ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2022
Pioglitazone use in Australia and the United Kingdom following drug safety advisories on bladder cancer risk: An interrupted time series study.
Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety Warnings on the Same Harmful Effects of Medicines: A Comparison of Four National Regulators.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2025Article
- Pioglitazone use in Australia and the United Kingdom following drug safety advisories on bladder cancer risk: An interrupted time series study.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeNational regulators in Australia and the United Kingdom issued safety advisories on the association between pioglitazone use and bladder cancer in July 2011. The Australian advisory noted that males were at higher risk of bladder cancer than females, while the UK advisory highlighted a new recommendation, suggest careful consideration in the elderly due to increasing risk with age. This study examined whether these differences in the advisories had different age- and sex-based impacts in each country.
methodsInterrupted time series analysis was used to compare pioglitazone use (prescriptions/100000 population) in Australia and the United Kingdom for the 24 months before and 11 months after the July 2011 safety advisories (study period July 2009-June 2012). Separate models were used to compare use by sex and age group (≥65 years vs. <65 years) in each country.
resultsPioglitazone use fell in Australia (17%) and the United Kingdom (24%) following the safety advisories. Use of pioglitazone fell more for males (18%) than females (16%) in Australia, and more for females (25%) than males (23%) in the United Kingdom; however, neither difference was statistically significant (Australia p = 0.445, United Kingdom p = 0.462). Pioglitazone use fell to a similar extent among older people than younger people in the United Kingdom (23% vs. 26%, p = 0.354), and did not differ between age groups in Australia (both 18%, p = 0.772).
conclusionsThe results indicate that differences in the Australian and UK safety advisories resulted in substantial reductions in pioglitazone use at the population level in both countries, however, differences by sub-groups were not observed.
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.