Lessons learned from postmarketing withdrawals of expedited approvals for oncology drug indications

In the past decade, there have been a record number of oncology therapy approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Besides the EMA's conditional marketing authorisation programme and the FDA's Accelerated Approval Program, we observe a tendency towards fast approval for exploratory studies with non-randomised, uncontrolled designs and surrogate endpoints. This issue raises concerns about the robustness and effectiveness of accepted treatments, leaving patients and health-care professionals in a state of uncertainty. A substantial number of accelerated approvals have recently been withdrawn in the USA, with some still authorised in Europe, emphasising discrepancies in regulatory standards that affect both patients and society as a whole. We highlight examples of drugs, authorised on the basis of surrogate endpoints, that were later withdrawn due to an absence of overall survival benefit. Our findings address the challenges and consequences of accelerated approval pathways in oncology. In conclusion, this Policy Review calls for regulatory bodies to better align their procedures and insist on robust evidence, preferably through unbiased randomised controlled trials. Drug approval processes should prioritise patient benefit, overall survival, and quality of life to minimise risks and uncertainties for patients.

Withdrawn 2.0-update on withdrawn drugs with pharmacovigilance data

One challenge in the development of novel drugs is their interaction with potential off-targets, which can cause unintended side-effects, that can lead to the subsequent withdrawal of approved drugs. At the same time, these off-targets may also present a chance for the repositioning of withdrawn drugs for new indications, which are potentially rare or more severe than the original indication and where certain adverse reactions may be avoidable or tolerable. To enable further insights into this topic, we updated our database Withdrawn by adding pharmacovigilance data from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), as well as mechanism of action and human disease pathway prediction features for drugs that are or were temporarily withdrawn or discontinued in at least one country. As withdrawal data are still spread over dozens of national websites, we are continuously updating our lists of discontinued or withdrawn drugs and related (off-)targets. Furthermore, new systematic entry points for browsing the data, such as an ATC tree, were added, increasing the accessibility of the database in a user-friendly way. Withdrawn 2.0 is publicly available without the need for registration or login at https://bioinformatics.charite.de/withdrawn_3/index.php.

Group sequential testing under instrumented difference-in-differences approach

Unmeasured confounding is a major obstacle to reliable causal inference based on observational studies. Instrumented difference-in-differences (iDiD), a novel idea connecting instrumental variable and standard DiD, ameliorates the above issue by explicitly leveraging exogenous randomness in an exposure trend. In this article, we utilize the above idea of iDiD, and propose a novel group sequential testing method that provides valid inference even in the presence of unmeasured confounders. At each time point, we estimate the average or conditional average treatment effect under iDiD setting using the data accumulated up to that time point, and test the significance of the treatment effect. We derive the joint distribution of the test statistics under the null using the asymptotic properties of M-estimation, and the group sequential boundaries are obtained using theα $$ \alpha $$ -spending functions. The performance of our proposed approach is evaluated on both synthetic data and Clinformatics Data Mart Database (OptumInsight, Eden Prairie, MN) to examine the association between rofecoxib and acute myocardial infarction, and our method detects significant adverse effect of rofecoxib much earlier than the time when it was finally withdrawn from the market.

Immunotherapy Withdrawals Put Spotlight on Accelerated Approval

The FDA's Accelerated Approval program is under scrutiny after four drug companies announced plans in recent months to withdraw indications for checkpoint inhibitors that, despite showing early promise, failed to demonstrate a survival benefit in confirmatory trials. The agency's Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee will meet in late April to discuss whether six more indications for some of these same immunotherapies should be nullified as well.

Long-term effects of weight-reducing drugs in people with hypertension

BACKGROUND

This is the third update of this review, first published in July 2009. All major guidelines on treatment of hypertension recommend weight loss; anti-obesity drugs may be able to help in this respect.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objectives: To assess the long-term effects of pharmacologically-induced reduction in body weight in adults with essential hypertension on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity, and adverse events (including total serious adverse events, withdrawal due to adverse events, and total non-serious adverse events).. Secondary objectives: To assess the long-term effects of pharmacologically-induced reduction in body weight in adults with essential hypertension on change from baseline in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and on body weight reduction.

SEARCH METHODS

For this updated review, the Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials up to March 2020: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The searches had no language restrictions. We contacted authors of relevant papers about further published and unpublished work.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of at least 24 weeks' duration in adults with hypertension that compared approved long-term weight-loss medications to placebo.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risks of bias, and extracted data. Where appropriate and in the absence of significant heterogeneity between studies (P > 0.1), we pooled studies using a fixed-effect meta-analysis. When heterogeneity was present, we used the random-effects method and investigated the cause of the heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

This third update of the review added one new trial, investigating the combination of naltrexone/bupropion versus placebo. Two medications, which were included in the previous versions of this review (rimonabant and sibutramine) are no longer considered relevant for this update, since their marketing approval was withdrawn in 2010 and 2009, respectively. The number of included studies in this review update is therefore six (12,724 participants in total): four RCTs comparing orlistat to placebo, involving a total of 3132 participants with high blood pressure and a mean age of 46 to 55 years; one trial comparing phentermine/topiramate to placebo, involving 1305 participants with high blood pressure and a mean age of 53 years; and one trial comparing naltrexone/bupropion to placebo, involving 8283 participants with hypertension and a mean age of 62 years. We judged the risks of bias to be unclear for the trials investigating orlistat or naltrexone/bupropion. and low for the trial investigating phentermine/topiramate. Only the study of naltrexone/bupropion included cardiovascular mortality and morbidity as predefined outcomes. There were no differences in the rates of all-cause or cardiovascular mortality, major cardiovascular events, or serious adverse events between naltrexone/bupropion and placebo. The incidence of overall adverse events was significantly higher in participants treated with naltrexone/bupropion. For orlistat, the incidence of gastrointestinal side effects was consistently higher compared to placebo. The most frequent side effects with phentermine/topiramate were dry mouth and paraesthesia. After six to 12 months, orlistat reduced systolic blood pressure compared to placebo by mean difference (MD) -2.6 mm Hg (95% confidence interval (CI) -3.8 to -1.4 mm Hg; 4 trials, 2058 participants) and diastolic blood pressure by MD -2.0 mm Hg (95% CI -2.7 to -1.2 mm Hg; 4 trials, 2058 participants). After 13 months of follow-up, phentermine/topiramate decreased systolic blood pressure compared to placebo by -2.0 to -4.2 mm Hg (1 trial, 1030 participants) (depending on drug dosage), and diastolic blood pressure by -1.3 to -1.9 mm Hg (1 trial, 1030 participants) (depending on drug dosage). There was no difference in the change in systolic or diastolic blood pressure between naltrexone/bupropion and placebo (1 trial, 8283 participants). We identified no relevant studies investigating liraglutide or lorcaserin in people with hypertension.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with elevated blood pressure, orlistat, phentermine/topiramate and naltrexone/bupropion reduced body weight; the magnitude of the effect was greatest with phentermine/topiramate. In the same trials, orlistat and phentermine/topiramate, but not naltrexone/bupropion, reduced blood pressure. One RCT of naltrexone/bupropion versus placebo showed no differences in all-cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality or morbidity after two years. The European Medicines Agency refused marketing authorisation for phentermine/topiramate due to safety concerns, while for lorcaserin the application for European marketing authorisation was withdrawn due to a negative overall benefit/risk balance. In 2020 lorcaserin was also withdrawn from the US market. Two other medications (rimonabant and sibutramine) had already been withdrawn from the market in 2009 and 2010, respectively.

[Pharmacovigilance update]

The main pharmacovigilance updates in 2020 are reviewed. Remdesivir in COVID-19: relatively safe but turns out to be less effective than expected. Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 : lack of efficacy and risk of arrhythmias. Cytokines storm in COVID-19: may impact pharmacokinetics. VEGF inhibitors: risk of aneurysm and artery dissection. Tofacitinib: dose-dependant risk of venous thromboembolic events. Ondansetron in the first trimester of pregnancy : a highly debated risk of orofacial cleft defects. Fingolimod : contraindicated during pregnancy due to suspected risk of congenital malformations. Ranitidine: global market withdrawal due to contamination with nitrosamines. Ulipristal for uterine fibroids : market withdrawal due to risk of severe liver injury. Ingenol mebutate : market withdrawal due to paradoxical risk of skin cancers.

Caregiver and service provider vaccine confidence following the Changchun Changsheng vaccine incident in China: A cross-sectional mixed methods study

INTRODUCTION

The Changchun Changsheng Vaccine Incident (CCVI) occurred mid-2018 and involved irregularities in the manufacture and quality control of diphtheria-tetanus-acellular-pertussis and rabies vaccines. This study investigates vaccine confidence amongst Chinese caregivers and vaccination-service providers (VSPs) six months after the CCVI.

METHODS

Quantitative surveys were conducted in January 2019 with 2124 caregivers of children and 555 VSPs in three areas in China. The proportions of respondents who agreed to the four statements from the Vaccine Confidence Index™ were used to measure vaccine confidence. Descriptive and univariate analyses were performed to study the level of vaccine confidence. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 48 caregivers, 43 VSPs and 9 immunization program managers. Interviews were analyzed thematically using a combination of deductive and inductive coding. Media surveillance was conducted to monitor public responses to the CCVI.

RESULTS

Media surveillance indicated that public attention to vaccine-related issues increased sharply immediately post-CCVI but declined rapidly thereafter. Six months post-CCVI, 96.0% of caregivers and the same proportion of VSPs reported that vaccination was important and compatible with their religious beliefs. 82.7% and 88.2% of caregivers agreed that vaccines were safe and effective. 92.8% and 94.6% of VSPs agreed that vaccines were safe and effective. Both caregivers and VSPs reported an immediate decline in vaccine confidence post-CCVI. In most cases this trust was regained over time following government and public health responses, however some people remained hesitant about vaccinating their children. Many VSPs were overwhelmed by consultations, workload and psychological pressure after the CCVI.

CONCLUSION

After an initial decline, vaccine confidence recovered to pre-incident levels six months after the CCVI. However, some caregivers moved from the higher to the lower end of the vaccine confidence spectrum, pointing to the need to promote the acceptance of vaccination especially given the need for new vaccines to control the coronavirus epidemic.

Should the Same Safety Scrutiny of Antiobesity Medications be Applied to Other Chronic Usage Drugs?

Obesity treatment is highly stigmatized, mainly because of the stigma of obesity itself. The frequent withdrawal of medications, lorcaserin being the last example, contributes to this stigma, but it is also probably a reflection of it, as data suggest that the threshold for a withdrawal is lower than with other classes of drugs. Safety should always be an absolute priority for every new medication, especially when used on a chronic basis; however, the safety scrutiny given to antiobesity medications is not given for other medications, such as postmenopausal hormone therapy and central nervous system drugs for psychiatric use. The withdrawal of medications for obesity can also impact future research in the area, so we need transparency and equality. Transparency in knowing exactly what reason led to a drug being discontinued and equality in long-term safety should be a concern with any medication prescribed for chronic diseases.

Administration of lower doses of radium-224 to ankylosing spondylitis patients results in no evidence of significant overall detriment

The use of low doses of radium-224 (224Ra) chloride for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis was stopped following the discovery that patients treated with it had a higher than control incidence of leukaemia and other cancers. This was so even though the treatment resulted in decreased pain and increased mobility-both of which are associated with decreased mortality. It was decided to re-analyze the epidemiological data looking at all causes of death. The risk of leukaemia, solid cancer, death from non-cancer causes and from all causes in a study populations of men that received either the typical dose of 5.6 to 11.1 MBq of 224Ra, any dose of 224Ra or no radium were compared using the Cox proportional hazard model. For patients that received the typical dose of 224Ra agreed with the excess cancer was similar to that reported in previous studies. In contrast, these patients were less likely to die from non-cancer diseases and from all causes of death than the control patients. No excess mortality was also found in the population of all males that received the radionuclide. It is concluded that 224Ra treatment administered at low doses to patients with ankylosing spondylitis did not impact mortality from all causes. The study demonstrates the need to consider all causes of death and longevity when assessing health impacts following irradiation.

Withdrawn medicines included in the essential medicines lists of 136 countries

BACKGROUND

Essential medicines lists and related policies are intended to meet the priority health needs of populations and their implementation is associated with more appropriate use of medicines. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that countries carefully select the medicines to be included in their national essential medicines lists. Lists that are used to prioritize access to important treatments should not include medicines that have been withdrawn elsewhere because of an unfavourable benefit-to-harm balance; however, countries still list and use medicines that have been withdrawn worldwide. The objective of this study was to determine whether the national essential medicines lists of 137 countries include medicines that have been withdrawn in other countries.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We performed an audit of national essential medicines lists for medicines that had been withdrawn. Medicines withdrawn from worldwide markets between 1953 and 2014 were identified using a systematic review of published literature and regulatory documents. The reviewers used sources including the WHO's database of drugs, PubMed, and the websites of regulatory agencies to obtain information regarding adverse effects associated with the medicines, the year of first withdrawal, markets of withdrawal, and the level of evidence supporting each withdrawal. We recorded the number of countries with a withdrawn medicine included in their national medicines list, the number of withdrawn medicines included in each nation's list, and the number of national essential medicines including each withdrawn medicine. 97 medicines were withdrawn in at least one country but still included in one more national essential medicines list. Of 137 countries with a national essential medicines list, 136 lists included at least one withdrawn medicine, with 54% of the lists containing 5 or fewer withdrawn medicines, and 27% including 10 or more withdrawn medicines. 11 medicines were withdrawn worldwide but still included on at least one national essential medicines list. Countries with longer essential medicines lists had more withdrawn medicines included in their lists.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that withdrawn medicines are included in all but one national essential medicines list, representing a need for more stringent processes for selecting and removing medicines on these lists. Countries may wish to apply special scrutiny to medicines withdrawn in other nations when selecting medicines to include on their lists.

Severe disease activity in a patient with multiple sclerosis after daclizumab discontinuation

Daclizumab, a MS treatment targeting IL2-receptor, has been recently withdrawn following reports of immune-mediated encephalitis. We report the case of a 39-years-old woman treated with daclizumab that presented a progressive decrease in the strength at her lower limbs which further worsened after the drug was stopped. Post-treatment MRI showed more than 20 new enhancing lesions. No symptoms nor signs associated with immune-mediated encephalitis were present. Our case highlights the problem of disease course after daclizumab discontinuation and urge neurologists to strictly monitor patients discontinuing the drug in order to exclude both the occurrence of immune-mediated encephalitis and disease reactivation.

Analysis of the Risks and Benefits of New Chemical Entities Approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Subsequently Withdrawn From the US Market

Benefit-risk evaluations of drugs have been conducted since the introduction of modern regulatory systems more than 50 years ago. Such judgments are typically made on the basis of qualitative or semiquantitative approaches, often without the aid of quantitative assessment methods, the latter having often been applied asymmetrically to place emphasis on benefit more so than harm. In an effort to preliminarily evaluate the utility of lives lost or saved, or quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) lost and gained as a means of quantitatively assessing the potential benefits and risks of a new chemical entity, we focused our attention on the unique scenario in which a drug was initially approved based on one set of data, but later withdrawn from the market based on a second set of data. In this analysis, a dimensionless risk to benefit ratio was calculated in each instance, based on the risk and benefit quantified in similar units. The results indicated that FDA decisions to approve the drug corresponded to risk to benefit ratios less than or equal to 0.136, and that decisions to withdraw the drug from the US market corresponded to risk to benefit ratios greater than or equal to 0.092. The probability of FDA approval was then estimated using logistic regression analysis. The results of this analysis indicated that there was a 50% probability of FDA approval if the risk to benefit ratio was 0.121, and that the probability approaches 100% for values much less than 0.121, and the probability approaches 0% for values much greater than 0.121. The large uncertainty in these estimates due to the small sample size and overlapping data may be addressed in the future by applying the methodology to other drugs.

Daclizumab in multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

Daclizumab is a monoclonal antibody directed against the CD25 subunit of the interleukin-2 receptor, investigated as a disease-modifying therapy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. The present review addresses how the drug was developed, the known mechanism of action of the drug and the up-to-date data of efficacy and safety.

DEVELOPMENT

Daclizumab has shown superiority in prevention of relapses against placebo and low-dose interferon beta-1a at a level that puts it on par with the rest of current first-line drugs. The effect on the progression of the disease and on neurodegeneration parameters, however, is not clear. On the other hand, it presents safety problems (mainly risk of autoimmunity phenomena including fulminant hepatopathy and encephalitis) that have supposed eventually its withdrawn from marketing. Daclizumab introduces a new mechanism of action through the blocking of a key interleukin in immune regulation and its effect on a population of cells with regulatory ability, such as the NK CD56(bright) cells.

CONCLUSIONS

Daclizumab has shown efficacy in slowing the inflammatory process of multiple sclerosis, although the appearance of potentially serious side effects has not allowed its use to significantly impact current clinical practice. The development of new drugs in multiple sclerosis must be contingent on maintaining or improving the risk-benefit profile with respect to those already in use.

Post-marketing withdrawal of analgesic medications because of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Many analgesics have been withdrawn from the market because of adverse drug reactions. Controversy still surrounds the use of some approved analgesics for pain management. However, the trends and reasons for withdrawal of analgesics when harms are attributed to their use have not been systematically assessed. .

AREAS COVERED

We conducted searches in PubMed; Embase; Google Scholar; clinicaltrials.gov; WHO databases of withdrawn products; websites of the European Medicines Agency, the US Food and Drug Administration, the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency; Meyler's Side Effects of Drugs; Stephens' Detection of New Adverse Drug Reactions; the Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Encyclopedia; and the Merck Index. We included licensed analgesics that were withdrawn after marketing because of adverse reactions between 1950 and March 2017. We excluded herbal products, non-human medicines, and non-prescription medicines. We used the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine criteria to document the levels of evidence, and chi-squared tests to compare withdrawal patterns across geographical regions.

EXPERT OPINION

Pharmacovigilance systems in low-resource settings should be strengthened. Greater co-ordination across regulatory authorities in assessing and interpreting the benefit-harm balance of new analgesics should be encouraged. Future reporting of harms in clinical trials of analgesics should follow standardized guidelines.

Direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Millions of people worldwide suffer from hepatitis C, which can lead to severe liver disease, liver cancer, and death. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), e.g. sofosbuvir, are relatively new and expensive interventions for chronic hepatitis C, and preliminary results suggest that DAAs may eradicate hepatitis C virus (HCV) from the blood (sustained virological response). Sustained virological response (SVR) is used by investigators and regulatory agencies as a surrogate outcome for morbidity and mortality, based solely on observational evidence. However, there have been no randomised trials that have validated that usage.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of DAAs in people with chronic HCV.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for all published and unpublished trials in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, and BIOSIS; the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China Network Knowledge Information (CNKI), the Chinese Science Journal Database (VIP), Google Scholar, The Turning Research into Practice (TRIP) Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, European Medicines Agency (EMA) (www.ema.europa.eu/ema/), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (www.fda.gov), and pharmaceutical company sources for ongoing or unpublished trials. Searches were last run in October 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing DAAs versus no intervention or placebo, alone or with co-interventions, in adults with chronic HCV. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, and language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were hepatitis C-related morbidity, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, hepatocellular carcinoma, non-serious adverse events (each reported separately), and SVR. We systematically assessed risks of bias, performed Trial Sequential Analysis, and followed an eight-step procedure to assess thresholds for statistical and clinical significance. We evaluated the overall quality of the evidence, using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 138 trials randomising a total of 25,232 participants. The trials were generally short-term trials and designed primarily to assess the effect of treatment on SVR. The trials evaluated 51 different DAAs. Of these, 128 trials employed matching placebo in the control group. All included trials were at high risk of bias. Eighty-four trials involved DAAs on the market or under development (13,466 participants). Fifty-seven trials administered DAAs that were discontinued or withdrawn from the market. Study populations were treatment-naive in 95 trials, had been exposed to treatment in 17 trials, and comprised both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced individuals in 24 trials. The HCV genotypes were genotype 1 (119 trials), genotype 2 (eight trials), genotype 3 (six trials), genotype 4 (nine trials), and genotype 6 (one trial). We identified two ongoing trials.We could not reliably determine the effect of DAAs on the market or under development on our primary outcome of hepatitis C-related morbidity or all-cause mortality. There were no data on hepatitis C-related morbidity and only limited data on mortality from 11 trials (DAA 15/2377 (0.63%) versus control 1/617 (0.16%); OR 3.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 26.18, very low-quality evidence). We did not perform Trial Sequential Analysis on this outcome.There is very low quality evidence that DAAs on the market or under development do not influence serious adverse events (DAA 5.2% versus control 5.6%; OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15 , 15,817 participants, 43 trials). The Trial Sequential Analysis showed that there was sufficient information to rule out that DAAs reduce the relative risk of a serious adverse event by 20% when compared with placebo. The only DAA that showed a lower risk of serious adverse events when meta-analysed separately was simeprevir (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.86). However, Trial Sequential Analysis showed that there was not enough information to confirm or reject a relative risk reduction of 20%, and when one trial with an extreme result was excluded, the meta-analysis result showed no evidence of a difference.DAAs on the market or under development may reduce the risk of no SVR from 54.1% in untreated people to 23.8% in people treated with DAA (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.52, 6886 participants, 32 trials, low quality evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.Only 1/84 trials on the market or under development assessed the effects of DAAs on health-related quality of life (SF-36 mental score and SF-36 physical score).There was insufficient evidence from trials on withdrawn or discontinued DAAs to determine their effect on hepatitis C-related morbidity and all-cause mortality (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.79; 5 trials, very low-quality evidence). However, these DAAs seemed to increase the risk of serious adverse events (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.73; 29 trials, very low-quality evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.None of the 138 trials provided useful data to assess the effects of DAAs on the remaining secondary outcomes (ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, and hepatocellular carcinoma).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for our main outcomes of interest come from short-term trials, and we are unable to determine the effect of long-term treatment with DAAs. The rates of hepatitis C morbidity and mortality observed in the trials are relatively low and we are uncertain as to how DAAs affect this outcome. Overall, there is very low quality evidence that DAAs on the market or under development do not influence serious adverse events. There is insufficient evidence to judge if DAAs have beneficial or harmful effects on other clinical outcomes for chronic HCV. Simeprevir may have beneficial effects on risk of serious adverse event. In all remaining analyses, we could neither confirm nor reject that DAAs had any clinical effects. DAAs may reduce the number of people with detectable virus in their blood, but we do not have sufficient evidence from randomised trials that enables us to understand how SVR affects long-term clinical outcomes. SVR is still an outcome that needs proper validation in randomised clinical trials.

An Increase in Dietary Supplement Exposures Reported to US Poison Control Centers

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to investigate the epidemiology of dietary supplement exposures in the USA.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted of out-of-hospital dietary supplement exposures reported to the National Poison Data System from 2000 through 2012.

RESULTS

There were 274,998 dietary supplement exposures from 2000 through 2012. The annual rate of dietary supplement exposures per 100,000 population increased by 46.1% during 2000-2002, decreased 8.8% during 2002-2005, and then increased again by 49.3% from 2005 to 2012. These trends were influenced by the decrease in ma huang exposures starting in 2002. Miscellaneous dietary supplements accounted for 43.9% of all exposures, followed by botanicals (31.9%), hormonal products (15.1%), and other supplements (5.1%). The majority of dietary supplement exposures (70.0%) occurred among children younger than 6 years old and were acute (94.0%) and unintentional (82.9%). Serious medical outcomes accounted for 4.5% of exposures and most (95.0%) occurred among individuals 6 years and older. Ma huang products, yohimbe, and energy products were the categories associated with the greatest toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an overall increase in the rate of dietary supplement exposures from 2000 through 2012. Although the majority of these exposures did not require treatment at a health care facility or result in serious medical outcomes, exposures to yohimbe and energy products were associated with considerable toxicity. Our results demonstrate the success of the FDA ban on ma huang products and the need for FDA regulation of yohimbe and energy products in the USA.

Direct-acting antivirals for chronic hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Millions of people worldwide suffer from hepatitis C, which can lead to severe liver disease, liver cancer, and death. Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are relatively new and expensive interventions for chronic hepatitis C, and preliminary results suggest that DAAs may eradicate hepatitis C virus (HCV) from the blood (sustained virological response). However, it is still questionable if eradication of hepatitis C virus in the blood eliminates hepatitis C in the body, and improves survival and leads to fewer complications.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of DAAs in people with chronic HCV.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for all published and unpublished trials in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, and BIOSIS; the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China Network Knowledge Information (CNKI), the Chinese Science Journal Database (VIP), Google Scholar, The Turning Research into Practice (TRIP) Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, European Medicines Agency (EMA) (www.ema.europa.eu/ema/), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (www.fda.gov), and pharmaceutical company sources for ongoing or unpublished trials. Searches were last run in October 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing DAAs versus no intervention or placebo, alone or with co-interventions, in adults with chronic HCV. We included trials irrespective of publication type, publication status, and language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were hepatitis C-related morbidity, serious adverse events, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, hepatocellular carcinoma, non-serious adverse events (each reported separately), and sustained virological response. We systematically assessed risks of bias, performed Trial Sequential Analysis, and followed an eight-step procedure to assess thresholds for statistical and clinical significance. The overall quality of the evidence was evaluated using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 138 trials randomising a total of 25,232 participants. The 138 trials assessed the effects of 51 different DAAs. Of these, 128 trials employed matching placebo in the control group. All included trials were at high risk of bias. Eighty-four trials involved DAAs on the market or under development (13,466 participants). Fifty-seven trials administered withdrawn or discontinued DAAs. Trial participants were treatment-naive (95 trials), treatment-experienced (17 trials), or both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced (24 trials). The HCV genotypes were genotype 1 (119 trials), genotype 2 (eight trials), genotype 3 (six trials), genotype 4 (nine trials), and genotype 6 (one trial). We identified two ongoing trials.Meta-analysis of the effects of all DAAs on the market or under development showed no evidence of a difference when assessing hepatitis C-related morbidity or all-cause mortality (OR 3.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 26.18, P = 0.19, I² = 0%, 2,996 participants, 11 trials, very low-quality evidence). As there were no data on hepatitis C-related morbidity and very few data on mortality (DAA 15/2377 (0.63%) versus control 1/617 (0.16%)), it was not possible to perform Trial Sequential Analysis on hepatitis C-related morbidity or all-cause mortality.Meta-analysis of all DAAs on the market or under development showed no evidence of a difference when assessing serious adverse events (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15, P = 0.52, I² = 0%, 15,817 participants, 43 trials, very low-quality evidence). The Trial Sequential Analysis showed that the cumulative Z-score crossed the trial sequential boundary for futility, showing that there was sufficient information to rule out that DAAs compared with placebo reduced the relative risk of a serious adverse event by 20%. The only DAA that showed a significant difference on risk of serious adverse events when meta-analysed separately was simeprevir (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.86). However, Trial Sequential Analysis showed that there was not enough information to confirm or reject a relative risk reduction of 20%, and when one trial with an extreme result was excluded, then the meta-analysis result showed no evidence of a difference.DAAs on the market or under development seemed to reduce the risk of no sustained virological response (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.52, P < 0.00001, I² = 77%, 6886 participants, 32 trials, very low-quality evidence) and Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.Only 1/84 trials on the market or under development assessed the effects of DAAs on health-related quality of life (SF-36 mental score and SF-36 physical score).Withdrawn or discontinued DAAs had no evidence of a difference when assessing hepatitis C-related morbidity and all-cause mortality (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.79, P = 0.40, I² = 0%; 5 trials, very low-quality evidence). However, withdrawn DAAs seemed to increase the risk of serious adverse events (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.73, P = 0.001, I² = 0%, 29 trials, very low-quality evidence), and Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed this meta-analysis result.Most of all outcome results were short-term results; therefore, we could neither confirm nor reject any long-term effects of DAAs. None of the 138 trials provided useful data to assess the effects of DAAs on the remaining secondary outcomes (ascites, variceal bleeding, hepato-renal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, and hepatocellular carcinoma).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, DAAs on the market or under development do not seem to have any effects on risk of serious adverse events. Simeprevir may have beneficial effects on risk of serious adverse event. In all remaining analyses, we could neither confirm nor reject that DAAs had any clinical effects. DAAs seemed to reduce the risk of no sustained virological response. The clinical relevance of the effects of DAAs on no sustained virological response is questionable, as it is a non-validated surrogate outcome. All trials and outcome results were at high risk of bias, so our results presumably overestimate benefit and underestimate harm. The quality of the evidence was very low.

Ontak-like human IL-2 fusion toxin

Ontak® is a FDA-approved diphtheria toxin-based recombinant fusion toxin for treatment of human CD25⁺ cutaneous T cell lymphoma (CTCL). However, it has been discontinued clinically due to the production issue related to the bacterial expression system with difficult purification. Recently we have developed monovalent and bivalent human IL-2 fusion toxins targeting human CD25⁺ cells using advanced unique diphtheria toxin resistant yeast Pichia Pastoris expression system. In vitro efficacy characterization using human CD25⁺ HUT102/6TG cells demonstrated that both monovalent and bivalent isoforms are potent and the bivalent isoform is approximately two logs more potent than the monovalent isoform. In this study, we further assessed the in vivo efficacy of the human IL-2 fusion toxins using human CD25⁺ HUT102/6TG tumor-bearing NSG mouse model. The data demonstrated that both monovalent and bivalent human IL-2 fusion toxins significantly prolonged the survival of the human CD25⁺ tumor-bearing NSG mice in a dose-dependent manner. Then we further assessed the residual tumor cells from the HUT102/6TG tumor-bearing NSG mice using the residual tumor cell bearing NSG mouse model. The results demonstrated that the residual tumor cells were still sensitive to the continual treatment with the human IL-2 fusion toxin. This yeast-expressed human IL-2 fusion toxin will be a promising candidate to replace the clinically discontinued Ontak®.

Why trash don't pass? pharmaceutical licensing and safety performance of drugs

This paper examines how asymmetric information in pharmaceutical licensing affects the safety standards of licensed drugs. Pharmaceutical companies often license potential drug molecules at different stages of drug development from other pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies and complete the remaining of research stages before submitting the new drug application(NDA) to the food and drug administration. The asymmetric information associated with the quality of licensed molecules might result in the molecules which are less likely to succeed to be licensed out, while those with greater potential of success being held internally for development. We identify the NDAs submitted between 1993 and 2004 where new molecular entities were acquired through licensing. Controlling for other drug area specific and applicant firm specific factors, we investigate whether drugs developed with licensed molecules face higher probability of safety based recall and ultimate withdrawal from the market than drugs developed internally. Results suggest the opposite of Akerlof's (Q J Econ 84:488-500, 1970) lemons problem. Licensed molecules rather have less probability of facing safety based recalls and ultimate withdrawal from the market comparing to internally developed drug molecules. This suggests that biotechnology and small pharmaceutical firms specializing in pharmaceutical research are more efficient in developing good potential molecules because of their concentrated research. Biotechnology firms license out good potential molecules because it increases their market value and reputation. In addition, results suggest that both the number of previous approved drugs in the disease area, and also the applicant firms' total number of previous approvals in all disease areas reduce the probability that an additional approved drug in the same drug area will potentially be harmful.

Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions: The Pharmacogenomics from Research to Clinical Implementation

Severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs), previously thought to be idiosyncratic or unpredictable, are a deadly form of adverse drug reactions with skin manifestations. Current pharmacogenomic studies of SCARs have made important strides, as the prevention of SCARs, to some extent, appears attainable with the identification of genetic variants for genes encoding drug-metabolizing enzymes and human leukocyte antigens (HLAs). Despite the improvement of incidence, a treatment guideline for this devastating condition is still unavailable, highlighting the inadequacy of contemporary accepted therapeutic interventions. As such, prompt withdrawal of causative drugs is believed to be a priority of patient management. In this review, we discuss recent cutting-edge findings concerning the discovery of biomarkers for SCARs and their clinical utilities in the better prediction and early diagnosis of this disease. The knowledge compiled herein provides clues for future investigations on deciphering additional genetic markers for SCARs and the design of clinical trials for the prospective identification of subjects at genetic risk for this condition, ultimately personalizing the medicine.

Long-term effects of weight-reducing drugs in people with hypertension

BACKGROUND

All major guidelines on antihypertensive therapy recommend weight loss; anti-obesity drugs may be able to help in this respect.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES

To assess the long-term effects of pharmacologically induced reduction in body weight in adults with essential hypertension on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular morbidity, and adverse events (including total serious adverse events, withdrawal due to adverse events, and total non-serious adverse events).

SECONDARY OBJECTIVES

To assess the long-term effects of pharmacologically induced reduction in body weight in adults with essential hypertension on change from baseline in systolic blood pressure, change from baseline in diastolic blood pressure, and body weight reduction.

SEARCH METHODS

We obtained studies using computerised searches of the Cochrane Hypertension Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, the clinical trials registry ClinicalTrials.gov, and from handsearches in reference lists and systematic reviews (status as of 13 April 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in hypertensive adults of at least 24 weeks' duration that compared long-term pharmacologic interventions for weight loss with placebo. 

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. Where appropriate and in the absence of significant heterogeneity between studies (P > 0.1), we pooled studies using fixed-effect meta-analysis. When heterogeneity was present, we used the random-effects method and investigated the cause of heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

After updating the literature search, which was extended to include four new weight-reducing drugs, we identified one additional study of phentermine/topiramate, bringing the total number of studies to nine that compare orlistat, sibutramine, or phentermine/topiramate to placebo and thus fulfil our inclusion criteria. We identified no relevant studies investigating rimonabant, liraglutide, lorcaserin, or naltrexone/bupropion. No study included mortality and cardiovascular morbidity as predefined outcomes. Incidence of gastrointestinal side effects was consistently higher in those participants treated with orlistat versus those treated with placebo. The most frequent side effects were dry mouth, constipation, and headache with sibutramine, and dry mouth and paresthaesia with phentermine/topiramate. In participants assigned to orlistat, sibutramine, or phentermine/topiramate body weight was reduced more effectively than in participants in the usual-care/placebo groups. Orlistat reduced systolic blood pressure as compared to placebo by -2.5 mm Hg (mean difference (MD); 95% confidence interval (CI): -4.0 to -0.9 mm Hg) and diastolic blood pressure by -1.9 mm Hg (MD; 95% CI: -3.0 to -0.9 mm Hg). Sibutramine increased diastolic blood pressure compared to placebo by +3.2 mm Hg (MD; 95% CI: +1.4 to +4.9 mm Hg). The one trial that investigated phentermine/topiramate suggested it lowered blood pressure.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with elevated blood pressure, orlistat and sibutramine reduced body weight to a similar degree, while phentermine/topiramate reduced body weight to a greater extent. In the same trials, orlistat and phentermine/topiramate reduced blood pressure, while sibutramine increased it. We could include no trials investigating rimonabant, liraglutide, lorcaserin, or naltrexone/bupropion in people with elevated blood pressure. Long-term trials assessing the effect of orlistat, liraglutide, lorcaserin, phentermine/topiramate, or naltrexone/bupropion on mortality and morbidity are unavailable and needed. Rimonabant and sibutramine have been withdrawn from the market, after long-term trials on mortality and morbidity have confirmed concerns about the potential severe side effects of these two drugs. The European Medicines Agency refused marketing authorisation for phentermine/topiramate due to safety concerns, while the application for European marketing authorisation for lorcaserin was withdrawn by the manufacturer after the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use judged the overall benefit/risk balance to be negative.

[What happened after meprobamate's withdrawal? Survey in two nursing homes]

We have conducted in two nursing homes a survey to study the impact of meprobamate's withdrawal, at the beginning of 2012, in terms of extent of prescribing to others psychotropic drugs and occurrence of adverse events. After meprobamate's withdrawal, 65 % of residents did not receive alternative medication and within three months after meprobamate stopping, adverse events (drowsiness, falls and hospitalization) decreased while agitation did not increase.

GPR40 agonists for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: life after 'TAKing' a hit

The free fatty acid receptor GPR40 has been proposed as a potential target for type 2 diabetes (T2D) pharmacotherapy. This idea has been validated in both preclinical and clinical studies, in which activation of GPR40 was shown to improve glycaemic control by stimulating glucose-dependent insulin secretion; however, the recent termination of phase III clinical trials using the GPR40 agonist TAK-875 (fasiglifam) has raised important questions regarding the long-term safety and viability of targeting GPR40 and, more specifically, about our understanding of this receptor's basic biology. In the present review, we provide a summary of established and novel concepts related to GPR40's pharmacobiology and discuss the current status and future outlook for GPR40-based drug development for the treatment of T2D.

Tolerability of selective cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors used for the treatment of rheumatological manifestations of inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used to reduce inflammatory pain and swelling in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients with rheumatological manifestations. While these drugs effectively reduce musculoskeletal pain and stiffness, long-term use is limited by gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects (AEs) and disease exacerbation. As an alternative to NSAIDs, selective cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors were developed to improve GI safety and tolerability. COX-2 inhibitors include drugs such as celecoxib, rofecoxib, valdecoxib, etoricoxib, and lumiracoxib. Rofecoxib and valdecoxib have been withdrawn from the market worldwide due to safety concerns (most importantly for cardiovascular adverse events) and lumiracoxib has been withdrawn in many countries due to liver toxicity. However, celecoxib and etoricoxib continue to be available for use in many countries. Several studies have examined whether COX-2 inhibitors can be safely used for the treatment of rheumatological manifestations of IBD with inconsistent results. Some investigators report acceptable safety profiles associated with these drugs while others found that COX-2 inhibitors are associated with high rates of disease exacerbation.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the tolerability and safety of COX-2 inhibitors used for the treatment of rheumatological manifestations of IBD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from inception to 19 September 2013: PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL. The search was not limited by language. Additional trials were identified by manually searching the reference lists of relevant papers and conference proceedings and through correspondence with experts and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared COX-2 inhibitors to placebo were considered for inclusion. Participants were adult patients with IBD presenting with rheumatological manifestations of at least two weeks duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and extracted data. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with disease exacerbation as defined by the included studies. Secondary outcomes included GI adverse effects, renal toxicity, cardiovascular and thrombotic events. Data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis where patients with missing final outcomes were assumed to have had an exacerbation of IBD. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

There were no RCTs that assessed the tolerability or safety of the withdrawn COX-2 inhibitors rofecoxib, valdecoxib, or lumiracoxib. Two RCTs (n = 381 IBD patients with rheumatological manifestations) were included in the review. One study (n = 159) compared etoricoxib (60 to 120 mg/day) to placebo in IBD patients with quiescent or active ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease. The other study (n = 222) compared celecoxib (200 mg twice daily) to placebo in patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis. Both studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. The two included studies were not pooled for meta-analysis due to differences in patient populations and treatment duration. There was no statistically significant difference in exacerbation of IBD between etoricoxib and placebo. After 12 weeks of treatment the IBD exacerbation rate was 17% (14/82) in the etoricoxib group compared to 19% (15/77) in the placebo group (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.69). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (29 events). There was no statistically significant difference in exacerbation of ulcerative colitis between celecoxib and placebo. After two weeks of treatment 4% (5/112) of celecoxib patients experienced an exacerbation of ulcerative colitis compared to 6% (7/110) of patients in the placebo group (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.14). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (12 events). The study comparing etoricoxib to placebo documented but did not report on AEs. The proportion of patients who experienced AEs was similar in the celecoxib and placebo groups (21% and 17%, respectively, P > 0.20). No patients in either group died or experienced serious adverse events. Eleven percent of patients in the celecoxib and placebo groups experienced GI AEs (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.07). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (24 events). GI AEs led to premature withdrawal from the study in 3% of patients in celecoxib and placebo groups respectively. GI AEs included increased stool frequency, rectal bleeding, and inflamed mucosa. No patients experienced any cardiovascular adverse events. Renal toxicity or thrombotic AEs were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results for disease exacerbation and AEs between the COX-2 inhibitors celecoxib and etoricoxib and placebo were uncertain. Thus no definitive conclusions regarding the tolerability and safety of the short term use of celecoxib and etoricoxib in patients with IBD can be drawn. The two included studies suggest that celecoxib and etoricoxib do not exacerbate IBD symptoms. However, it should be noted that both studies had relatively small sample sizes and short follow-up durations. Clinicians need to continue to weigh the risks and benefits of these drugs when treating patients IBD patients with rheumatological manifestations in order to avoid disease exacerbation and other adverse effects. Further RCTs are needed to determine the tolerability and safety of celecoxib and etoricoxib in these patients.

Inconsistencies among European Union pharmaceutical regulator safety communications: a cross-country comparison

Background

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) and national regulators share the responsibility to communicate to healthcare providers postmarketing safety events but little is known about the consistency of this process. We aimed to compare public availability of safety-related communications and drug withdrawals from the EMA and European Union member countries for novel medicines.

Methods and Findings

We performed a cross-sectional analysis using public Dear Healthcare Professional Communications (DHPCs) for all novel medicines authorized between 2001 and 2010 by the EMA and available for use in France, Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Between 2001 and 2010, the EMA approved 185 novel medicines. DHPCs could not be ascertained for the EMA. Among the 4 national regulators, as of April 30, 2013, at least one safety DHPC or withdrawal occurred for 53 (28.6%) medicines, totaling 90 DHPCs and 5 withdrawals. Among these 53 medicines, all 4 national agencies issued at least one communication for 17 (32.1%), three of the four for 25 (47.2%), two of the four for 6 (11.3%), and one of the four for 5 (9.4%). Five drugs were reported to be withdrawn, three by all four countries, one by three and one by two. Among the 95 DHPCs and withdrawals, 20 (21.1%) were issued by all 4 national regulators, 37 (38.9%) by 3 of the 4, 22 (23.2%) by 2 of the 4, and 16 (16.8%) by one. Consistency of making publicly available all identified safety DHPC or withdrawal across regulator pairs varied from 33% to 73% agreement.

Conclusions

Safety communications were not made publicly available by the EMA. Among the 4 European member countries with national regulators that make DHPCs publicly available since at least 2001, there were substantial inconsistencies in safety communications for novel medicines. The impact of those inconsistencies in terms of public health remains to be determined.

A retrospective analysis of 72 patients on prior efalizumab subsequent to the time of voluntary market withdrawal in 2009

BACKGROUND

Efalizumab was voluntarily withdrawn from the market in April 2009 after four cases of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.

OBJECTIVE

To review the baseline characteristics and psoriasis phenotypes of patients with prior excelled response to efalizumab, and to determine the response of these patients to prior as well as subsequent therapies. By defining this subgroup of patients, particularly relating to palmoplantar psoriasis, future therapeutic considerations could be improved.

DESIGN

A retrospective review of 72 patients who were on efalizumab at the time of market withdrawal was conducted. Data was obtained through chart review of patients at a specialty psoriasis clinic in Dallas, TX.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Patient characteristics, details of efalizumab use, and efficacy of efalizumab compared with other psoriasis treatment modalities.

RESULTS

Of the 72 patients, 24 (33%) were found to have palmoplantar disease. As a group, these patients were older, more likely to be female, and less likely to have a family history of psoriasis. 48 patients (67%) were on one or more systemic and/or biologic medication prior to starting efalizumab. Their BSA improved from 5.45 to 0.8 as a group. Six patients were identified as having failed TNF alpha antagonist treatment prior to starting efalizumab. All responded well to the medication with an average BSA of 0.54. Five of these six patients had evidence of palmoplantar disease prior to starting efalizumab and five of these six patients were female. Eleven patients (15%) experienced neurologic side effects and 13 (18%) had infections while on efalizumab treatment.

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective review. Quality of life issues could not always be fully assessed from the data available.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Efalizumab was effectively utilized in our clinical practice to treat patients with palmoplantar psoriasis, including six patients who had failed prior treatment with one or more TNF alpha antagonist agents.

Ischaemic cardiovascular risk and prescription of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for musculoskeletal complaints

OBJECTIVE

To determine the influence of ischaemic cardiovascular (CV) risk on prescription of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) by general practitioners (GPs) in patients with musculoskeletal complaints.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING

A healthcare database containing the electronic GP medical records of over one million patients throughout the Netherlands.

PATIENTS

A total of 474 201 adults consulting their GP with a new musculoskeletal complaint between 2000 and 2010. Patients were considered at high CV risk if they had a history of myocardial infarction, angina pectoris, stroke, transient ischaemic attack, or peripheral arterial disease, and at low CV risk if they had no CV risk factors.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Frequency of prescription of non-selective (ns)NSAIDs and selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (coxibs).

RESULTS

Overall, 24.4% of patients were prescribed an nsNSAID and 1.4% a coxib. Of the 41,483 patients with a high CV risk, 19.9% received an nsNSAID and 2.2% a coxib. These patients were more likely to be prescribed a coxib than patients with a low CV risk (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.8-2.0). Prescription of nsNSAIDs decreased over time in all risk groups and was lower in patients with a high CV risk than in patients with a low CV risk (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.7-0.8).

CONCLUSION

Overall, patients with a high CV risk were less likely to be prescribed an NSAID for musculoskeletal complaints than patients with a low CV risk. Nevertheless, one in five high CV risk patients received an NSAID, indicating that there is still room for improvement.