Withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids versus continuation of triple therapy in patients with COPD in real life: observational comparative effectiveness study

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are indicated for prevention of exacerbations in patients with COPD, but they are frequently overprescribed. ICS withdrawal has been recommended by international guidelines in order to prevent side effects in patients in whom ICS are not indicated.

METHOD

Observational comparative effectiveness study aimed to evaluate the effect of ICS withdrawal versus continuation of triple therapy (TT) in COPD patients in primary care. Data were obtained from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database (OPCRD) in the UK.

RESULTS

A total of 1046 patients who withdrew ICS were matched 1:4 by time on TT to 4184 patients who continued with TT. Up to 76.1% of the total population had 0 or 1 exacerbation the previous year. After controlling for confounders, patients who discontinued ICS did not have an increased risk of moderate or severe exacerbations (adjusted HR: 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-1.15; p = 0.441). However, rates of exacerbations managed in primary care (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.33, 95% CI 1.10-1.60; p = 0.003) or in hospital (IRR 1.72, 95% CI 1.03-2.86; p = 0.036) were higher in the cessation group. Unsuccessful ICS withdrawal was significantly and independently associated with more frequent courses of oral corticosteroids the previous year and with a blood eosinophil count ≥ 300 cells/μL.

CONCLUSIONS

In this primary care population of patients with COPD, composed mostly of infrequent exacerbators, discontinuation of ICS from TT was not associated with an increased risk of exacerbation; however, the subgroup of patients with more frequent courses of oral corticosteroids and high blood eosinophil counts should not be withdrawn from ICS. Trial registration European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (EUPAS30851).

An investigation into drug products withdrawn from the EU market between 2002 and 2011 for safety reasons and the evidence used to support the decision-making

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to determine the nature of evidence used to support the withdrawal of marketing authorisations of drug products for safety reasons throughout the European Union (EU) between 2002 and 2011.

SETTING

Products withdrawn, either by a medicines agency or a marketing authorisation holder, during the period 2002-2011 were identified by conducting detailed searches of the WHO, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and national medicines agency websites throughout the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. The scientific evidence used to support the decision was identified from a search within PubMed, the EMA and national medicines agencies websites. Information about spontaneous case reports entered into EudraVigilance and unavailable on the EMA website was received by email from the EMA.

RESULTS

19 drugs were withdrawn from the market, throughout the EU, for safety reasons from 2002 to 2011. Case reports were cited in 95% of withdrawals (18/19) and case-control studies (4/19), cohort studies (4/19), randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (12/19) or meta-analysis (5/19) were cited in 63% of withdrawals (12/19). Cardiovascular events or disorders were the main reason for withdrawal (9/19), followed by hepatic disorders (4/19) and neurological or psychiatric disorders (4/19).

CONCLUSIONS

This study has shown that the level of evidence used to support drug withdrawal has improved during the past 10 years, with an increased use of case-control studies, cohort studies, RCTs and meta-analyses. This research has demonstrated that such studies have contributed to decision-making in almost two-thirds of cases.

Use of analgesics in intentional drug overdose presentations to hospital before and after the withdrawal of distalgesic from the Irish market

BACKGROUND

Distalgesic, the prescription-only analgesic compound of paracetamol (325 mg) and dextropropoxyphene (32.5 mg) known as co-proxamol in the UK, was withdrawn from the Irish market as of January 2006. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the withdrawal of distalgesic in terms of intentional drug overdose (IDO) presentations to hospital emergency departments (EDs) nationally.

METHODS

A total of 42,849 IDO presentations to 37 of the 40 hospitals EDs operating in Ireland in 2003-2008 were recorded according to standardised procedures. Data on sales of paracetamol-containing drugs to retail pharmacies for the period 1998-2008 were obtained from IMS Health.

RESULTS

The withdrawal of distalgesic from the Irish market resulted in an immediate reduction in sales to retail pharmacies from 40 million tablets in 2005 to 500,000 tablets in 2006 while there was a 48% increase in sales of other prescription compound analgesics. The rate of IDO presentations to hospital involving distalgesic in 2006-2008 was 84% lower than in the three years before it was withdrawn (10.0 per 100,000). There was a 44% increase in the rate of IDO presentations involving other prescription compound analgesics but the magnitude of this rate increase was five times smaller than the magnitude of the decrease in distalgesic-related IDO presentations. There was a decreasing trend in the rate of presentations involving any paracetamol-containing drug that began in the years before the distalgesic withdrawal.

CONCLUSIONS

The withdrawal of distalgesic has had positive benefits in terms of IDO presentations to hospital in Ireland and provides evidence supporting the restriction of availability of means as a prevention strategy for suicidal behaviour.