Cited by 42Pharmacology and Obesity TreatmentPharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug ReactionsBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Cardiovascular Safety During and After Use of Phentermine and Topiramate

Open access
Ritchey, Mary E, Harding, Abenah, Hunter, Shannon, Peterson, Craig, Sager, Philip T, Kowey, Peter R, Nguyen, Lan, Thomas, Steven, Cainzos-Achirica, Miguel, Rothman, Kenneth J, Andrews, Elizabeth B, Anthony, Mary S·2019·The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism

Abstract

Context: Increases in heart rate were seen during the clinical program for fixed-dose combination phentermine (PHEN) and topiramate (TPM), an oral medication indicated for weight management; however, the effect on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes is uncertain. Objective: The aim of the present study was to determine the extent to which the rates of major adverse CV events (MACE) in patients using PHEN and TPM (including fixed dose) differed from the MACE rates during unexposed periods. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: MarketScan, US insurance billing data. Patients or Other Participants: Patients aged >18 years with ≥6 months of continuous enrollment in the database before taking PHEN and/or TPM or after stopping these medications. Interventions: PHEN and TPM, taken separately and together (including fixed dose). Main Outcome Measures: MACE, a composite of hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction and stroke and in-hospital CV death. Results: Because the outcomes are rare and the duration of medication use was brief, few events occurred. The MACE rates among current users of PHEN/TPM, fixed-dose PHEN/TPM, and PHEN were lower than those among unexposed former users. In contrast, the rate of MACE among current users of TPM was greater than among unexposed former users [incidence rate ratio: PHEN/TPM, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.19 to 1.78; fixed-PHEN/TPM, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.03 to 1.70; PHEN, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.91; TPM, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.33 to 1.87). Conclusions: Overall, the data indicated no increased risk of MACE for current PHEN/TPM users; however, the 95% CIs for the PHEN/TPM groups were broad, indicating that the data were compatible with a wide range of possible values.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1210/jc.2018-01010

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A retrospective cohort of over 500,000 patients taking PHEN/TPM, 36.9% of whom were older than 50 years, found no increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events for current users.

    “although one retrospective cohort analysed data from over 500,000 patients taking PHEN/TPM, 36.9% of which were >50 years (no maximum age), and found no increased risk of MACE for current users [114].”
  • In a recent study, adverse cardiovascular events among users of phentermine/topiramate ER were less frequent than among unexposed former users.

    “In a recent study, the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular events among the users of phentermine/topiramate ER was less frequent than the unexposed former users [40].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 15 · Cited by 42

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Rothman, 2008, Modern epidemiology

Metadata

Authors
Ritchey, M. E., Harding, A., Hunter, S., Peterson, C., Sager, P. T., Kowey, P. R., Nguyen, L., Thomas, S., Cainzos-Achirica, M., Rothman, K. J., Andrews, E. B., & Anthony, M. S.
Affiliations
  • RTI Health Solutions (US)
  • Vivus (United States) (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Thomas Jefferson University (US)
  • RTI Health Solutions, Barcelona, Spain
Corresponding author
Ritchey, Mary E
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
Published
2018-09-21
Volume
104
Issue
2
Pages
513-522
ISSN
  • 0021-972X (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-7197
OpenAlex
W2891354593
Cited by
42
References
15
Citations by year
2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5
FWCI
3.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Vivus
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Pharmacology and Obesity Treatment
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Keywords
phentermine, topiramate, cardiovascular safety, major adverse cardiovascular events, weight management, fixed-dose combination, myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular mortality, heart rate
MeSH terms
Topiramate, Adolescent, Adult, Drug Combinations, Female, Heart Rate, Hospitalization, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Myocardial Infarction, Obesity, Phentermine, Retrospective Studies, Weight Loss, Incidence, Anti-Obesity Agents, Stroke, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review