RESUMO
To date, no population-based studies have specifically explored the external validity of pivotal randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of biologics simultaneously for a broad spectrum of immuno-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). The aims of this study were, firstly, to compare the patients' characteristics and median treatment duration of biologics approved for IMIDs between RCTs' and real-world setting (RW); secondly, to assess the extent of biologic users treated for IMIDs in the real-world setting that would not have been eligible for inclusion into pivotal RCT for each indication of use. Using the Italian VALORE distributed database (66,639 incident biologic users), adult patients with IMIDs treated with biologics in the Italian real-world setting were substantially older (mean age ± SD: 50 ± 15 years) compared to those enrolled in pivotal RCTs (45 ± 15 years). In the real-world setting, certolizumab pegol was more commonly used by adult women with psoriasis/ankylosing spondylitis (F/M ratio: 1.8-1.9) compared to RCTs (F/M ratio: 0.5-0.6). The median treatment duration (weeks) of incident biologic users in RW was significantly higher than the duration of pivotal RCTs in almost all indications for use and most biologics (4-100 vs. 6-167). Furthermore, almost half (46.4%) of biologic users from RW settings would have been ineligible for inclusion in the respective indication-specific pivotal RCTs. The main reasons were: advanced age, recent history of cancer and presence of other concomitant IMIDs. These findings suggest that post-marketing surveillance of biologics should be prioritized for those patients.
Assuntos
Produtos Biológicos , Psoríase , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Produtos Biológicos/efeitos adversos , Agentes de Imunomodulação , Itália , Psoríase/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
Recent medical advancements have increased life expectancy, leading to a surge in patients affected by multiple chronic diseases and consequent polypharmacy, especially among older adults. This scenario increases the risk of drug interactions and adverse drug reactions, highlighting the need for medication review and deprescribing to reduce inappropriate medications and optimize therapeutic regimens, with the ultimate goal to improving patients' health and quality of life. This position statement from the Italian Scientific Consortium on medication review and deprescribing aims to describe key elements, strategies, tools, timing, and healthcare professionals to be involved, for the implementation of medication review and deprescribing in different healthcare settings (i.e., primary care, hospital, long-term care facilities, and palliative care). Challenges and potential solutions for the implementation of medication review and deprescribing are also discussed.
Assuntos
Desprescrições , Humanos , Idoso , Prescrição Inadequada/prevenção & controle , Qualidade de Vida , Revisão de Medicamentos , Polimedicação , ItáliaRESUMO
Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic metabolic disease affecting over 500 million people worldwide, which leads to severe complications and to millions of deaths yearly. When therapeutic goals are not reached with diet, physical activity, or non-insulin drugs, starting/adding insulin treatment is recommended by international guidelines. A novel recombinant insulin is icodec, a once-weekly insulin that successfully completed phase III trials and that has recently obtained the marketing authorization approval from the European Medicines Agency. This narrative review aims to assess icodec pharmacological and clinical features concerning evidence on benefit-risk profile, as compared to other basal insulins, addressing the potential impact on patients' unmet needs. Icodec is a full agonist, recombinant human insulin analogue characterized by an ultra-long half-life (196 h), enabling its use in once-weekly administration. Phase III randomized clinical trials involving more than 4000 diabetic patients, mostly type 2 DM, documented non-inferiority of icodec, as compared to currently available basal insulins, in terms of estimated mean reduction of glycated hemoglobin levels; a superiority of icodec, compared to control, was confirmed in insulin-naïve patients (ONWARDS 1, 3, and 5), and in patients previously treated with basal insulin (ONWARDS 2). Icodec safety profile was comparable to the currently available basal insulins. Once-weekly icodec has the potential to improve patients' adherence, thus positively influencing patients' treatment satisfaction as well as quality of life, especially in type 2 DM insulin-naïve patients. An improved adherence might positively influence glycemic target achievement, reduce overall healthcare costs and overcome some of the unmet patients' needs. Icodec has the potential to emerge as a landmark achievement in the evolution of insulin therapy, with a positive impact also for the National Health Services and the whole society.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may be involved in drug-drug interactions (DDIs) potentially increasing the risk of adverse drug reactions. This study aimed to evaluate the level of agreement among interaction checkers (ICs) and DOACs' summary of product characteristics (SPCs), in listing DDIs and in attributing DDIs' severity. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The level of agreement among five ICs (i.e. INTERCheck WEB, Micromedex, Lexicomp, Epocrates, and drugs.com) in identifying potential DDIs and in attributing severity categories was evaluated using Gwet's AC1 on all five ICs and by comparing groups of four- and two-pair sets of ICs. RESULTS: A total of 486 potentially interacting drugs with dabigatran, 556 for apixaban, 444 for edoxaban, and 561 for rivaroxaban were reported. The level of agreement among the ICs in identifying potential DDIs was poor (range: 0.12-0.16). Similarly, it was low in 4 and 2 sets analyses. The level of agreement among the ICs in classifying the severity of potential DDIs was poor (range: 0.32-0.34), also in 4 and 2 sets analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity among different ICs and SPCs underscores the need to standardize DDI datasets and to conduct real-world studies to generate evidence regarding the frequency and clinical relevance of potential DOAC-related DDIs.
Assuntos
Anticoagulantes , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Humanos , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Interações Medicamentosas , Rivaroxabana , Dabigatrana/efeitos adversos , Administração OralRESUMO
Since its first approval by the Food and Drug Administration in 1989 for strabismus, botulinum toxin indications of use have been widely expanded. Due to its anticholinergic properties, this toxin is currently approved in adult patients for the treatment of a wide range of neuromuscular, otolaryngologic, orthopedic, gastrointestinal, and urologic disorders. Approved pediatric indications of use include the treatment of blepharospasm associated with dystonia, strabismus, lower-limb spasticity, focal spasticity in patients with cerebral palsy, and neurogenic detrusor overactivity. Alongside these approved indications, botulinum toxin is extensively used off-label. Although several clinical studies have shown that botulinum toxin is effective and well-tolerated in children, uncertainties persist regarding its long-term effects on growth and appropriate dosing in this population. As such, further research is needed to better define the botulinum toxin risk-benefit profile and expand approved uses in pediatrics. This narrative review aimed to provide a broad overview of the evidence concerning the clinical effectiveness and safety of BoNT with respect to its principal authorized and non-authorized pediatric therapeutic indications, as well as to describe perspectives on its future use in children.
Assuntos
Toxinas Botulínicas , Humanos , Criança , Toxinas Botulínicas/uso terapêutico , Toxinas Botulínicas/efeitos adversos , Fármacos Neuromusculares/uso terapêutico , Fármacos Neuromusculares/efeitos adversos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Myasthenia gravis (MG) is a rare autoimmune disease that causes debilitating muscle weakness due to impaired neuromuscular transmission. Since most (about 80-90%) MG patients present autoantibodies against the acetylcholine receptor, standard medical therapy consists of symptomatic treatment with acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (e.g., pyridostigmine). In addition, considering the autoimmune basis of MG, standard therapy includes immunomodulating agents, such as corticosteroids, azathioprine, cyclosporine A, and cyclophosphamide. New strategies have been proposed for the treatment of MG and include complement blockade (i.e., eculizumab, ravulizumab, and zilucoplan) and neonatal Fc receptor antagonism (i.e., efgartigimod and rozanolixizumab). The aim of this review is to provide a detailed overview of the pre- and post-marketing evidence on the five pharmacological treatments most recently approved for the treatment of MG, by identifying both preclinical and clinical studies registered in clinicaltrials.gov. A description of the molecules currently under evaluation for the treatment of MG is also provided.
Assuntos
Miastenia Gravis , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Acetilcolinesterase/uso terapêutico , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Autoanticorpos , Miastenia Gravis/tratamento farmacológico , Receptores Colinérgicos/uso terapêutico , Terapias em EstudoRESUMO
Importance: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a widely prescribed class of drugs, potentially interacting with a large number of medicines, especially among older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Beyond summary of product characteristics (SPCs), interaction checkers (ICs) are routinely used tools to help clinicians in medication review interventions. Objective: To assess the consistency of information on drugs potentially interacting with PPIs as reported in their SPCs and different ICs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study was conducted using data from SPCs for 5 PPIs (omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole, pantoprazole, and rabeprazole) and 5 ICs (ie, INTERCheck WEB, Micromedex, Lexicomp, Epocrates, and drugs.com). Information from the SPCs and the ICs were extracted between July 15 and 30, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the level of agreement among SPCs and the 5 ICs in identifying drugs potentially interacting with PPIs and attributing drug-drug interaction (DDI) severity categories. The level of agreement was computed using Gwet AC1 statistic on the 5 ICs and by comparing 4-sets and 2-sets of ICs. As a sensitivity analysis, the level of agreement in listing PPI-related DDIs was evaluated using Cohen κ and Fleiss κ coefficients. Results: Considering SPCs and the 5 ICs, a total of 518 potentially interacting drugs with omeprazole were reported, 455 for esomeprazole, 433 for lansoprazole, 421 for pantoprazole, and 405 for rabeprazole. As compared with the ICs, the SPCs reported a much smaller number of drugs potentially interacting with PPIs, with proportions ranging from 2.7% (11 potentially interacting drugs) for rabeprazole to 7.6% (33 potentially interacting drugs) for lansoprazole of the total identified drugs at risk of interaction with a PPI. The overall level of agreement among the 5 ICs for identifying potential interactions was poor (from 0.23 [95% CI, 0.21-0.25] for omeprazole to 0.27 [95% CI, 0.24-0.29] for pantoprazole and 0.27 [95% CI, 0.25-0.29] for rabeprazole). Similarly, the level of agreement was low in 4-set and 2-set analyses as well as when restricting the analysis to the potential DDIs identified as severe (range, 0.30-0.32). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found significant disagreement among different ICs and SPCs, highlighting the need to focus on standardizing DDI databases. Therefore, to ensure evaluation and prevention of clinically relevant DDIs, it is recommended to revise multiple ICs and consult with specialists, such as clinical pharmacologists, particularly for patients with complex medical conditions.
Assuntos
Interações Medicamentosas , Inibidores da Bomba de Prótons , Humanos , Estudos Transversais , Rabeprazol/farmacologia , Lansoprazol , Omeprazol , Esomeprazol , PantoprazolRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The management of uncontrolled severe asthma has greatly improved since the advent of novel biologic therapies. Up to August 2022, five biologics have been approved for the type 2 asthma phenotype: anti-IgE (omalizumab), anti-IL5 (mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab), and anti-IL4 (dupilumab) monoclonal antibodies. These drugs are usually well tolerated, although long-term safety information is limited, and some adverse events have not yet been fully characterized. Spontaneous reporting systems represent the cornerstone for the detection of potential signals and evaluation of the real-world safety of all marketed drugs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to provide an overview of safety data of biologics for severe asthma using VigiBase, the World Health Organization global pharmacovigilance database. METHODS: We selected all de-duplicated individual case safety reports (ICSRs) attributed to five approved biologics for severe asthma in VigiBase, up to 31st August 2022 (omalizumab, mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab). Descriptive frequency analyses of ICSRs were carried out both as a whole class and as individual products. Reporting odds ratios (ROR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the measure of disproportionality for suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with the study drugs compared with either all other suspected drugs (Reference Group 1, RG1) or inhaled corticosteroids plus long-acting ß-agonists (ICSs/LABAs) (Reference Group 2, RG2) or with oral corticosteroids (OCSs) (Reference Group 3, RG3). RESULTS: Overall, 31,724,381 ICSRs were identified in VigiBase and 167,282 (0.5%) were related to study drugs; the remaining reports were considered as RG1. Stratifying all biologic-related ICSRs by therapeutic indication, around 29.4% (n = 48,440) concerned asthma use; omalizumab was mainly indicated as the suspected drug (n = 20,501), followed by dupilumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab and reslizumab. Most asthma ICSRs concerned adults (57%) and women (64.1%). Asthma biologics showed a higher frequency of serious suspected ADR reporting than RG1 (41.3% vs 32.3%). The most reported suspected ADRs included asthma, dyspnea, product use issue, drug ineffective, cough, headache, fatigue and wheezing. Asthma biologics were disproportionally associated with several unknown or less documented adverse events, such as malignancies, pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis with omalizumab; alopecia and lichen planus with dupilumab; alopecia and herpes infections with mepolizumab; alopecia, herpes zoster and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis related to benralizumab; and alopecia with reslizumab. CONCLUSIONS: The most frequently reported suspected ADRs of asthma biologics in VigiBase confirmed the presence of well-known adverse effects such as general disorders, injection-site reactions, nasopharyngitis, headache and hypersensitivity, while some others (e.g. asthma reactivation or therapeutic failure) could be ascribed to the indication of use. Moreover, the analysis of signals of disproportionate reporting suggests the presence of malignancies, effects on the cardiovascular system, alopecia and autoimmune conditions, requiring further assessment and investigation.
Assuntos
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Farmacovigilância , Organização Mundial da Saúde , Humanos , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Antiasmáticos/efeitos adversos , Antiasmáticos/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Masculino , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Sistemas de Notificação de Reações Adversas a Medicamentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Bases de Dados Factuais , Adulto , Terapia Biológica/efeitos adversos , Terapia Biológica/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Omalizumab/uso terapêutico , Omalizumab/efeitos adversos , Produtos Biológicos/efeitos adversos , Produtos Biológicos/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
Acromegaly is a rare disease characterized by a diagnostic delay ranging from 5 to 10 years from the symptoms' onset. The aim of this study was to develop and internally validate machine-learning algorithms to identify a combination of variables for the early diagnosis of acromegaly. This retrospective population-based study was conducted between 2011 and 2018 using data from the claims databases of Sicily Region, in Southern Italy. To identify combinations of potential predictors of acromegaly diagnosis, conditional and unconditional penalized multivariable logistic regression models and three machine learning algorithms (i.e., the Recursive Partitioning and Regression Tree, the Random Forest and the Support Vector Machine) were used, and their performance was evaluated. The random forest (RF) algorithm achieved the highest Area under the ROC Curve value of 0.83 (95% CI 0.79-0.87). The sensitivity in the test set, computed at the optimal threshold of predicted probabilities, ranged from 28% for the unconditional logistic regression model to 69% for the RF. Overall, the only diagnosis predictor selected by all five models and algorithms was the number of immunosuppressants-related pharmacy claims. The other predictors selected by at least two models were eventually combined in an unconditional logistic regression to develop a meta-score that achieved an acceptable discrimination accuracy (AUC = 0.71, 95% CI 0.66-0.75). Findings of this study showed that data-driven machine learning algorithms may play a role in supporting the early diagnosis of rare diseases such as acromegaly.
Assuntos
Acromegalia , Doenças Raras , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Acromegalia/diagnóstico , Diagnóstico Tardio , Algoritmos , Aprendizado de Máquina , Prescrições de Medicamentos , Diagnóstico Precoce , Sicília/epidemiologiaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is gaining attention in pharmacovigilance, but its association with antipsychotics, other than clozapine, is still unclear. METHODS: We conducted a case/non-case study with disproportionality analysis based on the World Health Organization (WHO) global spontaneous reporting database, VigiBase®. We analyzed individual case safety reports of DRESS syndrome related to antipsychotics compared to (1) all other medications in VigiBase®, (2) carbamazepine (a known positive control), and (3) within classes (typical/atypical) of antipsychotics. We calculated reporting odds ratio (ROR) and Bayesian information component (IC), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Disproportionate reporting was prioritized based on clinical importance, according to predefined criteria. Additionally, we compared characteristics of patients reporting with serious/non-serious reactions. RESULTS: A total of 1534 reports describing DRESS syndrome for 19 antipsychotics were identified. The ROR for antipsychotics as a class as compared to all other medications was 1.0 (95% CI 0.9-1.1). We found disproportionate reporting for clozapine (ROR 2.3, 95% CI 2.1-2.5; IC 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.3), cyamemazine (ROR 2.3, 95% CI 1.5-3.5; IC 1.2, 95% CI 0.5-1.7), and chlorpromazine (ROR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.1; IC 0.6, 95% CI 0.1-1.0). We found 35.7% of cases with co-reported anticonvulsants, and 25% with multiple concurrent antipsychotics in serious compared to 8.6% in non-serious cases (p = 0.03). Fatal cases were 164 (10.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Apart from the expected association with clozapine, chlorpromazine and cyamemazine (sharing an aromatic heteropolycyclic molecular structure) emerged with a higher-than-expected reporting of DRESS. Better knowledge of the antipsychotic-related DRESS syndrome should increase clinicians' awareness leading to safer prescribing of antipsychotics.
Assuntos
Sistemas de Notificação de Reações Adversas a Medicamentos , Antipsicóticos , Bases de Dados Factuais , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos , Farmacovigilância , Organização Mundial da Saúde , Humanos , Antipsicóticos/efeitos adversos , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Sistemas de Notificação de Reações Adversas a Medicamentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto , Idoso , Adulto Jovem , Adolescente , Idoso de 80 Anos ou maisRESUMO
PURPOSE: X-linked hypophosphatemia (XLH) is a rare multi-systemic disease characterized by low plasma phosphate levels. The aim of this study was to investigate the annual XLH prevalence and internally evaluate predictive algorithms' application performance for the early diagnosis of XLH. METHODS: The PediaNet database, containing data on more than 400,000 children aged up to 14 years, was used to identify a cohort of XLH patients, which were matched with up to 10 controls by date of birth and gender. The annual prevalence of XLH cases per 100,000 patients registered in PediaNet database was estimated. To identify possible predictors associated with XLH diagnosis, a logistic regression model and two machine learning algorithms were applied. Predictive analyses were separately carried out including patients with at least 1 or 2 years of database history in PediaNet. RESULTS: Among 431,021 patients registered in the PediaNet database between 2007-2020, a total of 12 cases were identified with a mean annual prevalence of 1.78 cases per 100,000 patients registered in PediaNet database. Overall, 8 cases and 60 matched controls were included in the analysis. The random forest algorithm achieved the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) value both in the one-year prior ID (AUC = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.99-1.00) and the two-year prior ID (AUC = 1.00, 95% CI = 1.00-1.00) analysis. Overall, the XLH predictors selected by the three predictive methods were: the number of vitamin D prescriptions, the number of recorded diagnoses of acute respiratory infections, the number of prescriptions of antihistamine for systemic use, the number of prescriptions of X-ray of the lower limbs and pelvis and the number of allergology visits. CONCLUSION: Findings showed that data-driven machine learning models may play a prominent role for the prediction of the diagnosis of rare diseases such as XLH.
Assuntos
Raquitismo Hipofosfatêmico Familiar , Humanos , Masculino , Criança , Raquitismo Hipofosfatêmico Familiar/epidemiologia , Raquitismo Hipofosfatêmico Familiar/diagnóstico , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Itália/epidemiologia , Adolescente , Lactente , Prevalência , Bases de Dados Factuais , Recém-Nascido , Algoritmos , Diagnóstico Precoce , Aprendizado de MáquinaRESUMO
The post-organ transplant immunosuppressive therapy includes the administration of tacrolimus (Tac) or cyclosporine (CsA), along with antimetabolites (Antim) or mTOR inhibitors, with or without prednisone. A survey was conducted to investigate clinical experience regarding the use, efficacy, safety profile, and determinants of choice of maintenance immunosuppressive therapies. The questionnaire was sent to healthcare workers of 45 transplant centers specializing in kidney (K), liver (L), heart (H), and lung (P) transplants. Seventy-one responses were received from 15 Italian regions. The indicated first-choice therapy was Tac + Antim, except in the hepatic field where Tac monotherapy was favored. According to 44.1% of respondents, the first-choice therapy has changed over the last 15 years due to the replacement of CsA with Tac and increased use of mTOR inhibitors. Regarding the determinants of the index therapy, the choice of schemes to be applied depends mainly on international guidelines, previous experience, and internal protocols within the facility (80.3%; 54.9%; 50.7%, respectively). Compared to standard therapy, the criteria guiding the prescription of different therapies mainly involve the presence of comorbidities (K: 81.3%; L: 88.2%; H: 73.3%; P: 85.7%) and the evaluation of specific clinical parameters of the recipient. Additionally, the majority of respondents are in favor of using generic versions where available. The survey reveals dimensions not detectable by current healthcare administrative flows; such integrations provide a broader picture of the factors influencing the choice of post-transplant immunosuppressive therapeutic schemes.
Assuntos
Ciclosporina , Imunossupressores , Transplante de Órgãos , Tacrolimo , Humanos , Itália , Imunossupressores/administração & dosagem , Inquéritos e Questionários , Ciclosporina/administração & dosagem , Tacrolimo/administração & dosagem , Pesquisas sobre Atenção à Saúde , Quimioterapia CombinadaRESUMO
Purpose: This research aimed to develop and validate a META-algorithm combining individual immune-mediated inflammatory disease (IMID)-specific algorithms to identify the exact IMID indications for incident biological drug users from claims data within the context of the Italian VALORE project. Methods and Patients: All subjects with at least one dispensing of TNF-alpha inhibitors, anti-interleukin agents, and selective immunosuppressants approved for IMIDs were identified from claims databases of Latium region in Italy (observation period: 2010-2020). Validated coding algorithms for identifying individual IMIDs from claims databases were found from published literature and combined into a META-algorithm. Positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity (Se), negative predictive value (NPV), specificity (Sp), and accuracy (Acc) were estimated for each indication against the electronic therapeutic plans (ETPs) of the Latium region as the reference standard. Lastly, the frequency of the indication of use across individual biologic drugs was compared with that reported in three other Italian regions (Lombardy, Apulia, and the Veneto region). Results: In total, 9755 incident biological drug users with a single IMID indication were identified. Using the newly developed META-algorithm, an indication of use was detected in 95% (n=9255) of the total cohort. The estimated Acc, Se, Sp, PPV, and NPV, against the reference standard were as follows: 0.96, 0.86, 0.97, 0.82, and 0.98 for Crohn's disease, 0.96, 0.80, 0.98, 0.85, and 0.97 for ulcerative colitis, 0.93, 0.76, 0.99, 0.95, and 0.92 for rheumatoid arthritis, 0.97, 0.75, 0.99, 0.85, and 0.98 for spondylarthritis, and 0.91, 0.92, 0.91, 0.88, and 0.94 for psoriatic arthritis/psoriasis, respectively. Additionally, no substantial difference was observed in the frequency of indication of use by active ingredient among Latium and the other three Italian regions included in the study. Conclusion: The newly developed META-algorithm demonstrated high validity estimates in the Italian claims data and was capable of discriminating with good performance among the most frequent IMID indications.
In the claims database, the lack of information on the indication of use represents a well-known limitation for the conduct of observational studies. This study was conducted to develop and validate a META-algorithm that accurately identifies the exact indication for the use of biological drugs in treating various immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Using claims databases from the Latium region, we developed and validated a META-algorithm. The META-algorithm combines disease-specific algorithms for different immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (ie, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis, psoriasis, and psoriatic arthritis) and was tested against a reference standard (electronic therapeutic plans of the Lazio region). The META-algorithm reported high validity estimates and was able to distinguish with a good performance among the most frequent IMIDs as indications for use. Applying this META-algorithm may facilitate post-marketing surveillance of biological drugs such as TNF-alpha inhibitors, anti-interleukin, and selective immunosuppressants in specific therapeutic areas in an Italian setting.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is a primary risk factor for the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), drug-drug interactions (DDIs), and ultimately, adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Medication review and deprescribing represent effective strategies to simplify therapeutic regimens, minimize risks, and reduce PIM prescriptions. This systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental and observational studies aimed to evaluate the impact of different medication review and deprescribing interventions in hospitalized older patients. METHODS: Experimental and observational prospective cohort studies evaluating the clinical effects of medication review and deprescribing strategies in older hospitalized patients were searched in the bibliographic databases, PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, from inception until January 8, 2024. A narrative synthesis of the results was provided, along with a meta-analysis of dichotomous data (i.e., re-hospitalizations and mortality). RESULTS: Overall, 21 randomized controlled trials, 7 non-randomized interventional studies, and 2 prospective cohort studies were included in the systematic review. Of these, 14 (46.7%) assessed medication appropriateness as the primary outcome, while the remaining evaluated clinical outcomes (e.g., length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions, emergency department visits, and incidence of ADRs) and/or quality of life. The meta-analysis revealed a slight but statistically significant 8% reduction in hospital readmissions (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.85-0.99) following medication review and deprescribing, but no significant impact on mortality (HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-1.00). Of the 30 included studies, 21 were considered at high risk of bias, mostly due to potential deviations from intended interventions and randomization processes. The remaining nine studies had "some concerns" (eight studies) or were considered at "low" risk of bias (one study). CONCLUSION: Medication review and deprescribing are associated with potential benefits in reducing hospital readmission rates among hospitalized older patients, particularly through the reduction of PIM prescriptions. The integration of thorough medication review and deprescribing protocols in hospital settings may improve post-discharge outcomes and reduce overall healthcare costs.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Recently published studies have reported association of COVID-19 vaccine ChAdOx1-S (Vaxzevria) with Guillain Barré Syndrome (GBS). Less is known about the safety of other COVID-19 vaccines with respect to GBS outcome. This study investigated the association of COVID-19 vaccines with GBS in more than 15 million persons aged ≥12 years in Italy. METHODS: Study population was all individuals aged ≥12 years who received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccines, admitted to emergency care/hospital for GBS from 27 December 2020-30 September 2021 in Italy. Identification of GBS cases and receipt of at least one dose of mRNA-1273 (Elasomeran), BNT162b2 (Tozinameran), ChAdOx1-S (Vaxzevria) and Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen) through record linkage between regional health care and vaccination registries. Relative Incidence (RI) was estimated Self-controlled case series method adapted to event-dependent exposure using in the 42-day exposure risk period after each dose compared with other observation periods. RESULTS: Increased risk of GBS was found after first (RI = 6.83; 95% CI 2.14-21.85) and second dose (RI = 7.41; 2.35-23.38) of mRNA-1273 and first dose of ChAdOx1-S (RI = 6.52; 2.88-14.77). Analysis by age found an increased risk among those aged≥60 years after first (RI = 8.03; 2.08-31.03) and second dose (RI = 7.71; 2.38-24.97) of mRNA-1273. The first dose of ChAdOx1-S was associated with GBS in those aged 40-59 (RI = 4.50; 1.37-14.79) and in those aged ≥ 60 years (RI = 6.84; 2.56-18.28). CONCLUSIONS: mRNA-1273 and ChAdOx1-S vaccines were associated with an increased risk of GBS however this risk resulted in a small number of excess cases. Limitations were loss of GBS outpatient cases and imprecision of the estimates in the subgroup analysis due to a low number of events.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré , Humanos , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , Ad26COVS1 , Vacina BNT162 , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/complicações , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/epidemiologia , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/etiologia , Itália/epidemiologia , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , Vigilância de Produtos ComercializadosRESUMO
In all pivotal trials of COVID-19 vaccines, the history of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was mentioned as one of the main exclusion criteria. In the absence of clinical trials, observational studies are the primary source for evidence generation. This study aims to describe the patient-reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) following the first COVID-19 vaccination cycle, as well as the administration of booster doses of different vaccine brands, in people with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, as compared to prior infection-free matched cohorts of vaccinees. A web-based prospective study was conducted collecting vaccinee-reported outcomes through electronic questionnaires from eleven European countries in the period February 2021-February 2023. A baseline questionnaire and up to six follow-up questionnaires collected data on the vaccinee's characteristics, as well as solicited and unsolicited adverse reactions. Overall, 3886 and 902 vaccinees with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and having received the first dose or a booster dose, respectively, were included in the analysis. After the first dose or booster dose, vaccinees with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection reported at least one ADR at a higher frequency than those matched without prior infection (3470 [89.6%] vs. 2916 [75.3%], and 614 [68.2%] vs. 546 [60.6%], respectively). On the contrary side, after the second dose, vaccinees with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection reported at least one ADR at a lower frequency, compared to matched controls (1443 [85.0%] vs. 1543 [90.9%]). The median time to onset and the median time to recovery were similar across all doses and cohorts. The frequency of adverse reactions was higher in individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection who received Vaxzevria as the first dose and Spikevax as the second and booster doses. The frequency of serious ADRs was low for all doses and cohorts. Data from this large-scale prospective study of COVID-19 vaccinees could be used to inform people as to the likelihood of adverse effects based on their history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, age, sex, and the type of vaccine administered. In line with pivotal trials, the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines was also confirmed in people with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, EMA set-up a large-scale cohort event monitoring (CEM) system to estimate incidence rates of patient-reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of different COVID-19 vaccines across the participating countries. This study aims to give an up to date and in-depth analysis of the frequency of patient-reported ADRs after the 1st, 2nd, and booster vaccination, to identify potential predictors in developing ADRs and to describe time-to-onset (TTO) and time-to-recovery (TTR) of ADRs. METHODS: A CEM study was rolled out in a period ranging from February 2021 to February 2023 across multiple European countries; The Netherlands, Belgium, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Spain. Analysis consisted of a descriptive analyses of frequencies of COVID-19 vaccine-related ADRs for 1st, 2nd and booster vaccination, analysis of potential predictors in developing ADRs with a generalized linear mixed-effects model, analysis of TTO and TTR of ADRs and a sensitivity analysis for loss to follow-up (L2FU). RESULTS: A total of 29,837 participants completed at least the baseline and the first follow-up questionnaire for 1st and 2nd vaccination and 7,250 participants for the booster. The percentage of participants who reported at least one ADR is 74.32% (95%CI 73.82-74.81). Solicited ADRs, including injection site reactions, are very common across vaccination moments. Potential predictors for these reactions are the brand of vaccine used, the patient's age, sex and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. The percentage of serious ADRs in the study is low for 1st and 2nd vaccination (0.24%, 95%CI 0.19--0.31) and booster (0.26%, 95%CI 0.15, 0.41). The TTO was 14 h (median) for dose 1 and slightly longer for dose 2 and booster dose. TTR is generally also within a few days. The effect of L2FU on estimations of frequency is limited. CONCLUSION: Despite some limitations due to study design and study-roll out, CEM studies can allow prompt and almost real-time observations of the safety of medications directly from a patient-centered perspective, which can play a crucial role for regulatory bodies during an emergency setting such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Humanos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised patients has not been comprehensively evaluated. AIM: To measure the frequency of patient-reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to the first/second/booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine in immunocompromised subject versus matched cohort. As a secondary objective, the time course, evaluated as time to onset (TTO) and time to recovery (TTR), of COVID-19 vaccine-related ADRs was explored. METHODS: A prospective cohort study, based on electronic questionnaires filled by vaccinees from 11 European countries in the period February 2021 to February 2023 was conducted. All immunocompromised vaccinees who provided informed consent and registered to the project's web-app within 48 h after first/booster vaccine dose administration of any EMA-authorised COVID-19 vaccine were recruited. Participants filled baseline and up to six follow-up questionnaires (FU-Qs) over 6 months from vaccination, collecting information on suspected COVID-19 vaccine-related ADRs. As a control group, non-immunocompromised vaccinees from the same source population were 1:4 matched by sex, age, vaccine dose, and brand. A descriptive analysis of demographic/clinical characteristics of vaccinees was conducted. Heatmaps of the frequency of solicited ADRs, stratified by gender and vaccine brand, were generated. Median TTO/TTR of reported ADRs were visualised using violin/box-plots. RESULTS: A total of 773 immunocompromised vaccines were included in the analyses. Most participants were females (F/M ratio: 2.1 and 1.6) with a median age of 56 (43-74) and 51 (41-60) years, at the first vaccination cycle and booster dose, respectively. Injection-site pain and fatigue were the most frequently reported ADRs in immunocompromised vaccinees with higher frequency than matched control, especially after the first dose (41.2% vs 37.8% and 38.2% vs 32.9%, respectively). For both cohorts, all solicited ADRs were more frequently reported in females than males, and in those who had received a first dose of the Vaxzevria vaccine. Dizziness was the most frequently reported unsolicited ADR after the first dose in both groups (immunocompromised subjects: 2.5% and matched controls: 2.1%). At the booster dose, lymphadenopathy (3.9%) and lymphadenitis (1.8%) were the most reported unsolicited ADRs for immunocompromised subjects and matched controls, respectively. A very low number of subjects reported adverse event of special interest (AESI) (2 immunocompromised, 3 matched controls) and serious ADRs (5 immunocompromised, 5 matched controls). A statistically significant difference among study cohorts was observed for median TTO after the booster dose, and for median TTR after the first vaccination cycle and booster dose (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The overall safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised people was favourable, with minor differences as compared to non-immunocompromised vaccinees. Participants mostly experienced mild ADRs, mainly reported after the first dose of Vaxzevria and Jcovden vaccines. Serious ADRs and AESI were rare.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Cases of appendicitis were identified in the pivotal randomized clinical trial on BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine and reported from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine pharmacovigilance systems. Three cohort studies and two self-controlled case series (SCCS) studies evaluating the association between mRNA vaccines and appendicitis reported discordant results. To address this uncertainty, the present study examines in a large population, with a SCCS design, the association between mRNA (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) and, for the first time, viral vector (ChAdOx1-S and Ad26.COV2-S) COVID-19 vaccines and acute appendicitis. METHODS: The SCCS study design was used to evaluate the association between COVID-19 vaccination and subsequent onset of acute appendicitis. The study was based on record linkage of health archives through TheShinISS application, a statistical tool that locally processes data from regional health care databases according to ad hoc, study-tailored and common data model. The study population included all vaccinated subjects ≥ 12 years old between 27 December 2020 and 30 September 2021. The acute appendicitis was identified through discharge diagnoses of hospital admissions or emergency department visits. Incident cases were defined as those who experienced a first event of acute appendicitis in the study period, excluding subjects with a diagnosis of appendicitis in the previous 5 years. Exposure was defined as the first or second dose of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 and ChAdOx1-S and the single dose of Ad26.COV2-S. The risk interval was defined as 42 days from the first or second vaccination dose and divided into pre-specified risk subperiods; the reference period was the observation time outside the risk interval. Relative incidences (RI) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated with the SCCS method 'modified for event-dependent exposures', through unbiased estimating equations. The seasonal component was considered as a time-dependent covariate. RESULTS: In the 42-day risk interval 1285 incident cases of acute appendicitis occurred: 727 cases after the first dose and 558 cases after the second dose. In the main analysis, no increased risks of acute appendicitis were observed in subjects vaccinated with BNT162b, mRNA-1273, ChAdOx1-S and Ad26.COV2-S. The subgroup analyses by sex showed an increased risk in the 14-27 day risk interval, in males after the first dose of mRNA-1273 (RI of 1.71; 95% CI 1.08-2.70, p = 0.02) and in females after the single dose of Ad26.COV2-S (RI of 4.40; 95% CI 1.29-15.01, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of association of BNT162b, ChAdOx1-S, mRNA-1273 and Ad26.COV2-S with acute appendicitis in the general population. The results of the subgroup analyses by sex needs to be considered with caution. The multiplicity issue cannot be excluded being these hypotheses two of several hypotheses tested. In addition, relevant literature on the biological mechanism of the disease and evidence of similar effects with other vaccines or with the same vaccines are still lacking to provide strong support for a conclusion that there is an harmful effect in males and females with mRNA-1273 and Ad26.COV2-S.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Switch patterns among different biologics and from originators to biosimilars (and vice versa) can be complex in patients with psoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe switching patterns of biological drugs in PsO/PsA patients and to explore predictors of multiple switches and switch-back. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A large-scale retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Italian VALORE database. Bio-naïve users treated for PsO/PsA during 2010-2022 were included. Time to switch/swap and predictors of multiple switches and switch-back were analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty-thousand seven hundred bio-naïve users were included. At 3 and 5 years of follow-up, patients with at least one switch/swap were 37.1% and 47.8%, respectively. The median time to first switch/swap was significantly shorter (p< 0.001) for TNF-α inhibitors (2,068 days) than anti-IL (2,780 days). At 1 year of follow-up patients starting with IL-23 switched/swapped biological therapy less frequently than those with anti-IL-12/23 and anti-IL-17 (4.9% vs. 8.7% and 9.4%, respectively). Patients starting with anti-IL-12/23 reported a significantly lower risk of multiple switches and switch-back (0.74, 95% CI, 0.67-0.83; 0.58, 95% CI, 0.44-0.77, respectively) than those with TNF-α inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PsO/PsA starting with TNF-α inhibitors switch/swap more rapidly and frequently than those with anti-IL, which are also associated with a reduced risk of multiple switches during follow-up.