Comparison of losartan with ACE inhibitors and dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists: a pilot study of prescription-event monitoring in Japan

Drug-Induced Insomnia and Excessive Sleepiness

Undesirable side effects of insomnia and/or sleepiness may occur with many prescribed drugs, psychotropics as well as non-psychotropics. These central nervous system effects can be explained by the interactions of the drug with any of the numerous neurotransmitters and receptors that are involved in sleep and wakefulness. Also a close - sometimes bidirectional - relationship between disease and (disturbed) sleep/wakefulness is often present e.g. in chronic pain; drug effects may lead this vicious circle in both ways. Besides the importance for health and quality of life, effects on sleep or waking function can be a potential source of non-compliance.

[Drug-induced insomnia in old and very old patients]

According to modern concepts, sleep disorders are considered as a common geriatric syndrome, which also emphasizes their polyfactorial genesis. One of the important factors inducing sleep disorders is the intake of various drugs, which becomes especially significant with the problems of polymorbidity and polypharmacy occurring in older age groups. The article provides a classification of drug-induced sleep disorders, which presents a wide range of conditions associated with a disturbance of the sleep-wake cycle. The authors present the frequency of insomnia associated with taking drugs from different pharmacological groups according to the literature, and consider mechanisms of insomnia development due to the effect on various receptors and neurotransmitter systems, as well as data on their effect on sleep structure. The article presents risk factors for drug-induced insomnia and discusses preventive measures and management of patients.

Intensive Monitoring Studies for Assessing Medicines: A Systematic Review

Introduction: Intensive monitoring (IM) is one of the methods of post-marketing active surveillance based upon event monitoring, which has received interest in the current medicines regulatory landscape. For a specific period of time, IM involves primary data collection and is actively focused on gathering longitudinal information, mainly safety, since the first day of drug use. Objectives: To describe IM systems and studies' data published over 11-years period (2006-2016). Specifically, we reviewed study population/event surveillance, methodological approaches, limitations, and its applications in the real-world evidence generation data. Methods: We completed a systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify studies published from 2006 to 2016, that used IM methodology. We extracted data using a standardized form and results were analyzed descriptively. The methodological quality of selected studies was assessed using the modified Downs and Black checklist. Results: From 1,400 screened citations, we identified 86 papers, corresponding to 69 different studies. Seventy percent of reviewed studies corresponded to established IM systems, of which, more than half were prescription event monitoring (PEM) and modified-PEM. Among non-established IM systems, vaccines were the most common studied drugs (n = 14). The median cohort size ranged from 488 (hospitals) to 10,479 (PEM) patients. Patients and caregivers were the event data source in 39.1% of studies. The mean overall quality score was similar between established and non-established IM. Conclusions: Over the study period, IM studies were implemented in 26 countries with different maturity levels of post-marketing surveillance systems. We identified two major limitations: only 20% of studies were conducted at hospital-level, which is a matter of concern, insofar as healthcare systems are facing a lack of access to new medicines at ambulatory care level. Additionally, IM access to data of drug exposure cohorts, either at identification or at follow-up stages, could somehow constitute a barrier, given the complexity of managerial, linkable, and privacy data issues.

Effects of Heart Failure and its Pharmacological Management on Sleep

Heart failure (HF) patients have a high prevalence of disturbed sleep. Optimal pharmacological management of HF includes the use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and β-blockers, which have been associated with decreased severity of central sleep apnea, which is likely secondary to improvements in cardiac performance. There is also evidence, however, indicating that other pharmacological treatments for HF might adversely affect sleep. This brief review introduces the topic of disturbed sleep in HF and examines the extent to which its standard pharmacological management impacts sleep quality.

Insomnia and chronic heart failure

Insomnia is highly prevalent in patients with chronic disease including chronic heart failure (CHF) and is a significant contributing factor to fatigue and poor quality of life. The pathophysiology of CHF often leads to fatigue, due to nocturnal symptoms causing sleep disruption, including cough, orthopnea, paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea, and nocturia. Inadequate cardiac function may lead to hypoxemia or poor perfusion of the cerebrum, skeletal muscle, or visceral body organs, which result in organ dysfunction or failure and may contribute to fatigue. Sleep disturbances negatively affect all dimensions of quality of life and is related to increased risk of comorbidities, including depression. This article reviews insomnia in CHF, cardiac medication side-effects related to sleep disturbances, and treatment options.

Collection of Medical Drug Information in Pharmacies: Drug Event Monitoring (DEM) in Japan

To establish a system for collecting and reporting information from community pharmacists such as that on adverse effects, the Japan Pharmaceutical Association (JPA) conducts Drug Event Monitoring (DEM). In the fiscal year 2002, a survey was carried out to clarify the incidence of sleepiness due to antiallergic drugs. The investigated active ingredients were ebastine, fexofenadine hydrochloride, cetirizine hydrochloride, and loratadine. Community pharmacists asked the following question to patients who visited their pharmacies: "Have you ever become sleepy after taking this drug?" During a 4-week survey period, reports of 94256 cases were collected. To evaluate the incidence of sleepiness, we analyzed cases in which reports showed alleged absence of concomitant oral drugs, and drug use in conformity with the dose and method described in package inserts. The incidence of sleepiness was significantly different among the drugs (chi(2)-test, p<0.001). The observed incidences of sleepiness due to the drugs (8.8-20.5%) were higher than those described in each package insert (1.8-6.35%). This may be because an active question was used ("Have you ever become sleepy after taking this drug?"). Active intervention by pharmacists may be useful for collecting more information on improvement in the QOL of patients and safety. In addition, the pharmacists were asked to report events other than "sleepiness" in the free description column of the report. Some symptoms not described in the package inserts were reported, suggesting that DEM may lead to the discovery of new adverse effects. These results suggest that community pharmacists have a good opportunity to collect information in DEM, and safety information such as that on adverse effects can be obtained from pharmacies.