Evaluating the effectiveness of risk minimisation measures: the application of a conceptual framework to Danish real-world dabigatran data

The use of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks in implementation research for medicinal products: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The uptake, adoption and integration of new medicines and treatment regimens within healthcare delivery can take a decade or more. Increasingly, implementation science (IS) research is being used to bridge this gap between the availability of new therapeutic evidence and its actual application in clinical practice. Little is known, however, about the quality of IS research in this area, including the degree to which theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) are being used. The objective of this study was to conduct a scoping review of the use of TMFs in implementation research involving medicinal products.

METHODS

A search was conducted for English language abstracts and manuscripts describing the application of TMFs in IS studies for medicinal products. Eligible publications were those published between 1 January 1974 and 12 December 2022. All records were screened at the title and abstract stage; included full-text papers were abstracted using data extraction tables designed for the study. Study quality was appraised using the Implementation Research Development Tool.

RESULTS

The initial scoping search identified 2697 publications, of which 9 were ultimately eligible for inclusion in the review. Most studies were published after 2020 and varied in their objectives, design and therapeutic area. Most studies had sample sizes of fewer than 50 participants, and all focused on the post-marketing phase of drug development. The TMF most frequently used was the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Although most studies applied all TMF domains, TMF use was limited to instrument development and/or qualitative analysis. Quality appraisals indicated the need for engaging patients and other stakeholders in the implementation research, reporting on the cost of implementation strategies, and evaluating the unintended consequences of implementation efforts.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that few IS studies involving medicinal products reported using TMFs. Those that did encompassed a wide variety of therapeutic indications and medicinal products; all were in the post-marketing phase and involved limited application of the TMFs. Researchers should consider conducting IS in earlier phases of drug development and integrating the TMFs throughout the research process. More consistent and in-depth use of TMFs may help advance research in this area.

Effectiveness of drug safety measures for reducing the incidence of adverse drug reactions: Post-hoc analysis of data from all-case surveillance of iguratimod using generalized estimating equations

A post-marketing study was performed on all patients who had started treatment with iguratimod, a conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug approved in Japan. During the study period, various safety measures were implemented to reduce risks. We investigated the frequency of adverse drug reactions before and after implementation of each safety measure to examine the preventive effect of these measures. Post-hoc analysis was performed using data from all-case surveillance of iguratimod. The subjects were all of the patients receiving iguratimod for whom safety information was obtained. To identify the time after starting administration when adverse drug reactions were most likely to occur, a generalized linear mixed-effect model was applied for the period from initiation of administration until occurrence of reactions in each patient. The mean incidence of adverse drug reactions per patient was compared before and after the implementation of safety measures by using generalized estimating equations based on a two-sided test, 95% confidence interval, and 5% significance level. The number of patients treated with iguratimod was not related to changes in the number of patients with adverse drug reactions. After implementing precautions regarding co-administration with warfarin and liver dysfunction, the estimated mean incidence rate of adverse drug reactions (95% confidence interval) decreased significantly to 0.73 (0.59-0.90) and 0.72 (0.55-0.94), respectively. Accordingly, some of the implementation of safety measures significantly reduced adverse drug reactions. The effectiveness of safety measures implemented during the all-case surveillance of iguratimod was evaluated, revealing that early implementation of safety measures decreased the incidence of adverse drug reactions.

Risk Management for the 21st Century: Current Status and Future Needs

Global adoption of risk management principles outlined in the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) E2E guideline and the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) Working Group VI guidance introduced greater proactivity and consistency into the practice of pharmacovigilance and benefit–risk management throughout the lifecycle of a drug. However, following the release of these guidelines there have been important advances in the science and practice of risk minimisation itself, especially in terms of how risk minimisation measures (RMMs) are designed, implemented, disseminated and evaluated for effectiveness in real-world healthcare settings. In this article, we describe how the field of design, implementation, dissemination and evaluation of RMMs has advanced in recent years while highlighting current areas of challenge and possible solutions. Where possible we cite global examples to demonstrate how evidence-based approaches have informed the development of RMMs. In this context, while taking into consideration local healthcare system policies and national legislations, we conclude with a call for a global effort to harmonise certain areas that focus on, but are not limited to, standardising certain terms and definitions, consistent application of robust methodologies, and outline of best practices for risk minimisation design, implementation, and dissemination.

Risk Minimisation Evaluation with Process Indicators and Behavioural or Health Outcomes in Europe: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

European Pharmacovigilance regulatory guidance recommends the evaluation of additional risk minimisation measures (aRMMs) with process indicators and outcomes. Evaluation of both measures within the same evaluation helps to establish the relationship between the implementation of aRMMs (across process indicators) and the impact on drug safety-related outcomes. The term risk minimisation evaluation (RMEv) was used to describe a study or group of studies that assesses the effectiveness of aRMMs for one specific product.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to describe the characteristics and results of RMEv that include both process indicators and outcomes as well as those of studies that conform the RMEv in Europe.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search in the European Union Register of Post-Authorization Studies, PubMed and grey literature (Google and abstracts of the International Conference on Pharmacoepidemiology and Therapeutic Risk Management) to identify studies that assessed the effectiveness of aRMMs including at least one European country, from 1 January, 2011 to 12 October, 2019. Identified studies linked to one product were considered part of the product RMEv. Only RMEv that included both process indicators and outcomes (behavioural and/or health/safety outcomes) were eligible. Data were abstracted from reports, manuscripts and abstracts.

RESULTS

Eighteen of 102 (18%) RMEv had both process indicators and outcomes, and were included in this review. Of the 18 RMEv, ten consisted of one study only, five of two studies, and three of three or more studies. A total of 30 studies were included within the 18 RMEv. The designs of the studies were: 19 (63%) cross-sectional surveys (47% targeted patients and 89% healthcare professionals), 17 (57%) retrospective studies (47% using pre/post approach) and 3 (10%) prospective studies. Nineteen studies included process indicators that were receipt (n = 14), use (n = 12), knowledge (n = 17) and self-reported behaviour (n = 15). Regarding outcomes, 67% of the 18 RMEv evaluated behavioural outcomes and 50% health/safety outcomes. Three of the 18 RMEv evaluated both behavioural and health/safety outcomes. For five RMEv, correlations between process indicators and outcomes were performed, two at the patient level. Results were available for 14 of the 18 RMEv. In healthcare professional surveys, the median percentage was 57% for receipt, 92% for reading, 80% for use, 77% for knowledge and 74% for behaviour. In patient surveys, the median percentage was 56% for receipt, 87% for reading, 65% for use, 47% for knowledge and 69% for behaviour. Knowledge was better in healthcare professionals than patients (p < 0.05). Of the three RMEv with a correlation analysis, only one found a positive trend for a lower occurrence of outcomes as process indicators improved, though this was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

A minority of RMEv assessed both process indicators and outcomes. More RMEv require approaches that correlate process indicators and outcomes at the patient level to evaluate more comprehensively the implementation of aRMMs.

Drug Safety Issues Covered by Lay Media: A Cohort Study of Direct Healthcare Provider Communications Sent between 2001 and 2015 in The Netherlands

Background

Some drug safety issues communicated through direct healthcare professional communications (DHPCs) receive substantial media coverage, while others do not.

Objectives

The objective of this study was to assess the extent of coverage of drug safety issues that have been communicated through DHPCs in newspapers and social media. A secondary aim was to explore which determinants may be associated with media coverage.

Methods

Newspaper articles covering drug safety issues communicated through 387 DHPCs published between 2001 and 2015 were retrieved from LexisNexis Academic™. Social media postings were retrieved from Coosto™ for drugs included in 220 DHPCs published between 2010 and 2015. Coverage of DHPCs by newspapers and social media was assessed during the 2-month and 14-day time periods following issuance of the DHPC, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess potential DHPC- and drug-related determinants of media coverage.

Results

41 (10.6%) DHPC safety issues were covered in newspaper articles. Newspaper coverage was associated with drugs without a specialist indication [adjusted odds ratio 5.32; 95% confidence interval (2.64–10.73)]. Negative associations were seen for time since market approval [3–5 years 0.30; (0.11–0.82), 6–11 years 0.18; (0.06–0.58)] and year of the DHPC [0.88; (0.81–0.96)]. In the social media, 180 (81.8%) drugs mentioned in 220 DHPCs were covered. Social media coverage was associated with drugs without a specialist indication [6.92; (1.56–30.64)], and for DHPCs communicating clinical safety issues [5.46; (2.03–14.66)].

Conclusions

Newspapers covered a small proportion of DHPC safety issues only. Most drugs mentioned in DHPCs were covered in social media. Coverage in both media were higher for drugs without a specialist indication.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40264-020-00922-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A Novel Approach to Visualize Risk Minimization Effectiveness: Peeping at the 2012 UK Proton Pump Inhibitor Label Change Using a Rapid Cycle Analysis Tool

INTRODUCTION

Evaluation of risk minimization (RM) actions is an emerging area of regulatory science, often without tools to rapidly and systematically assess their effectiveness.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether chronographs, typically used for rapid signal detection in observational longitudinal databases, could be used to visualize RM effectiveness. We evaluated the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) 2012 proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) class-wide label change that warned of increased risk of bone fracture, advocated to limit duration of use, and recommended to treat those at risk for osteoporosis according to clinical guidelines.

METHODS

The cohort consisted of adults aged 18 years and above prescribed one of the five PPIs available in the UK The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database through September 2015. Four chronographs were compared using drug episodes that started before (PRE) and after (POST) the 20 April 2012 MHRA warning; fracture and osteoporosis were evaluated separately. Chronographs show a measure of observed/expected events, the Information Component (IC) and 95% credibility interval (CI), calculated at monthly time intervals relative to the start date of a prescription, and summed to estimate IC over a 3-year period; IC > 0 indicates observed > expected events. We hypothesized that chronographs may assess RM effectiveness if stratified by PRE/POST an RM intervention such as a label change.

RESULTS

There were 1,588,973 and 664,601 PPI users in the PRE and POST periods, respectively. We observed a 4.6% reduction in the proportion of long-term PPI episodes and a 4.1% reduction in the overall proportion of the THIN population using PPIs. Compared with the PRE chronographs, when both visually comparing and when examining the summed ICs for fracture in the POST period, a significant reduction was observed overall (IC = 0.024 [95% CI 0.015 to 0.33] PRE vs - 0.141 [95% CI - 0.162 to - 0.120] POST), suggesting less observed events than expected, and prior to PPI start, suggestive of strong channeling (IC = - 0.027 [95% CI - 0.037 to - 0.017] PRE vs - 0.291 [95% CI - 0.308 to - 0.274] POST). Results were qualitatively similar for osteoporosis.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot demonstrated a novel application of a visual, rapid analysis technique to assess RM effectiveness, and supported a hypothesis that prescribers altered some behaviors after the MHRA label change, such as channeling patients at risk of fracture or osteoporosis away from PPI use and potentially reducing fracture outcomes. Limitations include lack of confounding control and outcomes defined only by diagnosis code. Results demonstrate the potential to use large healthcare databases with chronographs to rapidly assess RM effectiveness, similar to signal detection in pharmacovigilance, and may help design more comprehensive RM evaluation studies.

A drug utilization study to evaluate effectiveness of risk minimization measures for trimetazidine in France, Hungary, Romania and Spain

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The approved indication for trimetazidine (TMZ) was restricted to "add-on therapy for the symptomatic treatment of patients with stable angina pectoris who are inadequately controlled by or intolerant to first-line antianginal therapies" in 2012 by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). TMZ was no longer indicated for ophthalmology and otolaryngology (ENT) indications. This drug utilization study analysed actual utilization of TMZ before and after the restriction on its indications to evaluate the effectiveness of risk minimization measures (RMM).

METHODS

This was a multi-national, cross-sectional, non-interventional drug utilization study using European databases: IMS Prescribing Insights (PI) for France and Spain, National Diagnostic Index (NDI) for Romania and National Prescription Audit (NPA) for Hungary. TMZ prescriptions issued by Ear-Nose-Throat (ENT) specialists, ophthalmologists, cardiologists and General Physicians (GPs)/others were analysed during the 24-month period before (reference period) and after RMM implementation (assessment period).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

During the assessment period, most of the TMZ prescriptions for ENT and ophthalmology indications (un-authorized indications) were made by GPs/others followed by ENT specialists, ophthalmologists and cardiologists in most of the countries. The proportion of TMZ prescriptions for ENT or ophthalmological indications after the restrictions on indication was reduced in Hungary (by 0.4%) and Spain (by 11.8%), remained the same in Romania and increased in France (by 3.7%).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

This study showed that a significant proportion of TMZ prescriptions was off-label for ENT or ophthalmological indications following the RMM implementation. More effective RMM strategies are required to reduce off-label prescriptions of TMZ.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of risk minimization measures for trimetazidine: A cross sectional joint PASS survey among physicians in selected European countries

PURPOSE

In 2012, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) restricted prescription of trimetazidine (TMZ) to "add-on therapy for patients with stable angina pectoris who are inadequately controlled by or intolerant to first-line therapies." TMZ was no longer indicated for ophthalmology and otolaryngology. Risk minimization measure (RMM) was communicated to physicians. The survey presented here evaluated effectiveness of the RMM and assessed physicians knowledge and compliance with RMM. It also analyzed actual prescribing pattern of TMZ.

METHODS

A cross sectional, web-based survey was developed and conducted among prescribing physicians of TMZ across 12 European countries. Physicians' samples were weighted to account for the actual proportion of specialties within and across countries.

RESULTS

Using weighted samples, data from 1123 physicians and 8332 prescriptions were analyzed. Most (74.0%) of the physicians assumed stable angina pectoris to be an indication for TMZ. Three quarter of (75.7%) of these physicians were aware of the approved indication. Vertigo (62.1%), tinnitus (42.5%), declined visual acuity, and visual field disturbances (45.1%) were also presumed to be approved indications for TMZ, and physicians actually prescribed for these indications. Only 29.8% of the physicians remembered receiving RMM communications regarding TMZ. Most (90.5%) of the physicians expressed their interest to know and comply with the safety communications. Of all prescriptions, 33.9% were issued for add-on therapy for patients with stable angina pectoris.

CONCLUSIONS

RMM for TMZ prescription have been moderately effective. Improvement in physician's compliance with safety information of TMZ is necessary for patient's safety.

Medicines for older people: assessment and transparency at the European Medicines Agency regarding cardiovascular and antithrombotic medicinal products

PURPOSE

To describe whether for the cardiovascular and antithrombotic medicines approved in the period 2006-2016 (a) the pivotal trial was designed with an upper ageexclusion criterion, (b) the age distribution of the participants in the registration trials reflected expected use, (c) post-authorisation studies were planned, and d) the age distribution of participants was clearly presented in the approval documents.

METHODS

The data provided to EMA in support of centralized marketing authorisations of were analysed.

RESULTS

Two out of 19 protocols excluded patients over 80 and 85 years old. In the heart failure, atrial fibrillation and antithrombotic drug registration trials, the proportion of patients aged 65-74 years was 33-50%, and 13-20% over 75 years. For antithrombotic drugs, it was 25-35% for the 65-74 age, and around 15% for the 75+ age. For statins and antihypertensives, it was 20-40% for the 65-74 age and 3-6% for 75+ age. Post-authorisation studies were planned in two cases. An improvement on the transparency of public data is apparent, although information is not always presented clearly and uniformly.

CONCLUSIONS

There is more publicly available information since 2006, but data on older patients with frailty and multimorbidity are generally scant. To address this, CHMP Geriatric Expert Group has currently published a Reflection paper on physical frailty to support subgroup categorisation of older patients beyond age with the aim of ensuring that clinical trial populations are representative of the users of the medicine.

Measuring the impact of medicines regulatory interventions - Systematic review and methodological considerations

AIMS

Evaluating the public health impact of regulatory interventions is important but there is currently no common methodological approach to guide this evaluation. This systematic review provides a descriptive overview of the analytical methods for impact research.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for articles with an empirical analysis evaluating the impact of European Union or non-European Union regulatory actions to safeguard public health published until March 2017. References from systematic reviews and articles from other known sources were added. Regulatory interventions, data sources, outcomes of interest, methodology and key findings were extracted.

RESULTS

From 1246 screened articles, 229 were eligible for full-text review and 153 articles in English language were included in the descriptive analysis. Over a third of articles studied analgesics and antidepressants. Interventions most frequently evaluated are regulatory safety communications (28.8%), black box warnings (23.5%) and direct healthcare professional communications (10.5%); 55% of studies measured changes in drug utilization patterns, 27% evaluated health outcomes, and 18% targeted knowledge, behaviour or changes in clinical practice. Unintended consequences like switching therapies or spill-over effects were rarely evaluated. Two-thirds used before-after time series and 15.7% before-after cross-sectional study designs. Various analytical approaches were applied including interrupted time series regression (31.4%), simple descriptive analysis (28.8%) and descriptive analysis with significance tests (23.5%).

CONCLUSION

Whilst impact evaluation of pharmacovigilance and product-specific regulatory interventions is increasing, the marked heterogeneity in study conduct and reporting highlights the need for scientific guidance to ensure robust methodologies are applied and systematic dissemination of results occurs.

Do FDA label changes work? Assessment of the 2010 class label change for proton pump inhibitors using the Sentinel System's analytic tools

PURPOSE

To pilot use of the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) Sentinel System data and analytic tools by a non-FDA stakeholder through the Innovation in Medical Evidence Development and Surveillance system of the Reagan Udall Foundation. We evaluated the US FDA 2010 proton pump inhibitor (PPI) class label change that warned of increased risk of bone fracture, to use PPIs for the lowest dose and shortest duration, and to manage bone status for those at risk for osteoporosis.

METHODS

The cohort consisted of adults aged 18 years or older prescribed PPIs without fracture risk factors. We evaluated incident and prevalent uses of the 8 PPIs noted in the label change. Outcomes evaluated before and after label change were PPI dispensing patterns, incident fractures, and osteoporosis screening or interventions. Consistent with FDA use of descriptive tools, we did not include direct comparisons or statistical testing.

RESULTS

There were 1 488 869 and 2 224 420 incident PPI users in the before [PRE] and after [POST] periods, respectively. Users with 1 year or more of exposure decreased (8.4% vs 7.5%), as did mean days supplied/user (130.4 to 113.7 d among all users and 830.8 to 645.4 d among users with 1 y or more of exposure). Osteoporosis screening and interventions did not appear to increase, but the proportion of patients with fractures decreased (4.4% vs 3.1%). Prevalent user results were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis demonstrated the ability to use Sentinel tools to assess the effectiveness of a label change and accompanying communication at the population level and suggests an influence on subsequent dispensing behavior.

Evaluation of Risk-Minimization Activities for Cyproterone Acetate 2 mg/Ethinylestradiol 35 µg: A Cross-Sectional Physician Survey

Background

Cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg, an estrogen/progestogen treatment with anti-androgenic properties, shares a thromboembolism risk with combined hormonal contraceptives. Educational materials (i.e., direct healthcare professional communication, patient information card, prescriber checklist) were distributed to physicians to increase risk awareness.

Objective

The objective of this study was to measure physician knowledge of thromboembolism risk of cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg and ascertain whether physicians received the educational materials.

Methods

A cross-sectional web-based physician survey of recent prescribers of cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg in Austria, the Czech Republic, France, the Netherlands, and Spain was conducted. Sampling targets for physician specialty were based on country-specific prescribing patterns. Frequency of correct responses was calculated for 14 knowledge questions.

Results

Among 759 physician respondents (37% of obstetricians/gynecologists, 42% of general practitioners, 20% of dermatologists), 51% received one or more of three educational materials. Knowledge was highest (≥80%) for symptoms of possible deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and cerebrovascular accident; most important risk factors for thrombosis; use in smokers; indication for moderate-to-severe acne; and understanding that cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg should not be used for contraception alone. Knowledge varied for contraindications, myocardial infarction symptoms, other risk factors for thrombosis, instructions regarding anticipated prolonged immobilization, and selected concomitant medical conditions. Knowledge was lower regarding prescribing cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg for acne only after failure of topical therapy or systemic antibiotics. Generally, knowledge did not vary by physician specialty, receipt of educational materials, number of patients prescribed cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg in the previous 3 months, and years in practice.

Conclusions

Knowledge was generally high for thromboembolism risk and varied for more complex or infrequent topics.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40290-017-0203-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.