ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2015
Acute renal failure in patients treated with dronedarone or amiodarone: a large population-based cohort study in Italy.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative study of the protective effects of coenzyme Q10 and cinnamon extract on possible kidney damage and dysfunction of amiodarone in rats.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2025Article
- Machine Learning in Causal Inference: Application in Pharmacovigilance.Drug safety · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCauses of ARF are numerous including drugs. In 2012, spontaneous reporting showed a possible association between dronedarone and ARF. To further investigate such association, a retrospective cohort study on health-service claim databases was performed taking amiodarone as comparison.
methodsAll patients receiving new prescription of amiodarone or dronedarone between September 2010 and December 2012 were selected. Cox regression models to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs), with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs), for dronedarone versus amiodarone were performed. HRs were calculated: (i) for the entire cohort; (ii) for matched cohorts using propensity score; (iii) and high-dimensional propensity score.
resultsNew users without previous episodes of ARF were 56,739 and 1761 on dronedarone and 54,978 on amiodarone. After 1:1 matching for propensity score, new users with dronedarone and amiodarone were 1467 and 1467, respectively. The cumulative incidence rate of ARF was 1.6 % (95 % CI 0.7-3.6 %) among dronedarone group and 2.3 % (1.0-5.1 %) among amiodarone group (p from log rank test = 0.4884). The unadjusted HR of ARF was 0.34 (0.18-0.64) in dronedarone new users compared to amiodarone; in propensity score matched cohort, it was 0.75 (0.26-2.16), and in high-dimensional propensity score, it was 0.83 (0.25-2.73).
conclusionsThis large community-based study did not confirm the signal of an increased nephrotoxicity from dronedarone compared to amiodarone. Nevertheless, given the increasing number of reports collected from pharmacovigilance databases worldwide on this association, it is advisable for clinicians and patients to be aware of the possible kidney damage due to dronedarone in order to improve clinical outcomes with early intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.