Obesity and comorbid risk factors for cardiovascular disease among physically inactive patients with musculoskeletal disorders : a targeted intervention for this priority patient group is warranted

Introduction The benefits of physical activity are established and numerous; not the least of which is reduced risk of negative cardiovascular events. While sedentary lifestyles are having negative impacts across populations, people with musculoskeletal disorders may face additional challenges to becoming physically active. Unfortunately, interventions in ambulatory hospital clinics for people with musculoskeletal disorders primarily focus on their presenting musculoskeletal complaint with cursory attention given to lifestyle risk factors; including physical inactivity. This missed opportunity is likely to have both personal costs for patients and economic costs for downstream healthcare funders. Objectives The objective of this study was to investigate the presence of obesity, diabetes, diagnosed cardiac conditions, and previous stroke (CVA) among insufficiently physically active patients accessing (non-surgical) ambulatory hospital clinics for musculoskeletal disorders to indicate whether a targeted risk-reducing intervention is warranted. Methods A sub-group analysis of patients (n=110) who self-reported undertaking insufficient physical activity level to meet national (Australian) minimum recommended guidelines was conducted. Responses to the Active Australia Survey were used to identify insufficiently active patients from a larger cohort study being undertaken across three (non-surgical) ambulatory hospital clinics for musculoskeletal disorders. Outcomes of interest included body mass index, Type-II diabetes, diagnosed cardiac conditions, previous CVA and patients’ current health-related quality of life (Euroqol-5D). Results The mean (standard deviation) age of inactive patients was 56 (14) years. Body mass index values indicated that n=80 (73%) were overweight n=26 (24%), or obese n=45 (49%). In addition to their presenting condition, a substantial number of patients reported comorbid diabetes n=23 (21%), hypertension n=25 (23%) or an existing heart condition n=14 (13%); 4 (3%) had previously experienced a CVA as well as other comorbid conditions. Health-related quality of life was also substantially impacted, with a mean (standard deviation) multi-attribute utility score of 0.51 (0.32). Conclusion A range of health conditions and risk factors for further negative health events, including cardiovascular complications, consistent with physically inactive lifestyles were evident. A targeted risk-reducing intervention is warranted for this high risk clinical group.

Gliptins - do they increase cardiovascular risk or benefit?

INTRODUCTION: In 2008, the US FDA required all new glucose-lowering therapies to show cardiovascular safety, and this applies to the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors ('gliptins'). AREAS COVERED: The cardiovascular safety trials of saxagliptin and alogliptin have recently been published and are the subject of this evaluation. EXPERT OPINION: The Saxagliptin Assessment of Vascular Outcomes Recorded in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus - Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 53 trial and Examination of Cardiovascular Outcomes with Alogliptin versus Standard of Care were both multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase IV clinical trials. These trials showed that saxagliptin and alogliptin did not increase the primary end point, which was a composite of cardiovascular outcomes that did not include hospitalisations for heart failure. However, saxagliptin significantly increased hospitalisation for heart failure, which was a component of the secondary end point. The effect of alogliptin on hospitalisations for heart failure has not been reported. Neither agent improved cardiovascular outcomes. As there is no published evidence of improved outcomes with gliptins, it is unclear to us why these agents are so widely available for use. We suggest that the use of gliptins be restricted to Phase IV clinical trials until such time as cardiovascular safety and benefits/superiority are clearly established