A multinational, drug utilization study of lipegfilgrastim use in real-world setting in Europe.

PURPOSE: Lipegfilgrastim (Lonquex, Teva Pharma B.V.) is approved for reduction in neutropenia duration and febrile neutropenia incidence. In the framework of lipegfilgrastim regulatory approval in the EU, the Health Authorities requested a drug utilization study. This study was conducted to characterize prescribing patterns of lipegfilgrastim and quantify the extent of on- and off-label use of lipegfilgrastim in real-world setting in Europe. METHODS: Information on lipegfilgrastim use between January 2014 and March 2020 was abstracted from medical records in hospital and outpatient clinical settings. Indication for lipegfilgrastim was classified either as on-label or off-label use according to pre-determined criteria. The primary endpoint was the extent of lipegfilgrastim off-label use based on the most recent lipegfilgrastim cycle. RESULTS: Records of 481 patients were obtained from five European countries. Lipegfilgrastim was most commonly prescribed for prevention of neutropenia by oncologists and hematologists. Patients who were administered lipegfilgrastim were primarily ≥ 55 years old (65.1%) and female (65.7%). The most frequent underlying diagnosis was breast cancer (38.3%). For the most recent lipegfilgrastim cycle, on-label use was recorded in 452/459 patients with no missing data (98.5%), while off-label use was recorded in 7/459 patients (1.5%). The majority of off-label use was attributed to use with non-cytotoxic chemotherapy (57.1%). Off-label use of lipegfilgrastim across all treatment cycles with no missing data was 11/1547 cycles (0.7%). CONCLUSION: Using real-world data, these findings confirm the low rate of lipegfilgrastim off-label use as reported in a preceding feasibility study, indicating very high adherence to the approved indication.

Assessment of colistimethate sodium (COLOBREATHE) risk minimization measures implemented in the European Union: A cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness of additional risk minimization measures (aRMMs) implemented in Europe for colistimethate sodium (CMS) among healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients/caregivers following safety concerns regarding incorrect use of CMS delivered via Turbospin inhaler. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among HCPs and patients/caregivers in Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, The Netherlands, and the United Kingdom between September 2016 and March 2018. Knowledge of the educational materials was assessed regarding common side effects, correct use of CMS and Turbospin inhaler, and capsule breakage. Awareness, receipt, and utilization of the aRMMs were also evaluated. RESULTS: Among 124 HCPs surveyed, the majority acknowledged awareness (86.2%), receipt (91.0%), and utilization (81.6%) of the CMS educational materials and were knowledgeable about the common CMS side effects (93.2%). Most HCPs correctly answered most questions regarding the proper use of CMS (>90%), yet only half knew how to correctly use the Turbospin inhaler (53.2%). Knowledge about capsule breakage was moderate (67.5%). Of the 29 patients/caregivers surveyed, almost half were aware of the educational materials (48.1%); of these, 69.2% received and used the materials. Most patients/caregivers were knowledgeable about the common CMS side effects (81.5%) and proper CMS use (>85%); however, knowledge about correct Turbospin inhaler use and potential for capsule breakage was moderate to low (48.1% and 37.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: HCPs and patients/caregivers have good knowledge about the common side effects associated with CMS. However, knowledge of correct use of the Turbospin inhaler and capsule breakage was moderate to low.

Prescribing patterns from medical chart abstraction of patients administered lipegfilgrastim: a pilot study in Europe.

Purpose: The objective of this pilot study was to explore the feasibility of conducting a drug utilization study of lipegfilgrastim in Europe using medical records and to examine the pattern of lipegfilgrastim on-label and off-label use. Methods: Data on lipegfilgrastim use between September 2014 and April 2017 were abstracted from medical records by two independent medical abstractors. Lipegfilgrastim indication was categorized either as on-label or as one of four types of off-label (I-IV) according to pre-defined criteria. An inter-rater reliability analysis was conducted to measure the degree of abstractor agreement for on-label and off-label use. Results: Information from 46 medical records was abstracted. Lipegfilgrastim use during the first chemotherapy treatment cycle was mostly indicated for prevention of neutropenia (82.6% of patients). On-label use was documented in 42 patients (91.3%), while off-label use was documented in two patients (4.3%); all events of off-label use were attributed to use with non-cytotoxic drugs. The remaining two patients (4.3%) had missing data. Overall agreement between the abstractors was high (91.6%). For three types (Types I-III) of off-label use, the kappa values suggested a perfect agreement (κ = 1). For Type IV off-label use (use in patients treated with non-cytotoxic drugs), κ = 0, suggesting a poor agreement. Conclusions: While recruitment was challenging, the results of this pilot study confirm the feasibility and availability of medical records and the use of pharmacists as abstractors to assess on- and off-label use of lipegfilgrastim. Lipegfilgrastim was mainly prescribed according to the approved indications.Key pointsFindings from this pilot study confirm the feasibility and availability of medical records and the use of pharmacists as abstractors to assess on-label and off-label use of lipegfilgrastim in routine clinical practice.Lipegfilgrastim was mainly prescribed according to the approved indications, and the proportion of off-label use was low.The high inter-rater agreement between the two abstractors suggests that one abstractor is sufficient for conducting chart abstraction of on- and off-label use.Additional data abstraction sources other than pharmacists will need to be identified to improve response rate and center recruitment.Findings from this pilot study are important for the successful planning and execution of subsequent drug utilization studies.

Comparing Ran-Out Status of Inhaled Short-Acting Beta-Agonists in Emergency Department Patients with Acute Asthma: 1996-1998 versus 2015-2017.

BACKGROUND: Medication nonadherence, including running out of inhaled asthma medications, is an important problem. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the changes in the proportion of adults with acute asthma who ran out of their short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) inhalers before presenting to the emergency department (ED) between 1996--1998 and 2015-2017. METHODS: We analyzed data from prospective multicenter observational cohort studies of ED adult patients (aged 18-54 years) with acute asthma. Within the same 3 EDs, we performed a structured interview during 2 time periods: 1996-1998 and 2015-2017. We fitted multivariable models to compare ran-out status between the 2 periods, adjusting for the baseline patient demographics, socioeconomic status, chronic asthma factors, and health care utilization factors. We further adjusted for the presence of a written action plan-an intervenable factor. RESULTS: The analytic cohort comprised 353 patients (150 from the 1996-1998 studies and 203 from the 2015-2017 study). Over the approximately 20-year period, the proportion of patients who ran out of SABA inhalers increased (18% in 1996-1998 vs 26% in 2015-2017). In the multivariable model, compared with patients in 1996-1998, those in 2015-2017 had a significantly higher risk of running out of their SABA inhalers (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-3.81; P = .03). With further adjustment for the presence of a written action plan, this difference attenuated (adjusted OR 1.66; 95% CI 0.75-3.68; P = .21). CONCLUSIONS: Between 1996 and 2017, the proportion of ED patients with asthma who ran out of SABA inhalers significantly increased. The increase was explained, at least partially, by a lack of a written action plan.