RESUMO
Importance: Drug expenditures in the US are higher than in any other country and are projected to continue increasing, so US health systems may benefit from evaluating international regulatory and reimbursement decision-making of new drugs. Objective: To evaluate regulatory decisions and health technology assessments (HTAs) in Australia, Canada, and the UK regarding new drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2017 through 2020, as well as to estimate the US cost per patient per year for drugs receiving negative recommendations. Design and Setting: In this cross-sectional study, recommendations issued by agencies in Australia, Canada, and the UK were collected for new drugs approved by the FDA in 2017 through 2020. All data were current as of May 31, 2022. Exposures: Authorizations and HTAs in selected countries. Main Outcomes and Measures: All FDA-approved drugs were matched by active ingredient to decision summary reports published by drug regulators and HTA agencies in Australia, Canada, and the UK. Regulatory approval concordance and reasons for negative recommendations were assessed using descriptive statistics. For drugs not recommended by an international agency, the annual US drug cost per patient was estimated from FDA labeling and wholesale acquisition costs. Results: The FDA approved 206 new drugs in 2017 through 2020, of which 162 (78.6%) were granted marketing authorization by at least 1 other regulatory agency at a median (IQR) delay of 12.1 (17.7) months following US approval. Conversely, 5 FDA-approved drugs were refused marketing authorization by an international regulatory agency due to unfavorable benefit-to-risk assessments. An additional 42 FDA-approved drugs received negative reimbursement recommendations from HTA agencies in Australia, Canada, or the UK due to uncertainty of clinical benefits or unacceptably high prices. The median (IQR) US cost of the 47 drugs refused authorization or not recommended for reimbursement by an international agency was $115â¯281 ($166â¯690) per patient per year. Twenty drugs were for oncology indications, and 36 were approved by the FDA through expedited regulatory pathways or the Orphan Drug Act. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study assessed reasons for which drugs recently approved by the FDA were refused marketing authorization or not recommended for public reimbursement in other countries. Drugs with limited international market presence may require close examination by US health care professionals and health systems.
Assuntos
Aprovação de Drogas , Produção de Droga sem Interesse Comercial , Humanos , Estudos Transversais , Preparações Farmacêuticas , Austrália , CanadáRESUMO
Importance: Older patients using many prescription drugs (hyperpolypharmacy) may be at increased risk of adverse drug effects. Objective: To test the effectiveness and safety of a quality intervention intended to reduce hyperpolypharmacy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial allocated patients 76 years or older who used 10 or more prescription medications to a deprescribing intervention or to usual care (1:1 ratio) at an integrated health system with multiple preexisting deprescribing workflows. Data were collected from October 15, 2020, to July 29, 2022. Intervention: Physician-pharmacist collaborative drug therapy management, standard-of-care practice recommendations, shared decision-making, and deprescribing protocols administered by telephone over multiple cycles for a maximum of 180 days after allocation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end points were change in the number of medications and in the prevalence of geriatric syndrome (falls, cognition, urinary incontinence, and pain) from 181 to 365 days after allocation compared with before randomization. Secondary outcomes were use of medical services and adverse drug withdrawal effects. Results: Of a random sample of 2860 patients selected for potential enrollment, 2470 (86.4%) remained eligible after physician authorization, with 1237 randomized to the intervention and 1233 to usual care. A total of 1062 intervention patients (85.9%) were reached and agreed to enroll. Demographic variables were balanced. The median age of the 2470 patients was 80 (range, 76-104) years, and 1273 (51.5%) were women. In terms of race and ethnicity, 185 patients (7.5%) were African American, 234 (9.5%) were Asian or Pacific Islander, 220 (8.9%) were Hispanic, 1574 (63.7%) were White (63.7%), and 257 (10.4%) were of other (including American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or >1 race or ethnicity) or unknown race or ethnicity. During follow-up, both the intervention and usual care groups had slight reductions in the number of medications dispensed (mean changes, -0.4 [95% CI, -0.6 to -0.2] and -0.4 [95% CI, -0.6 to -0.3], respectively), with no difference between the groups (P = .71). There were no significant changes in the prevalence of a geriatric condition in the usual care and intervention groups at the end of follow-up and no difference between the groups (baseline prevalence: 47.7% [95% CI, 44.9%-50.5%] vs 42.9% [95% CI, 40.1%-45.7%], respectively; difference-in-differences, 1.0 [95% CI, -3.5 to 5.6]; P = .65). No differences in use of medical services or adverse drug withdrawal effects were observed. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial from an integrated care setting with various preexisting deprescribing workflows, a bundled hyperpolypharmacy deprescribing intervention was not associated with reduction in medication dispensing, prevalence of geriatric syndrome, utilization of medical services, or adverse drug withdrawal effects. Additional research is needed in less integrated settings and in more targeted populations. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05616689.
Assuntos
Desprescrições , Humanos , Feminino , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Masculino , Conduta do Tratamento Medicamentoso , Alaska , HavaíRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to treat symptoms of chronic inflammatory diseases such as osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis; however, they are also associated with various adverse effects, including gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and renal harm. As patients get older, some medications may no longer be beneficial or may even cause harm. Deprescribing is defined as the planned and supervised process of dose reduction or discontinuation of medications. While there are studies showing that deprescribing strategies with several classes of medications positively affects outcomes in elderly patients, there is a lack of strong evidence and guidance to deprescribe NSAIDs. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and economic impact of pharmacists deprescribing NSAIDs under the guidance of a standardized deprescribing program compared with usual care within an integrated health care system. METHODS: This retrospective, propensity score-matched cohort study included patients aged ≥ 65 years who were eligible for the NSAID deprescribing program from July 2016 to June 2018. Those patients in the deprescribing group were assessed by pharmacists and had their medications deprescribed. Patients who were eligible for the deprescribing program but did not receive any interventions were matched to the deprescribed group using propensity score matching at a 4:1 ratio and became the usual care group. Patients were followed for 6 months, until end of membership, or until death, whichever occurred first. The effectiveness and safety outcomes included rates of 3 adverse events: GI bleeds, acute kidney injuries (AKI), and exacerbation of pain triggering a hospitalization or emergency room visit. The economic outcome was the change in monthly NSAID cost. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, chi-square tests, and conditional logistic regression models were used for analysis. RESULTS: There were 431 patients in the deprescribed group and 1,724 patients in the usual care group, with similar baseline characteristics after propensity score matching. The adjusted results showed no significant difference between the deprescribed and usual care groups for GI bleed events (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.36-1.16, P = 0.15) and AKI (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.24-1.16, P = 0.11). The deprescribed group experienced a significant 2-fold decrease in the odds of exacerbation of pain versus the deprescribed group (OR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.33-0.77, P < 0.01). Finally, there was no significant difference in the change in monthly NSAIDs costs between the 2 groups (median change, IQR: -$0.29, -$2.37 to -$0.11 for deprescribed group; -$0.23, -2.59 to 0.00 for usual care group, P = 0.054). CONCLUSIONS: Although this study did not find any difference in the rate of GI bleed or AKI, we found a significant decrease in the rate of exacerbation of pain in the deprescribed group versus the usual care group. This result suggests that deprescribing NSAIDs did not cause harm during the 6-month follow-up. Further long-term studies are necessary to validate these outcomes. DISCLOSURES: No funding was provided to support this research study. The authors of this study have no actual or potential conflicts of interest to report. Parts of this study were presented in a nonreviewed resident poster at the AMCP Managed Care and Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting; March 25-28, 2019; San Diego, CA.
Assuntos
Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Prestação Integrada de Cuidados de Saúde/normas , Desprescrições , Assistência Farmacêutica/normas , Farmacêuticos/normas , Papel Profissional , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/administração & dosagem , Estudos de Coortes , Prestação Integrada de Cuidados de Saúde/métodos , Feminino , Seguimentos , Gastroenteropatias/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the elderly, use of medications may increase the propensity for adverse drug events due to alterations in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles from normal aging processes. Deprescribing is the planned and supervised process of dose reduction or discontinuation of medications that may lead to harm or are no longer beneficial. While there are studies detailing strategies to deprescribe medications such as benzodiazepines and antipsychotics in nursing homes or for patients with dementia, there is a lack of guidance to safely deprescribe chronic medications, such as antidiabetics, for older patients in the community setting. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk of hypoglycemia and other outcomes of pharmacist-managed deprescribing on selected antidiabetic medications under the guidance of a standardized program compared with usual care within an integrated health care system. METHODS: This was a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study. The pharmacist-managed deprescribing group included patients who were enrolled in the deprescribing program between July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017. The usual care group included eligible patients who did not receive the deprescribing intervention and were matched to the deprescribing group using propensity score matching (PSM). Baseline demographics and clinical variables were used for matching. Patients were followed for 6 months or the end of membership or death, whichever occurred first. Primary outcome was the risk of hypoglycemia. Secondary outcomes included risk of hyperglycemia, proportion of patients at goal (A1c), change in A1c, change in monthly antidiabetic drug cost, and all-cause mortality. Outcomes were analyzed using descriptive statistics and multivariant regression or Cox proportional hazard models when appropriate. RESULTS: After PSM, 685 patients in the deprescribing group and 2,055 patients in the usual care group were similar in age, gender, weight, and comorbidity burden (mean [SD] age 82.4 [5.4] years, 48% female, mean [SD] weight 81.7 [19.2] kg, mean [SD] Charlson Comorbidity Index score 3.2 [1.6]). Compared with the usual care group, the deprescribing group had a lower risk of hypoglycemia (1.5% vs. 3.1%, P < 0.02; adjusted odds ratio 0.42, P < 0.01). As for the secondary outcomes, the deprescribing group had a greater change (SD) in A1c (0.3 [0.6] vs. 0.2 [0.7] P < 0.01) and lower all-cause mortality (2.3% vs 5.6%, P < 0.01; adjusted hazard ratio 0.35, P < 0.01). There were no differences observed in the risk of hyperglycemia, proportion of patients at goal A1c < 7%, and change in monthly antidiabetic drug costs between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: There are currently no studies to our knowledge that evaluate the outcomes of a pharmacist-managed deprescribing program targeting antidiabetic medications. The results of our study showed that deprescribing of selected antidiabetics reduced the risk of hypoglycemia and may have mortality benefit in elderly patients with well-controlled type 2 diabetes, who are taking medications that can cause hypoglycemia. Further and longer studies are needed to validate these benefits. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding was provided to support this research study. The authors of this study have no actual or potential conflicts of interest to report. Parts of this study were presented in a nonreviewed resident poster at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Managed Care and Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting; April 23-26, 2018; Boston, MA.