BACKGROUND: Daptomycin stands as a key IV antibiotic in treating MRSA infections. However, patients facing challenges with difficult venous access require alternative administration routes. This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile and safety of subcutaneous (SC) daptomycin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a two-period, two-treatment, single-blind crossover Phase I trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04434300), participants with no medical history received daptomycin (10 mg/kg) both IV and SC in a random order, with a minimum 2 week washout period together with matched placebo (NaCl 0.9%). Blood samples collected over 24 h facilitated PK comparison. Monte Carlo simulations assessed the PTA for various dosing regimens. Adverse events were graded according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events(CTCAE) v5.0. RESULTS: Twelve participants (aged 30.9 ± 24.4 years; 9 male,75%) were included. SC daptomycin exhibited delayed (median Tmax 0.5 h for IV versus 4 h for SC) and lower peak concentration than IV (Cmax = 132.2 ± 16.0 μg/mL for IV versus 57.3 ± 8.6 μg/mL for SC; P < 0.001). SC AUC0-24 (937.3 ± 102.5 μg·h/mL) was significantly lower (P = 0.005) than IV AUC0-24 (1056.3 ± 123.5 μg·h/mL) but was deemed bioequivalent. PTA demonstrated target AUC0-24 attainment for 100% of simulated individuals, for both 8 and 10 mg/kg/24 h SC regimens. Adverse events (AEs) related to SC daptomycin were more frequent than for SC placebo (25 versus 13, P = 0.016). No serious AEs were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Single-dose SC daptomycin infusion proved to be safe, exhibiting a bioequivalent AUC0-24 compared with the IV route. The SC route emerges as a potential and effective alternative when IV administration is not possible.

INTRODUCTION: Several randomised controlled trials have demonstrated that novel oral anticoagulants are safer compared with vitamin K antagonists for the management of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) to prevent thromboembolic events in the general population. There is a growing interest in the use of apixaban in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD) but there is a lack of randomised data in this population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: APIDP2 is a prospective parallel, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint trial involving patients with ESRD undergoing chronic PD who have NVAF. A total of 178 participants will be recruited from 20 French PD centres. Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive either apixaban at a reduced dose of 2.5 mg two times per day (dose determined with the previous pharmacokinetic study APIDP1) or dose-adjusted to international normalised ratio (INR) target (2-3) coumadin therapy. Anticoagulation to prevent thromboembolic events will be initiated or changed according to the randomisation for a duration of 1 year. The primary outcome is a major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding from randomisation up to month 12, assessed according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Score. Secondary outcomes encompass an efficacy composite criterion combining stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), cardiovascular death and thrombosis including myocardial infarction cumulated at 12 months. Bleeding events will be also classified according to Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) criteria and pharmacodynamics outcomes will evaluate the time within the INR target range of 2-3 in the warfarin arm over 1 year, and anti-Xa apixaban activity in case of bleeding events and at 1 month, 6 months and 12 months of follow-up in the apixaban arm. To demonstrate that apixaban is safer than warfarin at 1 year, assuming two interim analyses after 60 and 118 patients, a bilateral alpha risk of 5% and a power of 80%, 178 patients are needed in this randomised trial (effect size found from the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) Study among patients with creatinine clearance 25-30 ml/min), that is, 89 patients per group. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the ethics committee Comité de Protection des Personnes Sud Est III - Lyon - FRANCE, CT number 2023-507544-37-00. Written informed consent is required for each participant. Findings will be presented at scientific meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06045858; European Clinical Trial System, CT number 2023-507544-37-00.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative atrial fibrillation (PoAF) after cardiac surgery has a high incidence of 30%, but its management is controversial. Two strategies are recommended without evidence of a superiority of one against the other: rate control with beta-blocker or rhythm control with amiodarone. Landiolol is a new-generation beta-blocker with fast onset and short half-life. One retrospective, single-center study compared landiolol to amiodarone for PoAF after cardiac surgery with a better hemodynamic stability and a higher rate of reduction to sinus rhythm with landiolol, justifying the need for a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Our aim is to compare landiolol to amiodarone in the setting of PoAF after cardiac surgery with the hypothesis of a higher rate of reduction to sinus rhythm with landiolol during the 48 h after the first episode of POAF. METHODS: The FAAC trial is a multicenter single-blind two parallel-arm randomized study, which planned to include 350 patients with a first episode of PoAF following cardiac surgery. The duration of the study is 2 years. The patients are randomized in two arms: a landiolol group and an amiodarone group. Randomization (Ennov Clinical®) is performed by the anesthesiologist in charge of the patient if PoAF is persistent for at least 30 min after correction of hypovolemia, dyskalemia, and absence of pericardial effusion on a transthoracic echocardiography done at bedside. Our hypothesis is an increase of the percentage of patients in sinus rhythm from 70 to 85% with landiolol in less than 48 h after onset of PoAF (alpha risk = 5%, power = 90%, bilateral test). DISCUSSION: The FAAC trial was approved by the Ethics Committee of EST III with approval number 19.05.08. The FAAC trial is the first randomized controlled trial comparing landiolol to amiodarone for PoAF after cardiac surgery. In case of higher rate of reduction with landiolol, this beta-blocker could be the drug of choice used in this context as to reduce the need for anticoagulant therapy and reduce the risk of complications of anticoagulant therapy for patients with a first episode of postoperative atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04223739. Registered on January 10, 2020.

Topic: 14. Myeloma and other monoclonal gammopathies - Clinical Background: Frailty is associated with inferior outcome in elderly myeloma patients, especially in the relapse setting.1,2 This adverse prognosis is mainly related to a high discontinuation rate for treatment (Tx) related adverse events (AE). Dexamethasone is responsible of a high rate of infections and metabolic AE. Aims: To evaluate efficacy and tolerability of Ixazomib and Daratumumab without Dexamethasone in elderly frail patients with relapsed myeloma (RRMM) (NCT03757221). We present here the updated results from the phase 2 study I-Dara Methods: Ixa-Dara naïve RRMM patients received oral Ixazomib (4 mg: days 1, 8, 15), IV Daratumumab (16 mg/kg; days 1, 8, 15, 22, cycles 1-2; days 1, 15, cycles 3-6; days 1, cycles 7+) and IV Methylprednisolone before Daratumumab (100 mg at day 1, 8, cycle 1 and then 60 mg). They were enrolled after 1 or 2 prior therapy if their frailty score was ≥ 2 by IMWG score. The primary endpoint was ≥ very good partial response rate (VGPR) at one year. Secondary endpoints included ORR, PFS, OS & toxicity according to NCI-CTCAE version 5 Results: Sixty-three patients were screened and 55 enrolled between 03/2018 and 09/2021. Patient were at first (n = 36) or second relapse (n = 19). Thirty-five patients (64 %) were previously exposed to bortezomib, 37 (67%) were previously exposed to lenalidomide (Len) and 23 (42 %) were refractory to Len. Median age was 82 (72-93). All patients had a frailty score ≥2 and 13 (24 %) had a 3 or 4 frailty score. In 41 patients ISS at diagnosis was stage I (n = 11), II (n = 18) or III (n = 12). Seventeen (36%) patients harbored high-risk (HR) cytogenetic, including t(4;14) (n = 8) or del17p (n = 10). The median duration of Tx (DOT) in 14 pts with ongoing Tx was 22 mos [min-max: 16-40] at data cutoff (January, 19)]. The median DOT in 41 pts who stopped Tx was 10 mos [min-max: 0-31]: 28 had progressive disease (PD). Fourteen patients died during the study: Daratumumab-related bronchospasm (D1C1); Ixazomib-related overdose (C2), sepsis (n = 3), pneumonia (n = 2), PD (n = 7). Regarding toxicity, 31 pts had a ≥grade 3 AE (55%). The most common grade 3-4 AE were thrombocytopenia (n = 10), other cytopenias (n = 5), anemia (n = 3), infection (n = 6), gastrointestinal disorders (n = 5) and hypertension (n = 3). The ≥VGPR rate is 32 % @ 1 year (34 % overall) with an ORR of 70% @ 1 year (74 % overall). In Len refractory patients the ≥VGPR rate is 40 % @ 1 y and the ORR 70 %, in HR patients the ≥VGPR rate is 60 % and ORR 80 %. With a median follow-up of 23.0 mos median PFS is 18.5 mos and median OS NR (75% OS estimated at 27.9 mos). Summary/Conclusion: In this elderly frail population Ixa-Dara is a feasible combination with favorable efficacy profile even in Len refractory and HR cytogenetic patients. Early toxicity remains a concern in this population eventhough more manageable with Dara SC. Late benefit is consistent with one third of patients still on treatment. 1Palumbo et al. JCO 2015, 2Facon et al. Leukemia 2020Keywords: dexamethasone, Myeloma, Elderly, Relapse

BACKGROUND: Crushing or dissolving bictegravir/tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine (BIC/TAF/FTC) tablets is not recommended because there are no data supporting this practice. METHODS: A crossover, randomized trial in healthy adults (NCT04244448) investigated the bioavailability of two off-label uses of BIC/TAF/FTC (50/200/25 mg), dissolved in water or crushed in apple compote, compared with the solid tablet. Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were estimated from sequential intensive plasma antiretroviral concentrations over a 72 h period post dose. Bioequivalence was met if the 90% CIs of the geometric least-squares means ratios comparing BIC/TAF/FTC exposures (AUC and Cmax) from the experimental phases were within 80%-125% of the reference. RESULTS: Eighteen subjects participated in each of the three phases. Dissolved tablet Cmax geometric mean ratio (90% CI) for BIC/TAF/FTC was 105% (93-119)/97% (87-108)/96% (74-124), respectively. Dissolved tablet AUC geometric mean ratio (90% CI) for BIC/TAF/FTC was 111% (100-122)/100% (94 to 105)/99% (81 to 120), respectively. Crushed tablet Cmax geometric mean ratio (90%) CI for BIC/TAF/FTC was 110% (97 to 124)/70% (63-78)/66% (51-85), respectively. Crushed tablet AUC geometric mean ratio (90%) CI for BIC/TAF/FTC was 107% (96-118)/86% (82-91)/84% (69-103), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Crushing BIC/TAF/FTC tablets may lead to suboptimal emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide drug exposures. Dissolving BIC/TAF/FTC in water may be acceptable if the tablet cannot be swallowed whole.

BackgroundTenofovir and emtricitabine interfere with the SARS CoV-2 ribonucleic acid (RNA)-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp). Several cohorts reported that people treated by tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine are less likely to develop SARS CoV-2 infection and related severe COVID-19.MethodsWe conducted a pilot randomized, open-label, controlled, phase 2 trial at two hospitals in France. Eligible patients were consecutive outpatients (aged ≥18 years) with RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 7 days or less. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine (2 pills on day 1 followed by 1 pill per day on days 2–7) or the standard of care. The primary and secondary endpoints were SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance from baseline assessed by cycle threshold (Ct) RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swab collected at day 4 and day 7, respectively. A higher Ct corresponds to a lower SARS CoV-2 viral burden. Other endpoints were the time to recovery and the number of adverse events. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04685512.FindingsFrom November, 20th 2020 to March, 19th 2021, 60 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (30 to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine and 30 to standard of care). The median number of days from symptom onset to inclusion was 4 days (IQR 3–5) in both groups. Amongst patients who received tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, the difference from standard of care in the increase in Ct RT-PCR from baseline was 2.3 (95% confidence interval [-0.6 to 5.2], p = 0.13) at day 4 and 2.9 (95% CI [0.1 to 5.2], p = 0.044) at day 7. At day 7, 6/30 in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine group and 3/30 in the standard of care group reported no COVID-related symptoms. Adverse events included 11 cases of gastrointestinal side effects (grade ≤ 2), three of which leaded to drug discontinuation. Three patients had COVID-19 related hospitalisation, no participant died.InterpretationIn this pilot study of outpatients adult with recent non-severe COVID-19, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus emtricitabine appeared to accelerate the natural clearance of nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 viral burden. These findings support the conduct of larger trials of tenofovir-based therapies for the prevention and early treatment of COVID-19.FundingNo external funding.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The Clinical Trials Coordination and Facilitation Group has issued recommendations on contraception and pregnancy testing to help sponsors meet regulatory expectations and harmonize practices to limit embryofetal risks in clinical trials. Our objective was to assess the compliance of French academic clinical trials with these recommendations and to describe the mitigation measures required by sponsors in their trials. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed on the French academic drug trials authorized by the national competent authority between January 2015 and June 2018. We included trials which tested systemic administration of drugs and enrolled men or women of childbearing potential. RESULTS: Data from 97 trials included were compiled. One-third of the trials (23.8%-43.3%, 95% confidence interval) complied with the Clinical Trial Facilitation and Coordination Group recommendations. No improvement over time or according to embryofetotoxic status or drug duration exposure was found. Contraception was required in 56.7% of trials and was more often required in case of potentially embryofetotoxic drugs (68.5% vs 41.9%, p = 0.013) or exposure over 1 month (71.7% vs 43.8%, p = 0.006). Pregnancy testing at inclusion was required in 59.1% of trials and additional testing in 17.2%. Pregnancy testing at inclusion was more often required in trials with drug exposure above 1 month (67.4% vs 45.8%, p = 0.035). CONCLUSION: French academic sponsors barely met the recommendations on contraception and pregnancy testing potentially leading to potential embryofetal risks in case of pregnancy. They need to implement these recommendations quickly.

BACKGROUND: Among palliative care (PC) patients who are administered paracetamol, the subcutaneous (SC) route is often an alternative to the intravenous (IV) route. Yet pharmacological and clinical data on whether these are equivalent pharmacokinetically are lacking. Many French palliative teams are now empirically using paracetamol by the SC route, but there are no data to support this practice. This trial aims to compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of paracetomol between the IV and SC routes in PC patients. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a randomized, open, crossover study in two PC centers. The primary endpoints are AUC0-t, AUC0-∞, Cmax, Vd, and t1/2. All adverse events will be reported for a safety analysis. Twenty adult PC patients with an IV device having spontaneous pain not related to care, with a numeric pain rate scale > 3/10, or having a systematic prescription of paracetamol as the usual treatment will be included. All patients also have to meet all eligibility criteria. CONCLUSION: This is the first study comparing PK parameters for IV paracetamol versus SC paracetamol in PC patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03944044. Registered on 4 June 2019. Committee for the protection of persons (CPP) 18.09.05.58206 approval 4 October 2018. National Drug Safety Agency (ANSM; Agence Nationale de Sécurité Médicament) MEDAECNAT-2018-09-00009 approval 29 November 2018.

Abstract Background We aimed to describe the frequency, risk factors, and costs attributable to drug–drug interactions (DDIs) among an aging French HIV population. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study using French nationwide health care e-records: the SNIIRAM database. People living with HIV (PLWH) aged &gt;65 years and receiving combined antiretroviral treatment (cART) during 2016 were included. A DDI was defined as “These drugs should not be co-administered,” represented by a red symbol on the University of Liverpool website. Attributable DDIs’ cost was defined as the difference between individuals with and without DDIs regarding all reimbursed health care acts. Results Overall, 9076 PLWH met the study criteria. Their baseline characteristics were: mean age, 71.3 ± 4.9 years; 25% female; median HIV duration (interquartile range [IQR]), 16.2 (9.5–20.3) years; median comorbidities (IQR), 2 (1–3). During 2016, they received a median (IQR) of 14 (9–21) comedications (non-cART), and 1529 individuals had at least 1 DDI (16.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 16.1–17.6). In multivariate analysis, raltegravir or dolutegravir plus 2 nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) significantly and independently reduced the risk of DDIs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.02; 95% CI, 0.005–0.050; P &lt; .0001) compared with non-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor plus 2 NRTIs, whereas cART with boosted agents (protease inhibitors or elvitegravir) significantly increased the risk (aOR, 4.12; 95% CI, 3.34–5.10; P &lt; .0001). Compared with propensity score–matched PLWH without DDIs, the presence of DDIs was associated with a $2693 additional cost per year (P &lt; .0001). Conclusions The presence of DDIs is frequent and significantly increases health care costs in the aging population of PLWH.

BACKGROUND: The reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADR) by patients represents an interesting challenge in the field of pharmacovigilance, but the reporting system is not adequately implemented in France. In 2015, only 20 MS patients in France reported ADR due to first-line disease-modifying drugs (DMD), while more than 3000 patients were initiated on DMD. The aim of this study is to validate a proof-of-concept as to whether the use of a mobile application (App) increases ADR reporting among patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RR-MS) receiving DMD. METHODS/DESIGN: We designed a multi-centric, open cluster-randomized controlled trial, called the Vigip-SEP study (NCT03029897), using the App My eReport France® to report ADR to the appropriate authorities in E2B language, in accordance with European regulations. RR-MS patients who were initiated on, or switched, first-line DMD will be included. In the experimental arm, a neurologist will introduce the patient to the App to report ADR to the appropriate French authorities. In the control arm, the patient will be informed of the existence of the App but will not be introduced to its use and will then report ADR according to the usual reporting procedures. Primary assessment criteria are defined as the average number of ADR per patient and per center. We assume that the App will increase patient reporting by 10-fold. Therefore, we will require 24 centers (12 per arm: 6 MS academic expert centers, 3 general hospitals, 3 private practice neurologists), allowing for an expected enrollment of 180 patients (alpha risk 5%, power 90% and standard deviation 4%). DISCUSSION: Increasing patient reporting of ADR in a real-life setting is extremely important for therapeutic management of RR-MS, particularly for monitoring newly approved DMD to gain better knowledge of their safety profiles. To increase patient involvement, teaching patients to use tools, such as mobile applications, should be encouraged, and these tools should be tested rigorously. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , ID: NCT03029897 . Registered on 20 January 2017.

BACKGROUND: Despite the lack of scientific studies on biofield therapies, they are widely acclaimed by patients. The mechanisms of action are not explained by current allopathic medical approaches. Warts are common and contagious viral lesions that may be refractory to standard dermatologic treatments such as cryotherapy, laser therapy, and keratolytic ointments. Biofield therapies are efficient in various pathologies. Their ability to treat warts has never been demonstrated in a scientific study with a robust methodology. Patients with refractory warts often place their trust in these alternative therapies because of the poor results obtained from traditional medicine. We propose a prospective, randomized, single-blind, assessor-blind trial to evaluate the efficacy of treatment of warts by biofield therapy. METHODS/DESIGN: Subjects with warts on their feet or hands will be randomized into two groups: real biofield therapy versus sham therapy. The diagnosis will be made at the time of inclusion, and follow-up will take place in week 3. Comparison of pictures of the warts at baseline and after 3 weeks will be used as the primary outcome measure. The hypothesis is that the extent of the disappearance of the original wart in the group treated by real biofield therapy will be 70% and that it will be 30% in the group treated by sham therapy. Using 90% power and an alpha risk of 5%, 31 subjects are required in each group for a two-tailed proportion comparison test. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the efficacy of biofield therapy on warts. Therefore, the aim of this study is to extend knowledge of biofield therapy to another area of medicine such as dermatology and to propose complementary or alternative practices to improve patient well-being. The main strength of the study is that it is a randomized, single-blind, assessor-blind, placebo-controlled study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02773719 . Registered on 22 April 2016.

According to the letter of Bahat,1 we should have analyzed the association between the use of tramadol and PPI and hyponatremia using multivariate regression analysis.2 Five risks factors with P < .25 were entered into a forward multivariate logistic regression model with maximum likelihood estimation. Before the multivariate analysis, it was verified that none of the five drugs used in the univariate analysis were correlated. Only proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) remained as a risk factor using a forward logistic model (odds ratio (OR) = 4.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.77–11.13, P = .001). To assess the effect of synergy, a backward logistic regression model was used to identify the drugs that could potentiate the effect of PPIs. This analysis showed P = .06 for kaliuretic diuretic and P = .08 for tramadol. Therefore, it was decided to assess the potentiating effect of kaliuretic diuretic and tramadol with PPIs by testing the association between PPIs and kaliuretic diuretics in a univariate logistic model and the association between PPIs and tramadol. This second analysis is similar to testing in a univariate logistic regression the effect of taking a PPI plus tramadol or a PPI plus a kaliuretic diuretic on hyponatremia, versus another scheme of treatment for the sample tested. The univariate logistic regression showed that taking a PPI plus tramadol was a risk factor for hyponatremia (OR = 7.70, 95% CI = 1.90–31.25, P = .004). Univariate logistic regression showed that taking a PPI plus a kaliuretic diuretic was not a risk factor for hyponatremia because the association was not significant (OR = 2.85, 95% CI = 0.78–10.27, P = .11). Knowing that, the real effect of the synergy had to be assessed by comparing the risk of hyponatremia in two groups (PPI plus tramadol (n = 9) vs PPI alone (n = 39)). This analysis showed that there was no greater risk of hyponatremia when tramadol was taken in addition to PPI (OR = 3.62, 95% CI = 0.81–16.22, P = .09). The univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were not the first statistical analyses used because of low enrollment for certain risk factors such as corticosteroids. The use of the Fisher exact test was preferable because a multivariate model would need at most two covariates to explain hyponatremia because there were only 24 cases. By taking into account risk factors present in the sample, PPI remains a risk factor for hyponatremia in elderly adults. Conflict of Interest: The editor in chief has reviewed the conflict of interest checklist provided by the author and has determined that the author has no financial or any other kind of personal conflicts with this paper. Author Contributions: LPSP is the sole author of this paper. Sponsor's Role: None.

To the Editor: The incidence of hyponatremia, a side effect that can result from using proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), is unknown in elderly adults. A prospective clinical study of individuals with suspected drug-induced moderate hyponatremia was recently conducted; 47% of the population was being treated with PPIs, indicating that the risk of PPI-induced hyponatremia is significant in elderly adults (≥65).1 This was a retrospective study. The main objective was to determine the incidence of hyponatremia in the elderly population being treated with PPIs; other objectives were to determine the odds ratio of PPI inducing hyponatremia, the relationship between PPI dose and occurrence of hyponatremia, and risk of hyponatremia in association with other medications. The incidence of hyponatremia in individuals who had been taking PPIs for at least 1 year was compared with that in a control group of individuals who had not been exposed to PPIs. Hyponatremia risk factors, except drugs known to induce hyponatremia, were exclusion criteria. The study included individuals in a unit of a general hospital admitted during 2011. Of 302 individuals analyzed, 145 were included. Twenty-four (16.6%) had moderate hyponatremia, and 48 (33.1%) had been taking PPIs for longer than 1 year, 31.3% of whom (95% confidence interval (CI) = 18.7–46.3%) had moderate hyponatremia, versus 9.3% (95% CI = 14.3–16.9%) in the rest of the population (OR = 4.4, 95% CI = 1.8–11.1, P = .001). The relationship between dose and occurrence of hyponatremia was not significant (coefficient of determination = 0.05, P = .74). Individuals taking PPIs and tramadol had a significantly higher risk of having hyponatremia than those taking neither (OR = 7.7, 95% CI = 1.9–31.2). Table 1 describes the relationship between hyponatremia, medication use, and potentiation in association with PPIs. The results are expressed as incidence of hyponatremia and the number of affected subjects for each drug or each drug combined with PPIs. In the literature, cases of hyponatremia in conjunction with PPI use have been reported without reporting the incidence rate.2 Moreover, hyponatremia is described as a rare event in PPI product information (<0.1%).3 Between 18.7% and 46.3% of elderly PPI users had hyponatremia in the current study. This study demonstrates that the chronic use of PPIs increases the risk of hyponatremia in older adults. This could be a result of their antidiuretic activity or the potentiation of the reactive antidiuretic hormone secretion.2 The association between PPIs and tramadol also appears to potentiate the risk of hyponatremia. Risk of hyponatremia with tramadol has been described in the literature.4 This combination is frequently administered to elderly adults and requires further study. Drugs are an underestimated cause of hyponatremia in elderly adults.5 Moderate hyponatremia significantly increases morbidity, for example, by increasing the risk of falls and fractures, and increases the risk of osteoporosis. It is also a predictor of death, myocardial infarction, and longer duration of hospitalization in elderly adults.6, 7 The effectiveness of PPIs and their safety has led to their widespread use. The known potential consequences of chronic use of PPIs include hypergastrinemia, enterochromaffin-like cell hyperplasia, and parietal cell hypertrophy, which causes rebound acid hypersecretion. PPI use is also a risk factor for Clostridium difficile enteritis, pneumonia, nutritional deficiencies, and interactions with antiplatelet agents.8 Although PPI moderate hyponatremia is an unknown effect, more fractures are being reported. It may be that episodes of hyponatremia potentiate these events by causing attention deficits, with a higher incidence of falls causing fractures, which adds to the direct effect on bone remodeling.9, 10 Thus, the literature suggests a need for a benefit: risk balance assessment amended by the latest knowledge of pharmacovigilance, and the current study confirms the potential adverse effects of PPI use in the elderly population. PPIs are commonly administered to elderly adults: 33% in the current study. The extensive use of PPIs in elderly adults is often the result of a lack of therapeutic reevaluation or requests from the individual to avoid treatment interruption. PPIs must be discontinued when the risk-benefit balance becomes unfavorable. Reassessment of the prescription is useful, particularly because a recent study has shown that hyponatremia is reversible; the reduction of drugs that may induce hyponatremia was associated with significant clinical improvement.1 Future prospective studies that include follow-up laboratory results for comparisons of pre- and post-PPI therapy would be optimal and informative. Conflict of Interest: The editor in chief has reviewed the conflict of interest checklist provided by the authors and has determined that the authors have no financial or any other kind of personal conflicts with this…