β-Blockers and Asthma: Surprising findings from the FAERS database

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Mario Cazzola , Josuel Ora , Luigino Calzetta , Paola Rogliani , Maria Gabriella Matera
{"title":"β-Blockers and Asthma: Surprising findings from the FAERS database","authors":"Mario Cazzola ,&nbsp;Josuel Ora ,&nbsp;Luigino Calzetta ,&nbsp;Paola Rogliani ,&nbsp;Maria Gabriella Matera","doi":"10.1016/j.rmed.2024.107849","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>β-Blockers are essential for cardiovascular disease management but can induce respiratory issues, particularly with non-selective β-blockers. Their safety in asthmatic patients is debated.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This study investigates the link between different classes of β-blockers and the risk of asthma and asthma-like adverse events (AEs) using data from the Food and Drug Administration's Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>β-Blockers were first reviewed according to European Society of Cardiology classification and then using the Vashistha and Kumar classification. The risk associated with different β-blocker classes was evaluated through disproportionality analysis using the reporting odds ratio (ROR).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Among 251,145 AEs reported for β-blockers, 4104 were asthma-related. Selective β<sub>1</sub>-blockers had a higher asthma risk signal (ROR: 1.15) compared to non-selective β-blockers (ROR: 0.90). α- and β-Blockers showed the lowest risk (ROR: 0.51). The Vashistha and Kumar classification detailed risk profiles for various β-blockers, highlighting differences even within the same class. Dual α- and β-blockers, hydrophilic, and lipophilic β-blockers posed lower asthma risks, while selective β<sub>1</sub>-blockers had higher risks regardless of intrinsic sympathomimetic activity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Although the signals detected by disproportionality analysis are only candidate risks, the risk stratification resulting from our analysis highlights the need for cautious β-blocker selection in asthmatic patients or those predisposed to asthma. Furthermore, despite the limitations associated with the FAERS data, the study reveals significant variability in risk among different β-blocker classes, crucial for clinical decisions and patient management. Drugs like esmolol, metoprolol, nebivolol, and nadolol may be safer for asthmatic patients, whereas betaxolol, bisoprolol, timolol, and propranolol should be avoided.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21057,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory medicine","volume":"234 ","pages":"Article 107849"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095461112400324X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

β-Blockers are essential for cardiovascular disease management but can induce respiratory issues, particularly with non-selective β-blockers. Their safety in asthmatic patients is debated.

Objective

This study investigates the link between different classes of β-blockers and the risk of asthma and asthma-like adverse events (AEs) using data from the Food and Drug Administration's Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).

Methods

β-Blockers were first reviewed according to European Society of Cardiology classification and then using the Vashistha and Kumar classification. The risk associated with different β-blocker classes was evaluated through disproportionality analysis using the reporting odds ratio (ROR).

Results

Among 251,145 AEs reported for β-blockers, 4104 were asthma-related. Selective β1-blockers had a higher asthma risk signal (ROR: 1.15) compared to non-selective β-blockers (ROR: 0.90). α- and β-Blockers showed the lowest risk (ROR: 0.51). The Vashistha and Kumar classification detailed risk profiles for various β-blockers, highlighting differences even within the same class. Dual α- and β-blockers, hydrophilic, and lipophilic β-blockers posed lower asthma risks, while selective β1-blockers had higher risks regardless of intrinsic sympathomimetic activity.

Conclusion

Although the signals detected by disproportionality analysis are only candidate risks, the risk stratification resulting from our analysis highlights the need for cautious β-blocker selection in asthmatic patients or those predisposed to asthma. Furthermore, despite the limitations associated with the FAERS data, the study reveals significant variability in risk among different β-blocker classes, crucial for clinical decisions and patient management. Drugs like esmolol, metoprolol, nebivolol, and nadolol may be safer for asthmatic patients, whereas betaxolol, bisoprolol, timolol, and propranolol should be avoided.
β-受体阻滞剂与哮喘:来自 FAERS 数据库的惊人发现。
导言:β-受体阻滞剂是治疗心血管疾病的重要药物,但可能会引发呼吸系统问题,尤其是非选择性β-受体阻滞剂。这些药物对哮喘患者的安全性还存在争议:本研究利用美国食品和药物管理局不良事件报告系统(FAERS)的数据,调查不同类别的β-受体阻滞剂与哮喘及类似哮喘不良事件(AEs)风险之间的联系:从 FAERS 数据库中分析了与β-受体阻滞剂有关的哮喘相关不良事件。通过使用报告几率比(ROR)进行比例失调分析,评估与不同β-受体阻滞剂类别相关的风险:结果:在报告的 251,145 例 β 受体阻滞剂 AE 中,4,104 例与哮喘有关。与非选择性β受体阻滞剂(ROR:0.90)相比,选择性β1受体阻滞剂的哮喘风险信号更高(ROR:1.15)。α和β双重受体阻滞剂的风险最低(ROR:0.51)。Vashistha 和 Kumar 分类法详细描述了各种 β 受体阻滞剂的风险特征,突出显示了即使在同一类别中也存在的差异。双重 α 和 β 受体阻滞剂、亲水性和亲油性 β 受体阻滞剂的哮喘风险较低,而选择性 β1 受体阻滞剂的风险较高,无论其内在拟交感活性如何:风险分层强调了在哮喘患者或易患哮喘的患者中谨慎选择 β 受体阻滞剂的必要性。该研究强调了不同类别的 β 受体阻滞剂在风险方面的显著差异,这对临床决策和患者预后至关重要。艾司洛尔、美托洛尔、奈比洛尔和纳多洛尔等药物对哮喘患者可能更安全,而倍他洛尔、比索洛尔、噻吗洛尔和普萘洛尔则应避免使用。对于使用β受体阻滞剂的哮喘患者来说,定期进行呼吸监测至关重要,应从小剂量开始治疗并进行调整,以尽量减少支气管收缩的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Respiratory medicine
Respiratory medicine 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
199
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Respiratory Medicine is an internationally-renowned journal devoted to the rapid publication of clinically-relevant respiratory medicine research. It combines cutting-edge original research with state-of-the-art reviews dealing with all aspects of respiratory diseases and therapeutic interventions. Topics include adult and paediatric medicine, epidemiology, immunology and cell biology, physiology, occupational disorders, and the role of allergens and pollutants. Respiratory Medicine is increasingly the journal of choice for publication of phased trial work, commenting on effectiveness, dosage and methods of action.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信