Patient-Reported Opioid Analgesic Use After Discharge from Surgical Procedures: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review synthesizes evidence on patient-reported outpatient opioid analgesic use after surgery. METHODS: We searched PubMed (February 2019) and Web of Science and Embase (June 2019) for U.S. studies describing patient-reported outpatient opioid analgesic use. Two reviewers extracted data on opioid analgesic use, standardized the data on use , and performed independent quality appraisals based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and an adapted Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: Ninety-six studies met the eligibility criteria; 56 had sufficient information to standardize use in oxycodone 5-mg tablets. Patient-reported opioid analgesic use varied widely by procedure type; knee and hip arthroplasty had the highest postoperative opioid use, and use after many procedures was reported as <5 tablets. In studies that examined excess tablets, 25-98% of the total tablets prescribed were reported to be excess, with most studies reporting that 50-70% of tablets went unused. Factors commonly associated with higher opioid analgesic use included preoperative opioid analgesic use, higher inpatient opioid analgesic use, higher postoperative pain scores, and chronic medical conditions, among others. Estimates also varied across studies because of heterogeneity in study design, including length of follow-up and inclusion/exclusion criteria. CONCLUSION: Self-reported postsurgery outpatient opioid analgesic use varies widely both across procedures and within a given procedure type. Contributors to within-procedure variation included patient characteristics, prior opioid use, intraoperative and perioperative factors, and differences in the timing of opioid use data collection. We provide recommendations to help minimize variation caused by study design factors and maximize interpretability of forthcoming studies for use in clinical guidelines and decision-making.

Trend changes of national zolpidem users and exposure cases after FDA drug safety communications.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of FDA's 2013 zolpidem Drug Safety Communications (DSCs), which recommended lowering the initial dose to mitigate drowsiness, on national estimates of zolpidem users and zolpidem exposure cases. METHODS: We analyzed trend changes of national zolpidem users from the IQVIA Total Patient Tracker (TPT) and zolpidem exposure cases reported to the National Poison Data System (NPDS), 2009-2018. To control for time varying confounding, the adjusted trends were analyzed using simple and controlled interrupted time series (ITS). We also adjusted for seasonal changes. Three sedating antidepressants were used together as a control. RESULTS: The national estimates of high-dose zolpidem users in TPT decreased significantly in the month immediately post-DSC; the absolute level decrease was -12.51 (95% CI: -14.12, -10.89) per 10 000 U.S. population relative to sedating antidepressants. The trend continuously decreased post-DSC, resulting in a 59% overall decrease by the end of the study period. There was a larger decrease in high-dose zolpidem use in females than in males. There was a level decrease of zolpidem exposure cases in the NPDS immediately post-DSC, -0.37 absolute decline (95% CI, -0.53, -0.20) per 10 000 national zolpidem users; or -1.33 absolute decline (95% CI, -1.54, -1.13) per 1000 total NPDS exposure cases relative to sedating antidepressants. Similar patterns were observed for cases reporting drowsiness. The results from the single ITS and controlled ITS were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Zolpidem users and exposure cases decreased significantly post-DSC, suggesting practitioners and patients became aware of and responded to the zolpidem DSCs.

A COVID-19-ready public health surveillance system: The Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel System.

The US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel System was established in 2009 to use routinely collected electronic health data for improving the national capability to assess post-market medical product safety. Over more than a decade, Sentinel has become an integral part of FDA's surveillance capabilities and has been used to conduct analyses that have contributed to regulatory decisions. FDA's role in the COVID-19 pandemic response has necessitated an expansion and enhancement of Sentinel. Here we describe how the Sentinel System has supported FDA's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We highlight new capabilities developed, key data generated to date, and lessons learned, particularly with respect to working with inpatient electronic health record data. Early in the pandemic, Sentinel developed a multi-pronged approach to support FDA's anticipated data and analytic needs. It incorporated new data sources, created a rapidly refreshed database, developed protocols to assess the natural history of COVID-19, validated a diagnosis-code based algorithm for identifying patients with COVID-19 in administrative claims data, and coordinated with other national and international initiatives. Sentinel is poised to answer important questions about the natural history of COVID-19 and is positioned to use this information to study the use, safety, and potentially the effectiveness of medical products used for COVID-19 prevention and treatment.

Leveraging the Capabilities of the FDA's Sentinel System To Improve Kidney Care.

The Sentinel System is a national electronic postmarketing resource established by the US Food and Drug Administration to support assessment of the safety and effectiveness of marketed medical products. It has built a large, multi-institutional, distributed data network that contains comprehensive electronic health data, covering about 700 million person-years of longitudinal observation time nationwide. With its sophisticated infrastructure and a large selection of flexible analytic tools, the Sentinel System permits rapid and secure analyses, while preserving patient privacy and health-system autonomy. The Sentinel System also offers enhanced capabilities, including accessing full-text medical records, supporting randomized clinical trials embedded in healthcare delivery systems, and facilitating effective collection of patient-reported data using mobile devices, among many other research programs. The nephrology research community can use the infrastructure, tools, and data that this national resource offers for evidence generation. This review summarizes the Sentinel System and its ability to rapidly generate high-quality, real-world evidence; discusses the program's experience in, and potential for, addressing gaps in kidney care; and outlines avenues for conducting research, leveraging this national resource in collaboration with Sentinel investigators.

FDA postmarketing safety labeling changes: What have we learned since 2010 about impacts on prescribing rates, drug utilization, and treatment outcomes.

PURPOSE: Prior literature reviews have identified gaps in understanding of how postmarketing safety labeling changes and related FDA communications impact key clinical and behavioral outcomes. We conducted a review of newly published studies on this topic to determine what new evidence exists and to identify which gaps may still remain. We believe that this information can support FDA as it develops and implements future risk communication approaches. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase for studies published between January 1, 2010, and August 7, 2017 that examined the impact of labeling changes or associated FDA safety-related communications. For each study, we extracted information on research design and findings for key clinical outcomes and behaviors. We also conducted a ROBINS-I review to identify potential for bias in the research design of each study. RESULTS: We found that the estimated impacts of FDA labeling changes on several key outcomes-including adverse events-varied. Labeling changes also yielded unintended consequences on drug prescribing in some cases, despite low provider adherence. Finally, some studies we reviewed exhibited potential for bias due to confounding, among other factors. CONCLUSIONS: The new studies we reviewed contain many of the same limitations identified in previously published reviews. While there are several challenges to conducting this research there is substantial room for improvement in the quality of the evidence base. More information, particularly with respect to the types of populations and medications affected by labeling changes, is needed to support the development of more effective and targeted safety communications.

Changes in emergency department visits for zolpidem-attributed adverse drug reactions after FDA Drug Safety Communications.

Purpose: To identify possible changes in U.S. emergency department (ED) visits from zolpidem-attributed adverse drug reactions (ADRs) after 2013 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Drug Safety Communications (DSCs), which notified the public about FDA's new dosing recommendations for zolpidem. Methods: We estimated the occurrence of ED visits from zolpidem-attributed ADRs using nationally representative, public health surveillance of medication harms (National Electronic Injury Surveillance System-Cooperative Adverse Drug Event Surveillance project, 2010-2017). We estimated the number of zolpidem prescriptions using IQVIA National Prescription Audit, 2010-2017. We calculated rates of ED visits for zolpidem-attributed ADRs per 10 000 dispensed zolpidem prescriptions and identified time trends and potential inflection points using joinpoint regression. For comparison, we repeated these analyses for sedating antidepressants commonly used to treat disordered sleep (trazodone, doxepin, and mirtazapine). Results: The best-fit regression model for rates of ED visits for zolpidem-attributed ADRs by 6-month intervals identified a single inflection point in the second half of 2014 (P = .024) with a 6.7% biannual decrease from 2010 to 2014 ([-13.1%, 0.3%], P = .059) and a 13.9% biannual increase from the second half of 2014 through 2017 ([-1.1%, 31.3%], P = .068). No change or inflection points were identified for rates of ED visits for sedating antidepressant-attributed ADRs. Conclusions: While there was a nominal decline in the rate of ED visits for ADRs in the time period before and for 18 months after FDA's 2013 zolpidem DSCs, the decrease was not sustained, and thus questions remain concerning the long-term impact of the zolpidem DSCs on ADRs.

Graphical Depiction of Longitudinal Study Designs in Health Care Databases.

Pharmacoepidemiologic and pharmacoeconomic analysis of health care databases has become a vital source of evidence to support health care decision making and efficient management of health care organizations. However, decision makers often consider studies done in nonrandomized health care databases more difficult to review than randomized trials because many design choices need to be considered. This is perceived as an important barrier to decision making about the effectiveness and safety of medical products. Design flaws in longitudinal database studies are avoidable but can be unintentionally obscured in the convoluted prose of methods sections, which often lack specificity. We propose a simple framework of graphical representation that visualizes study design implementations in a comprehensive, unambiguous, and intuitive way; contains a level of detail that enables reproduction of key study design variables; and uses standardized structure and terminology to simplify review and communication to a broad audience of decision makers. Visualization of design details will make database studies more reproducible, quicker to review, and easier to communicate to a broad audience of decision makers.

New Opioid Analgesic Approvals and Outpatient Utilization of Opioid Analgesics in the United States, 1997 through 2015.

BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic, driven in part by increased prescribing, is a public health emergency. This study examines dispensed prescription patterns and approvals of new opioid analgesic products to investigate whether the introduction of these new drugs increases prescribing. METHODS: Prescribing patterns based on dispensed prescription claims from the U.S. retail setting were assessed with new brand and generic opioid analgesic products approved in the United States from 1997 through 2015. RESULTS: From 1997 through 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (Silver Spring, Maryland) approved 263 opioid analgesic products, including 33 brand products. Dispensed prescriptions initially increased 80% from 145 million prescriptions in 1997 to a peak of 260 million prescriptions in 2012 before decreasing by 12% to 228 million prescriptions in 2015. Morphine milligram equivalents dispensed per prescription increased from 486 in 1997 to a peak of 950 in 2010, before decreasing to 905 in 2015. In 2015, generic products accounted for 96% (218/228 million prescriptions) of all opioid analgesic prescriptions dispensed. The remaining prescriptions were dispensed for brand products, of which nearly half were dispensed for one brand product (OxyContin, Purdue, USA). CONCLUSIONS: There has been a dramatic increase in prescriptions dispensed for opioid analgesics since 1997 and an increasing number of opioid analgesic approvals; however, the number of prescriptions dispensed has declined since 2012 despite an increasing number of approvals. Examination of dispensed prescriptions shows a shifting and complex market where multiple factors likely influence prescribing; the approval of new products alone may not be sufficient to be a primary driver of increased prescribing. VISUAL ABSTRACT: An online visual overview is available for this article at http://links.lww.com/ALN/B705.

Drug availability adjustments in population-based studies of prescription opioid abuse.

PURPOSE: Population-based prescription opioid abuse studies in which one drug is compared to another, or drugs are compared across time, often account for the availability of those drugs in the community. The objective of this investigation is to assess consistency in the relative abuse ratios (RARs) across different approaches for adjusting for drug availability. METHODS: For the years 2004 through 2010, RARs for each of four prescription opioids (hydrocodone, oxycodone, hydromorphone, and morphine) were calculated using negative binomial regression. Measures of abuse (outcome) were misuse/abuse-related emergency department visits obtained from the Drug Abuse Warning Network. Measures of drug availability (offsets) were drug utilization estimates obtained from IMS Health. Separate regression models were run using each of five measures of drug utilization: unique patients (URDD), prescriptions dispensed (RX), tablets dispensed (TD), kilograms (KGs) sold, and morphine-equivalents (MEs) of kilograms sold. These results were compared for consistency. RESULTS: Aside from oxycodone-combination products, across molecules, RARs adjusted by RXs, TDs, and URDDs were generally similar to each other while RARs adjusted by KGs and MEs were different. For example, compared to hydrocodone, oxycodone had statistically significantly increased RARs of 3.6 (95%CI: 2.0-6.5), 3.5 (95%CI: 1.9-6.4), and 2.7 (95%CI: 1.5-5.0) when adjusted by URDDs, RXs, and TDs, respectively, but not when adjusted by KGs or MEs. CONCLUSIONS: Different drug utilization adjustment approaches may yield inconsistent RAR estimates in population-based prescription opioid abuse analyses. Published 2016. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Changes in prescribing and healthcare resource utilization after FDA Drug Safety Communications involving zolpidem-containing medications.

PURPOSE: Products containing the sedative/hypnotic zolpidem were subject to Drug Safety Communications (DSCs) in January and May 2013 describing the risk of next-morning impairment and recommending lower starting doses particularly for women. This study aimed to assess whether zolpidem DSCs were associated with prescribing-pattern changes between January 2011 and December 2013. METHODS: We assessed overall dispensings of zolpidem-containing products between January 2011 and December 2013 by conducting a time-series analysis. Analyses were stratified by gender because the DSC contained gender-specific information. Participants were patients drawn from the Optum Clinformatics data source of commercially insured people in the USA. We evaluated changes in mean prescribed dose of the two drugs and health care utilization metrics. RESULTS: Each month of the study, more than 80 000 patients received a zolpidem-containing product and approximately one-tenth as many received eszopiclone. The two DSCs did not affect the downward trajectory of new zolpidem prescriptions. However, there was an increase in use of lower-dose forms of zolpidem (30% increase, p < 0.001), coupled with a reduction in higher-dose forms (13% decrease, p = 0.03), so that the average dose decreased after the DSCs (from 9.7 mg to 9.4 mg, p < 0.001), a change that was not seen with eszopiclone (from 2.74 mg to 2.74 mg, p = 0.45). CONCLUSION: The DSCs related to zolpidem-containing products shifted prescribing toward the lower-dose formulations, consistent with the recommendations in the DSCs. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Media Coverage of FDA Drug Safety Communications about Zolpidem: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis.

FDA issues Drug Safety Communications (DSCs) to alert health care professionals and the public about emerging safety information affecting prescription and over-the-counter drugs. News media may amplify DSCs, but it is unclear how DSC messaging is transmitted through the media. We conducted a content analysis of the lay media coverage reaching the broadest audience to characterize the amount and content of media coverage of two zolpidem DSCs from 2013. After the first DSC, zolpidem news stories increased from 19 stories/week in the preceding 3 months to 153 following its release. Most (81%) appeared in the lay media, and 64% focused on the DSC content. After the second DSC, news stories increased from 24 stories/week in the preceding 3 months to 39 following. Among the 100 unique lay media news stories, at least half correctly reported three key DSC messages: next-day impairment and drowsiness as common safety hazards, lower doses for some but not all zolpidem products, and women's higher risk for impairment. Other DSC messages were reported in fewer than one-third of stories, such as the warning that impairment can happen even when people feel fully awake. The first-but not the second-zolpidem DSC generated high-profile news coverage. The finding that some messages were widely reported but others were not emphasizes the importance of ensuring translation of key DSC content.

Patient understanding of drug risks: an evaluation of medication guide assessments.

PURPOSE: When a Medication Guide (MG) is part of Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS), manufacturers assess the effectiveness of MGs through patient surveys, which have not undergone systematic evaluation. We aimed to characterize knowledge rates from these patient surveys, describe their design and respondent characteristics, and explore predictors of acceptable knowledge rates. METHODS: We analyzed MG assessments submitted to the Food and Drug Administration from September 2008 through June 2012. We evaluated the prevalence of specific characteristics, and calculated knowledge rates, whereby we defined "acceptable knowledge" when ≥ 80% of respondents correctly answered questions about the primary drug risk. Univariate logistic models were used to investigate the predictors of acceptable knowledge rates. RESULTS: We analyzed the first completed MG assessment for each drug with a patient survey, resulting in 66 unique MG assessments. The mean knowledge rate was 63.8%, with 20 MG assessments (30.3%) achieving the 80% threshold. Compared to assessments that did not reach acceptable knowledge rates, those that did were more likely associated with additional REMS elements (e.g. Elements to Assure Safe Use or Communication Plans). Other factors, including mean age, reading or understanding the MG, and being offered or accepting counseling were not associated with knowledge rates. There was considerable variation in the design of MG assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Most MG assessments did not reach the 80% knowledge threshold, but those associated with additional interventions were more likely to achieve it. Our study highlights the need to improve patient-directed information and the methods of assessing it.

Orphan therapies: making best use of postmarket data.

BACKGROUND: Postmarket surveillance of the comparative safety and efficacy of orphan therapeutics is challenging, particularly when multiple therapeutics are licensed for the same orphan indication. To make best use of product-specific registry data collected to fulfill regulatory requirements, we propose the creation of a distributed electronic health data network among registries. Such a network could support sequential statistical analyses designed to detect early warnings of excess risks. We use a simulated example to explore the circumstances under which a distributed network may prove advantageous. METHODS: We perform sample size calculations for sequential and non-sequential statistical studies aimed at comparing the incidence of hepatotoxicity following initiation of two newly licensed therapies for homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia. We calculate the sample size savings ratio, or the proportion of sample size saved if one conducted a sequential study as compared to a non-sequential study. Then, using models to describe the adoption and utilization of these therapies, we simulate when these sample sizes are attainable in calendar years. We then calculate the analytic calendar time savings ratio, analogous to the sample size savings ratio. We repeat these analyses for numerous scenarios. KEY RESULTS: Sequential analyses detect effect sizes earlier or at the same time as non-sequential analyses. The most substantial potential savings occur when the market share is more imbalanced (i.e., 90% for therapy A) and the effect size is closest to the null hypothesis. However, due to low exposure prevalence, these savings are difficult to realize within the 30-year time frame of this simulation for scenarios in which the outcome of interest occurs at or more frequently than one event/100 person-years. CONCLUSIONS: We illustrate a process to assess whether sequential statistical analyses of registry data performed via distributed networks may prove a worthwhile infrastructure investment for pharmacovigilance.

Minimizing signal detection time in postmarket sequential analysis: balancing positive predictive value and sensitivity.

PURPOSE: Outcome misclassification in retrospective epidemiologic analyses has been well-studied, but little is known about such misclassification with respect to sequential statistical analysis during surveillance of medical product-associated risks, a planned capability of the US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel System. METHODS: Using a vaccine example, we model and simulate sequential database surveillance in an observational data network using a variety of outcome detection algorithms. We consider how these algorithms, as characterized by sensitivity and positive predictive value, impact the length of surveillance and timeliness of safety signal detection. We show investigators/users of these networks how they can perform preparatory study design calculations that consider outcome misclassification in sequential database surveillance. RESULTS: Non-differential outcome misclassification generates longer surveillance times and less timely safety signal detection as compared with the case of no misclassification. Inclusive algorithms characterized by high sensitivity but low positive predictive value outperform more narrow algorithms when detecting rare outcomes. This decision calculus may change considerably if medical chart validation procedures were required. CONCLUSIONS: These findings raise important questions regarding the design of observational data networks used for pharmacovigilance. Specifically, there are tradeoffs involved when choosing to populate such networks with component databases that are large as compared with smaller integrated delivery system databases that can more easily access laboratory or clinical data and perform medical chart validation.