Is erenumab an efficient alternative for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine in Spain? Results of a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: The reimbursement of erenumab in Spain and other European countries is currently restricted because of the cost of this novel therapy to patients with migraine who have experienced previous failures to traditional preventive treatments. However, this reimbursement policy should be preferably based on cost-effectiveness studies, among other criteria. This study performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of erenumab versus topiramate for the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine (EM) and versus placebo for chronic migraine (CM). METHODS: A Markov model with a 10-year time horizon, from the perspective of the Spanish National Healthcare System, was constructed based on data from responder and non-responder patients. A responder was defined as having a minimum 50% reduction in the number of monthly migraine days (MMD). A hypothetical cohort of patients with EM with one or more prior preventive treatment failures and patients with CM with more than two treatment failures was considered. The effectiveness score was measured as an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost per migraine day (MD) avoided. Data from clinical outcomes and patient characteristics were obtained from erenumab clinical trials (NCT02066415, STRIVE, ARISE, LIBERTY and HER-MES). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to validate the robustness of the model. RESULTS: After a 10-year follow-up, the estimated QALYs were 5.88 and 6.11 for patients with EM treated with topiramate and erenumab, respectively. Erenumab showed an incremental cost per patient of €4,420 vs topiramate. For CM patients, erenumab resulted in 0.756 QALYs gained vs placebo; and an incremental cost of €1,814. Patients treated with erenumab achieved reductions in MD for both EM and CM (172 and 568 MDs, respectively). The incremental cost per QALY gained with erenumab was below the Spanish threshold of €30,000/QALY for both health and societal perspectives (EM €19,122/QALY and CM €2,398/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Erenumab is cost-effective versus topiramate as a preventive treatment for EM and versus placebo for patients with CM from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.

Comparing the efficacy of anti-seizure medications using matched cohorts on a large insurance claims database.

Epilepsy is a severe chronic neurological disease affecting 60 million people worldwide. Primary treatment is with anti-seizure medicines (ASMs), but many patients continue to experience seizures. We used retrospective insurance claims data on 280,587 patients with uncontrolled epilepsy (UE), defined as status epilepticus, need for a rescue medicine, or admission or emergency visit for an epilepsy code. We conducted a computational risk ratio analysis between pairs of ASMs using a causal inference method, in order to match 1034 clinical factors and simulate randomization. Data was extracted from the MarketScan insurance claims Research Database records from 2011 to 2015. The cohort consisted of individuals over 18 years old with a diagnosis of epilepsy who took one of eight ASMs and had more than a year of history prior to the filling of the drug prescription. Seven ASM exposures were analyzed: topiramate, phenytoin, levetiracetam, gabapentin, lamotrigine, valproate, and carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine (treated as the same exposure). We calculated the risk ratio of UE between pairs of ASM after controlling for bias with inverse propensity weighting applied to 1034 factors, such as demographics, confounding illnesses, non-epileptic conditions treated by ASMs, etc. All ASMs exhibited a significant reduction in the prevalence of UE, but three drugs showed pair-wise differences compared to other ASMs. Topiramate consistently was associated with a lower risk of UE, with a mean risk ratio range of 0.68-0.93 (average 0.82, CI: 0.56-1.08). Phenytoin and levetiracetam were consistently associated with a higher risk of UE with mean risk ratio ranges of 1.11 to 1.47 (average 1.13, CI 0.98-1.65) and 1.15 to 1.43 (average 1.2, CI 0.72-1.69), respectively. Large-scale retrospective insurance claims data - combined with causal inference analysis - provides an opportunity to compare the effect of treatments in real-world data in populations 1,000-fold larger than those in typical randomized trials. Our causal analysis identified the clinically unexpected finding of topiramate as being associated with a lower risk of UE; and phenytoin and levetiracetam as associated with a higher risk of UE (compared to other studied drugs, not to baseline). However, we note that our data set for this study only used insurance claims events, which does not comprise actual seizure frequencies, nor a clear picture of side effects. Our results do not advocate for any change in practice but demonstrate that conclusions from large databases may differ from and supplement those of randomized trials and clinical practice and therefore may guide further investigation.

Association of patient characteristics and insurance type with anti-obesity medications prescribing and fills.

AIM: To characterize factors associated with the receipt of anti-obesity medication (AOM) prescription and fill. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used electronic health records from 1 January 2015 to 30 June 2023, in a large health system in Ohio and Florida. Adults with a body mass index ≥30 kg/m2 who attended ≥1 weight-management programme or had an initial AOM prescription between 1 July 2015 and 31 December 2022, were included. The main measures were a prescription for an AOM (naltrexone-bupropion, orlistat, phentermine-topiramate, liraglutide 3.0 mg and semaglutide 2.4 mg) and an AOM fill during the study follow-up. RESULTS: We identified 50 678 adults, with a mean body mass index of 38 ± 8 kg/m2 and follow-up of 4.7 ± 2.4 years. Only 8.0% of the cohort had AOM prescriptions and 4.4% had filled prescriptions. In the multivariable analyses, being a man, Black, Hispanic and other race/ethnicity (vs. White), Medicaid, traditional Medicare, Medicare Advantage, self-pay and other insurance types (vs. private insurance) and fourth quartile of the area deprivation index (vs. first quartile) were associated with lower odds of a new prescription. Hispanic ethnicity, being a man, Medicaid, traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage insurance types, liraglutide and orlistat (vs. naltrexone-buproprion) were associated with lower odds of AOM fill, while phentermine-topiramate was associated with higher odds. Among privately insured individuals, the insurance carrier was associated with both the odds of AOM prescription and fill. CONCLUSIONS: Significant disparities exist in access to AOM both at the prescribing stage and getting the prescription filled based on patient characteristics and insurance type.

Competing treatments for migraine: a headache for decision-makers.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is the world's second most common disabling disorder, affecting 15% of UK adults and costing the UK over £1.5 billion per year. Several costly new drugs have been approved by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. AIM: To assess the cost-effectiveness of drugs used to treat adults with chronic migraine. METHODS: We did a systematic review of placebo-controlled trials of preventive drugs for chronic migraine. We then assessed the cost-effectiveness of the currently prescribable drugs included in the review: Onabotulinum toxin A (BTA), Eptinezumab (100mg or 300mg), Fremanezumab (monthly or quarterly dose), Galcanezumab or Topiramate, each compared to placebo, and we evaluated them jointly. We developed a Markov (state-transition) model with a three-month cycle length to estimate the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for the different medications from a UK NHS and Personal Social Services perspective. We used a two-year time horizon with a starting age of 30 years for the patient cohort. We estimated transition probabilities based on monthly headache days using a network meta-analysis (NMA) developed by us, and from published literature. We obtained costs from published sources and applied discount rates of 3.5% to both costs and outcomes. RESULTS: Deterministic results suggest Topiramate was the least costly option and generated slightly more QALYs than the placebo, whereas Eptinezumab 300mg was the more costly option and generated the most QALYs. After excluding dominated options, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between BTA and Topiramate was £68,000 per QALY gained and the ICER between Eptinezumab 300mg and BTA was not within plausible cost-effectiveness thresholds. The cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier showed that Topiramate is the most cost-effective medication for any amount the decision maker is willing-to-pay per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Among the various prophylactic medications for managing chronic migraine, only Topiramate was within typical cost-effectiveness threshold ranges. Further research is needed, ideally an economic evaluation alongside a randomised trial, to compare these newer, expensive CGRP MAbs with the cheaper oral medications.

Cost-Effectiveness of Antiobesity Drugs for Adolescents With Severe Obesity.

Importance: Although the American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended treatment with antiobesity drugs for adolescents, the cost-effectiveness of antiobesity drugs for this population is still unknown. Objective: To quantify cost-effectiveness of different antiobesity drugs available for pediatric use. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation used a Markov microsimulation model with health states defined by obesity levels. Effectiveness was measured by quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs were calculated from third-party payer perspective, estimated in 2023 US dollars over a 10-year horizon. Data were obtained from the published literature. Intervention: Antiobesity drugs orlistat, liraglutide, semaglutide, and phentermine-topiramate vs no treatment. Metformin hydrochloride and 2 types of bariatric surgical procedures (sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass) were considered in sensitivity analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results: Among the 4 antiobesity drugs currently approved for pediatric use, phentermine-topiramate was the most cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $93 620 per QALY relative to no treatment in this simulated cohort of 10 000 adolescents aged 12 to 17 years (mode, 15 years) with severe obesity (62% female). While semaglutide offered more QALYs than phentermine-topiramate, its higher cost resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ($1 079 480/QALY) that exceeded the commonly used willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 to $150 000/QALY. Orlistat and liraglutide cost more and were less effective than phentermine-topiramate and semaglutide, respectively. Sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass were more effective than phentermine-topiramate but were also more costly, rendering them not cost-effective compared with phentermine-topiramate at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 to $150 000/QALY. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation of weight loss drugs for adolescents with severe obesity, we found phentermine-topiramate to be a cost-effective treatment at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 to $150 000/QALY. Further research is needed to determine long-term drug efficacy and how long adolescents continue treatment.

Cost-Effectiveness of Pharmacotherapy for the Treatment of Obesity in Adolescents.

Importance: Antiobesity pharmacotherapy is recommended for adolescents ages 12 years and older with obesity. Several medications have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for adolescent use, but the most cost-effective medication remains unclear. Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of lifestyle counseling alone and as adjunct to liraglutide, mid-dose phentermine and topiramate (7.5 mg phentermine and 46 mg topiramate), top-dose phentermine and topiramate (15 mg phentermine and 92 mg topiramate), or semaglutide among adolescent patients with obesity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation used a microsimulation model to project health and cost outcomes of lifestyle counseling alone and adjunct to liraglutide, mid-dose phentermine and topiramate, top-dose phentermine and topiramate, or semaglutide over 13 months, 2 years, and 5 years among a hypothetical cohort of 100 000 adolescents with obesity, defined as an initial body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 37. Model inputs were derived from clinical trials, published literature, and national sources. Data were analyzed from April 2022 to July 2023. Exposures: Lifestyle counseling alone and as adjunct to liraglutide, mid-dose phentermine and topiramate, top-dose phentermine and topiramate, or semaglutide. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs (2022 US dollars), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), with future costs and QALYs discounted 3.0% annually. A strategy was considered cost-effective if the ICER was less than $100 000 per QALY gained. The preferred strategy was determined as the strategy with the greatest increase in QALYs while being cost-effective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to assess parameter uncertainty. Results: The model simulated 100 000 adolescents at age 15 with an initial BMI of 37, of whom 58 000 (58%) were female. At 13 months and 2 years, lifestyle counseling was estimated to be the preferred strategy. At 5 years, top-dose phentermine and topiramate was projected to be the preferred strategy with an ICER of $56 876 per QALY gained vs lifestyle counseling. Semaglutide was projected to yield the most QALYs, but with an unfavorable ICER of $1.1 million per QALY gained compared with top-dose phentermine and topiramate. Model results were most sensitive to utility of weight reduction and weight loss of lifestyle counseling and top-dose phentermine and topiramate. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation of pharmacotherapy for adolescents with obesity, top-dose phentermine and topiramate as adjunct to lifestyle counseling was estimated to be cost-effective after 5 years. Long-term clinical trials in adolescents are needed to fully evaluate the outcomes of pharmacotherapy, especially into adulthood.

Obesity prevalence and variability in management practices for patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease.

Obesity has been associated with poor disease outcomes in patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Given evolving treatments for obesity, evaluating its prevalence and treatment practices are key to develop a holistic management of PAD. We aimed to examine prevalence of obesity and variability of management strategies in symptomatic PAD patients enrolled in the international multicenter PORTRAIT registry from 2011 to 2015. Obesity management strategies studied included weight and/or dietary counseling and prescription of weight loss medications (orlistat, lorcaserin, phentermine-topiramate, naltrexone-buproprion, and liraglutide). Use frequency of obesity management strategies were calculated by country and compared across centers using adjusted median odds ratios (MOR). Of 1002 patients included, 36 % had obesity. No patients received weight loss medications. Weight and/or dietary counseling was prescribed in only 20 % of patients with obesity with significant variability in practices between centers (range 0.0-39.7 %; MOR 3.6, 95 % CI 2.04-9.95, p = < 0.001). In conclusion, obesity is a prevalent modifiable comorbidity in PAD that is hardly addressed during PAD management, with significant variability across practices. As obesity prevalence rates are growing, along with treatment modalities to treat it, especially in those with PAD, building systems to integrate systematic evidence-based weight and dietary management strategies in PAD are essential to close this gap in care.

Assessment of the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) for Phentermine-Topiramate to Prevent Exposure During Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved phentermine-topiramate for obesity in 2012 and required a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) to prevent prenatal exposure. No such requirement was introduced for topiramate. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of prenatal exposure, contraceptive use, and pregnancy testing among patients with phentermine-topiramate compared with topiramate or other antiobesity medications (AOMs). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Nationwide health insurance claims database. PARTICIPANTS: Females aged 12 to 55 years with no infertility diagnosis or sterilization procedure. Patients with other indications for topiramate were excluded to identify a cohort that was likely treated for obesity. MEASUREMENTS: Patients initiated use of phentermine-topiramate, topiramate, or an AOM (liraglutide, lorcaserin, or bupropion-naltrexone). Pregnancy at treatment initiation, conception during treatment, contraceptive use, and pregnancy testing outcomes were ascertained. Measurable confounders were adjusted for, and extensive sensitivity analyses were done. RESULTS: A total of 156 280 treatment episodes were observed. Adjusted prevalence of pregnancy at treatment initiation was 0.9 versus 1.6 per 1000 episodes (prevalence ratio, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.95]) for phentermine-topiramate versus topiramate. The incidence rate of conception during treatment was 9.1 versus 15.0 per 1000 person-years (rate ratio, 0.61 [CI, 0.40 to 0.91]) for phentermine-topiramate versus topiramate. Both outcomes were similarly lower for phentermine-topiramate compared with AOM. Prenatal exposure was marginally lower in topiramate users compared with AOM users. Approximately 20% of patients in all cohorts had at least 50% of treatment days covered by contraceptives. Few patients had pregnancy tests before treatment (≤5%), but this was more common among phentermine-topiramate users. LIMITATIONS: Outcome misclassification; unmeasured confounding due to lack of prescriber data to account for possible clustering and spillover effects. CONCLUSION: Prenatal exposure seemed to be significantly lower among phentermine-topiramate users under the REMS. Pregnancy testing and contraceptive use appeared to be inadequate for all groups, which deserves attention to prevent the remaining potential exposures. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Estimated minimum prices and lowest available national prices for antiobesity medications: Improving affordability and access to treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Novel antiobesity treatments are highly effective in recent clinical trials. Access to these medications is needed to supplement lifestyle and surgical interventions for millions living with obesity worldwide, but high prices are limiting. This study aimed to review current treatment costs and calculate potential estimated minimum prices (EMPs). METHODS: The authors searched national drug price databases across various countries for orlistat, naltrexone-bupropion, topiramate-phentermine, liraglutide, semaglutide, and tirzepatide. EMPs for antiobesity medications were calculated using established methodology, using active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) from the Panjiva database. EMPs were calculated per 30-day course and include costs of active pharmaceutical ingredients, excipients, formulation, taxation, and 10% profit margin. RESULTS: National prices of antiobesity medications were significantly higher than calculated EMPs. Semaglutide 30-day course prices ranged from $804 (United States) to $95 (Turkey) while the EMP was $40. Liraglutide prices ranged from $1418 (United States) to $252 (Norway) while the EMP was $50. Some oral treatments could be generically manufactured at very low costs per course ($7 for orlistat; $5 for phentermine/topiramate combination tablets), while naltrexone/bupropion was more expensive ($54). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that certain weight loss treatments can be manufactured and sold profitably at low costs, but prices currently range widely between countries, limiting access for those in need.

Eficacia y seguridad de lacosamida como tratamiento complementario en pacientes pediátricos con epilepsia focal refractaria / Efficacy and safety of lacosamide as adjunctive treatment in pediatric patients with refractory focal epilepsy

ANTECEDENTES: En el marco de la metodología ad hoc para evaluar solicitudes de tecnologías sanitarias, aprobada mediante Resolución de Institución de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación N° 97-IETSI-ESSALUD-2022, se ha elaborado el presente dictamen que expone la evaluación de la eficacia y seguridad de lacosamida para el tratamiento de pacientes pediátricos con epilepsia focal refractaria. Así, el médico Dr. Edwin Martín Lazo Rivera, especialista en neurología pediátrica del Hospital Nacional Carlos Alberto Seguín Escobedo - Red Asistencial Arequipa y la Dra. Rebeca Fiorella Valdivia Bravo, especialista en pediatría del Hospital Nacional Alberto Sabogal Sologuren de la Red Prestacional Sabogal, siguiendo la Directiva N° 003-IETSI-ESSALUD-2016, enviaron al Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación ­ IETSI sus respectivas solicitudes de autorización de uso del producto farmacéutico lacosamida no incluido en el Petitorio Farmacológico de EsSalud. ASPECTOS GENERALES: La epilepsia es una condición del sistema nervioso central caracterizada por crisis epilépticas recurrentes y no provocadas por desencadenantes inmediatos identificables. Así, la crisis epiléptica es aquel acontecimiento transitorio de signos y/o síntomas originados por una actividad neuronal cerebral sincrónica anormal o excesiva, que puede manifestarse por fenómenos sensitivos, motores, sensoriales o autonómicos con o sin pérdida de la conciencia, ya que dependen del área cerebral donde se originan. En ese sentido, las crisis convulsivas se clasifican según tres posibilidades de origen: las de inicio focal, generalizado y desconocido. Las crisis focales, a su vez, se pueden subclasificar en aquellas que tienen pérdida o no de la consciencia, para posteriormente categorizar si los síntomas son motores o no motores. En consecuencia, los especialistas deciden el abordaje terapéutico de los pacientes con epilepsia focal teniendo en cuenta esta clasificación, adicional a la etiología y a las comorbilidades asociadas (Reséndiz-Aparicio et al.,2019, Fisher et al.,2017, INSN.,2020). En todo el mundo, la epilepsia afecta aproximadamente a 65 millones de personas, reportándose una incidencia de la epilepsia de 67,8 por 100 000 habitantes en los países en desarrollo (Mohammadzadeh et al., 2022). En el Perú, se estima que la prevalencia de epilepsia es de 11,9 a 32,1 por cada 1000 personas (Burneo et al., 2017). Asimismo, es conocido que la incidencia de la epilepsia en la población pediátrica es de aproximadamente 0,5 % a 1 % de la población general. Además, algunos estudios sugieren que hasta el 60 % de los pacientes pediátricos con epilepsia presentarán remisión de su condición, mientras que alrededor del 20 % a 30 % de los pacientes con epilepsia serán refractarios al tratamiento médico (Ortiz de la Rosa et al., 2015). METODOLOGÍA: La búsqueda bibliográfica exhaustiva se llevó a cabo con el objetivo de identificar la mejor evidencia disponible sobre la eficacia y seguridad de lacosamida para el tratamiento de pacientes pediátricos con epilepsia focal refractaria a los FAE disponibles en EsSalud. La búsqueda bibliográfica se realizó en las bases de datos PubMed, The Cochrane Library. Web of Science y LILACS. Adicionalmente, se amplió la búsqueda revisando la evidencia generada por grupos internacionales que realizan revisiones sistemáticas (RS), evaluaciones de tecnologías sanitarias (ETS) y guías de práctica clínica (GPC) de: la National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), la American Academy of Neurology (ANN), la American Epilepsy Society (AES), la Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), la Internacional Database of GRADE Guideline (BIGG), la Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), la Comissáo Nacional de Incorporadáo de Tecnologias no Sistema Único de Saúde (CONITEC) y el Ministerio de Salud del Perú (MINSA). Adicionalmente, se realizó una búsqueda manual en las bases el portal de la Base Regional de Informes de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud de las Américas (BRISA), y el repositorio institucional de la Dirección General de Medicamentos, Insumos y Drogas (DIGEMID). Finalmente, se realizó una búsqueda en el portal ClinicalTrials.govdel National Institutes of Health (NIH) para identificar ensayos clínicos en desarrollo o que aún no hayan sido publicados. La metodología de tipo escalonada fue utilizada para la selección de documentos a ser incluidos en el presente dictamen. De acuerdo con los criterios de elegibilidad, se priorizaron durante la selección: GPC, ETS, RS de ensayos clínicos (EC) con o sin metaanálisis (MA), y ensayos clínicos aleatorizados (ECA) de fase III. Se elaboraron estrategias de búsqueda sensibles en bases de datos bibliográficas y sitios web para obtener la evidencia científica que permita responder a la pregunta PICO. Las estrategias de búsqueda incluyeron términos relacionados con la intervención y población de interés. Se emplearon términos MeSH4, así como términos de lenguaje libre, junto con operadores booleanos para cada una de las bases de datos elegidas para la búsqueda. Los registros obtenidos de la búsqueda bibliográfica fueron importados al aplicativo web Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org/) para una revisión manual por título y resumen. La selección de los estudios se realizó en una primera fase por dos evaluadores del Equipo Técnico del IETSI de manera independiente (búsqueda par); evaluando los títulos y resúmenes en relación con la pregunta PICO y seleccionando aquellos que serían evaluados a texto completo en una segunda fase por un único evaluador. En la segunda fase, uno de los evaluadores revisó los documentos a texto completo incluidos en la primera fase y realizó la selección final de los estudios. RESULTADOS: Luego de la búsqueda bibliográfica, se incluyó una GPC elaborada por la National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE 2022), y un ECA de fase III, NCT01921205 (Farkas et al., 2019). CONCLUSIÓN: Por lo expuesto, el Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación aprueba el uso de lacosamida para el tratamiento complementario en pacientes pediátricos con epilepsia focal refractaria, como producto farmacéutico no incluido en el Petitorio Farmacológico de EsSalud, según lo establecido en el Anexo N° 1. La vigencia del presente informe preliminar es de un año a partir de la fecha de publicación. Así, la continuación de dicha aprobación estará sujeta a la evaluación de los resultados obtenidos y de mayor evidencia que pueda surgir en el tiempo.

Eficacia y seguridad de fentermina/topiramato en pacientes adultos con obesidad que persisten sin pérdida de peso luego de terapia nutricional y actividad física a seis meses / Efficacy and safety of phentermine/topiramate in adult patients with obesity who persist without weight loss after nutritional therapy and physical activity at six months

ANTECEDENTES: En el marco de la metodología ad hoc para evaluar solicitudes de tecnologías sanitarias, aprobada mediante Resolución de Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación N° 111-IETSI-ESSALUD-2021, se ha elaborado el presente dictamen, el cual expone la evaluación de la eficacia y seguridad de fentermina/topiramato en pacientes adultos con obesidad que persisten sin pérdida de peso luego de terapia nutricional y actividad física a seis meses. ASPECTOS GENERALES: La obesidad es definida como una acumulación excesiva de grasa que puede perjudicar la salud de niños y adultos y se diagnóstica operacionalmente con un índice de massa corporal (IMC) igual o superior a 30 (MacMahon et al. 2009). La obesidad es una enfermedad crónica que aumenta el riesgo de complicaciones a largo plazo, genera un deterioro de la calidad de vida y disminuye la esperanza de vida (Blüher 2019). La prevalencia de este trastorno ha aumentado en los últimos 40 años con variaciones entre países (de 3.8 % en Japón a 38.2 % en Estados Unidos) (MP et al. 2018). En el Perú, la prevalencia de obesidad ha aumentado de 8.5 % en 1975 a 18.5 % en 2013, y a 24.6 % en 2020 (INEI 2020). La obesidad mórbida se presenta con mayor frecuencia en las mujeres (1.3 %) que en los varones (0.4 %) (Pajuelo Ramírez et al. 2019). La obesidad es considerada como un factor de riesgo para desarrollar enfermedades metabólicas, cardiovasculares, musculoesqueléticas, Alzheimer, depresión y algunos tipos de cáncer (Blüher 2019). Estas condiciones han generado que las muertes globales y los años de vida ajustados por discapacidad (AVAD) debido a la obesidad se dupliquen entre 1990 y 2017 en hombres (de 1.0 a 2.3 millones de muertes, y de 31.9 a 77.0 millones de AVAD) y mujeres (de 1.2 a 2.4 millones de muertes, y de 33.1 a 70.7 millones de AVAD) (Dai et al. 2020). En este sentido, reducir la carga de enfermedad y disminuir la prevalencia de la obesidad son prioridades sanitarias para la Organización Mundial de la Salud (WHO 2016). METODOLOGÍA: Se realizó una búsqueda sistemática, amplia y exhaustiva, en las bases de datos bibliográficas PubMed, The Cochrane Library y LILACS (Literatura Latinoamericana y del Caribe en Ciencias de la Salud). Asimismo, se realizó una búsqueda dentro de la información generada en las páginas web de grupos o instituciones que realizan revisiones sistemáticas (RS), evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias (ETS) y guías de práctica clínica (GPC), tales corno: el National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), la Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), el Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC), la Haute Authorité de Santé (HAS), el Institute for Quality and Efficiency in HealthCare (IQWiG), el Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) y en la Base Regional de Informes de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud de las Américas (BRISA), y en las principales instituciones o sociedades especializadas en endocrinología: la American Association of Clinical Endocrinology, la Obesity Society, la Endocrine Society, y la European Association for the Study of Obesity. Además, se llevó a cabo una búsqueda manual en el motor de búsqueda Google utilizando los términos: "Obesity guidelines"; revisando en las diez primeras páginas de resultados, a fin de poder identificar otras publicaciones de relevancia que pudiesen haber sido omitidas por la estrategia de búsqueda o que no hayan sido publicadas en las bases de datos bibliográficas consideradas. Finalmente, se realizó una búsqueda manual en ClinicalTrials.gov para identificar ensayos clínicos aleatorizados (ECA) en curso o que o hayan sido publicados aún. Se elaboraron estrategias de búsqueda en bases de datos bibliográficas y sitios web para obtener la evidencia científica que permita responder a la pregunta PICO. Las estrategias de búsqueda incluyeron términos relacionados con la intervención, población de interés y tipo de estudio. Se emplearon términos MeS1-11, así como, términos de lenguaje libre, junto con operadores booleanos para cada una de las bases de datos elegidas para la búsqueda. RESULTADOS: Luego de la búsqueda bibliográfica realizada hasta el 19 de septiembre del 2022, se identificaron: cuatro GPC (AHA/ACC/TOS, 2013; NICE, 2014; ES, 2015; MSPS, 2016) que emiten recomendaciones para el tratamiento de pacientes con obesidad y no han respondido a la terapia de cambios de estilos de vida. También se incluyó una RS (Khera et al., 2016) y tres ECA fase III (Allison et al., 2012; Gadde et al., 2011; Garvey et al., 2012). Por otro lado, se excluyeron seis GPC: una (SIGN, 2010) porque fue publicada antes de la primera autorización de comercialización de fentermina/topiramato; y cuatro (MSA 2014; AACE, 2016; OC/CAE3PS, 2020; VA/DoD, 2020) porque no brindan recomendaciones específicas para la población objetivo del presente dictamen. Además, se excluyeron tres RS (Xiang-Guo et al., 2021; Singh et al., 2020; Shi et al., 2022) porque incluyeron los mismos ECA pivotales que la RS incluida en el dictamen (Khera et al., 2016), pero tuvieron menor calidad metodológica según la herramienta AMSTAR. Finalmente, se excluyó un estudio (Kolotkin et al., 2015) que evaluó la calidad de vida mediante un análisis combinado de datos a nivel de paciente (pooled analysis of patient levet data) de cuatro ECA de fase III. Este estudio se excluyó porque el análisis combinado no tomó en cuenta las diferencias en los diseños de estudio de los cuatro ECA. Por ello, los resultados de calidad de vida fueron analizados en cada estudio, individualmente. CONCLUSIÓN: Por lo expuesto, el Instituto de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud e Investigación - IETSI no aprueba el uso de fentermina/topiramato en pacientes adultos con obesidad que persisten sin pérdida de peso luego de terapia nutricional y actividad física a seis meses, como producto farmacéutico no incluido en el Petitorio Farmacológico de EsSalud. Se recomienda a los especialistas que, en caso de identificar nueva evidencia que responda a la población de la PICO de interés, envíen sus propuestas para ser evaluadas en el marco de la Directiva N° 003-IETSI-ESSALUD-2016.

Simulations of topiramate dosage recommendations for poor compliance events.

PURPOSE: To determine the influences of one or two consecutive missed topiramate (TPM) doses on TPM pharmacokinetics and to suggest the proper TPM replacement dosing schemes using Monte Carlo simulations. METHODS: Monte Carlo simulations were performed for various replacement dosing schemes using the parameters from the published population pharmacokinetic models. The lowest percentage of deviation of simulated concentrations outside the reference range of 5-20 mg/L from the compliance scenario for each replacement dosing scheme was used as a criterion for choosing the proper replacement dosing scheme. RESULTS: For the one missed dose, the replacement with an immediate regular dose and a partial dose resulted in the lowest and highest percentages of concentration below 5 mg/L, respectively. While the opposite results were observed for the upper bound of the reference range (20 mg/L). For the two consecutive missed doses, the replacement with one and a half-missed doses resulted in a lower percentage of deviation of concentrations below 5 mg/L from the compliance scenario than the replacement with one regular dose. CONCLUSIONS: For the one missed dose, taking an immediate regular dose might be suitable for patients who require higher TPM levels, while for patients who require lower TPM levels, an immediate partial dose could be used. For the two consecutive missed doses, an immediate one and a half regular dose might be suitable. However, these results were merely based on simulations; thus, they should be used alongside the clinician's justification based on seizure control.

Genotoxic, biochemical and histopathological studies to assessment the topiramate hepatorenal toxicity in mice.

Liver and kidney role in detoxification and drug metabolism increases the risk of their poisonous injury. Topiramate (TMP) is an effective popular migraine prophylaxis that is accepted for utilize in adults and teenagers. Therefore, the target of this research is to estimate the potential toxic effects of TMP on liver and kidney in male mice. Thirty-two adult albino male mice were divided into four groups (n = 8 mice). Group I of animals was given saline solution and used as negative control. The other three groups were administrated TPM at doses (100, 200 and 400 mg/kg) for 28 days. Genotoxicity was evaluated by comet assay and DNA fragmentation by Diphenyleamine. Biochemical investigation was achieved by estimating liver enzymes (AST, ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP) creatinine and uric acid. In addition, measurement of the antioxidant enzymes, malondialdehyde and nitric oxide were performed in both two tissues of liver and kidney. Microscopic examination of hematoxyline and eosin (H&E), tumor necrosis factor (TNF-α) and caspase3 stained sections were done to explore the effect of topiramate on mice tissues of liver and kidney. The data revealed that TPM showed dose dependent toxicity that represented in: DNA damage in tested cells and increased level of liver enzymes, creatinine and uric acid as markers of toxicity. Topiramate significantly diminished antioxidant enzymes activities and elevated the level of malondialdehyde and nitric oxide. In addition, TPM caused histopathological alterations and dose dependent positive immune reaction for TNF--α and caspase 3 in kidney and liver tissues. The results showed that Topiramate has marked toxicity in liver and kidney of mice.

Behavioral economic analysis of topiramate pharmacotherapy for alcohol: a placebo-controlled investigation of effects on alcohol reinforcing value and delayed reward discounting.

RATIONALE: Pharmacotherapies are an important clinical strategy for treating alcohol use disorder and an understanding of their functional mechanisms can inform optimal use. Behavioral economics provides a translational platform that may advance our understanding of the motivational impacts of pharmacotherapies. OBJECTIVES: This secondary analysis study examined the effect of topiramate, a promising pharmacotherapy for treating alcohol use disorder, on two behavioral economic domains, the reinforcing value of alcohol (alcohol demand and alcohol-specific monetary expenditures) and delayed reward discounting (preference for smaller immediate rewards over larger delayed rewards). METHODS: A double-blind randomized placebo-controlled study (n = 99) was conducted with non-treatment seeking heavy drinkers, comparing topiramate (target dose of 200 mg/day titrated for 3 weeks and remained at the target dose for 2 weeks) to matched placebo. RESULTS: We found that compared to placebo, topiramate reduced the reinforcing value of alcohol, as shown by a reduction in two alcohol demand indices (intensity and Omax), money spent per week on alcohol and an almost a 50% increase in days without expenditures on alcohol from baseline. Directionally consistent patterns were also present for breakpoint and elasticity (ps = .08). No significant effects were found for delayed reward discounting. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that topiramate reduces alcohol's reinforcing value as measured by alcohol demand and alcohol expenditure. More broadly, these findings support the utility of behavioral economics for understanding how medications reduce alcohol use.

Multimodal Assessment of Medication Adherence Among Youth With Migraine: An Ancillary Study of the CHAMP Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Examine preventive medication adherence among youth with migraine. METHODS: Adherence (self-report, pill count, and blood serum drug levels) was assessed as an ancillary study that utilized data from 328 CHAMP Study participants (ages 8-17). CHAMP was a multisite trial of preventive medications. Participants completed a prospective headache diary during a six-month active treatment period during which youth took amitriptyline, topiramate, or placebo pill twice daily. Self-reported medication adherence was collected via daily diary. At monthly study visits, pill count measures were captured. At trial month 3 (trial midpoint) and 6 (end of active trial), blood serum drug levels were obtained. Self-report and pill count adherence percentages were calculated for the active trial period, at each monthly study visit, and in the days prior to participants' mid-trial blood draw. Percentages of nonzero drug levels were calculated to assess blood serum drug level data. Adherence measures were compared and assessed in context of several sociodemographic factors. Multiple regression analyses investigated medication adherence as a predictor of headache outcomes. RESULTS: Self-report and pill count adherence rates were high (over 90%) and sustained over the course of the trial period. Serum drug level adherence rates were somewhat lower and decreased significantly (from 84% to 76%) across the trial period [t (198) = 3.23, p = .001]. Adherence measures did not predict headache days at trial end; trial midpoint serum drug levels predicted headache-related disability. CONCLUSIONS: Youth with migraine can demonstrate and sustain relatively high levels of medication adherence over the course of a clinical trial.

Understanding the migraine treatment landscape prior to the introduction of calcitonin gene-related peptide inhibitors: Results from the Assessment of TolerabiliTy and Effectiveness in MigrAINe Patients using Preventive Treatment (ATTAIN) study.

BACKGROUND: Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) inhibitors were introduced in the United States (US) in 2018. To understand the changing patterns of preventive treatment following the introduction of these new agents, we must first characterize the patterns which preceded their introduction. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the burden, unmet need, and treatment patterns in patients with migraine initiating preventive migraine medications before the introduction of CGRP inhibitors in the US. METHODS: Between March 2016 and October 2017, we enrolled episodic (EM) and chronic migraine (CM) patients initiating or changing preventive treatment at primary care or neurology clinic visits in the US, in a real-world observational study using a prospective cohort design. At baseline and monthly thereafter for 6 months, we collected data from study sites and patients on migraine frequency, treatment modifications, migraine impact on functioning, and work productivity for a descriptive analysis of migraine patient experience and treatment patterns. RESULTS: From the sample of 234 completers, 118 had EM (50.4%) and 116 had CM (49.6%). Mean age at enrollment was 41 years (SD = 12) and mean age at first migraine diagnosis was 22 years (SD = 11). Most participants were females (n = 204/234; 87.2%) and white (n = 178/234; 76.1%). The majority (n = 164/234; 70.1%) had not used preventive migraine treatment in the 5 years prior to enrollment (treatment naïve). At baseline, mean monthly migraine days were 9.6 days (SD = 5.0) for the preventive treatment naïve group and 12.4 days (SD = 7.0) for treatment experienced patients. The majority had severe Migraine Disability Assessment (Grade IV, total score ≥21), including 67.1% (n = 110/164) of the preventive treatment naïve and 77.1% (n = 54/70) of the preventive treatment experienced patients. Headache Impact Test total scores indicating severe impairment (score >59) occurred in 88.4% (n = 145/164) of the treatment naïve and 88.6% (n = 62/70) of treatment experienced patients. Mean work productivity loss as measured by the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire in the subsample of employed patients was 53.3% loss. The most used acute medications at baseline were nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (n = 124/234; 53.0%), acetaminophen-based products (n = 112/234; 47.9%), and triptans (n = 105/234; 44.9%). The most commonly initiated preventive treatments were topiramate (n = 100/234; 42.7%), tricyclic antidepressants (n = 39/234; 16.7%), beta-blockers (n = 26/234; 11.1%), and onabotulinumtoxinA (n = 24/234; 10.3%). Over the 6-month follow-up period, almost half of patients (n = 116/234, 49.6%) modified their preventive treatment and discontinued treatment (n = 88/312 total modifications; 28.2%) or modified their pattern of use by increasing, decreasing, or skipping doses (n = 224/312 total modifications; 71.8%), often without seeking medical advice. Avoiding side effects was the main reason reported among patients who discontinued (n = 52/88; 59.1%), decreased frequency or dose (n = 37/89; 41.6%), and skipped doses (n = 29/86; 33.7%). Perceived lack of efficacy was another frequent reason reported among those who discontinued (n = 20/88; 22.7%), decreased frequency or dose (n = 15/89; 16.9%), and skipped doses (n = 18/86; 20.9%). Despite initiation of preventive treatment and improvements observed in number of headache and migraine days, migraine patients continued to experience substantial disability, headache impact, and reduced productivity throughout the 6-month follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to 2018, the burden of migraine was high for patients initiating preventive treatments. Despite having more than 9 days of migraine per month on average, the majority (70.1%) of patients initiating prevention had been treatment naïve, indicating underuse of preventive treatments. The preventive treatments used in this study were poorly tolerated and were reported by patients to lack efficacy, resulting in suboptimal adherence. The high discontinuation rates suggest that the preventive medications being offered during the period of the study did not meet the treatment needs of patients. In addition, the decisions by about half of patients to alter their prescribed treatment plan without consulting their provider can pose substantial health risks. These findings pertain to the broad set of preventive treatments initiated in this study and do not support inferences about individual preventive treatments, due to limitations in sample size. These findings suggest the need for more effective and better tolerated preventive treatment options.

The use of off-label medications in substance abuse treatment programs.

Background: Substance use disorder (SUD) treatment centers serve a population of clients who have diverse needs, and may desire or require access to varied treatments while seeking care for their SUDs. While pharmacotherapies have increased in popularity for the treatment of SUDs, adoption rates do remain quite low. But a wider array of pharmacotherapies has become available in recent years which may shift the trend. This article helps shed light on how variations in SUD treatment centers develop and persist with regard to the adoption and delivery of off-label medications. Methods: We use a nationally representative and longitudinal sample of SUD treatment centers in the US (N = 196). We use a logistic regression to analyze the relationship between organizational characteristics and offering any medications, off-label. We also use a negative binomial regression to analyze the relationship between organizational characteristics and the number of medications that were used off-label. Results: Our findings reveal that older centers, accredited centers, and centers that offer mental health screenings are all positively associated with the provision of off-label medication in SUD treatment. We also find a positive relationship between private funding and offering a greater number of off-label medications. Conclusions: Our results suggest that SUD clients who seek treatment from centers that offer medications off-label, may have access to a greater number of medication-assisted treatment options.

[Real-world migraine burden: clinical and economic aspects]. / Bremia migreni v real'noi klinicheskoi praktike: klinicheskie i ékonomicheskie aspekty.

AIM: To evaluate the rationale for different approaches to preventive chronic migraine (CM) treatment by comparing clinical outcomes and financial burden of the disease in the real-world practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-six patients with CM were enrolled at the Alexander Vein Headache Clinic (60 women and 6 men, aged 28-51). All patients were divided into 3 groups: group 1 (n=22) received oral preventative treatment with topiramate, up to 100 mg daily, for three months; group 2 (n=20) received 12 acupuncture sessions (3 sessions a week); group 3 (n=24) received 155-195 units of botulinum toxin type A (botox, BTA). The follow-up period in all groups was 3 months. Efficacy was evaluated by clinical examination, the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and questionnaires to assess subjective patient satisfaction and treatment tolerability. RESULTS: BTA demonstrated the highest efficacy in this study. Compared to the oral preventative treatment and acupuncture, BTA reduced the frequency of headache faster and more significantly facilitating CM transformation into episodic migraine (headache frequency was 16.1±0.1; 18.0±0.02; and 13.9±0.3 in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively, after one month of treatment). BTA also improved the quality of life faster and more significantly and was better tolerated (good - 51%, 75% and 85% in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively; satisfactory - 35%, 25% and 15% in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively; bad 14% in the oral prevention group). In the BTA group, the majority of patients demonstrated earlier treatment satisfaction. Despite higher (compared to topiramate) direct costs in the BTA group (RUB 29 931.51 and RUB 32 085.87, respectively), the predicted cost of a headache-free day was the smallest and totaled RUB 652.15 (compared to RUB 692.86 and RUB 1017.60 in the topiramate and acupuncture groups, respectively). CONCLUSION: The data on the efficacy and costs of different CM prevention strategies would facilitate optimal treatment choice for neurologists and patients.

Implementing statistical methods for generalizing randomized trial findings to a target population.

Randomized trials are considered the gold standard for assessing the causal effects of a drug or intervention in a study population, and their results are often utilized in the formulation of health policy. However, there is growing concern that results from trials do not necessarily generalize well to their respective target populations, in which policies are enacted, due to substantial demographic differences between study and target populations. In trials related to substance use disorders (SUDs), especially, strict exclusion criteria make it challenging to obtain study samples that are fully "representative" of the populations that policymakers may wish to generalize their results to. In this paper, we provide an overview of post-trial statistical methods for assessing and improving upon the generalizability of a randomized trial to a well-defined target population. We then illustrate the different methods using a randomized trial related to methamphetamine dependence and a target population of substance abuse treatment seekers, and provide software to implement the methods in R using the "generalize" package. We discuss several practical considerations for researchers who wish to utilize these tools, such as the importance of acquiring population-level data to represent the target population of interest, and the challenges of data harmonization.