Table 2.
Object drug cohort | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Clopidogrel | Pravastatin | Ratio of Clopidogrel to Pravastatin | |||
Before semi-Bayes adjustment | Unadjusted analyses | ||||
Candidate interacting precipitant drugs examined, number | 536 | 436 | 433 | ||
RR | DDI signals, number (%) | 189 (35.3) | 141 (32.3) | 98 (22.6) | |
Increased rate* | 124 (23.1) | 94 (21.6) | 48 (11.1) | ||
Decreased rate† | 65 (12.1) | 47 (10.8) | 50 (11.5) | ||
Geometric mean ± standard deviation | 1.14 ± 1.97 | 1.14 ± 2.30 | 0.99 ± 2.23 | ||
Range, minimum to maximum | 0.08 – 24.67 | 0.07 – 28.19 | 0.05 – 14.21 | ||
Confounder-adjusted analyses | |||||
Candidate interacting precipitant drugs examined, number | 536 | 434 | 431 | ||
RR | DDI signals, number (%) | 174 (32.5) | 125 (28.8) | 97 (22.5) | |
Increased rate* | 107 (20.0) | 81 (18.7) | 51 (11.8) | ||
Decreased rate† | 67 (12.5) | 44 (10.1) | 46 (10.7) | ||
Geometric mean ± standard deviation | 1.14 ± 1.98 | 1.12 ± 2.26 | 0.99 ± 2.26 | ||
Range, minimum to maximum | 0.06 – 24.43 | 0.05 – 42.22 | 0.04 – 16.92 | ||
After semi-Bayes adjustment | Unadjusted analyses | ||||
Candidate interacting precipitant drugs examined, number | 536 | 436 | 433 | ||
RR | DDI signals, number (%) | 150 (28.0) | 109 (25.0) | 72 (16.6) | |
Increased rate* | 101 (18.8) | 78 (17.9) | 33 (7.6) | ||
Decreased rate† | 49 (9.1) | 31 (7.1) | 39 (9.0) | ||
Geometric mean ± standard deviation | 1.12 ± 1.43 | 1.14 ± 1.47 | 0.98 ± 1.52 | ||
Range, minimum to maximum | 0.36 – 4.53 | 0.45 – 6.95 | 0.20 – 3.81 | ||
Confounder-adjusted analyses | |||||
Candidate interacting precipitant drugs examined, number | 536 | 434 | 431 | ||
RR | DDI signals, number (%) | 139 (25.9) | 90 (20.7) | 73 (16.9) | |
Increased rate* | 90 (16.8) | 63 (14.5) | 37 (8.6) | ||
Decreased rate† | 49 (9.1) | 27 (6.2) | 36 (8.4) | ||
Geometric mean ± standard deviation | 1.11 ± 1.42 | 1.12 ± 1.48 | 0.99 ± 1.54 | ||
Range, minimum to maximum | 0.35 – 4.15 | 0.40 – 8.11 | 0.17 – 3.95 |
DDI = drug-drug interaction; RR = rate ratio
lower bound of the 95% confidence interval for the RR of interest was greater than the null value
upper bound of the 95% confidence interval for the RR of interest was less than the null value