Assessing the benefit: risk ratio of a drug--randomized and naturalistic evidence

A mixed-methods approach exploring acceptability and feasibility of trials designed to test drugs targeting prevention of post-traumatic osteoarthritis after knee injury

Aims

To explore key stakeholder views around feasibility and acceptability of trials seeking to prevent post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) following knee injury, and provide guidance for next steps in PTOA trial design.

Methods

Healthcare professionals, clinicians, and/or researchers (HCP/Rs) were surveyed, and the data were presented at a congress workshop. A second and related survey was then developed for people with joint damage caused by knee injury and/or osteoarthritis (PJDs), who were approached by a UK Charity newsletter or Oxford involvement registry. Anonymized data were collected and analyzed in Qualtrics.

Results

Survey responses (n = 19 HCP/Rs, 39 PJDs) supported studies testing pharmacological agents preventing PTOA. All HCP/Rs and 30/31 (97%) PJDs supported the development of new treatments that improved or delayed knee symptoms and damage to knee structure. PJDs thought that improving structural knee damage was more important than knee symptoms. Both groups found studies more acceptable as expected future benefit and risk of PTOA increased. All drug delivery routes were acceptable. Workshop participants (around n = 60) reflected survey views. Discussions suggested that stratifying using molecular testing for likely drug response appeared to be more acceptable than using characteristics such as sex, age, and BMI.

Conclusion

Our findings supported PTOA drug intervention studies, including situations where there is low risk of disease, no expected benefit of treatment, and frequent treatment administration. PJDs appeared less risk-averse than HCP/Rs. This work reinforces the benefits of consensus and involvement work in the co-creation of PTOA drug trial design. Involvement of key stakeholders, such as PJDs with different risks of OA and regulatory representatives, are critical for trial design success.

Pharmacovigilance in Vaccines: Importance, Main Aspects, Perspectives, and Challenges-A Narrative Review

Pharmacovigilance plays a central role in safeguarding public health by continuously monitoring the safety of vaccines, being critical in a climate of vaccine hesitancy, where public trust is paramount. Pharmacovigilance strategies employed to gather information on adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) include pre-registration data, media reports, clinical trials, and societal reporting. Early detection of AEFIs during clinical trials is crucial for thorough safety analysis and preventing serious reactions once vaccines are deployed. This review highlights the importance of societal reporting, encompassing contributions from community members, healthcare workers, and pharmaceutical companies. Technological advancements such as quick response (QR) codes can facilitate prompt AEFI reporting. While vaccines are demonstrably safe, the possibility of adverse events necessitates continuous post-marketing surveillance. However, underreporting remains a challenge, underscoring the critical role of public engagement in pharmacovigilance. This narrative review comprehensively examines and synthesizes key aspects of virus vaccine pharmacovigilance, with special considerations for specific population groups. We explore applicable legislation, the spectrum of AEFIs associated with major vaccines, and the unique challenges and perspectives surrounding pharmacovigilance in this domain.

Methodological guidelines and publications of benefit-risk assessment for health technology assessment: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

To map the available methodological guidelines and documents for conducting and reporting benefit-risk assessment (BRA) during health technologies' life cycle; and to identify methodological guidelines for BRA that could serve as the basis for the development of a BRA guideline for the context of health technology assessment (HTA) in Brazil.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in three main sources up to March 2023: (1) electronic databases; (2) grey literature (48 HTA and regulatory organisations) and (3) manual search and contacting experts. We included methodological guidelines or publications presenting methods for conducting or reporting BRA of any type of health technologies in any context of the technology's life cycle. Selection process and data charting were conducted by independent reviewers. We provided a structured narrative synthesis of the findings.

RESULTS

From the 83 eligible documents, six were produced in the HTA context, 30 in the regulatory and 35 involved guidance for BRA throughout the technology's life cycle. We identified 129 methodological approaches for BRA in the documents. The most commonly referred to descriptive frameworks were the Problem, Objectives, Alternatives, Consequences, Trade-offs, Uncertainty, Risk and Linked decisions and the Benefit-Risk Action Team. Multicriteria decision analysis was the most commonly cited quantitative framework. We also identified the most cited metric indices, estimation and utility survey techniques that could be used for BRA.

CONCLUSIONS

Methods for BRA in HTA are less established. The findings of this review, however, will support and inform the elaboration of the Brazilian methodological guideline on BRA for HTA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/69T3V.

Assessing Patient Risk, Benefit, and Outcomes in Drug Development: A Decade of Lenvatinib Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Chemotherapy agents are typically initially tested in their most promising indications; however, following initial US FDA approval, new clinical trials are often initiated in less promising indications where patients experience a worse burden-benefit ratio. The current literature on the burden-benefit profile of lenvatinib in non-FDA-approved indications is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate published clinical trials of lenvatinib in order to determine the burden-benefit profile for patients over time.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

On 25 May 2023, we searched the Pubmed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for clinical trials of lenvatinib used to treat solid cancers. Eligible articles were clinical trials, containing adult participants, published in English, and involving solid tumors. Screening and data collection took place in a masked, duplicate fashion. For each eligible study, we collected adverse event data, trial characteristics, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). Trials were classified as positive when meeting their primary endpoint and safety, negative (not meeting either criteria), or indeterminate (lacking prespecified primary endpoint).

FINDINGS

Expansion of clinical trial testing beyond lenvatinib's initial FDA indication demonstrated a consistent rise in cumulative adverse events, along with a decline in drug efficacy. Lenvatinib was tested in 16 cancer indications, receiving FDA approval in 4. A total of 5390 Grade 3-5 adverse events were experienced across 6225 clinical trial participants. Expanded indication testing further demonstrated widely variable ORR (11-69%), OS (6.2-32 months), and PFS (3.6-15.7 months) across all indications. After initial FDA approval, clinical trial results in expanded indications were less likely to meet their primary endpoints, particularly among non-randomized clinical trials.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Our paper evaluated the effectiveness of lenvatinib for its FDA-approved indications; however, expansion of clinical trials into novel indications was characterized by diminished efficacy, while patients experienced a high burden of adverse events consistent with lenvatinib's established safety profile. Furthermore, clinical trials testing in novel indications was marked by repeated phase I and II clinical trials along with a failure to progress to phase III clinical trials. Future clinical trials using lenvatinib as an intervention should carefully evaluate the potential benefits and burden patients may experience.

Drug Repurposing Using FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Database

Drug repurposing is an emerging approach to reassigning existing pre-approved therapies for new indications. The FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) is a large database of over 28 million adverse event reports submitted by medical providers, patients, and drug manufacturers and provides extensive drug safety signal data. In this review, four common drug repurposing strategies using FAERS are described, including inverse signal detection for a single disease, drug-drug interactions that mitigate a target ADE, identifying drug-ADE pairs with opposing gene perturbation signatures and identifying drug-drug pairs with congruent gene perturbation signatures. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of these different approaches using existing successful applications in the literature. With the fast expansion of adverse drug event reports, FAERS-based drug repurposing represents a promising strategy for discovering new uses for existing therapies.

Adverse Events During Dosing of Delayed-release/Extended-release Methylphenidate: Learnings From the Open-label Phase of a Registration Trial and a Real-world Postmarketing Surveillance Program

PURPOSE

Delayed-release/extended-release methylphenidate (DR/ER-MPH) (formerly HLD200) is an evening-dosed agent used for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Postmarketing surveillance data from approximately 74,000 patients exposed to DR/ER-MPH (up to June 17, 2022) were reported and compared with the open-label, treatment-optimization phase of a Phase III clinical trial to derive possible learnings on how to approach adverse events (AEs) that emerge during dose titration.

METHODS

An analysis of AEs spontaneously reported to Ironshore in postmarketing surveillance included, where available, age, dose, timing, and discontinuations. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics.

FINDINGS

A total of 395 children, adolescents, and adults reported 601 AEs in postmarketing surveillance. Five AEs were classified as serious. AEs preceded drug use discontinuation in 172 patients. Many AEs occurred early (52% were reported within 30 days) and at lower doses (54% were reported at 20 to 40 mg), similar to the trial data. Reported AEs included those similar in type but orders of magnitude lower in number than those from the clinical trial.

IMPLICATIONS

No new safety concerns were revealed in this real-world setting compared with the safety profile identified in DR/ER-MPH trial data. In real-world practices, clinicians tended to discontinue DR/ER-MPH treatment after AE onset, whereas trial investigators continued to optimize treatment and found that AEs were generally tolerable, suggesting that health care practitioners may consider developing strategies to manage tolerability issues with DR/ER-MPH treatment on AE emergence rather than immediately discontinuing use of the drug to provide optimal therapeutic benefit.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov identifier: NCT02493777.

Drug Safety in Episodic Migraine Management in Adults Part 1: Acute Treatments

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to aid in choosing safe options when assessing potential risks of acute migraine treatments based on known mechanisms of action and anticipated safety concerns.

RECENT FINDINGS

Part 1 highlights safety issues associated with commonly used medications to treat acute migraine attacks. Strategies to mitigate cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risks of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, evaluation of cardiovascular risks of triptan and ergot alkaloids, and precautions with use of antiemetics and the novel drugs gepants and ditans are discussed to help practitioners in clinical decision-making. When available, we included recommendations from professional societies and data from pharmacovigilance systems. While guidelines on efficacy are available, one must also consider the possible risks and adverse effects of a drug when creating treatment plans.

Dynamics of Patient-Based Benefit-Risk Assessment of Medicines in Chronic Diseases: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

A critical gap exits in understanding the dynamics of patient-based benefit-risk assessment (BRA) of medicines in chronic diseases during the disease journey.

PURPOSE

To systematically review and synthesize current evidence on the changes of patients' preferences about the benefits and risks of medicines during their disease journey including the influence of disease duration and severity, and previous treatment experience.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies identified in PubMed and Embase, from inception to November 2020, was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Articles were eligible if they analyzed adult patient-based BRA of medicines with a chronic disease, based on at least one of the pre-specified dimensions: disease severity, disease duration, or previous treatment experience.

RESULTS

A total of 26,228 articles were identified and 105 were eligible for inclusion. Of these, 85 detected a variation in patient-based BRA of medicines with at least one of the pre-specified criteria. Patients with higher disease severity and more treatment experience have increased risk tolerance. It remains inconclusive whether disease duration directly affects the relative importance of a patient's preference.

CONCLUSION

Factors important for patients' BRA of their medicines during a chronic disease journey vary more with their clinical situation and previous treatment experience than with time since diagnosis. Due to the importance of these factors on patients' perspectives and potential impact on their decision-making and eventually their clinical outcomes, there is a need for more studies to assess the dynamics of patients' BRA in every disease.

Relational dynamics involved in therapeutic discordance among prescribers and patients: A Grounded Theory study

OBJECTIVE

No studies have explored the negative process of concordance: discordance in prescribing-medication-taking. This study provides a deeper understanding of discordance as a co-constructed process among patients and prescribers.

METHODS

To explore the question "what psychological and relational processes are involved when therapeutic discordance among prescribers and receivers occurs?" a constructivist Grounded Theory study was carried out through semi-structured interviews with patients and their medical doctors.

RESULTS

The final sample of our study was composed of 29 participants: 16 receivers and 13 prescribers. "Neglecting the relationship", the core category, shapes the therapeutic discordance and connects three main conceptual phases: signing a non-negotiating contract, acting alone, and establishing a superficial relationship.

CONCLUSION

Our grounded theory conceptualization contributes to the concordance-related debate by evidencing the processes among prescribers and receivers in interwoven actions. It offers another dimension to how notions of compliance, adherence and concordance have been theorized to date.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

More than one interaction with receivers is recommended. If there are hints that conflict potentially is compromising the relationship, prescribers should involve intermediaries. Setting aside for a moment, evidence-based justification for treatments and trying to understand prescribers' motivations may boost a positive change.

Risk Management Framework for Nano-Biomaterials Used in Medical Devices and Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products

The convergence of nanotechnology and biotechnology has led to substantial advancements in nano-biomaterials (NBMs) used in medical devices (MD) and advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMP). However, there are concerns that applications of NBMs for medical diagnostics, therapeutics and regenerative medicine could also pose health and/or environmental risks since the current understanding of their safety is incomplete. A scientific strategy is therefore needed to assess all risks emerging along the life cycles of these products. To address this need, an overarching risk management framework (RMF) for NBMs used in MD and ATMP is presented in this paper, as a result of a collaborative effort of a team of experts within the EU Project BIORIMA and with relevant inputs from external stakeholders. The framework, in line with current regulatory requirements, is designed according to state-of-the-art approaches to risk assessment and management of both nanomaterials and biomaterials. The collection/generation of data for NBMs safety assessment is based on innovative integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA). The framework can support stakeholders (e.g., manufacturers, regulators, consultants) in systematically assessing not only patient safety but also occupational (including healthcare workers) and environmental risks along the life cycle of MD and ATMP. The outputs of the framework enable the user to identify suitable safe(r)-by-design alternatives and/or risk management measures and to compare the risks of NBMs to their (clinical) benefits, based on efficacy, quality and cost criteria, in order to inform robust risk management decision-making.

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to Develop an Efficacy-Safety Profile of Parenteral Analgesics Used in the Treatment of Postoperative Pain

Background

Identifying the optimal treatment in an acute postoperative setting remains a challenge. Multiple analgesic options are available, but comparing outcomes is limited by a lack of head-to-head trials. In addition, decisions based on efficacy only do not take drug safety into account. In such cases, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) can be utilized to quantify and compare the efficacy and safety data of various drugs.

Methodology

The efficacy-safety profiles of eight parenteral, postoperative analgesics (acetaminophen, diclofenac, ketorolac, metamizole, morphine, nefopam, parecoxib, tramadol) widely used in Europe were evaluated using an MCDA model that included 17 criteria: three for efficacy and 14 for safety. Each drug was scored on each criterion on a scale from 0 (worst) to 100 (best), according to published data and the judgment of an expert panel. A weighting process was then applied to standardize the impact of each criterion and adjust drugs' preference scores accordingly, normalizing them on the 0-100 scale. Sensitivity analyses were also performed, including a model in which analgesic profiles were compared when opioid sparing effect was set at a zero value for all drugs.

Results

In the primary model, efficacy and safety had relative weightings of 64% and 36%, respectively. Efficacy and safety criteria with the highest values were pain relief (relative weight, 29%) and gastrointestinal effects (12%). Parecoxib received the highest overall score (93), followed by diclofenac (80), and ketorolac (75). Morphine scored the lowest (57), due to the lack of an opioid sparing effect. When opioid sparing was given a zero rating, parecoxib remained the highest scoring analgesic (93), followed by diclofenac (80), metamizole (76), and morphine (76). Parecoxib remained the most preferred analgesic in several other sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

This MCDA-based assessment suggests that parecoxib has the most favorable efficacy-safety profile among the assessed postoperative analgesics.

Precision Dosing Priority Criteria: Drug, Disease, and Patient Population Variables

The administered dose of a drug modulates whether patients will experience optimal effectiveness, toxicity including death, or no effect at all. Dosing is particularly important for diseases and/or drugs where the drug can decrease severe morbidity or prolong life. Likewise, dosing is important where the drug can cause death or severe morbidity. Since we believe there are many examples where more precise dosing could benefit patients, it is worthwhile to consider how to prioritize drug-disease targets. One key consideration is the quality of information available from which more precise dosing recommendations can be constructed. When a new more precise dosing scheme is created and differs significantly from the approved label, it is important to consider the level of proof necessary to either change the label and/or change clinical practice. The cost and effort needed to provide this proof should also be considered in prioritizing drug-disease precision dosing targets. Although precision dosing is being promoted and has great promise, it is underutilized in many drugs and disease states. Therefore, we believe it is important to consider how more precise dosing is going to be delivered to high priority patients in a timely manner. If better dosing schemes do not change clinical practice resulting in better patient outcomes, then what is the use? This review paper discusses variables to consider when prioritizing precision dosing candidates while highlighting key examples of precision dosing that have been successfully used to improve patient care.

Assessing patients' acceptance of their medication to reveal unmet needs: results from a large multi-diseases study using a patient online community

Background

Patients with chronic conditions are required to take long-term treatments for their disease itself or to prevent any potential health risks. Measuring patient acceptance of their medication should help to better understand and predict patients’ behavior toward treatment. This study aimed to describe the level of patient acceptance toward various long-term treatments in real life using an online patient community.

Methods

This was an observational, cross-sectional study conducted through the French Carenity platform. All Carenity patient members were invited to complete an online questionnaire including the 25-item ACCEptance by the Patients of their Treatment (ACCEPT©) questionnaire. ACCEPT© measures patient acceptance toward their medication and includes one general acceptance dimension (Acceptance/General) and six treatment-attribute specific dimensions (scores 0–100; lowest to highest acceptance): Acceptance/Medication Inconvenience, Acceptance/Long-term Treatment, Acceptance/Regimen Constraints, Acceptance/Side effects, Acceptance/Effectiveness, and Acceptance/Numerous Medications. Patients included in the analysis were treated adults experiencing any chronic diseases and who responded to at least one ACCEPT© item.

Results

Among the 4193 patients included in the analysis, more than 270 chronic diseases were represented, amidst which 19 included more than 30 patients. Mean ACCEPT© Acceptance/General score for those 19 diseases were 61.2 (SD = 31.9) for type 1 diabetes, 59.8 (SD = 32.3) for asthma, 56.3 (SD = 34.3) for hypertension, 52.0 (SD = 32.2) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 51.7 (SD = 27.0) for epilepsy, 50.1 (SD = 33.1) for bipolar disorder, 49.9 (SD = 33.1) for type 2 diabetes, 48.6 (SD = 31.6) for multiple sclerosis, 46.1 (SD = 34.5) for Crohn’s disease/ulcerative colitis, 44.3 (SD = 31.5) for depression, 42.8 (SD = 31.5) for lupus, 42.3 (SD = 33.0) for arthrosis, 41.8 (SD = 32.6) for Parkinson’s disease, 40.5 (SD = 32.2) for rheumatoid arthritis, 38.6 (SD = 31.7) for breast cancer, 36.4 (SD = 36.4) for myocardial infarction, 35.8 (SD = 32.0) for ankylosing spondylitis, 34.1 (SD = 32.3) for psoriasis, and 33.7 (SD = 31.7) for fibromyalgia.

Conclusions

This first of its kind study enabled ACCEPT© data to be collected in real life for a variety of chronic diseases. These data may help in evaluating and interpreting levels of acceptance in future studies and provide valuable insights about patient priorities and current unmet needs.

Causality and preventability assessment of adverse drug events of antibiotics among inpatients having different lengths of hospital stay: a multicenter, cross-sectional study in Lahore, Pakistan

BACKGROUND

A large number of hospital admissions are attributed to adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and they are the fifth leading cause of death worldwide. The present study aimed to assess the causality and preventability of adverse drug events (ADEs) of antibiotics among inpatients having different lengths of hospital stay.

METHODS

A prospective, observational study was conducted in four tertiary-care public sector hospitals of Lahore, Pakistan. Study population consisted of hospitalized patients who were prescribed one or more antibiotics. Data were collected between 1st January, 2017 and 30th June, 2017 from 1249 patients. Naranjo score, modified Schumock and Thornton scale were used for causality and preventability assessments, respectively. Medication errors (MEs) were assessed by MEs tracking form. SPSS and Microsoft Excel were used for data analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 2686 antibiotics were prescribed to 1249 patients and 486 ADEs were found. The preventability assessment revealed that most of the ADEs (78.8%) were found among patients having long length of stay (LOS) in hospital and were preventable (59.3% of the ADEs were definitely preventable while 44.7% were probably preventable) and caused by MEs including wrong drug (40.1%) and monitoring errors (25%). The errors were caused due to non-adherence of policies (38.4%) and lack of information about antibiotics (32%). Most of the non-preventable ADEs or ADRs among patients having long and short LOS in hospital were "probable" (35.5%) and "possible" (35.8%), respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed that ADEs were significantly less among females (OR = 0.047, 95% CI = 0.018─0.121, p-value = < 0.001), patients aged 18─52 years (OR = 0.041, 95% CI = 0.013─0.130, p-value = < 0.001), patients with ARTIs (OR = 0.004, 95% CI = 0.01-0.019, p-value = < 0.001), patients prescribed with 2 antibiotics per prescription (OR = 0.455, 95% CI = 0.319─0.650, p-value = < 0.001) and patients with long LOS (OR = 14.825, 95% CI = 11.198─19.627, p-value = < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Antibiotics associated definitely preventable ADEs were more commonly found in patients having long LOS in the inpatient departments because of MEs and lack of proper pharmacovigilance system. The ADRs showed a probable and possible causal association with both β-lactams and non β-lactams antibiotics.

An integrated computational approach of molecular dynamics simulations, receptor binding studies and pharmacophore mapping analysis in search of potent inhibitors against tuberculosis

Tuberculosis is an infectious chronic disease caused by obligate pathogen Mycobacterium tuberculosis that affects millions of people worldwide. Although many first and second line drugs are available for its treatment, but their irrational use has adversely lead to the emerging cases of multiple drug resistant and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis. Therefore, there is an intense need to develop novel potent analogues for its treatment. This has prompted us to develop potent analogues against TB. The Mycobacterium tuberculosis genome provides us with number of validated targets to combat against TB. Study of Mtb genome disclosed six epoxide hydrolases (A to F) which convert harmful epoxide into diols and act as a potential drug target for rational drug design. Our current strategy is to develop such analogues which inhibits epoxide hydrolase enzyme present in Mtb genome. To achieve this, we adopted an integrated computational approach involving QSAR, pharmacophore mapping, molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulation studies. The approach envisaged vital information about the role of molecular descriptors, essential pharmacophoric features and binding energy for compounds to bind into the active site of epoxide hydrolase. Molecular docking analysis revealed that analogues exhibited significant binding to Mtb epoxide hydrolase. Further, three docked complexes 2s, 37s and 15s with high, moderate and low docking scores respectively were selected for molecular dynamics simulation studies. RMSD analysis revealed that all complexes are stable with average RMSD below 2 Å throughout the 10 ns simulations. The B-factor analysis showed that the active site residues of epoxide hydrolase are flexible enough to interact with inhibitor. Moreover, to confirm the binding of these urea derivatives, MM-GBSA binding energy analysis were performed. The calculations showed that 37s has more binding affinity (ΔGtotal = -52.24 kcal/mol) towards epoxide hydrolase compared to 2s (ΔGtotal = -51.70 kcal/mol) and 15s (ΔGtotal = -49.97 kcal/mol). The structural features inferred in our study may provide the future directions to the scientists towards the discovery of new chemical entity exhibiting anti-TB property.

Does Internet-based guided-self-help for depression cause harm? An individual participant data meta-analysis on deterioration rates and its moderators in randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Almost nothing is known about the potential negative effects of Internet-based psychological treatments for depression. This study aims at investigating deterioration and its moderators within randomized trials on Internet-based guided self-help for adult depression, using an individual patient data meta-analyses (IPDMA) approach.

METHOD

Studies were identified through systematic searches (PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane Library). Deterioration in participants was defined as a significant symptom increase according to the reliable change index (i.e. 7.68 points in the CES-D; 7.63 points in the BDI). Two-step IPDMA procedures, with a random-effects model were used to pool data.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies (21 comparisons, 2079 participants) contributed data to the analysis. The risk for a reliable deterioration from baseline to post-treatment was significantly lower in the intervention v. control conditions (3.36 v. 7.60; relative risk 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.75). Education moderated effects on deterioration, with patients with low education displaying a higher risk for deterioration than patients with higher education. Deterioration rates for patients with low education did not differ statistically significantly between intervention and control groups. The benefit-risk ratio for patients with low education indicated that 9.38 patients achieve a treatment response for each patient experiencing a symptom deterioration.

CONCLUSIONS

Internet-based guided self-help is associated with a mean reduced risk for a symptom deterioration compared to controls. Treatment and symptom progress of patients with low education should be closely monitored, as some patients might face an increased risk for symptom deterioration. Future studies should examine predictors of deterioration in patients with low education.

Patient-Focused Benefit-Risk Analysis to Inform Regulatory Decisions: The European Union Perspective

Regulatory decisions are often based on multiple clinical end points, but the perspectives used to judge the relative importance of those end points are predominantly those of expert decision makers rather than of the patient. However, there is a growing awareness that active patient and public participation can improve decision making, increase acceptance of decisions, and improve adherence to treatments. The assessment of risk versus benefit requires not only information on clinical outcomes but also value judgments about which outcomes are important and whether the potential benefits outweigh the harms. There are a number of mechanisms for capturing the input of patients, and regulatory bodies within the European Union are participating in several initiatives. These can include patients directly participating in the regulatory decision-making process or using information derived from patients in empirical studies as part of the evidence considered. One promising method that is being explored is the elicitation of "patient preferences." Preferences, in this context, refer to the individual's evaluation of health outcomes and can be understood as statements regarding the relative desirability of a range of treatment options, treatment characteristics, and health states. Several methods for preference measurement have been proposed, and pilot studies have been undertaken to use patient preference information in regulatory decision making. This article describes how preferences are currently being considered in the benefit-risk assessment context, and shows how different methods of preference elicitation are used to support decision making within the European context.

Testing the usefulness of the number needed to treat to be harmed (NNTH) in benefit-risk evaluations: case study with medicines withdrawn from the European market due to safety reasons

OBJECTIVE

To explore the usefulness of number needed to treat to be harmed (NNTH), in benefit-risk assessments, by studying the agreement between NNTH values and withdrawals of medicines from European market due to safety reasons.

METHODS

Medicines with data from longitudinal studies were included. Studies were identified from European Medicines Agency's Reports. Meta-analyses were performed to pool odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence-intervals (CI). Published control event rates were applied to ORs to calculate NNTHs (95%CI) for selected adverse events.

RESULTS

NNTH (95%CI) decreased from pre- to post-marketing for the eight medicines included: peripheral neuropathy (∞ vs. 12[non-significant; NS] with almitrine; heart valve disease with benfluorex (∞ vs. NNTH ranging from 7[4-13] to 7[5-9]); myopathy (-4096[NS] vs. 797[421-1690]), new-onset diabetes (113[NS] vs. 390[425-778]), bleeding (∞ vs. 517[317-1153]), and infection (∞ vs. 253[164-463]) with niacin-laropiprant; psychiatric disorders (12[7-34] vs. 9[5-24]) with rimonabant; myocardial infarction (MI) [-1305 vs. 270[89-4362]) with rofecoxib; MI (-510 vs. NNTH ranging from 152[55-4003] to 568[344-1350]) with rosiglitazone; cardiovascular events (∞ vs. 245[129-1318]) with sibutramine; and liver injury (∞ vs. 5957[NS]) with ximelagatran.

CONCLUSION

NNTH have potential of use as a supportive tool in benefit-risk re-evaluations of medicines and may help regulators to making decisions on drug safety.

Malaria Prevention, Mefloquine Neurotoxicity, Neuropsychiatric Illness, and Risk-Benefit Analysis in the Australian Defence Force

The Australian Defence Force (ADF) has used mefloquine for malaria chemoprophylaxis since 1990. Mefloquine has been found to be a plausible cause of a chronic central nervous system toxicity syndrome and a confounding factor in the diagnosis of existing neuropsychiatric illnesses prevalent in the ADF such as posttraumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury. Overall health risks appear to have been mitigated by restricting the drug's use; however serious risks were realised when significant numbers of ADF personnel were subjected to clinical trials involving the drug. The full extent of the exposure, health impacts for affected individuals, and consequences for ADF health management including mental health are not yet known, but mefloquine may have caused or aggravated neuropsychiatric illness in large numbers of patients who were subsequently misdiagnosed and mistreated or otherwise failed to receive proper care. Findings in relation to chronic mefloquine neurotoxicity were foreseeable, but this eventuality appears not to have been considered during risk-benefit analyses. Thorough analysis by the ADF would have identified this long-term risk as well as other qualitative risk factors. Historical exposure of ADF personnel to mefloquine neurotoxicity now also necessitates ongoing risk monitoring and management in the overall context of broader health policies.

Integration of PKPD relationships into benefit-risk analysis

AIM

Despite the continuous endeavour to achieve high standards in medical care through effectiveness measures, a quantitative framework for the assessment of the benefit-risk balance of new medicines is lacking prior to regulatory approval. The aim of this short review is to summarise the approaches currently available for benefit-risk assessment. In addition, we propose the use of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) modelling as the pharmacological basis for evidence synthesis and evaluation of novel therapeutic agents.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search has been performed using MESH terms in PubMed, in which articles describing benefit-risk assessment and modelling and simulation were identified. In parallel, a critical review of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is presented as a tool for characterising a drug's safety and efficacy profile.

RESULTS

A definition of benefits and risks has been proposed by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), in which qualitative and quantitative elements are included. However, in spite of the value of MCDA as a quantitative method, decisions about benefit-risk balance continue to rely on subjective expert opinion. By contrast, a model-informed approach offers the opportunity for a more comprehensive evaluation of benefit-risk balance before extensive evidence is generated in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Benefit-risk balance should be an integral part of the risk management plan and as such considered before marketing authorisation. Modelling and simulation can be incorporated into MCDA to support the evidence synthesis as well evidence generation taking into account the underlying correlations between favourable and unfavourable effects. In addition, it represents a valuable tool for the optimization of protocol design in effectiveness trials.

Dilemmas of the causality assessment tools in the diagnosis of adverse drug reactions

Importance: Basic essence of Pharmacovigilance is prevention of ADRs and its precise diagnosis is crucially a primary step, which still remains a challenge among clinicians. Objective: This study is undertaken with the objective to scrutinize and offer a notion of commonly used as well as recently developed methods of causality assessment tools for the diagnosis of adverse drug reactions and discuss their pros and cons. Evidence review: Overall 49 studies were recognized for all assessment methods with five major decisive factors of causality evaluation, all the information regarding reasons allocating causality, the advantages and limitations of the appraisal methods were extracted and scrutinized. Findings: From epidemiological information a past prospect is designed and subsequent possibility merged this background information with a clue in the individual case to crop up with an approximation of causation. Expert judgment is typically based on the decisive factor on which algorithms are based, nevertheless in imprecise manner. The probabilistic methods use the similar principle; however connect probabilities to each measure. Such approaches are quite skeptical and liable to generate cloudy causation results. Causation is quite intricate to ascertain than correlation in Pharmacovigilance due to numerous inherent shortcomings in causality assessment tools. Conclusions and relevance: We suggest that there is a need to develop a high quality assessment tool which can meticulously establish suitable diagnostic criteria for ADRs with universal acceptance to improvise the fundamental aspect of drug safety and evade the impending ADRs with the motive to convert Pharmacovigilance into a state of art.

Balancing benefit and risk of medicines: a systematic review and classification of available methodologies

BACKGROUND

The need for formal and structured approaches for benefit-risk assessment of medicines is increasing, as is the complexity of the scientific questions addressed before making decisions on the benefit-risk balance of medicines. We systematically collected, appraised and classified available benefit-risk methodologies to facilitate and inform their future use.

METHODS

A systematic review of publications identified benefit-risk assessment methodologies. Methodologies were appraised on their fundamental principles, features, graphical representations, assessability and accessibility. We created a taxonomy of methodologies to facilitate understanding and choice.

RESULTS

We identified 49 methodologies, critically appraised and classified them into four categories: frameworks, metrics, estimation techniques and utility survey techniques. Eight frameworks describe qualitative steps in benefit-risk assessment and eight quantify benefit-risk balance. Nine metric indices include threshold indices to measure either benefit or risk; health indices measure quality-of-life over time; and trade-off indices integrate benefits and risks. Six estimation techniques support benefit-risk modelling and evidence synthesis. Four utility survey techniques elicit robust value preferences from relevant stakeholders to the benefit-risk decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

Methodologies to help benefit-risk assessments of medicines are diverse and each is associated with different limitations and strengths. There is not a 'one-size-fits-all' method, and a combination of methods may be needed for each benefit-risk assessment. The taxonomy introduced herein may guide choice of adequate methodologies. Finally, we recommend 13 of 49 methodologies for further appraisal for use in the real-life benefit-risk assessment of medicines.

Registering medicines for low-income countries: how suitable are the stringent review procedures of the World Health Organisation, the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency?

New medicines are registered after a resource-demanding process. Unfortunately, in low-income countries (LICs), demand outweighs resources. To facilitate registration in LICs, stringent review procedures of the European Medicines Agency (EMA Article-58), Food and Drug Administration (FDA PEPFAR-linked review) and WHO Prequalification programme have been established. Only the PEPFAR-linked review gives approval, while the others make recommendations for approval. This study assessed the performance and discussed the challenges of these three stringent review procedures. Data from WHO, FDA, EMA, Medline and Internet were analysed. Over 60% of medicines reviewed by stringent review procedures are manufactured in India. Until 2012, WHO prequalified 400 medicines (211 vaccines, 130 antiretrovirals, 29 tuberculostatics, 15 antimalarials and 15 others). PEPFAR-linked review approved 156 antiretrovirals, while EMA Article 58 recommended approval of 3 antiretrovirals, 1 vaccine and 1 antimalarial. WHO Prequalification and PEPFAR-linked review are free of charge and as a result have accelerated access to antiretrovirals. They both built capacity in sub-Saharan Africa, although WHO prequalification relies technically on stringent regulatory authorities and financially on donors. Article-58 offers the largest disease coverage and strongest technical capacities, is costly and involves fewer LICs. To meet the high demand for quality medicines in LICs, these stringent review procedures need to enlarge their disease coverage. To improve registration, EMA Article 58 should actively involve LICs. Furthermore, LIC regulatory activities must not be fully resigned to stringent review procedure.

Strengths and weaknesses of pharmacogenetic studies of antipsychotic drugs: the potential value of the PEPs study

The successful application of pharmacogenetics in routine clinical practice is still a long way from becoming a reality. In order to favor the transfer of pharmacogenetic results to clinical practice, especially in psychiatry, these studies must be optimized. This article reviews the strengths and weaknesses that characterize pharmacogenetic studies in psychiatry and condition their implementation in clinical practice. We also include recommendations for improving the design of pharmacogenetic studies, which may convert their limitations into strengths and facilitate the implementation of their results into clinical practice. Finally, we discuss the potential value of naturalistic, prospective, multicenter and coordinated projects such as the 'Phenotype-genotype and environmental interaction. Application of a predictive model in first psychotic episodes' (known as the PEPs study, from the Spanish abbreviation) in pharmacogenetic studies.