Women's health in focus: Real-world data on valproate prescriptions during pregnancy - a cohort study in Catalonia (Spain).

OBJECTIVES: To characterise the exposure to valproate within a cohort of pregnant women using electronic health records (EHRs) from Catalonia (System for the Development of Research in Primary Care, SIDIAP). DESIGN: Drug-utilisation cohort study covering the period from January 2011 to June 2020. The study included pregnancy episodes of women from Catalonia identified by the algorithm. SETTING: Data were sourced from SIDIAP, a comprehensive EHR repository that includes information from various data sources: recorded prescriptions (both hospital and primary care), diagnoses and sociodemographic characteristics identified by primary care physicians, and sexual and reproductive health data from ASSIR (used by gynaecologists and midwives). PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 12-50 with at least one pregnancy episode occurred during January 2011-June 2020 and at least a prescription of valproate during pregnancy. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Primary outcomes included valproate exposure, measured through prevalence and cumulative incidence in pregnancy episodes and by trimester. The impact of regulatory measures (risk mitigation measures, RMMs) was assessed, and prescriptions over time were analysed using interrupted time series analysis. Secondary outcomes included health issues, pregnancy outcomes, smoking habits and socioeconomic characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 99 605 pregnancies were identified, with at least 3.03‰ (95% CI 2.69‰ to 3.39‰) exposed to valproate at some point (302 pregnancies, 276 women). The median pregnancy duration was 38.30 weeks (IQR 12.6-40.1), and the median age at pregnancy was 32.37 years (IQR 27.20-36.56). Epilepsy was the most frequent health issue. The prevalence and cumulative incidence of valproate prescriptions decreased during pregnancy and increased postpregnancy. The RMMs implemented in 2014 led to a reduction in monthly valproate prescriptions during pregnancy in this cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights the decline in valproate prescriptions during pregnancy due to RMMs and underscores the need for standardised methodologies in future studies to ensure the safety of pregnant patients and optimise scientific evidence.

Calculating daily dose in the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model.

PURPOSE: We aimed to develop a standardized method to calculate daily dose (i.e., the amount of drug a patient was exposed to per day) of any drug on a global scale using only drug information of typical observational data in the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model (OMOP CDM) and a single reference table from Observational Health Data Sciences And Informatics (OHDSI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The OMOP DRUG_STRENGTH reference table contains information on the strength or concentration of drugs, whereas the OMOP DRUG_EXPOSURE table contains information on patients' drug prescriptions or dispensations/claims. Based on DRUG_EXPOSURE data from the primary care databases Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD (United Kingdom) and Integrated Primary Care Information (IPCI, The Netherlands) and healthcare claims from PharMetrics® Plus for Academics (USA), we developed four formulas to calculate daily dose given different DRUG_STRENGTH reference table information. We tested the dose formulas by comparing the calculated median daily dose to the World Health Organization (WHO) Defined Daily Dose (DDD) for six different ingredients in those three databases and additional four international databases representing a variety of healthcare settings: MAITT (Estonia, healthcare claims and discharge summaries), IQVIA Disease Analyzer Germany (outpatient data), IQVIA Longitudinal Patient Database Belgium (outpatient data), and IMASIS Parc Salut (Spain, hospital data). Finally, in each database, we assessed the proportion of drug records for which daily dose calculations were possible using the suggested formulas. RESULTS: Applying the dose formulas, we obtained median daily doses that generally matched the WHO DDD definitions. Our dose formulas were applicable to >85% of drug records in all but one of the assessed databases. CONCLUSION: We have established and implemented a standardized daily dose calculation in OMOP CDM providing reliable and reproducible results.

[Prevalence of frailty in a population aged 70 and older who pay a visit to health center and its detection in primary care]. / Prevalencia de fragilidad en personas de 70 o más años que acuden a un centro de salud y su detección en atención primaria.

INTRODUCTION: The detection of frailty in the elderly is key to preventing disability. The main objective of this study is to find out the proportion of frail people in subjects aged 70 and over who attend a health center in A Coruña (Spain). METHODS: Cross-sectional study, carried out from August 2020 to April 2021. Consecutive selection of patients ≥70 years, with Barthel ≥90, who accessed the health center. DEPENDENT VARIABLES: Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), Get Up and Go (TUG) and Gait Speed (MV); independent: gender, age, number of falls in the last year, number of drugs used chronically, and Charlson index. RESULTS: The sample was 114 people. The proportion of frail people is 16.7% (95% CI 10.94-24.57) with the SPPB, 28.6% in those aged 80 and over; and 36.8% using VM. The risk of frailty increases by at least 4.1% for each year of age after 70. Being a woman multiplies the risk by at least 1.5. The concordance between frailty according to the SPPB and MV is 46.8% (95% CI 30.85-62.77). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of frailty in independent people for basic ADL who attend a health center is at least 10.94%. Both the SPPB and the MV are feasible and useful methods in primary care.

Unknown adverse drug reactions from spontaneous reports in a hospital setting: characterization, follow-up, and contribution to the pharmacovigilance system.

Introduction: Post-marketing identification and report of unknown adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are crucial for patient safety. However, complete information on unknown ADRs seldom is available at the time of spontaneous ADR reports and this can hamper their contribution to the pharmacovigilance system. Methods: In order to characterize the seriousness and outcome of unknown ADRs at the time of report and at follow-up, and analyze their contribution to generate pharmacovigilance regulatory actions, a retrospective observational study of those identified in the spontaneous ADR reports of patients assisted at a hospital (January, 2016-December, 2021) was carried out. Information on demographic, clinical and complementary tests was retrieved from patients' hospital medical records. To evaluate the contribution to pharmacovigilance system we reviewed the European Union SmPCs, the list of the pharmacovigilance signals discussed by the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee, and its recommendations reports on safety signals. Results: A total of 15.2% of the spontaneous reported cases during the study contained at least one unknown drug-ADR pair. After exclusions, 295 unknown drug-ADR pairs were included, within them the most frequently affected organs or systems were: skin and subcutaneous tissue (34, 11.5%), hepatobiliary disorders (28, 9.5%), cardiac disorders (28, 9.5%) and central nervous system disorders (27, 9.2%). The most frequent ADRs were pemphigus (7, 2.4%), and cytolytic hepatitis, sudden death, cutaneous vasculitis and fetal growth restriction with 6 (2%) each. Vaccines such as covid-19 and pneumococcus (68, 21.3%), antineoplastics such as paclitaxel, trastuzumab and vincristine (39, 12.2%) and immunosuppressants such as methotrexate and tocilizumab (35, 11%) were the most frequent drug subgroups involved. Sudden death due to hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination (4, 1.4%) and hypertransaminasemia by vincristine (n = 3, 1%) were the most frequent unknown drug-ADR pairs. A total of 269 (91.2%) of them were serious. Complementary tests were performed in 82.7% of unknown-ADR pairs and helped to reinforce their association in 18.3% of them. A total of 18 (6.1%) unknown drug-ADR pairs were evaluated by the EMA, in 8 (2.7%) the information was added to the drug's SmPC and in 1 case the risk prevention material was updated. Conclusion: Identification and follow-up of unknown ADRs can be of great relevance for patient safety and for the enrichment of the pharmacovigilance system.