<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New RECORD but same tune</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.prescriber.org.uk/2009/06/new-record-but-same-tune/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.prescriber.org.uk/2009/06/new-record-but-same-tune/</link>
	<description>An NHS Prescribing Advisers&#039; Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 12:49:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Robinson</title>
		<link>http://www.prescriber.org.uk/2009/06/new-record-but-same-tune/comment-page-1/#comment-3452</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Robinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prescriber.org.uk/?p=792#comment-3452</guid>
		<description>Paul,

It certainly is a good thing being on a statin if you are at risk of cardiovascular events. The point here is that there were differences between the two arms of the study in the use of statin medication; that difference may have had consequences in the differences observed between the patients or corrected for some differences such that certain events appeared to happen at the same rate.

So, essentially we have a concern that rosiglitazone may cause heart attacks. Statins stop heart attacks. The rate was similar between the two arms so was the higher use of stains in patients taking rosiglitazone balancing the increased risk from taking rosiglitazone? The answer is we really don&#039;t know and this study therefore doesn&#039;t really change anything although it may be used to suggest that rosiglitazone has no additional heart attack risk based on the raw data.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul,</p>
<p>It certainly is a good thing being on a statin if you are at risk of cardiovascular events. The point here is that there were differences between the two arms of the study in the use of statin medication; that difference may have had consequences in the differences observed between the patients or corrected for some differences such that certain events appeared to happen at the same rate.</p>
<p>So, essentially we have a concern that rosiglitazone may cause heart attacks. Statins stop heart attacks. The rate was similar between the two arms so was the higher use of stains in patients taking rosiglitazone balancing the increased risk from taking rosiglitazone? The answer is we really don't know and this study therefore doesn't really change anything although it may be used to suggest that rosiglitazone has no additional heart attack risk based on the raw data.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul</title>
		<link>http://www.prescriber.org.uk/2009/06/new-record-but-same-tune/comment-page-1/#comment-3448</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 09:48:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prescriber.org.uk/?p=792#comment-3448</guid>
		<description>&quot;In particular, 9.2% more patients were using a statin (55.2% versus 46.0%) and 4.9% more were using loop diuretics (13.0% versus 8.1%).&quot;
Isn&#039;t it a good thing that more patients were using a statin-I don&#039;t think that this can be seen as a bad thing or related to Rosiglitazone use.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>"In particular, 9.2% more patients were using a statin (55.2% versus 46.0%) and 4.9% more were using loop diuretics (13.0% versus 8.1%)."<br />
Isn't it a good thing that more patients were using a statin-I don't think that this can be seen as a bad thing or related to Rosiglitazone use.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

