ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2019
Amiodarone use and the risk of acute pancreatitis: Influence of different exposure definitions.
Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of sensitivity analyses to assess uncontrolled confounding from unmeasured variables in observational, active comparator pharmacoepidemiologic studies: a systematic review.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Pooled it
- A large genome-wide association study of QT interval length utilizing electronic health records.Genetics · 2022Pooled it
- Drug exposure definitions reported in real-world evidence studies on oncology medicines in patients with colorectal cancer: a scoping review.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Review
- [Type 2 amiodarone-induced thyrotoxicosis: prevalence, time and predictors of development].Problemy endokrinologii · 2023Article
- Amiodarone use and the risk of acute pancreatitis: Influence of different exposure definitions.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe antiarrhythmic drug amiodarone has a long half-life of 60 days, which is often ignored in observational studies. This study aimed to investigate the impact of different exposure definitions on the association between amiodarone use and the risk of acute pancreatitis.
methodUsing data from the Dutch PHARMO Database Network, incident amiodarone users were compared to incident users of a different type of antiarrhythmic drug. Eighteen different definitions were applied to define amiodarone exposure, including dichotomized, continuous and categorized cumulative definitions with lagged effects to account for the half-life of amiodarone. For each exposure definition, a Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of hospitalization for acute pancreatitis.
resultsThis study included 15,378 starters of amiodarone and 21,394 starters of other antiarrhythmic drugs. Adjusted HRs for acute pancreatitis ranged between 1.21-1.43 for dichotomized definitions of exposure to amiodarone, between 1.13-1.22 for dose definitions (per DDD) and between 0.52-1.72 for cumulative dose definitions, depending on the category. Accounting for lagged effects had little impact on estimated HRs.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates the relative insensitivity of the association between amiodarone and the risk of acute pancreatitis against a broad range of different exposure definitions. Accounting for possible lagged effects had little impact, possibly because treatment switching and discontinuation was uncommon in this population.
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.