Effect of Multi-Dose Dispensing on Medication Regimen Complexity: A Real-World Study.

(1) Background: Older patients frequently require dosing aids, such as multi-dose medication dispensing (MMD) when they experience medication regimen complexity (MRC) with increased drug use. However, the evaluations of the efficacy of MMD alterations remain limited. (2) Methods: A total of 1120 patients were included in the study who were discharged from hospital during the study period of January to March 2019. The Medication Regimen Complexity Index (MRCI) score, a validated 65-item tool in Korea (MRCI-K), was used to quantify MRC. The original MRCI-K scores, representing the typical administration based on prescription information, were compared to recalculated MRCI-K scores measured following MMD during the hospital dispensing period. Differences in MRCI-K across the top four wards based on the numbers of discharge prescription medications were assessed, and the overall scores were categorized into quartiles to identify MMD's impact within each group. We confirmed the effect of MMD based on the patient's admission diagnosis depending on MRCI. (3) Results: The mean (standard deviation) of original MRCI scores was 26.2 (13.4), which decreased to 18.9 (8.8) after applying MMD. The decrease in MRCI scores after MMD was statistically significant in all four wards, with the Orthopedic Surgery ward showing the biggest decrease. The patients with MRCI scores in the highest quartile group demonstrated the greatest improvement as a result of the implementation of MMD. Respiratory diseases exhibited the highest baseline MRCI scores due to formulation complexity, and ear, nose, and throat patients demonstrated the most significant reduction in MRC after MMD, depending on the diagnostic criteria at administration. (4) Conclusions: We confirmed the reduction in MRC after applying MMD, as a significant decrease in MRCI-K scores. This study highlights the need to deliver effective pharmacist-led services to identify patients who would benefit from MMD.

Population pharmacokinetics of everolimus in patients with seizures associated with focal cortical dysplasia.

Background: Everolimus is an inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1. As mutations in TSC1 and TSC2, which cause partial-onset seizures associated with TSC, were found in focal cortical dysplasia type Ⅱ (FCD Ⅱ) patients, a clinical trial has been performed to explore the efficacy and safety of everolimus in FCD patients. However, no dosage regimen was determined to treat FCD II. To recommend an optimal dose regimen for FCD patients, a population pharmacokinetic model of everolimus in FCD patients was developed. Methods: The data of everolimus were collected from September 2017 to May 2020 in a tertiary-level hospital in Korea. The model was developed using NONMEM® software version 7.4.1 (Icon Development Solutions, Ellicott City, MD, United States). Results: The population pharmacokinetics of everolimus was described as the one-compartment model with first-order absorption, with the effect of BSA on clearance. The final model was built as follows: TVCL = 12.5 + 9.71 × (BSA/1.5), TVV = 293, and TVKA = 0.585. As a result of simulation, a dose higher than 7 mg/m2 is needed in patients with BSA 0.5 m2, and a dose higher than 6 mg/m2 is needed in patients with BSA 0.7 m2. A dose of 4.5 mg/m2 is enough in the population with BSA higher than 1.5 m2 to meet the target trough range of 5-15 ng/mL. Conclusion: Based on the developed pharmacokinetics model, the optimal dose of everolimus in practice was recommended by considering the available strengths of Afinitor disperz®, 2 mg, 3 mg, and 5 mg.

Risk of major adverse events associated with gabapentinoid and opioid combination therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: The use of opioid-gabapentinoid combinations has increased, raising several safety concerns. However, meta-analysis studies focusing on this issue are limited. Objective: To evaluate the risk of central nervous system (CNS) depression, gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events, and mortality of combination therapy compared with those of opioid therapy and to explore the differences in the results according to study design and indications. Methods: Relevant studies were selected (published before 30 January 2022) by searching the MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases. The pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of the outcomes were estimated using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were performed according to study characteristics. Quality assessment was conducted using the Risk of Bias 2 tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias in non-RCTs tool for non-randomized trials. Results: Adverse events were reported in 26 RCTs and 7 non-RCTs, and mortality was reported in 10 non-RCTs. Compared to opioid therapy, dizziness, cognitive dysfunction, and respiratory depression in combination therapy significantly increased in non-RCTs (OR 3.26, 95% CI 1.82-5.85; OR 3.13, 95% CI 1.51-6.50; OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.31-2.24, respectively), and a similar trend for dizziness and cognitive dysfunction was also identified in the RCT analysis, although the difference was not significant. Combination therapy for cancer pain was associated with the highest risk of sedation in subgroup analysis. Combination therapy significantly decreased the risk of GI adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, and constipation. The mortality risk associated with combination therapy was higher than that associated with opioid therapy (OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.26-6.05). Conclusion: Opioid-gabapentinoid combination therapy could be associated with an increased risk of CNS depression and mortality, despite tolerable GI adverse events. These data suggest that combination therapy requires close monitoring of CNS depression, especially in cancer patients. Caution is needed in interpreting the clinical meanings owing to the lack of risk difference in respiratory depression in the RCT-only analysis and the absence of RCT or prospective studies investigating mortality.

Real-world experience of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor on the glucose-lowering effect.

We investigated the effect of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) on glycemic control in Korean patients. This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary hospital. We compared the HbA1c level reduction between the ARNI and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in chronic heart failure patients with diabetes. We also examined whether the target HbA1c level was reached and the time to start insulin between the two groups. Over the study period, ARNI did not significantly lower the HbA1c level after adjusting confounding factors compared to ACEIs or ARBs. However, as a result of a simple comparison using Mann-Whitney U test, ARNI group showed significant decrease in HbA1c at 6, 12, and 24 months compared to ACEIs or ARBs group (p = 0.003, 0.009, and 0.026, respectively). The initiation of insulin was delayed in the ARNI group, but this difference was not significant based on the result of hazard ratio, but cumulative incidence was significantly lower in the ARNI group. In the real world, the blood glucose-control effects of ARNI were not superior to those of ACEIs or ARBs. However, long-term studies are needed as ARNI use increases to obtain more statistically significant results.