Appropriateness of Levothyroxine Prescription: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.

CONTEXT: Levothyroxine is one of the most prescribed medications in the United States. OBJECTIVE: This study explores the appropriateness of levothyroxine prescriptions. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter study was conducted on adult patients who were prescribed levothyroxine for the first time between 2017 and 2020 at three academic centers in the United States. We classified each case of levothyroxine initiation into one of three mutually exclusive categories: appropriate (clinically supported), indeterminate (clinically unclear), or nonevidence based (NEB, not clinically supported). RESULTS: A total of 977 participants were included. The mean age was 55 years (SD 19), there was female (69%) and White race predominance (84%), and 44% had possible hypothyroid symptoms. Nearly half of the levothyroxine prescriptions were considered NEB (528, 54%), followed by appropriate (307, 31%) and indeterminate (118, 12%). The most common reason for NEB prescription was an index thyrotropin (TSH) value of less than 10 mIU/L without previous TSH or thyroxine values (131/528, 25%), for appropriate prescription, was overt hypothyroidism (163/307, 53%), and for an indeterminate prescription was a nonconfirmed subclinical hypothyroidism with TSH greater than or equal to 10 mIU/L (no confirmatory testing) (51/118, 43%). In multivariable analysis, being female (odds ratio [OR]: 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.7) and prescription by a primary care provider (OR: 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-2.0) were associated with NEB prescriptions. CONCLUSION: There is a considerable proportion of NEB levothyroxine prescriptions. These results call for additional research to replicate these findings and to explore the perspective of those prescribing and receiving levothyroxine.

Use of Riluzole for the Treatment of Hereditary Ataxias: A Systematic Review.

Ataxia is a constellation of symptoms that involves a lack of coordination, imbalance, and difficulty walking. Hereditary ataxia occurs when a person is born with defective genes, and this degenerative disorder may progress for several years. There is no effective cure for ataxia, so we need to search for new treatments. Recently, interest in riluzole in the treatment of ataxia has emerged. We conducted this systematic review to analyze the safety and efficacy of riluzole for treating hereditary ataxia in recent clinical trials. We conducted a systematic review using PubMed and Google Scholar as databases in search of this relationship. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) protocols to conduct this study. For inclusion criteria, we included full-text clinical trials on humans written in English and found three clinical trials. We excluded case reports, literature reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses for this analysis. We aimed to evaluate the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) score, the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale (ICARS) score, and the safety of the medication. Two out of the three clinical trials showed statistically significant clinical improvement in the ICARS and SARA scores, while the other trial did not show improvement in the clinical or radiological outcomes. The drug was safe in all clinical trials. Overall, the results of this analysis of riluzole for the treatment of hereditary ataxia are encouraging. Further clinical trials are needed to investigate the efficacy of riluzole on hereditary ataxia.