Nitric oxide and cardiovascular effects: new insights in the role of nitric oxide for the management of osteoarthritis

Nitric oxide (NO) is an important mediator in both health and disease. In addition to its effects on vascular tone and platelet function, it plays roles in inflammation and pain perception that may be of relevance in osteoarthritis. Many patients with osteoarthritis take nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) long term for pain control. Over recent years concern has been raised about the possible cardiovascular side effects of NSAIDs. The reasons for this possible increased cardiovascular risk with NSAIDs are not yet entirely clear, although changes in blood pressure, renal salt handling and platelet function may contribute. Recently, drugs that chemically link a NSAID with a NO donating moiety (cyclo-oxygenase-inhibiting NO-donating drugs [CINODs]) were developed. NO is an important mediator of endothelial function, acting as a vasodilator and an inhibitor of platelet aggregation, and having anti-inflammatory properties. The potential benefits of CINODs include the combination of effective analgesic and anti-inflammatory actions with NO release, which might counterbalance any adverse cardiovascular effects of NSAIDs. Effects of CINODs in animal studies include inhibition of vasopressor responses, blood pressure reduction in hypertensive rats and inhibition of platelet aggregation. CINODs may also reduce ischemic damage to compromised myocardial tissue. In addition, endothelial dysfunction is a recognized feature of inflammatory arthritides, and therefore a drug that might provide slow release of NO to the vasculature while treating pain is an attractive prospect in these conditions. Further studies of the effects of CINODs in humans are required, but these agents represent a potential exciting advance in the management of osteoarthritis

Changes in prescribing rates of sodium-containing medications in the UK from 2009 to 2018:a cross-sectional study with interrupted time series analysis

Objective Effervescent, soluble, dispersible formulations contain considerable amounts of sodium. In 2013, we previously confirmed the association between sodium-containing medications and cardiovascular risks. This study aimed to determine the changes in the prescribing pattern in clinical practice following this publication.Design A longitudinal cross-sectional study.Setting Primary care in the UK from 2009 to 2018.Participants Prescribing information in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) and Prescription Cost Analysis (PCA) databases in the UK.Outcome measurements Prescription rates per 10 000 inhabitants were calculated using the number of prescriptions or the number of drug-using patients over the total number of inhabitants, and the prescription rates were measured at annual intervals. Prescribing trends from 2009 to 2018 were indexed with yearly data from THIN and PCA. Interrupted time series analysis (ITSA) was conducted with monthly data in THIN.Results From the THIN database, a total of 3 651 419 prescription records from 446 233 patients were included. The prescribing rate of sodium-containing medications changed from 848.3/10 000 inhabitants in 2009 to 571.6/10 000 inhabitants in 2018. The corresponding figures from PCA data were of 631.0/10 000 inhabitants in 2009 and 423.8/10 000 inhabitants in 2018. ITSA showed the prescribing trend reduced significantly during the postpublication period (prescribing rate: slope change=−0.26; 95% CI −0.45 to –0.07; p=0.009; proportion of patients: slope change=−0.22; 95% CI −0.35 to –0.09; p<0.001), but no change in postpublication level from baseline. The prescribing rates for the non-sodium-containing standard formulations were relatively stable over the study period. The reduction in the proportion of patients using sodium-containing medications was only significant in patients over 45 years old.Conclusions The prescribing of sodium-containing medications in the UK primary care has declined significantly during the postpublication period. Changes in the prescribing trends for sodium-containing medications varied across regions of the UK and patient age groups

A novel drug management system in the Febuxostat versus Allopurinol Streamlined Trial:A description of a pharmacy system designed to supply medications directly to patients within a prospective multicenter randomised clinical trial

Background: Trials of investigational medicinal products are required to adhere to strict guidelines with regard to the handling and supply of medication. Information technology offers opportunities to approach clinical trial methodology in new ways. This report summarises a novel pharmacy system designed to supply trial medications directly to patients by post in the Febuxostat versus Allopurinol Streamlined Trial.Method: A bespoke web-based software package was designed to facilitate the direct supply of trial medications to Febuxostat versus Allopurinol Streamlined Trial participants from a pharmacy based in the Medicines Monitoring Unit, University of Dundee.Results: To date, 65,467 packs of medication have been dispensed using the system to 3978 patients. Up to 238 packs per day have been dispensed.Conclusion: The Medicines Monitoring Unit Febuxostat versus Allopurinol Streamlined Trial drug management system is an effective method of administering the complex drug supply requirements of a large-scale clinical trial with advantages over existing arrangements. A low rate of loss to follow-up in the Febuxostat versus Allopurinol Streamlined Trial may be attributable to the drug management system.</p

Learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences:a qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders

AIMS: The aim of the study was to identify actionable learning points from stakeholders in remote decentralised clinical trials (RDCTs) to inform their future design and conduct. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were carried out with a purposive sample of stakeholders, including senior managers, trial managers, technology experts, principal investigators, clinical investigators, research scientists, research nurses, vendors, patient representatives and project assistants. The interview data were coded using a thematic approach, identifying similarities, differences and clustering to generate descriptive themes. Further refinement of themes was guided by empirical phenomenology, grounding explanation in the meanings that interviewees gave to their experiences. RESULTS: Forty‐eight stakeholders were interviewed. Actionable learning points were generated from the thematic analysis. Patient involvement and participant engagement were seen as critical to the success of RDCTs where in‐person contact is minimal or nonexistent. Involving patients in identifying the research question, creating recruitment materials, apps and websites, and providing ongoing feedback to trial participants were regarded as facilitating recruitment and engagement. Building strong relationships early with trial partners was thought to support RDCT conduct. Multiple modes of capturing information, including patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) and routinely collected data, were felt to contribute to data completeness. However, RDCTs may transfer trial activity burden onto participants and remote‐working research staff, therefore additional support may be needed. CONCLUSION: RDCTs will continue to face challenges in implementing novel technologies. However, maximising patient and partner involvement, reducing participant and staff burden, and simplifying how participants and staff interact with the RDCT may facilitate their implementation

When innovation outpaces regulations:The legal challenges for direct-to-patient supply of investigational medicinal products

AIMS: We profile the lack of specific regulation for direct‐to‐patient postal supply (DTP) of clinical trial medications (investigational medicinal products, IMPs) calling for increased efficiency of patient‐centred multi‐country remote clinical trials. METHODS: Questionnaires emailed to 28 European Economic Area (EEA) Medical Product Licensing Authorities (MPLAs) and Swissmedic MPLA were analysed in 2019/2020. The questionnaire asked whether DTP of IMPs was legal, followed by comparative legal analysis profiling relevant national civil and criminal liability provisions in 30 European jurisdictions (including The Netherlands), finally summarising accessible COVID‐19‐related guidance in searches of 30 official MPLA websites in January 2021. RESULTS: Twenty MPLAs responded. Twelve consented to response publication in 2021. DTP was not widely authorised, though different phrases were used to explain this. Our legal review of national laws in 29 EEA jurisdictions and Switzerland did not identify any specific sanctions for DTP of IMPs; however, we identified potential national civil and criminal liability provisions. Switzerland provides legal clarity where DTP of IMPs is conditionally legal. MPLA webpage searches for COVID‐19 guidance noted conditional acceptance by 19 MPLAs. CONCLUSIONS: Specific national legislation authorising DTP of IMPs, defining IMP categories, and conditions permitting the postage and delivery by courier in an EEA‐wide clinical trial, would support innovative patient‐centred research for multi‐country remote clinical trials. Despite it appearing more acceptable to do this between EU Member States, provided each EU MPLA and ethics board authorises it, temporary Covid‐19 restrictions in national Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidance discourages innovative research into the safety and effectiveness of clinical trial medications

Home blood pressure monitors owned by participants in a large decentralised clinical trial in hypertension:the Treatment In Morning versus Evening (TIME) study

Various home blood pressure monitors (HBPMs) are available to the public for purchase but only some are validated against standardised protocols. This study aimed to assess whether HBPMs owned by participants taking part in a clinical trial were validated models. The TIME study is a decentralised randomised trial investigating the effect of antihypertensive medication dosing time on cardiovascular outcomes in adults with hypertension. No HBPMs were provided to participants in this trial but patients were asked to report if they already owned one. We identified the model of HBPM reported by participants, then cross-referenced this against lists of validated HBPMs produced by dabl Educational Trust and the British and Irish Hypertension Society (BIHS). Of 21,104 participants, 10,464 (49.6%) reported their model of HBPM. 7464 (71.3%) of these participants owned a monitor that could be identified from the participants’ entry. Of these, 6066 (81.3%) participants owned a monitor listed as validated by either dabl (n = 5903) or BIHS (n = 5491). Some were listed as validated by both. 1398 (18.7%) participants owned an identifiable HBPM that lacked clear evidence of validation. 6963 (93.3%) participants owned an upper arm HBPM and 501 (6.7%) owned a wrist HBPM. Validated HBPMs had a higher median online retail price of £45.00 compared to £20.00 for HBPMs lacking clear evidence of validation. A significant number of participants own HBPMs lacking evidence of validation