<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_449"
                     title="FDA Okays Statin for Primary Prevention"
                     score="0.013"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/InfectiousDisease/PublicHealth/tb/18380?impressionId=1265774448058"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;WASHINGTON  --  The FDA has approved rosuvastatin (Crestor) for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, making it the first statin to receive this indication.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The new labeling, recommended by an FDA advisory panel late last year, also marks the first time that a drug label will include an indication based on the biomarker highly-sensitive C-reactive protein, an inflammatory marker.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The new indication would be for men 50 or older and women 60 or older who have fasting LDL of less than 130 mg/dL, a highly-sensitive CRP of 2.0 mg/L or greater, triglycerides of less than 500 mg/dL, and no prior history of heart attack or stroke, or coronary heart disease risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The basis for the new labeling was the JUPITER trial, a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of 17,802 men and women with a mean age of 66 and no history of atherosclerosis. All participants had LDL of less than 130 mg/dL and a highly-sensitive C-reactive protein concentration of 2 mg/L or higher.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients were randomized to 20 mg of rosuvastatin for 1.9 years, which reduced median LDL cholesterol to 55 mg/dL, down from a median of 108 mg/dL at baseline. The corresponding relative reduction in the rate of MI, stroke, arterial revascularization, or cardiovascular death was 44% (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.00001).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The number needed to treat to avoid one cardiovascular event was 25.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those results, according to Melvyn Rubenfire, MD, of the University of Michigan, were a &quot;home run for JUPITER,&quot; but it is not clear whether the results would be the same with another statin.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And there were some risks associated with rosuvastatin, including 13 deaths due to gastrointestinal disorders in the rosuvastatin arm, and 18 patients reported experiencing a &quot;confused state&quot; while taking the drug.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The most troubling adverse event, however, was an uptick in investigator-reported, new onset diabetes mellitus in the treatment arm, 2.8% versus 2.5%, for a hazard ratio of 1.27 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.53, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.015).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Rosuvastatin in marketed by AstraZeneca, which also sponsored the JUPITER trial.&lt;/p&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_361"
                     title="Hidden Dangers of Herbal Meds Reviewed"
                     score="0.009"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/AlternativeMedicine/tb/18244?impressionId=1265774448058"
                     
      Herbal medicines are not always the harmless nostrums that many patients and even some physicians think, but may actually contribute to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, researchers warned in a review covering 44 years of research into the subject.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Many such products, including aloe vera, ginkgo biloba, ginseng, and green tea, can interact with conventional cardiovascular drugs and lead to serious adverse reactions, according to Arshad Jahangir, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Ariz., and two other Mayo physicians.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;&quot;There is a clear need for better public and physician understanding of herbal products through health education, early detection and management of herbal toxicities, scientific scrutiny of their use, and research on their safety and effectiveness,&quot; they wrote in the Feb. 9 &lt;em&gt;Journal of the American College of Cardiology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Jahangir and colleagues also called for increased regulation of such products, at least requiring manufacturers of herbal medicines to register with the FDA and provide evidence of good manufacturing practices.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Some of these adverse drug reactions are preventable,&quot; Jahangir told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt; in a telephone interview. &quot;Simple things like taking a good history or giving that history and discussing these issues, probably we can avoid [such reactions].&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Other physicians contacted by &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt; and ABC News agreed that the growth in popularity of herbal medicines poses problems for physicians and patients.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Because these remedies are &apos;natural,&apos; their potential dangers are not considered the same way they would be if they were medication,&quot; commented Suzanne Steinbaum, MD, a cardiologist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, in an e-mail.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;For many reasons, patients tend not to disclose to their doctors if they are taking herbal remedies, including fear that their doctors won&apos;t approve or they will be told to stop them,&quot; Steinbaum added. &quot;This lack of knowledge and full-disclosure, for some, might be a fatal omission.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Jahangir and colleagues reviewed nearly 90 publications that have addressed herbal or complementary therapies and cardiovascular effects since 1966.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Their &lt;em&gt;JACC&lt;/em&gt; article listed 15 common herbal medicines known to interact adversely with conventional cardiovascular drugs.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In many cases, the herbal products compete with the regular medicines for the same drug-metabolizing cytochrome P450 enzymes, potentiating the latter&apos;s effects. In other cases, the herbal products have their own cardiovascular effects.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Many physicians already know that grapefruit juice occupies the CYP3A4 enzyme, leading to slower-than-expected metabolism and, therefore, higher blood levels of a host of pharmaceuticals.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;These include the statins, calcium channel antagonists, several common anti-arrhythmic drugs, and the angiotensin receptor blocker irbesartan (Avapro), Jahangir and colleagues noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Garlic is one of several common herbal remedies with specific cardiovascular effects in its own right (others include ginkgo biloba, ginseng, and saw palmetto). Garlic inhibits platelet aggregation and thus can lead to increased bleeding risks when combined with aspirin, clopidogrel (Plavix), or warfarin (Coumadin), the researchers noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Mayo group identified 10 herbal products that increase bleeding risks with anticoagulant and antiplatelet drugs, as well as 14 that can induce arrhythmias.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In all, Jahangir and colleagues listed 27 herbal products that patients with cardiovascular diseases would do well to avoid. These include such common and harmless-seeming products as green tea, capsicum pepper, licorice, and kelp, as well as grapefruit juice and garlic.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;We need to check with our patients what type of products they are using, to identify these potential interactions,&quot; Jahangir told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;He cited the previously reported figure of 100,000 deaths annually from drug interactions, adding, &quot;We don&apos;t even know how many of these are due to use of compounds that we are not aware that our patients are taking.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Jahangir said he was surprised, in preparing the review, at the scale of hebal medicine use in the U.S.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;He and his colleagues found data from the 1990s suggesting that more patients consult complementary and alternative medicine providers than regular physicians.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The total annual out-of-pocket expenditure on complementary and alternative medicine services and products also was greater than for conventional physician services.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The surprise for me was . . . how much people are willing to spend on a type of therapy which has not shown, in any scientific way, to be effective or safe,&quot; Jahangir said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;He added that the trend may reflect shortcomings of the conventional medical system.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;What is the reason people are going there? Is it because there is some unmet type of need that we are not recognizing as practitioners of conventional medicine?&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Jahangir said it may be that physicians aren&apos;t spending enough time with patients to understand their true needs. He said it appears that, &quot;despite the advancement in our technology and new medicines, there is a demand for alternative therapies that is increasing.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;He recommended that, in addition to asking patients in detail about herbal and other alternative therapies they may be using, physicians should educate themselves on what these therapies purport to do and what is known about their real biological effects.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://nccam.nih.gov&quot; mce_href=&quot;http://nccam.nih.gov&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine&lt;/a&gt; at the National Institutes of Health is a good starting point for such information, both for physicians and for patients, Jahangir said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lenox Hill&apos;s Steinbaum said it was important that conventional physicians &quot;become more open-minded and accepting&quot; of alternative medicine, if only because so many of their patients are already practicing it.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;David Meyerson, MD, JD, a Johns Hopkins University cardiologist, told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt; and ABC News in an e-mail that he advises patients to limit their use of &quot;unstudied and unproven and FDA-unregulated herbal medications.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It&apos;s unfortunately very big business, and potential drug interactions and potential harmful effects abound,&quot; he wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But another physician criticized the Mayo physicians&apos; emphasis on adverse effects in their review.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;For many of products listed, evidence for side effects seems to be minimal,&quot; Scott Grundy, MD, of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, argued in an e-mail.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;He agreed that the efficacy and safety of such drugs remains largely unproven, but added, &quot;It is mainly for these reasons that they cannot be recommended for use.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Creating alarm about side effects &quot;may not be the appropriate way to discourage their use,&quot; Grundy said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This article was developed in collaboration with ABC News. &lt;/em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; mce_src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_352"
                     title="ICAO: Future Chronic Disease Risk Goes Beyond BMI (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.009"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Endocrinology/Diabetes/tb/18233?impressionId=1265774448058"
                     
      When it comes to predicting chronic disease, body mass index doesn&apos;t tell the whole story, according to a population-based study that found elevated risk with obesity and other metabolic risk factors independently.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Metabolically-healthy obese people tended toward being at least twice as likely to develop multiple metabolic risk factors and diabetes as healthy, normal weight individuals over the subsequent 3.5 years of a study led by Sarah Appleton, a postgraduate student at the University of Adelaide, Australia.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;However, normal weight individuals with metabolic risk factors  --  a group the researchers called &quot;metabolically obese&quot;  --  were at greater risk, she told attendees at the International Congress on Abdominal Obesity in Hong Kong, a conference sponsored by the International Chair on Cardiometabolic Risk.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Overall, just 4.1% of the 3,743 adults in the population-based, North West Adelaide Health Study were in the normal body mass index range at baseline but had at least two of the following metabolic risk factors:&lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;Triglyceride levels of 1.7 mmol/L or greater&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;HDL cholesterol under 1.0mmol/L for men or 1.3 mmol/L for women&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Blood pressure of 130/85 mm Hg or higher&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;A fasting plasma glucose of at least 5.6mmol/L or self-reported diabetes&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Treatment for any of these disorders &lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Although free of cardiovascular disease when they entered the study through a random population sample of the northwest region of Adelaide, after a mean of 3.5 years of follow-up, this group was 2.48 times at risk of incident cardiovascular disease or stroke events (95% CI 1.1 to 5.4).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Compared with metabolically-healthy, normal weight individuals, those with metabolic risk factors tended to be&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;3.27 times as likely to develop diabetes (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.07).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Identifying these individuals for prevention efforts may require less emphasis on BMI and increased surveillance of central obesity in primary care, the researchers told the congress.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The problem with BMI is it doesn&apos;t tell you where the fat is,&quot; Appleton added in an interview. &quot;Visceral fat is really bad for you.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Obese individuals without multiple metabolic risk factors at baseline comprised a larger group (12.1%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They were more likely to be middle age, live in a disadvantaged neighborhood, have smoked at some point, and get less exercise than their metabolically similar, but slimmer peers.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Over the subsequent 3.5 years, they were 2.82 times more likely to develop more than one metabolic risk factor than metabolically-healthy, normal weight individuals (95% CI 2.0 to 4.0).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The metabolically-normal obese also tended to be 2.36 times more likely to develop diabetes (95% CI 0.8 to 7.1). On the other hand, their risk of cardiovascular disease wasn&apos;t elevated, &quot;which likely related to the younger age of that group,&quot; Appleton told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Notably, abdominal obesity as determined by a waist circumference of 80 cm and over for men or 95 cm and greater for women was 6.1 times more likely among metabolically healthy individuals if their BMI was in the obese versus normal range.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But those who were in the normal BMI range were 2.2-fold more likely to be overweight or obese according to waist circumference if they had metabolic risk factors, which was statistically significant as well and likely contributed to the health risks they faced over the short-term future, Appleton said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Maintenance of metabolic health in the obese population was more likely for younger individuals (OR 2.83 for age 40 or younger, 95% CI 1.1 to 7.6) and those who were at least moderately physically active (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 4.1).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Appleton noted that these findings generally fit with data from the U.S. National Health Assessment Survey and Examination.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Regardless of whether patients have abdominal obesity, BMI obesity, or other metabolic risk factors, the solution is likely similar  --  improved diet and exercise, she said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by the University of Adelaide and the South Australian Department of Health.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Appleton reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_280"
                     title="Better Overall Diabetes Care Lowers Nephropathy Risk (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.002"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Nephrology/Diabetes/tb/18136?impressionId=1265774448058"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Simultaneously achieving tight glucose control and other targets in diabetes reduces the risk of kidney complications, researchers found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;An aggressive multifactorial intervention appeared to delay diabetic nephropathy better when more targets were achieved (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.002 for trend) in a longitudinal study of Chinese patients led by Ming-Chia Hsieh, MD, PhD, of Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital in Kaohsiung, Taiwan.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The risk of new-onset microalbuminaria dropped 27.1% for those who met the American Diabetes Association-recommended goal of less than 7% glycosylated hemoglobin (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.03), the researchers reported in the Jan. 25 &lt;em&gt;Archives of Internal Medicine&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Reaching the systolic blood pressure goal of less than 130 mm Hg reduced this risk 35.5% (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.002). Achieving the HDL cholesterol goal  --  over 50 mg/dL for women and 40 mg/dL for men  --  reduced the risk by 28.5% (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.02).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The control of microalbuminuria may halt progress to overt nephropathy and reduce occurrence of cardiovascular events in these patients,&quot; Hsieh&apos;s group wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They suggested that this type of intensive intervention &quot;can be used at the very early stages of diabetic renal disease.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Prior studies had suggested that intensive therapy could prevent nephropathy in patients who had already started showing signs of progression.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So to see if starting earlier would be as effective, Hsieh and colleagues initiated a longitudinal cohort study of 1,290 patients with type 2 diabetes and normoalbuminuria in which participants received intensified treatment to meet ADA-recommended goals on glucose, blood pressure, cholesterol, and triglycerides.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To this end, patients got the combined efforts of a physician, nurse, and dietitian working together on counseling and patient education to modify behavior.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;By the end of the intervention patients were more likely to have switched from single agent glucose-lowering treatment to insulin plus an oral hypoglycemic agent and to have gone on an antihypertensive (74% versus 48% baseline), statin (58.1% versus 28.0% baseline), and fibrate (14.0% versus 3.0% baseline).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;By the end of the study period, the mean glycosylated hemoglobin was 7.3%, while blood pressure averaged 129.3/74.4 mm Hg. Mean LDL cholesterol was 98.6 mg/dL, triglycerides were at 116.0 mg/dL, and mean HDL cholesterol was 53.6 mg/dL.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Over the 4.5 years of follow-up, 16.4% of patients developed new-onset microalbuminuria.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Unlike attainment of HDL cholesterol, glycosylated hemoglobin, and systolic blood pressure goals, reaching those for LDL cholesterol, diastolic blood pressure, and triglycerides appeared to have little impact on kidney function.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But the more targets patients reached, the less likely they were to develop microalbuminuria (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.002).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The majority of participants in the study reached one or two of the treatment targets (71.4%) and 8.1% achieved three.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those who did reach two or three of the goals were at significantly lower risk of new-onset microalbuminuria than the 20.5% who didn&apos;t reach any of the goals (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those who reached one target tended to be at lower risk as well, but the effect was not significant compared with reaching none of the goals (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.35).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;One of the concerns with the tight glucose control goal has been hypoglycemia. In the study, 217 patients had at least one episode. Four cases involved major hypoglycemia, though without clinical morbidity or mortality.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, 37 patients died from any cause during the study period.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/Diabetes/13818&quot; mce_href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/Diabetes/13818&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;review&lt;/a&gt; of recent large trials of aggressive glycemic control  --  U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) and the U.S.-based ACCORD, ADVANCE, and VA Diabetes trials  --  suggested a two- to threefold increased risk of severe hypoglycemia without macrovascular benefits.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the recent &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/Diabetes/9739&quot; mce_href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/Diabetes/9739&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;ACCORD&lt;/a&gt; trial, tight glucose control that brought hemoglobin A1c close to 6%, with a target of less than the standard 7.0%, resulted in 22% excess mortality risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The search for a reason behind this risk has yet to turn up a culprit. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ADA/14635&quot; mce_href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ADA/14635&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Analyses&lt;/a&gt; have suggested that hypoglycemia isn&apos;t to blame and that the lower A1c levels themselves aren&apos;t a problem.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the wake of the negative findings from ACCORD, ADVANCE, and the VA trials, leading diabetologists had suggested that pushing too hard in people who couldn&apos;t reach the targets might have been at fault.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Rather than a one-size-fits all approach, the ADA guidelines suggest individualizing treatment targets.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Hsieh&apos;s group acknowledged that &quot;even with close attention, not all our patients could achieve the ADA-recommended goals,&quot; but re-emphasized that for patients who could achieve targets, there were benefits.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers cautioned that their study was limited by lack of a comparison group, no data on genetic factors, and use of potentially arbitrary treatment target cutoff points.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_231"
                     title="FDA Adds Cardio Warnings to Weight-Loss Drug"
                     score="-0.002"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/ProductAlert/DevicesandVaccines/tb/18088?impressionId=1265774448058"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;WASHINGTON  --  The FDA said the weight-loss drug sibutramine (Meridia) should not be taken by patients with history of cardiovascular disease following a review of additional data showing an increased risk of heart attack and stroke among that population.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The agency said the manufacturer, Abbott, has agreed to add the contraindication to its labeling, which will be expanded to include patients with a history of the following: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;Coronary artery disease (i.e., heart attack, angina)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Stroke or transient ischemic attack&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Heart arrhythmia&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Congestive heart failure&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Peripheral arterial disease&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Uncontrolled hypertension (&amp;gt;145/90 mmHg)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The initial review of sibutramine began in November 2009 when the FDA received preliminary data from the SCOUT study suggesting patients using the drug had a higher risk for cardiovascular events. (See &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/ProductAlert/Prescriptions/17147&quot; mce_href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/ProductAlert/Prescriptions/17147&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Early Data Link Diet Drug to MI, Stroke, and Cardiac Death&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Prior to review, the product label included a warning for patients with cardiovascular disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Healthcare professionals should monitor patients for increase in blood pressure and heart rate and should discontinue therapy if either increase is observed, an FDA statement said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients should also discontinue use of sibutramine if they do not lose 5% of their baseline body weight within the first three to six months of treatment, as the drug may not be effective and puts the patient at unnecessary risk, the release said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The FDA said its review of SCOUT study data, as well as other information related to the drug&apos;s risks and benefits, is ongoing and will be followed by an open public advisory committee meeting to determine if it requires additional regulatory action.&lt;/p&gt;

    </recommendedItem>
</recommendedContent>
