Assessment of prior opioid tolerance among new users of fentanyl transdermal system in FDA's Sentinel System.

PURPOSE: Fentanyl transdermal system (FTS) is intended only for patients with prior opioid tolerance. The purpose of this study is to identify the proportion of new FTS users who had evidence of prior opioid tolerance, by dosage strength, in FDA's Sentinel System. METHODS: We identified new FTS episodes (183-day washout) from 2009 through 2013. Members were <65 years and enrolled in medical and pharmacy coverage for 183 days prior to initial FTS dispensing (index). We assessed the proportion of users with prior tolerance stratified by dosage strength of FTS using four definitions of opioid tolerance: ≥30-mg oxycodone equivalents/day in each of 7 consecutive days immediately prior to index; ≥30-mg oxycodone equivalents/day for any 7 days in the 30 days prior to index (secondary); any dose in each of 7 days in the 7 consecutive days immediately prior to index (tertiary); and any dose for any 7 days in the 30 days prior to index (quaternary). RESULTS: Of 44 450 episodes of 25 mcg/hr FTS, 37% met the primary definition, and 77% met the quaternary definition. Of 3507 episodes of 100 mcg/hr FTS, 57% and 74% met the primary and quaternary definitions, respectively. Those aged 25 to 34 years had the highest proportion of episodes with prior tolerance; those aged 55 to 64 accounted for more of the episodes overall. CONCLUSIONS: In Sentinel, many new users of FTS did not have evidence of prior opioid tolerance by the primary definition, ie, the product label definition, which is the minimum standard for the lowest FTS dose (12 mcg/hr), especially at the highest strength (100 mcg/hr). Validation of this metric is warranted, but our findings suggest the need for further prescriber education regarding appropriate prescribing of FTS.

Opioid analgesic dose and the risk of misuse, overdose, and death: A narrative review.

PURPOSE: Despite the rise in serious adverse events paralleling increased prescription opioid analgesic use in the United States over the past 2 decades, the association between opioid analgesic dose and the risk of serious adverse health outcomes is incompletely characterized. We sought to synthesize the medical literature for observational studies examining the association between opioid analgesic dose and the risk of serious adverse health outcomes, with particular attention to the outcomes of misuse, abuse, addiction, overdose, and death. METHODS: Searching MEDLINE using PubMed and bibliography review, we identified 22 observational studies published between 2000 and 2015 that assessed the association between opioid analgesic dose and the risk of serious adverse health outcomes. Some of these studies had significant methodological limitations. Twelve reviewed studies examined the outcomes of misuse, overdose, or death; no studies examining the risk of addiction or abuse met our criteria for inclusion. RESULTS: The results of multiple studies clearly indicate an increasing risk of serious adverse health outcomes associated with increasing opioid analgesic dose. In particular, the risk of misuse, overdose, and death increases with increasing opioid analgesic dose. However, there is no opioid dose inflection point beyond which the risk of these adverse health outcomes increases. No opioid analgesic dose is without risk. CONCLUSIONS: The reviewed studies show an increasing risk of serious adverse health outcomes-including misuse, overdose, and death-associated with increasing opioid analgesic dose. Further research is needed to characterize the relationship between opioid analgesic dose and the risk of addiction and abuse. This analysis could inform policy actions for regulators and clinical decision making for providers.

Important statistical considerations in the evaluation of post-market studies to assess whether opioids with abuse-deterrent properties result in reduced abuse in the community.

PURPOSE: Abuse, misuse, addiction, overdose, and death associated with non-medical use of prescription opioids have become a serious public health concern. Reformulation of these products with abuse-deterrent properties is one approach for addressing this problem. FDA has approved several extended-release opioid analgesics with abuse-deterrent labeling, the bases of which come from pre-market studies. As all opioid analgesics must be capable of delivering the opioid in order to reduce pain, abuse-deterrent properties do not prevent abuse, nor do pre-market evaluations ensure that there will be reduced abuse in the community. Utilizing data from various surveillance systems, some recent post-market studies suggest a decline in abuse of extended-release oxycodone after reformulation with abuse-deterrent properties. We discuss challenges stemming from the use of such data. METHODS: We quantify the relationship between the sample, the population, and the underlying sampling mechanism and identify the necessary conditions if valid statements about the population are to be made. The presence of other interventions in the community necessitates the use of comparators. We discuss the principles under which the use of comparators can be meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: Results based on surveillance data need to be interpreted with caution as the underlying sampling mechanisms can bias the results in unpredictable ways. The use of comparators has the potential to disentangle the effect due to the abuse-deterrence properties from those due to other interventions. However, identifying a comparator that is meaningful can be very difficult.

Cardiovascular and mortality risks in older Medicare patients treated with varenicline or bupropion for smoking cessation: an observational cohort study.

PURPOSE: To compare cardiovascular and mortality risks in elderly patients treated with varenicline or bupropion for smoking cessation. METHODS: Elderly Medicare beneficiaries were entered into new-user cohorts of varenicline or bupropion for smoking cessation and followed on therapy for primary outcomes of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, mortality, and a composite of any of these events. Secondary outcomes were unstable angina, coronary revascularization, and a composite of any primary or secondary outcome event. Propensity score stratification was used to adjust for baseline differences in potential confounding factors. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards, with bupropion as reference. RESULTS: In cohorts of 74 824 varenicline and 14 133 bupropion users, there were 164 AMI, 96 stroke, 87 death, 317 primary composite, and 814 secondary composite events while on therapy. The HRs (95%CI) were 0.79 (0.50-1.24) for AMI, 1.27 (0.63-2.55) for stroke, 0.58 (0.30-1.13) for death, 0.84 (0.58-1.23) for the primary composite, and 0.92 (0.73-1.14) for the secondary composite. The risk of AMI or the primary composite outcome did not differ in subgroups defined by age, diabetes status, or presence of underlying ischemic heart disease. Only 30% of patients remained on either study drug beyond their first prescription. CONCLUSION: Cardiovascular and mortality risks were not increased in older patients treated with varenicline compared with bupropion for smoking cessation. A potential increase in the risk of stroke with varenicline could not be excluded. Treatment persistence with either drug was low. Published 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

The incident user design in comparative effectiveness research.

Comparative effectiveness research includes cohort studies and registries of interventions. When investigators design such studies, how important is it to follow patients from the day they initiated treatment with the study interventions? Our article considers this question and related issues to start a dialogue on the value of the incident user design in comparative effectiveness research. By incident user design, we mean a study that sets the cohort's inception date according to patients' new use of an intervention. In contrast, most epidemiologic studies enroll patients who were currently or recently using an intervention when follow-up began. We take the incident user design as a reasonable default strategy because it reduces biases that can impact non-randomized studies, especially when investigators use healthcare databases. We review case studies where investigators have explored the consequences of designing a cohort study by restricting to incident users, but most of the discussion has been informed by expert opinion, not by systematic evidence.

Meta-analysis of a possible signal of increased mortality associated with cefepime use.

BACKGROUND: On the basis of meta-analyses, concern has been raised regarding a possible signal of increased mortality associated with the use of cefepime versus other beta-lactam antibiotics. To further investigate this possible signal, we accessed findings and data from published and unpublished cefepime clinical trials. METHODS: We performed meta-analyses using trial- and patient-level data from comparative trials. Trial-level analyses were performed using summary data from all patients in the trials, and patient-level analyses were performed on trials for which patient-level data were available. Thirty-day, all-cause mortality was analyzed using the Mantel-Haenszel adjusted risk difference (ARD) method. RESULTS: The trial-level meta-analysis was based on 88 trials (9467 cefepime patients and 8288 comparator patients). The 30-day, all-cause mortality rates were 6.21% (588/9467) for the cefepime patients and 6.00% (497/8288) for comparator patients (ARD per 1000 population, 5.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.53 to 12.28). In the patient-level analysis (35 trials, 5058 cefepime patients, and 3976 comparator patients), 30-day, all-cause mortality rates were 5.63% (285/5058) for cefepime patients and 5.68% (226/3976) for comparator patients (ARD per 1000 population, 4.83; 95% CI, -4.72 to 14.38). A sensitivity analysis based solely on the 24 febrile neutropenia trials did not show a statistically significant increase in mortality with cefepime use (ARD per 1000 population, 9.67; 95% CI, -2.87 to 22.21). CONCLUSIONS: In both trial-level and patient-level meta-analyses, we did not identify a statistically significant increase in mortality among cefepime-treated patients, compared with those treated with other antibacterials.

Assessment of Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing of Opioid Analgesics Requiring Prior Opioid Tolerance.

Importance: Opioid-tolerant only (OTO) medications, such as transmucosal immediate-release fentanyl products and certain extended-release opioid analgesics, require prior opioid tolerance for safe use, as patients without tolerance may be at increased risk of overdose. Studies using insurance claims have found that many patients initiating these medications do not appear to be opioid tolerant. Objectives: To measure prevalence of opioid tolerance in patients initiating OTO medications and to determine whether linked electronic health record (EHR) data contribute evidence of opioid tolerance not found in insurance claims data. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used a national database of deidentified longitudinal health information, including medical and pharmacy claims, insurance enrollment, and EHR data, from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2016. Data included 131 756 US residents with at least 183 days of continuous enrollment in commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance (including medical and pharmacy benefits) who had received an OTO medication and who had no inpatient stays in the 30 days prior to starting an OTO medication; of these, 20 044 individuals had linked EHR data within the prior 183 days. Data were analyzed from July 1, 2017, to August 31, 2018. Exposures: Initiating an OTO medication. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prior opioid tolerance demonstrated through pharmacy fills or EHR data on prescriptions written. Results: Among 153 385 OTO use episodes identified, 89 029 (58.0%) occurred among women, 62 900 (41.0%) occurred among patients with Medicare Advantage insurance, 39 394 (25.7%) occurred in the Midwest, 17 366 (11.3%) occurred in the Northeast, 73 316 (47.8%) occurred in the South, and 23 309 (15.2%) occurred in the West. Less than half of use episodes (73 117 episodes [47.7%]) involved patients with evidence in claims data of opioid tolerance prior to initiating therapy with an OTO medication, including 31 392 of 101 676 episodes (30.9%) involving transdermal fentanyl, 1561 of 2440 episodes (64.0%) involving transmucosal fentanyl, 36 596 of 43 559 episodes (84.0%) involving extended-release oxycodone, and 3568 of 5710 episodes (62.5%) involving extended-release hydromorphone. Among 20 044 OTO use episodes with linked EHR and claims data, less than 1% of OTO episodes identified in claims had evidence of opioid tolerance in structured EHR data that was not present in claims data (108 episodes [0.5%]). After limiting the sample to OTO episodes identified in claims with a matching OTO prescription within 14 days in the structured EHR data, only 40 of 939 episodes (4.0%) occurred among patients with evidence of tolerance that was not present in claims data. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that most patients initiating OTO medications did not have evidence of prior opioid tolerance, suggesting they were at increased risk of opioid-related harms, including fatal overdose. Data from EHRs did not contribute substantial additional evidence of opioid tolerance beyond the data found in prescription claims. Future research is needed to understand the clinical rationale behind these observed prescribing patterns and to quantify the risk of harm to patients associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing.

Onset of acute myocardial infarction after use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

PURPOSE: To examine the association between cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) selective and traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and incident acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and to address unanswered questions regarding the contour of risk over time. METHODS: A cohort of new NSAID users aged 40-84 years was followed for the occurrence of first AMI. Data were collected within the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) from 1 January 1997 to 31 December 2004. RESULTS: The study population included 1185 AMI events (889 probable and 296 possible) from a cohort of 283 136 patients. After adjustment for demographic and cardiovascular risk factors, the hazard ratio (HR) for AMI was significantly increased for both coxib (2.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-4.26) and non-coxib (2.24, 95%CI 1.13-4.42) COX-2 selective NSAIDs when compared to remote exposure to NSAIDs, but was not increased for traditional NSAIDs. Stratifying exposure into the first month of use versus use beyond 1 month, the risk of AMI was increased during the first month of COX-2 selective NSAIDs use, but not later (3.43, 95%CI 1.66-7.07 and 1.88, 95%CI 0.82-4.31, respectively p-value for interaction = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the use of coxib and non-coxib COX-2 selective NSAIDs was associated with an elevated risk of AMI within the first month of exposure. Recent past exposure to NSAID was not associated with a similar increase in risk.

Patterns of Immediate-Release and Extended-Release Opioid Analgesic Use in the Management of Chronic Pain, 2003-2014.

Importance: Many stakeholders are working to improve the safe use of immediate-release (IR) and extended-release/long-acting (ER/LA) opioid analgesics. However, little information exists regarding the relative use of these 2 formulations in chronic pain management. Objectives: To describe the distribution of IR and ER/LA opioid analgesic therapy duration and examine adding and switching patterns among patients receiving long-term IR opioid analgesic therapy, defined as at least 90 consecutive days of IR formulation use. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study of 169 million individuals receiving opioid analgesics from across 90% of outpatient retail pharmacies in the United States from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2014, using the IQVIA Health Vector One: Data Extract Tool. Analyses were conducted from March 2015 to June 2017. Exposures: Receipt of dispensed IR or ER/LA opioid analgesic prescription. Main Outcomes and Measures: Distribution of therapy frequency and duration of IR and ER/LA opioid analgesic use, and annual proportions of patients receiving long-term IR opioid analgesic therapy who added an ER/LA formulation while continuing to use an IR formulation, switched to an ER/LA formulation, or continued receiving IR opioid analgesic therapy only. Results: Among the 169 280 456 patients included in this analysis, 168 315 458 patients filled IR formulations and 10 216 570 patients filled ER/LA formulations. A similar percentage of women received ER/LA (55%) and IR (56%) formulations, although those receiving ER/LA formulations (72%) were more likely to be aged 45 years or older compared with those receiving IR formulations (46%). The longest opioid analgesic episode duration was 90 days or longer for 11 563 089 patients (7%) filling IR formulations and 3 103 777 patients (30%) filling ER/LA formulations. The median episode duration was 5 days (interquartile range, 3-10 days) for patients using IR formulations and 30 days (interquartile range, 21-74 days) for patients using ER/LA formulations. From January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2014, a small and decreasing proportion of patients with long-term IR opioid analgesic therapy added (3.8% in 2003 to 1.8% in 2014) or switched to (1.0% in 2003 to 0.5% in 2014) an ER/LA formulation. Conclusions and Relevance: Most patients receiving opioid analgesics, whether for short or extended periods, use IR formulations. Once receiving long-term IR opioid analgesic therapy, patients are unlikely to add or switch to an ER/LA formulation.

Opioid tolerance and urine drug testing among initiates of extended-release or long-acting opioids in Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel System.

OBJECTIVE: A risk evaluation and mitigation strategy for extended-release and long-acting (ER/LA) opioid analgesics was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2012. Our objective was to assess frequency of opioid tolerance and urine drug testing for individuals initiating ER/LA opioid analgesics. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Sentinel, a distributed database with electronic healthcare data on >190 million predominantly commercially insured members. PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS: Members under age 65 initiating ER/LA opioid analgesics between January 2009 and December 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We examined the proportion of opioid-tolerant-only ER/LA opioid analgesic initiates meeting tolerance criteria: receipt of ≥30 mg oxycodone equivalents per day in 7 days prior to the first opioid-tolerant-only dispensing. We separately examined the proportion of new users of extended-release oxycodone (ERO) and other ER/LA opioid analgesics with a claim for a urine drug test in the 30 days prior to, and separately for the 183 days after, dispensing. RESULTS: We identified 79,824 ERO, 7,343 extended-release hydromorphone, and 91,778 transdermal fentanyl opi-oid-tolerant-only episodes. Tolerance criteria were met in 64 percent of ERO, 64 percent of extended-release hydromorphone and 40 percent of transdermal fentanyl episodes. We identified 210,581 incident ERO and 311,660 other ER/LA opioid analgesic episodes. Use of urine drug testing for ERO compared with other ER/LA opioid analgesics was: 4 percent vs 14 percent respectively in the 30 days prior to initiation and 9 percent vs 23 percent respectively in the 183 days following initiation. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest potential areas for improving appropriate ER/LA opioid analgesic prescribing practices.

Trends in the Concomitant Prescribing of Opioids and Benzodiazepines, 2002-2014.

INTRODUCTION: Although many clinical guidelines caution against the combined use of opioids and benzodiazepines, overdose deaths and emergency department visits involving the co-ingestion of these drugs are increasing. METHODS: In this ecologic time series study, the IMS Health Total Patient Tracker was used to describe nationally projected trends of patients receiving opioids and benzodiazepines in the U.S. outpatient retail setting between January 2002 and December 2014. The IMS Health Data Extract Tool was used to examine trends in the concomitant prescribing of these two medication classes among 177 million individuals receiving opioids during this period. The annual proportion of opioid recipients who were prescribed benzodiazepines concomitantly was calculated and stratified by gender, age, duration of opioid use, immediate-release versus extended-release/long-acting opioids, and benzodiazepine molecule. The proportion of patients with concomitancy receiving opioids and benzodiazepines from the same prescriber was also analyzed. Analyses were conducted from April to June 2015. RESULTS: The nationally projected number of patients receiving opioids and benzodiazepines increased by 8% and 31%, respectively, from 2002 to 2014. During this period, the annual proportion of opioid recipients dispensed a benzodiazepine concomitantly increased from 6.8% to 9.6%, which corresponded to a relative increase of 41%. Approximately half of these patients received both prescriptions from the same prescriber on the same day. Concomitancy was more common in patients receiving opioids for ≥90 days, women, and the elderly. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant prescribing of opioids and benzodiazepines is increasing and may play a growing role in adverse patient outcomes related to these medications.

Trends in adherence to a revised risk management program designed to decrease or eliminate isotretinoin-exposed pregnancies: evaluation of the accutane SMART program.

OBJECTIVE: To review adherence to selected procedures outlined in the System to Manage Accutane-Related Teratogenicity (SMART) program during the first year of implementation vs the procedures in effect in the year prior to initiation of the SMART program. DESIGN: Observational. SETTING: A novel pharmacy compliance survey and an ongoing, voluntary survey. PATIENTS: Female recipients of isotretinoin. INTERVENTION: In April 2002, Hoffmann-La Roche Inc, Nutley, NJ, manufacturer of Accutane brand isotretinoin and at that time the sole source of isotretinoin, revised earlier guidelines and instituted the SMART risk management program, which included the use of qualification stickers to affix to all prescriptions for Accutane to indicate, among other things, a negative pregnancy test just before the prescription was written. The goal of the SMART program was to decrease or eliminate isotretinoin-exposed pregnancies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Use and completion of prescription qualification stickers; changes in pretherapy pregnancy testing and birth control use. RESULTS: The results of the pharmacy compliance survey indicated high (>90%) use of prescription qualification stickers. Results of the patient survey suggested that 9% of prescription qualification stickers within the observed user cohort were issued without a pregnancy test. Furthermore, the pregnancy rate for patients participating in the survey was similar to that reported for cohorts recruited before the SMART program. CONCLUSIONS: The usefulness of the results derived from 2 surveys designed to evaluate the SMART program is limited by the lack of reliability and validity of the survey instruments and by questionable generalizability to all female recipients of isotretinoin. The presence of a qualification sticker may not have an impact on pregnancy testing or compliance with effective birth control behavior as outlined in the SMART program.

Incident diabetes associated with antipsychotic use in the United Kingdom general practice research database.

BACKGROUND: Recent reports suggest an association between antipsychotic use and development or exacerbation of diabetes. This study evaluated the risk of incident diabetes associated with the use of atypical and conventional antipsychotics. METHOD: This nested case-control study included all patients in the U.K. General Practice Research Database treated with antipsychotic drugs between January 1994 and December 1998. The main outcome measures were the odds ratios of current (within prior 6 months) or recent (7 to 12 months) antipsychotic exposure among those with (N = 424) compared with those without incident diabetes (N = 1522). RESULTS: The adjusted odds ratio for current use of any antipsychotic drug compared with no use in the past year among those with diabetes was 1.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3 to 2.3). The adjusted odds ratio for current use of atypical and conventional antipsychotic drugs compared with no use in the past year among those with diabetes was 4.7 (95% CI = 1.5 to 14.9) and 1.7 (95% CI = 1.2 to 2.3), respectively. The adjusted odds ratio for recent use of conventional antipsychotic drugs compared with no use in the past year among those with diabetes was 1.0 (95% CI = 0.6 to 1.6). The odds ratio for recent atypical antipsychotic drug use could not be calculated because no study subjects had this exposure. CONCLUSION: This study showed an increased risk of incident diabetes among current users of atypical and conventional antipsychotic medications. These results were independent of other established risk factors. The larger association observed for atypical antipsychotic users should be regarded as preliminary given the small number of incident diabetes cases in this group.

No association of abacavir use with myocardial infarction: findings of an FDA meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have reported an association between abacavir (ABC) exposure and increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI) among HIV-infected individuals. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a pooled analysis by GlaxoSmithKline, however, do not support this association. To better estimate the effect of ABC use on risk of MI, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) conducted a trial-level meta-analysis of RCTs in which ABC use was randomized as part of a combined antiretroviral regimen. METHODS: From a literature search conducted among 4 databases, 26 RCTs were selected that met the following criteria: conducted in adults, sample size more than 50 subjects, status completed, not a pharmacokinetic trial, and not conducted in Africa. The Mantel-Haenszel method, with risk difference and 95% confidence interval, was used for the primary analysis, along with additional alternative analyses, based on FDA-requested adverse event reports of MI provided by each investigator. RESULTS: The 26 RCTs were conducted from 1996 to 2010, and included 9868 subjects (5028 ABC and 4840 non-ABC). Mean follow-up was 1.43 person-years in the ABC group and 1.49 person-years in the non-ABC group. Forty-six (0.47%) MI events were reported [24 (0.48%) ABC and 22 (0.46%) non-ABC], with no significant difference noted between the 2 groups (risk difference of 0.008% with 95% confidence interval: -0.26% to 0.27%). CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, our study represents the largest trial-level meta-analysis to date of clinical trials in which ABC use was randomized. Our analysis found no association between ABC use and MI risk.