Skip to main content

Table 2 Recurrent ischemic stroke and secondary safety outcomes of patients with and without use of pioglitazone

From: Pioglitazone and PPAR-γ modulating treatment in hypertensive and type 2 diabetic patients after ischemic stroke: a national cohort study

Outcome

Pioglitazone (n = 3189)

Non-pioglitazone (n = 6378)

Pioglitazone vs. non-pioglitazone

SHR (95% CI)

p-value

Primary analysis: propensity score matching

 Recurrent ischemic stroke, n (%)

598 (18.8)

1273 (20.0)

0.91 (0.84, 0.99)

0.033

Sensitivity analysis: IPTW

 Recurrent ischemic stroke, %

19.0

21.2

0.89 (0.80, 0.99)

0.025

Secondary outcomes

 Acute myocardial infarction, n (%)

119 (3.7)

265 (4.2)

0.79 (0.65, 0.97)

0.021

 Hospitalization for heart failure, n (%)

200 (6.3)

410 (6.4)

0.99 (0.85, 1.15)

0.867

 All-cause mortality, n (%)

560 (17.6)

1158 (18.2)

0.94 (0.83, 1.06)

0.320

 Cardiovascular death, n (%)

362 (11.4)

731 (11.5)

0.95 (0.81, 1.11)

0.523

 Bladder cancer, n (%)

10 (0.31)

11 (0.17)

1.34 (0.62, 2.88)

0.456

  1. SHR subdistribution hazard ratio, CI confidence interval, IPTW inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting
  2. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05