Using a multihospital systems framework to evaluate and establish drug use policy.

PURPOSE: In order to develop rational drug purchasing and use policy for a class of pharmaceuticals used in a consortium system of 14 university based hospitals, the antiemetic use patterns of inpatients receiving cancer chemotherapy were evaluated to assess the comparative effectiveness of granisetron, ondansetron, and conventional antiemetics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, observational study was conducted in 14 academic health centers linked under research and purchasing consortium arrangements from October to December 1994. The use of antiemetics was evaluated in hospitalized patients receiving cancer chemotherapy agents with a known propensity for causing, alone or in combination, varying degrees of nausea or vomiting. Clinical outcomes measured were the impact of chemotherapy administration on the functional status of patients, and the occurrence of post-treatment vomiting. RESULTS: The most often prescribed cancer chemotherapy regimens consisted of cisplatin, paclitaxel, etoposide and cyclophosphamide, and the most often prescribed antiemetics were the 5-hydroxytryptamine subtype-3 antagonists (5-HT3 antagonists, granisetron and ondansetron), dexamethasone and lorazepam. Of the 439 patients studied, 329 (75%) reported no episodes of emesis. Of the patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy, those receiving 5-HT3 antagonists experienced better overall outcomes (as measured by functional health status and the absence of vomiting) than patients receiving conventional (non-5-HT3 antagonist) antiemetics. In contrast, patients receiving chemotherapy associated with moderate or low emetogenicity experienced similar outcomes, regardless of the antiemetic regimen selected. No statistical difference was seen between granisetron and ondansetron in achieving positive patient outcomes. CONCLUSION: The study results suggest that 5-HT3 antagonists are associated with better clinical outcomes than other antiemetics in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Less costly conventional antiemetic therapy (or, in some cases, no antiemetic therapy) provide comparable outcomes in patients receiving chemotherapy associated with moderate or low emetogenic potential. Granisetron and ondansetron were found to be clinically comparable.

Recombinant human growth hormone for AIDS-associated wasting.

OBJECTIVE: To review the current literature regarding the role of recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) in the treatment of AIDS-associated wasting and to briefly describe alternative therapies. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was performed on MEDLINE and AIDSLINE for the period from January 1985 through September 1997. Key words used in the search strategy were growth hormone, human immunodeficiency virus, acquired immune deficiency syndrome, wasting, and weight gain. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All articles were considered for possible inclusion in this review. Abstracts were included only when they were judged to add critical information. Thereafter, the inclusion was restricted to English-language articles and abstracts on clinical trials and human studies in AIDS-associated wasting. DATA SYNTHESIS: Body wasting, characterized by an involuntary loss of body cell mass, is a well-recognized feature of many chronic diseases, including infection with HIV AIDS-associated wasting is a metabolic disorder characterized by weight loss, depletion of lean body mass (LBM), and preservation of body fat, leading to muscle weakness and organ failure. rhGH has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in treating AIDS-associated wasting. The adverse event profile is similar to that of other rhGH products. The recommended dosage of rhGH is 4-6 mg administered by subcutaneous injection daily. It offers a more expensive alternative to appetite stimulants such as megestrol acetate and dronabinol. CONCLUSIONS: Trials with rhGH on the control of wasting in patients with AIDS have been encouraging, but with limited conclusive evidence of sustainable positive outcomes. Studies demonstrate that rhGH increases LBM and decrease adipose tissue, but how these translate into long-term outcomes such as decreased hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality has yet to be determined. A formal health economic assessment is needed to properly determine the impact of rhGH on the healthcare system.