Laboratory Monitoring of Patients Treated with Antihypertensive Drugs and Newly Exposed to Non Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: Drug-Drug Interactions between Non Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) and Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEIs), Angiotensin Receptor Blocker (ARBs) or diuretics can lead to renal failure and hyperkalemia. Thus, monitoring of serum creatinine and potassium is recommended when a first dispensing of NSAID occur in patients treated with these drugs. METHODS: We conducted a pharmacoepidemiological retrospective cohort study using data from the French Health Insurance Reimbursement Database to evaluate the proportion of serum creatinine and potassium laboratory monitoring in patients treated with ACEI, ARB or diuretic and receiving a first dispensing of NSAID. We described the first dispensing of NSAID among 3,500 patients of a 4-year cohort (6,633 patients treated with antihypertensive drugs) and analyzed serum creatinine and potassium laboratory monitoring within the 3 weeks after the first NSAID dispensing. RESULTS: General Practitioners were the most frequent prescribers of NSAIDs (85.5%, 95% CI: 84.3-86.6). The more commonly prescribed NSAIDs were ibuprofen (20%), ketoprofen (15%), diclofenac (15%) and piroxicam (12%). Serum creatinine and potassium monitoring was 10.7% (95% CI: 9.5-11.8) in patients treated by ACEIs, ARBs or diuretics. Overall, monitoring was more frequently performed to women aged over 60, treated with digoxin or glucose lowering drugs, but not to patients treated with ACEIs, ARBs or diuretics. Monitoring was more frequent when NSAIDs' prescribers were cardiologists or anesthesiologists. CONCLUSION: Monitoring of serum creatinine and potassium of patients treated with ACEIs, ARBs or diuretics and receiving a first NSAID dispensing is insufficiently performed and needs to be reinforced through specific interventions

Drugs associated with restless legs syndrome: A case/noncase study in the French pharmacovigilance database

BACKGROUND: Several case reports have suggested that drugs could induce restless legs syndrome. However, no systematic review of this adverse drug reaction (ADR) in a pharmacovigilance database has been published. OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency of restless legs syndrome in the French Pharmacovigilance Database. METHODS: We selected all ADR reports from January 1, 1984 to December 31, 2009 coded as restless legs syndrome. Restless legs syndrome diagnosis was validated from case descriptions. Using a case/noncase approach, reporting odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were calculated for ''suspected'' drugs with 2 or more observations. RESULTS: Twenty-six ADR reports were found. Four cases were excluded because of alternative diagnosis. Fourteen cases were women (64%). Median age was 57. Most frequently suspected drugs were antidepressants (reporting odds ratio, 15.9 [6.4-39.7]; amitriptyline, escitalopram, mianserine, mirtazapine, duloxetine), neuroleptics (17.8 [6.1-51.7]; thioridazine, loxapine, risperidone, aripiprazole) or tramadol (18.2 [6.3-52.8]). CONCLUSIONS: Restless legs syndrome is a very rare ADR that was more frequently reported in association with antidepressants, neuroleptics, or tramadol.Fil: Perez Lloret, Santiago. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; Francia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Rey, María Verónica. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; FranciaFil: Bondon Guitton, Emmanuelle. Inserm; FranciaFil: Rascol, Olivier. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; FranciaFil: Montastruc, And Jean-Louis. Inserm; Franci

Prevalence and pharmacological factors associated with impulse-control disorder symptoms in patients with parkinson disease

BACKGROUND: Impulse-control disorders (ICDs) occur in patients with Parkinson disease (PD), especially in younger patients on dopamine therapies. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of ICD symptoms and its pharmacological correlations in a sample of French patients with PD and without PD (poststroke). METHODS: Outpatients with PD and without PD (poststroke) were screened for compulsive behaviors related to hypersexuality, compulsive shopping, pathological gambling, or compulsive eating by means of the Questionnaire for Impulse-Control Disorders-short version. Full medical history and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale scores were also recorded. Dose of dopamine agonists were converted to defined daily doses (DDDs), according to the World Health Organization Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification system classification system. RESULTS: Two hundred three patients with PD and 52 patients without PD were recruited (mean ± SD age, 67 ± 1 vs 69 ± 2, P= 0.4; males: 62% vs 55% P= 0.2). Symptoms of ICDs were reported by 0% of poststroke patients and 25% of the patients with PD (P < 0.001). Hypersexuality was reported by 10% of the patients with PD, compulsive shopping by 6%, pathological gambling by 3%, and compulsive eating by 14%. A logistic regression analysis found that age younger than 68 years (odds ratio [OR], 3.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-6.6) and exposure to dopamine agonists (OR, 20.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.7-65.0) or monoaminooxidase-B inhibitor (OR, 3.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-12.6) were significant factors associated with increased ICD frequency. Patients with ICD symptoms were exposed to higher dopamine doses than those without them (1.6 ± 0.1 vs 1.0 ± 0.1 daily-defined doses; P < 0.001). A dose-response pharmacodynamic model disclosed a significant nonlinear dose-response relationship between dopamine agonists and frequency of ICD symptoms (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Impulse-control disorder symptoms were more frequent in the patients with PD than in the poststroke patients with PD. Impulse-control disorder symptoms were related to younger age and exposure to monoaminooxidase-B inhibitors, and showed a nonlinear dose-response relationship with dopamine agonists.Fil: Perez Lloret, Santiago. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Inserm; FranciaFil: Rey, María Verónica. Inserm; FranciaFil: Fabre, Nelly. No especifíca;Fil: Ory, Fabienne. No especifíca;Fil: Spampinato, Umberto. No especifíca;Fil: Brefel Courbon, Christine. No especifíca;Fil: Montastruc, Jean Louis. No especifíca;Fil: Rascol, Olivier. Inserm; Franci

Potentially inappropriate medication use among patients with Alzheimer disease in the REAL.FR cohort: be aware of atropinic and benzodiazepine drugs!

Abstract Objective Few studies have investigated potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in patients with Alzheimer&apos;s disease (AD). The aim of our study was to assess the prevalence of PIM in community-dwelling patients diagnosed with mild-to-moderate AD and identify the clinical factors associated with PIM prescriptions. Methods REAL.FR is a 4-year, prospective, multicenter French cohort of AD patients recruited in centers of expertise. We analyzed patient baseline data at entry into the study. PIMs were assessed using the Laroche list. A multivariate logistic regression was conducted to assess factors associated with PIMs. Results A total of 684 AD patients were enrolled in the study [mean age 77.9±6.8 years, 486 (71.0 %) females]. According to the Laroche list, 46.8 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 43.0-50.5 %] of the patients had at least one PIM. &quot;Cerebral vasodilators&quot; were the most widely used class of PIM, accounting for 24.0 % (95 % CI 20.9-27.3 %) of all prescriptions, followed by atropinic drugs (17.0 %, 95 % CI 14.1-19.8 %) and long half-life benzodiazepines (8.5 %, 95 % CI 6.4-10.6 %). Atropinic drugs were associated with cholinesterase inhibitors in 16 % of patients. In the multivariate analysis, only two factors, namely, female gender [odds ratio (OR) 1.5, 95 % CI 1.1-2.2] and polypharmacy (≥5 drugs; OR3.6, 95 % CI 2.6-4.5) were associated with prescriptions for PIMs. Conclusions These results reveal that approximately one out of two community-dwelling patients with mild-to-moderate AD treated by AD specialists use PIMs. They also indicate that the characteristics of the disease and the pharmacodynamic/ pharmacokinetic profile of the drugs prescribed are not sufficiently taken into account by physicians when prescribing for AD patients

Authors' Reply to Coste et al.: "Levothyrox® New and Old Formulations: Are they Switchable for Millions of Patients?"

"Authors'Reply to Coste et al"International audienc

Why Were More Than 200 Subjects Required to Demonstrate the Bioequivalence of a New Formulation of Levothyroxine with an Old One?

At the request of French Regulatory Authorities, a new formulation of Levothyrox® was licensed in France in 2017, with the objective of avoiding the stability deficiencies of an existing licensed formulation. Before launching the new formulation, an average bioequivalence (ABE) trial was conducted, having enrolled 204 subjects and selected for interpretation a narrow a priori bioequivalence range of 0.90–1.11. Bioequivalence was concluded. In a previous publication, we questioned the ability of an ABE trial to guarantee the switchability within patients of the new and old levothyroxine formulations. It was suggested that the two formulations should be compared using the conceptual framework of individual bioequivalence. The present paper is a response to those claiming that, despite the fact that ABE analysis does not formally address the switchability of the two formulations, future patients will nevertheless be fully protected. The basis for this claim is that the ABE study was established in a large trial and analyzed using a stringent a priori acceptance interval of equivalence. These claims are questionable, because the use of a very large number of subjects nullifies the implicit precautionary intention of the European guideline when, for a Narrow Therapeutic Index drug, it recommends shortening the a priori acceptance interval from 0.80–1.25 to 0.90–1.11

Levothyrox® new and old formulations: are they switchable for millions of patients?

International audienceIn France, more than 2.5 million patients are currently treated with levothyroxine, mainly as the marketed product Levothyrox ®. In March 2017, at the request of French authorities, a new formulation of Levothyrox ® was licensed, with the objective of avoiding stability deficiencies of the old formulation. Before launching this new formulation, an average bioequivalence trial, based on European Union recommended guidelines, was performed. The implicit rationale was the assumption that the two products, being bioequivalent, would also be switchable, allowing substitution of the new for the old formulation, thus avoiding the need for individual calibration of the dosage regimen of thyroxine, using the thyroid-stimulating hormone level as the endpoint, as required for a new patient on initiating treatment. Despite the fact that both formulations were shown to be bioequivalent, adverse drug reactions were reported in several thousands of patients after taking the new formulation. In this opinion paper, we report that more than 50% of healthy volunteers enrolled in a successful regulatory average bioequivalence trial were actually outside the a priori bioequivalence range. Therefore, we question the ability of an average bioequivalence trial to guarantee the switchability within patients of the new and old levothyroxine formulations. We further propose an analysis of this problem using the conceptual framework of individual bioequivalence. This involves investigating the bioavailability of the two formulations within a subject, by comparing not only the population means (as established by average bioequivalence) but also by assessing two variance terms, namely the within-subject variance and the variance estimating subject-by-formulation interaction. A higher within individual variability for the new formulation would lead to reconsideration of the appropriateness of the new formulation. Alternatively, a possible subject-by-formulation interaction would allow a judgement on the ability, or not, of doctors to manage patients effectively during transition from the old to the new formulation

Drug safety of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone in France: a study using the French PharmacoVigilance database

International audienceBackgroundThiazolidinediones (TZDs), rosiglitazone (RGZ) and pioglitazone (PGZ) are widely used as hypoglycemic drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The aim of our study was to investigate the profile of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to TZDs and to investigate potential risk factors of these ADRs.MethodsType 2 diabetic patients were identified from the French Database of PharmacoVigilance (FPVD) between 2002 and 2006. We investigated ADR related to TZD, focusing on 4 ADR: edema, heart failure, myocardial infarction and hepatitis corresponding to specific WHO-ART terms.ResultsAmong a total of 99,284 adult patients in the FPVD, 2295 reports concerned type 2 diabetic patients (2.3% of the whole database), with 161 (7%) exposed to TZDs. The frequency of edema and cardiac failure was significantly higher with TZDs than in other patients (18% and 7.4% versus 0.8% and 0.1% respectively, p ConclusionsThiazolidinediones exposure is associated with an increased risk of edema and heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes even when recommendations for use are respected. In contrast, the risk of hepatic reactions and myocardial infarction with this class of drugs seems to be similar to other hypoglycemic agents