Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

[Q]: Context: To assess the effects of treatment with antitumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents, methotrexate, or other non-biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on cardiovascular event risks among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).', "We conducted a retrospective study using data from the MarketScan claims database. Patients with RA with ≥1 prescription for an index drug were included. Each patient's use of an index drug was calculated cumulatively as a time-varying exposure. The incidence of cardiovascular events among patients with RA was determined. Associations between drug exposures and occurrence of cardiovascular events were assessed with Cox proportional hazards models.", 'Of 113\u2005677 patients identified, 35.8%, 41.1% and 23.1% received anti-TNF agents, methotrexate and other DMARDs, respectively. Patients were treated for an average of 7.6\u2005months; 2138 patients (1.9%) had a cardiovascular event following their index prescription. Each additional 6\u2005months of anti-TNF therapy use versus non-use reduced the risk (HR; 95% CI) for any cardiovascular event by 12% (0.88; 0.81 to 0.95, p=0.002). Anti-TNF therapy was associated with a 13% and 12% reduction in cardiovascular events in patients aged ≥50\u2005years (0.87; 0.80 to 0.95, p=0.002) and in those without prior methotrexate use (0.88; 0.78 to 0.99, p=0.04), respectively. Cumulative use of 1, 2 or 3\u2005years of anti-TNF therapy versus non-use is expected to reduce cardiovascular event risks by 21%, 38% and 51%, respectively.
Answer: Anti-TNF therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular events among patients with RA, older patients with RA and patients without prior exposure to methotrexate.
[A]: Are longer durations of antitumour necrosis factor treatment associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular events in patients with rheumatoid arthritis?


[Q]: Context: Sepsis is an emergency condition with high mortality and morbidity rate. There are limited data on the association of cancer as a risk factor for mortality in sepsis patients in the emergency department (ED).', 'This retrospective study was conducted at the ED, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. The study period was between January 1st and December 31st, 2014. The inclusion criteria were as follows: adult patients over 15 years of age who presented at the ED with suspicion of sepsis, received treatment at the ED, and whose blood culture was found to be positive. Clinical data were recorded from medical records including the Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score (MEDS score). The primary outcome of this study was mortality at one month. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent factors associated with death.', 'During the study period, there were 775 eligible patients. The two most common pathogens identified from blood cultures were Staphylococcus aureus (193 patients; 24.9%) and Escherichia coli (158 patients; 20.4%). At one month after presenting at the ED, 110 patients (14.2%) had died. There were four significant factors for death, having cancer, being on an endotracheal tube, initial diagnosis of bacteremia, and high MED scores. Having cancer had an adjusted OR of 2.12 (95% CI of 1.29, 3.47).
Answer: Cancer patients have double the risk of mortality if presenting with sepsis at the ED.
[A]: Do cancer Patients Are at High Risk of Mortality if Presenting with Sepsis at an Emergency Department?


[Q]: Context: To demonstrate bioequivalence of linagliptin/metformin fixed-dose combination (FDC) tablets and the corresponding combination of individual tablets taken together, i.e., free-pill (FP) treatment.', 'Three dosing combinations were evaluated in three separate randomized studies: linagliptin 2.5 mg with 500 mg, 850 mg, or 1,000 mg metformin. These studies used a prospective, open-label, randomized, two-way crossover design to evaluate bioequivalence in healthy volunteers (n = 287). After an overnight fast, participants received an FDC tablet once, and on a separate visit received the corresponding FP treatment. The two possible treatment sequences (FDC/FP and FP/FDC) were randomly allocated to the participants. A washout period of 35 days separated the two study treatments. The primary endpoints were maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) of linagliptin and metformin, area under the plasma concentration time curve from 0 to 72 hours (AUC0-72) for linagliptin, and from 0 to infinity (AUC0-inf) for metformin.', 'The 90% confidence intervals of the adjusted geometric mean ratios of Cmax and AUC (calculated as FDC/ FP) were within the bioequivalence acceptance limits of 80 - 125%. The number of participants reporting at least one adverse event following FDC treatments was comparable to, or less than, that following FP treatments. Evaluation of vital signs and clinical laboratory tests revealed no safety issues.
Answer: FDC tablets of linagliptin and metformin are bioequivalent to individual tablets of respective dose strengths taken together. Both treatments were well tolerated.
[A]:
Is linagliptin fixed-dose combination with metformin bioequivalent to co-administration of linagliptin and metformin as individual tablets?