Institutional strategies as a mechanism to rationalize the negative effects of the judicialization of access to medicine in Brazil

[Judicialization of cannabidiol-based products in Brazil: an analysis from 2019 to 2022]

The study analyzed the lawsuits of patients who requested cannabidiol (CBD)-based products from the Brazilian Unified National Health System during the period from 2019 to 2022, describing sociodemographic, clinical, and legal characteristics. This is a cross-sectional study composed of the evaluation of the technical notes issued by the Center for Technical Support of the Judiciary (NatJus), which supports judicial decisions. The data were obtained from the e-NatJus system, of the Brazilian Ministry of Justice, using web scraping techniques. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. We analyzed 1,115 technical notes of the CBD plaintiffs, of which 54.7% of the male patients, with a mean age of 18.4 years, mostly from the South Region of the country (38.8%), and 49.6% sought treatment for epilepsy. Regarding the actions with favorable opinions, 28.8% had no scientific evidence, 26.5% pleaded for products without registration with the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency, and 25.3% of those that had registration were not in compliance with the therapeutic indication. Patients from the Northeast Region had a chance of a favorable opinion increased by 3.0 times and those diagnosed with epilepsy by 2.3. The expert opinions that supported the magistrates for the judicial decisions regarding the demands of patients for cannabidiol-based products in Brazil were mostly in accordance with scientific evidence, denoting the importance of NatJus in the qualification of access to medicinal products in the country.

Health litigation and cancer survival in patients treated in the public health system in a large Brazilian city, 2014-2019

BACKGROUND

Litigation for health care, also known as health judicialization, is frequent in Brazil. It involves recourse to the court system to access health services. The study aimed to evaluate whether cancer patients in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil, increased their overall survival by increasing access to certain drugs or treatments through litigation, controlling for the effect of demographic and disease-related variables.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients with breast, prostate, brain, lung, or colon cancers from 2014 to 2019 were included. Survival analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

In the multivariate analysis, litigation was significantly associated with increased survival in cancers of breast (HR = 0.51, 95%CI 0.33-0.80), prostate (HR = 0.50, 95%CI 0.30-0.85), colon (HR = 0.59, 95%CI 0.38-0.93), and lung (HR = 0.36, 95%CI 0.22-0.60). Five-year survival rates of patients who sued for treatment were 97.8%, 88.7%, 59.3%, and 26.0%, compared to median survival of 95.7%, 78.7%, 41.2%, and 2.4%, respectively, among patient that did not resort to court action. The study suggests that litigation for access to cancer treatment may represent a step forward in obtaining more effective treatment. This study´s main limitations are the lack of patients´ clinical information for use as control variables and the lack of variables to assess patients´ quality of life. The study also found that many cases involved claims that could have been solved by administrative rather than legal action. Some claims thus reflect the lack of adequate administrative procedures.

CONCLUSION

When based on scientific evidence, access to new therapies, combined with other technologies already available, can favor patient survival. Access to new therapies through litigation may increase health inequalities since low-income patients have limited access to legal recourse against the State to meet their needs. The timely approval of new effective therapies can mitigate the judicialization of cancer treatment.

An ontology of Pharmaceutical Services in the pages of Journal Ciência & Saúde Coletiva

Pharmaceutical Services (PS) is a growing field which has established itself over the last 25 years in Brazil through scientific publications. This work investigates the evolution of the field in the Brazilian periodical Journal Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. We conducted a scoping review of relevant literature produced in four separate periods (1996-2003, 2004-2010, 2011-2015, and 2016-2019). A search for articles that contained one or more of the pre-established key words in the title was performed by separate pairs of reviewers. The search resulted in 307 articles, 260 of which were included. The findings show that the number of publications increased steadily over the study period. The papers were predominantly open-topic and original articles and written in Portuguese. Most of the lead authors were from the South and Southeastern regions of Brazil and from public universities and Fiocruz. The predominant primary theme was medicine utilization (161 articles), followed by management (56), and tangential aspects of the PM cycle (43). An ontology of PS was created based on the classification of the articles. The findings show that the field of PS encompasses public policy and management and frontline activities involved in the delivery of health care to the population. It is hoped that the diverse range of interrelations in the field of PS will be increasingly addressed in future publications.

Pacientes com diabetes mellitus tipo 2 em uso de medicamentos via judicial

Introdução: O aumento contínuo do número de processos de judicialização da saúde, a relevância epidemiológica do diabetes mellitus tipo 2 (DM2), a escassez de recursos utilizados para monitorar os investimentos dos processos judiciais e do seu alto custo para a saúde pública, diante disso torna-se necessário estudos que analisem o perfil da judicialização dos antidiabéticos, que é a principal classe de medicamentos alvo dos processos judiciais. Objetivo: Analisar se os pacientes com DM2 atendidos via judicial, foram acompanhados e monitorados no Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) antes e após os processos judiciais. Além de analisar o perfil de medicamentos judicializados para tratamento da DM2. Métodos: Trata-se de um estudo longitudinal retrospectivo, que utilizou dados secundários, prontuários e arquivos de processos judiciais, de 56 pacientes com DM2 que adquiriram pelo menos um de seus medicamentos por meio da judicialização, no ano de 2019, em um município mineiro. Os dados foram analisados 12 meses antes e 12 meses após a judicialização. Resultados: Dentre as 56 ações judiciais, 39% se concentraram em apenas três unidades de saúde do município. Somente 30 pacientes (53%) antes e 29 (51%) após a judicialização tiveram consultas no SUS. Além disso, apenas 15 (26%) e 13 (23%) pacientes, respectivamente antes e após a judicialização, apresentaram algum exame laboratorial realizado pelo SUS. As insulinas Levemir Flex Pen® (13%), Novo Rapid® (11%) e Lantus® (7%) foram os medicamentos mais judicializados. Conclusão: Observou-se que apesar do SUS prover o insumo terapêutico de elevado custo por meio de uma porta de entrada não convencional, não há monitorização clínica e laboratorial para avaliação da efetividade do uso da tecnologia, conforme recomendam os protocolos clínicos e dispositivos legais brasileiros sobre acesso a medicamentos.