An evaluation of asthma medication utilization for risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) in the United States: 2005-2011

Integrating Pharmacy and Registry Data Strengthens Clinical Assessments of Patient Adherence

Background: Accurate clinical assessment of patient adherence using reliable and valid measures is essential in establishing the presence of adherence issues and support practices for pharmacists.

Objective: This investigation aims to conduct a novel assessment of patient adherence to asthma controller therapy by combining 1) patient-specific dosage data found in pharmacy dispensing data with 2) centrally collected administrative claims records, to determine the added value of using both sources of data.

Methods: A total of 381 clinically uncontrolled asthma patients, from 95 community pharmacies across three Australian States were recruited and provided consent for the retrieval of their claims records and pharmacy dispensing data. Patients were stratified as multiple or single pharmacy users and adherence scores were calculated via the proportion of days covered (PDC) method using 1) patient claims records, 2) patient pharmacy dispensing data, and 3) combined claims records and pharmacy dispensing data. Cohort and subgroup adherence estimates were then compared.

Results: Low levels of adherence were evident amongst the cohort irrespective of the data source used. PDC estimates based on claims records alone or combined claims records and pharmacy dispensing data were significantly higher than estimates based on pharmacy dispensing data for the total cohort (56%, 52%, 42% respectively, p < 0.001) and more noticeably for multiple pharmacy users (67%, 64%, 35% respectively, p < 0.001). PDC estimates based on combined claims records and pharmacy dispensing data were significantly lower than estimates based on claims records alone, indicating that perhaps standard daily dose is not a robust proxy for prescribed dosage to inhaled respiratory devices in adherence approximations. Poorer adherence was found amongst single pharmacy users than multiple pharmacy users when combined claims records and pharmacy dispensing data (46% compared to 64% respectively, p < 0.001) or claims records alone (51% compared to 67% respectively, p < 0.001) were compared.

Conclusion: Access to routine collected data increases clinical acuity over patient adherence to asthma controller medications and is a valuable resource for health care professionals. A policy of secure accessibility of such data at the patient-pharmacist or patient-GP interface may allow real-time intervention and assist in decision making across numerous therapeutic areas.

Medication Adherence in a Community Population with Uncontrolled Asthma

It is well documented that the use of medications in asthma and allergic rhinitis is often suboptimal, and consequently, patients remain symptomatic. This study aimed to determine the extent and type of medication-related issues contributing to poor asthma control by profiling medication management in those most at risk—a population with clinically uncontrolled asthma. Participants (n = 363) were recruited from Australian community pharmacies, and a dispensed medication history report for the previous 12 months was collected to examine medication adherence and factors affecting adherence. Information was also collected regarding participant asthma control and asthma/allergic rhinitis (if applicable) management. The participants’ mean asthma control score was 2.49 (± 0.89 SD, IQR = 1.20) (score ≥ 1.5 indicative of poorly controlled asthma), and 72% were either non-adherent or yet to initiate preventer therapy. Almost half had been prescribed high doses of inhaled corticosteroid and 24% reported use of oral corticosteroids. Only 22% of participants with concomitant allergic rhinitis were using first line treatment. A logistic regression model highlighted that participant health care concession status and hospital admissions were associated with better adherence. Suboptimal medication management is evident in this at-risk population.

Usage Patterns of Short-Acting β2-Agonists and Inhaled Corticosteroids in Asthma: A Targeted Literature Review

Despite the availability of effective asthma treatments, some patients are poorly controlled because of overreliance on short-acting β₂-agonists (SABAs) and underuse of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). To identify patient characteristics and outcomes associated with SABA overreliance and ICS underuse, we conducted a targeted literature review of the quantitative evidence on asthma medication use. Articles evaluating SABA and/or ICS use in patients with asthma (aged ≥12 years), published between January 2012 and March 2018, were identified using MEDLINE and EMBASE. We observed that studies classified SABA usage as "overuse," "high use," "excess use," "extreme overuse," "suboptimal use," and "inappropriate use." Multiple thresholds were used to define overuse of SABA (≥3 to ≥12 canisters/y). SABA overreliance was prevalent, with approximately 20% of adults using 3 or more canisters per year (≥12 inhalations/wk). Similarly, inappropriate ICS use, classified as "suboptimal," "high use," "underuse," and "unlicensed use," was defined by varying thresholds. Specific patient populations, such as older adults, smokers, and patients with low income, were more susceptible to SABA overreliance and ICS underuse. Overreliance on SABAs was associated with increased risk of severe exacerbations, asthma-related hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and asthma-related costs. These findings emphasize the prevalence and related burden of SABA overreliance at the potential expense of appropriate ICS use.

The RIMES Statement: A Checklist to Assess the Quality of Studies Evaluating Risk Minimization Programs for Medicinal Products

INTRODUCTION

Pharmaceutical risk minimization programs involve interventions designed to support safe and appropriate use of medicines. Currently, information regarding the evaluation of these programs is not publicly reported in a standardized and transparent manner. To address this gap, we developed and piloted a quality reporting checklist entitled the Reporting recommendations Intended for pharmaceutical risk Minimization Evaluation Studies (RIMES).

METHODS

Checklist development was guided by three sources: (1) a theoretical framework derived from program theory and process evaluation; (2) public health intervention design and evaluation principles; and (3) a review of existing quality reporting checklists. Two raters independently reviewed 10 recently published (2012-2016) risk minimization program evaluation studies using the proposed checklist. Inter-rater reliability of the checklist was assessed using Cohen's Kappa and Gwet's AC1.

RESULTS

A 43-item checklist was generated. Results indicated substantial inter-rater reliability overall (κ = 0.65, AC1 = 0.65) and for three (key information, design and evaluation) of the four subscales (κ ≥ 0.64, AC1 ≥ 0.64). The fourth subscale (implementation) showed low reliability based on Cohen's Kappa, but substantial reliability based on the AC1 (κ = 0.17, AC1 = 0.61).

CONCLUSIONS

The RIMES statement augments relevant elements from existing quality reporting guidelines with items that address aspects of intervention design, implementation and evaluation specific to pharmaceutical risk minimization programs. Our results show that the RIMES statement reliably measures key dimensions of reporting quality. This tailored checklist is an important first step in improving the reporting quality of risk minimization evaluation studies and may ultimately help to improve the quality of these interventions themselves.

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.

New and incremental FDA black box warnings from 2008 to 2015

BACKGROUND

The boxed warning (also known as 'black box warning [BBW]') is one of the strongest drug safety actions that the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) can implement, and often warns of serious risks. The objective of this study was to comprehensively characterize BBWs issued for drugs after FDA approval.

METHODS

We identified all post-marketing BBWs from January 2008 through June 2015 listed on FDA's MedWatch and Drug Safety Communications websites. We used each drug's prescribing information to classify its BBW as new, major update to a preexisting BBW, or minor update. We then characterized these BBWs with respect to pre-specified BBW-specific and drug-specific features.

RESULTS

There were 111 BBWs issued to drugs on the US market, of which 29% (n = 32) were new BBWs, 32% (n = 35) were major updates, and 40% (n = 44) were minor updates. New BBWs and major updates were most commonly issued for death (51%) and cardiovascular risk (27%). The new BBWs and major updates impacted 200 drug formulations over the study period, of which 64% were expected to be used chronically and 58% had available alternatives without a BBW.

CONCLUSIONS

New BBWs and incremental updates to existing BBWs are frequently added to drug labels after regulatory approval.

Changing patterns of asthma medication use related to US Food and Drug Administration long-acting β2-agonist regulation from 2005-2011

BACKGROUND

Safety concerns associated with long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) have led to many US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory activities for this class of drugs. Little is known about the effect of these regulatory activities on use of LABA-containing agents or other asthma medications.

METHODS

We created rolling cohorts of pediatric and adult asthmatic patients in the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database between January 2005 and June 2011. The proportions of asthmatic patients using LABA-containing products, inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), leukotriene modifiers, short-acting β2-agonists, oral corticosteroids, other bronchodilators, and no medications were measured on a monthly basis, and the changes were evaluated by using interrupted time series with segmented regression analysis.

RESULTS

When the 2005 regulatory activity was announced, there were statistically significant decreases in the use of fixed-dose ICS-LABA agents in children (-0.98 percentage points) and adults (-1.24 percentage points). Increased use of ICSs and leukotriene modifiers was observed just after the regulatory activities were announced in both children and adults. Although of smaller magnitude, continued favorable changes in the use of LABA agents were observed after the 2010 FDA regulatory activity.

CONCLUSION

The 2005 and 2010 FDA regulatory activities might have contributed to reduced use of LABA agents, as intended; however, their effect, independent of other factors, cannot be determined. Use of other classes of asthma medications was similarly affected.

Adherence to risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) requirements for monthly testing of liver function

Background:

Risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS), as mandated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for medications with the potential for harm, are increasingly incorporating rigid protocols for patient evaluation, but little is known about compliance with these programs. Despite the inherent limitations, data on administrative claims may provide an opportunity to investigate adherence to these programs.

Methods:

We assessed adherence to liver function test (LFT) requirements included in the REMS program for bosentan through use of administrative claims. Patients observed in the Optum Research Database who were initiators of bosentan from November 20, 2001 to March 31, 2013 were included. Adherence to LFTs was calculated using pharmacy claims for bosentan dispensation and medical claims for laboratory services, and was assessed at the time of drug initiation and within specified time intervals throughout follow-up.

Results:

Of 742 patients, 523 (70.5%) had ≥1 qualifying LFT. Among patients with ≥12 dispensations, claims for LFTs at individual dispensations were 53.2–64.0%. Median proportion of dispensations with ≥1 LFT was 0.8 among patients with ≥6 (interquartile range, 0.7–1.0) or ≥12 (0.7–0.9) dispensations. Adherence was 90–100% for 33.3% of all initiators, whereas 29.3% of initiators were non-adherent (defined as <50% of on-therapy LFTs).

Conclusions:

Analyses of administrative claims suggest that the REMS program for bosentan may not have adequately guaranteed adherence to the program’s monthly monitoring of LFTs. Such investigations of existing REMS programs may provide insight on how to accomplish more successful evaluation of REMS.

Patient Comprehension of Medication Guides for Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Medications

PURPOSE

This study assessed patients' comprehension of the Advair and Serevent medication guides (MGs) and MG reading behaviors with the goal to improve risk communication.

METHODS

After reading their assigned MGs, 452 adults with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease participated in structured interviews to assess comprehension of safety risks in the Advair MG (asthma, n = 150; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, n = 153) and Serevent MG (asthma, n = 149). Generalized estimating equations for correlated binary data were used to identify factors associated with correct responses.

RESULTS

For 10 of 12 individual risk questions, ≥75% of patients reported correct responses. After adjusting for patient characteristics, health literacy was significantly associated with correct responses (odds ratio = 1.03, 95% confidence interval = 1.02-1.05 per 1-point increase in the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine). MG reading behaviors were inconsistent, with many patients reading MGs only once (40%) despite multiple prescriptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehension of safety risks in the Advair and Serevent MGs was adequate for most patients in the study but decreased with health literacy. Initiatives to improve patient-directed risk communication should consider health literacy and reasons for inconsistent reading behaviors.