.97-14.47) in CPRD and 5.76 (95% CI: 3.46-9.59) in BIFAP. In the case-control analyses adjusting for life-style, comorbidities and use of medications, the OR of ALI for current users of antibiotics was and 5.7 (95% CI: 3.46-9.36) in CPRD and 2.6 (95% CI: 1.26-5.37) in BIFAP. Guided by a common protocol, both cohort and case-control study designs found an increased risk of ALI associated with the use of antibiotics in both databases, independent of the exposure and case definitions used. However, the magnitude of the risk was higher in CPRD compared to BIFAP. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Item Type: Article
Faculty and Department: Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health > Dept of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology
Research Centre: EHR Research Group
Centre for Global Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs)
Centre for Statistical Methodology
PubMed ID: 27038354
Web of Science ID: 373607500004
URI: http://researchonline.lshtm.ac.uk/id/eprint/2535736

Statistics


Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads since deposit
0Downloads
78Hits
Accesses by country - last 12 months
Accesses by referrer - last 12 months
Impact and interest
Additional statistics for this record are available via IRStats2

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item