Use of cardioselective β-blockers and overall death and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with COPD: a population-based cohort study
- 428 Downloads
Use of β-blockers (BBs) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and cardiovascular diseases is supported by increasing evidence. However, most of these studies focused on the survival outcome and used a non-active comparison, prevalent-user design. We aimed to examine the risk of overall death and cardiovascular outcomes associated with use of cardioselective BBs using an active comparison, incident cohort approach.
We identified COPD patients initiating cardioselective BBs or non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) between 2007 and 2011 in the population-based Taiwan database. A Cox regression model was applied to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for overall death, cardiovascular death, and cardiovascular events comparing cardioselective BBs and non-dihydropyridine CCBs after propensity score matching. We also conducted sensitivity analyses to quantify the unmeasured confounding effect from COPD severity.
A total of 107,902 patients were included. Cardioselective BBs were associated with a modest, lower risk of overall death (HR, 0.85; 95 % CI, 0.81–0.88). The reduced risk of overall death, however, was vulnerable to distribution of COPD severity and was easily weakened with lower prevalence of severe COPD patients in the initiators of cardioselective BBs and higher prevalence of severe COPD patients in the initiators of non-dihydropyridine CCBs. No excess benefit for cardiovascular death (HR, 1.05; 95 % CI, 0.97–1.13) or cardiovascular events (HR, 0.98; 95 % CI, 0.94–1.03) was detected.
The present study demonstrated a potential effect of confounding by COPD severity and therefore did not suggest an association between use of cardioselective BB and survival benefit in COPD patients.
KeywordsChronic obstructive pulmonary disease Cardioselective β-blockers Non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers Overall death Cardiovascular outcomes
Compliance with ethical standards
The protocol was approved by the National Taiwan University Hospital Research Ethics Committee.
This study was in part supported by the Taiwan Department of Health grant (DOH101-TD-B-111-01), which did not play any role in the conception and design of study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of data; and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
- 1.Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease, Global strategy for the Diagnosis, management and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (2013) http://www.goldcopd.org/uploads/users/files/GOLD_Report_2013_Feb20.pdf. Accessed July 5, 2014
- 6.Smith SC Jr, Benjamin EJ, Bonow RO, et al. (2011) AHA/ACCF secondary prevention and risk reduction therapy for patients with coronary and other atherosclerotic vascular disease: 2011 update: a guideline from the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology Foundation endorsed by the World Heart Federation and the Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association. J Am Coll Cardiol 58:2432–2446CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 35.Bangalore S, Messerli FH, Cohen JD, et al. (2008) Verapamil-sustained release-based treatment strategy is equivalent to atenolol-based treatment strategy at reducing cardiovascular events in patients with prior myocardial infarction: an INternational VErapamil SR-Trandolapril (INVEST) substudy. Am Heart J 156:241–247CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar