Off-label-prescriptions in daily clinical practice – a cross-sectional national survey of palliative medicine physicians

Off-label use in adult palliative care - more common than expected. A retrospective chart review

OBJECTIVE

Off-label drug use seems to be integral to adult palliative care pharmacotherapy. Balancing potential risks and benefits in the context of limited therapeutic options is challenging. To provide specific support for clinicians in dealing with off-label use, it is essential to understand off-label use in everyday clinical practice. The aim of this pilot study was to quantify and describe off-label use in an adult palliative care unit.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of all adult patients treated on a palliative care unit in October 2017. All data on drug use (eg, indication, dose, route of administration) were extracted and matched with the prescribing information. Identified off-label use was subsequently compared with recommendations in the relevant literature. The main outcome measure was frequency and type of off-label drug use.

RESULTS

Some 2352 drug application days and 93 drugs were identified for 28 patients. Of all drugs, 47 (51%) were used off-label at least once. Most off-label uses concerned indication (57%) followed by mode of administration. In drugs highly relevant to palliative care the rate of off-label use was as high as 67%. The extent to which off-label therapy was supported by literature was very variable and ranged from 0% to 88%.

CONCLUSIONS

These data from a single unit confirm the high prevalence of off-label use in palliative medicine and demonstrate that off-label use in adult palliative care is multifaceted. The data presented allow for a more precise characterisation of various aspects of off-label use in order to derive concrete further measures for research and clinical practice.

Assessment of Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Toward Off-Label Medicine Use in Female Reproductive Health Issues

Background

Off-label medication usage (OLMU) is prevalent in the treatment of various diseases, including female reproductive health issues (FRHIs). However, there is a paucity of literature on the perspective of health professionals on this subject. The purpose of the current study was to assess gynecologists/obstetricians' knowledge, attitude and practice toward OLMU in the treatment of FRHIs.

Methods

The current cross-sectional study was conducted in September and October 2021, at five tertiary care hospitals (two public and three private sector), different clinics and maternity homes in a metropolitan city of Karachi, Pakistan. The target population was gynecologists, obstetricians and physicians/residents working in the ob/gyn department in various hospitals and clinical settings of Karachi.

Results

The overall response rate was 77.1%. The mean age of the study respondents was 36.1 ± 7.7 years; n = 85 (55.9%) respondents were working in primary patient care. The majorly reported OLMU by the respondents were clomiphene citrate in unexplained infertility (n = 66; 43.4%), metformin to improve cycle regularity in females with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) (n = 59; 38.8%) and letrozole to induce ovulation (n = 31; 20.4%). The majorly stated categories of OLMU were at a different dose (n = 95; 62.5%) and at different indications than approved to treat (n = 89; 58.5%). It was reported by the majority of the respondents (n = 95; 62.5%) that they do not follow any guidelines or regulations for OLMU in their work setting; however, the response was statistically varied with the working organization (CI 2.14–2.93; p = 0.037) and practice area (CI 2.85–4.32; p = 0.0001) of respondents.

Conclusions

The present study revealed that the respondents were well-familiar with the practice of OLMU in the treatment of FRHIs. They expressed their concerns about decreasing such practices by being involved in collective decision-making procedures, and they were inclined to accept initiatives aimed at ensuring drug safety in patients.

Understanding the Potential for Pharmacy Expertise in Palliative Care: The Value of Stakeholder Engagement in a Theoretically Driven Mapping Process for Research

Potentially avoidable medication-related harm is an inherent risk in palliative care; medication management accounts for approximately 20% of reported serious incidents in England and Wales. Despite their expertise benefiting patient care, the routine contribution of pharmacists in addressing medication management failures is overlooked. Internationally, specialist pharmacist support for palliative care services remains under-resourced. By understanding experienced practices (‘what happens in the real world’) in palliative care medication management, compared with intended processes (‘what happens on paper’), patient safety issues can be identified and addressed. This commentary demonstrates the value of stakeholder engagement and consultation work carried out to inform a scoping review and empirical study. Our overall goal is to improve medication safety in palliative care. Informal conversations were undertaken with carers and various specialist and non-specialist professionals, including pharmacists. Themes were mapped to five steps: decision-making, prescribing, monitoring and supply, use (administration), and stopping and disposal. A visual representation of stakeholders’ understanding of intended medicines processes was produced. This work has implications for our own and others’ research by highlighting where pharmacy expertise could have a significant additional impact. Evidence is needed to support best practice and implementation, particularly with regard to supporting carers in monitoring and accessing medication, and communication between health professionals across settings.

[Off-label use in palliative medicine]

Palliative care serves to improve the quality of life in patients suffering from incurable diseases. Pharmacotherapy of distressing symptoms plays an important role. Off-label use refers to the use of drugs outside the marketing authorization. In addition to the indications off-label use may also be due to duration of treatment, route of administration and the admixture of substances. Off-label use is common in palliative and hospice care and is probably unavoidable in many cases. For treatment planning and realization of off-label therapy in clinical practice, patient-related aspects, information, therapy monitoring and documentation of therapy effects should be considered in addition to drug-related information. Only in this way it is possible to offer a scientifically adequate, appropriate and economic therapy that is linked to an appropriate risk-benefit ratio for the individual patient. Due to the lack of authorization studies, reporting is of particular importance.

Off-label drugs in palliative care: a Group Delphi treatment recommendation process

OBJECTIVES

The use of drugs beyond their marketing authorisation, that is, off-label use, is common practice in palliative care with over 70% of off-label use having little or no scientific support. The lack of evidence makes recommendations for off-label use essential, in order to increase the safety of drug therapy and thus patient safety. The aim of this study was to develop a guide for preparing and consenting drug-specific recommendations for off-label use in palliative care.

METHODS

Group Delphi Study with three rounds and a prior online survey to identify topics of dissent. Participants represented professional groups working in palliative care involved in direct patient care and/or drug management and various care settings. Furthermore, representatives of relevant professional associations, experts with academic, non-clinical background and experts with international expertise were invited.

RESULTS

18/20 invited professionals participated in the prior online-survey. 15 experts participated in the Group Delphi process. Six domains, including identification of drugs, drug uses, assessment of evidence, formulation, consensus and updating of recommendations were generated and respective statements were included in the Group Delphi process. The consensus process resulted in 28 statements forming the guide for recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The resultant systematic approach for preparing and consenting drug-specific recommendations for off-label use will allow the development of recommendations with transparent and reproducible monographs. This will help to increase treatment quality and patient safety as well as security of decision-making in palliative care. The developed guide is part of a larger project aiming to provide therapy recommendations for areas that have little or no scientific evidence.