Preventable Cases of Oral Anticoagulant-Induced Bleeding: Data From the Spontaneous Reporting System

Background: Despite the risk of bleeding is a well-known adverse effect of oral anticoagulants, there is scarce evidence on the preventability of oral anticoagulant-induced bleedings. Therefore, we investigated the potential risk factors related to preventable cases of oral anticoagulant-induced bleedings. Methods: We performed a study using Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) with an oral anticoagulant as suspected drug among those reported through the spontaneous reporting system of Campania Region from 1 July 2012 to 31 December 2017. The P-method was used for the preventability assessment of all cases of bleeding. Results: In total, 58 cases out of 253 (22.9%) were preventable, and the most reported suspected drug was an indirect oral anticoagulant (warfarin). Sixty-eight critical criteria for preventability were identified, all related to healthcare professionals' practices. The most detected risk factor related to healthcare professionals' practices was the labeled drug-drug interaction for both direct and indirect oral anticoagulants. Conclusion: Our findings describe the most reported risk factors for preventability of oral anticoagulant-induced bleedings. These factors may be useful for targeting interventions to improve pharmacovigilance activities in our regional territory and to reduce the burden of medication errors and inappropriate prescription

Pattern of statin use in southern Italian primary care: Can prescription databases be used for monitoring long-term adherence to the treatment?

Objectives: We sought to evaluate the prescribing pattern of statins according to national and regional health policy interventions and to assess specifically the adherence to the therapy in outpatient setting in Southern Italy. Methods: A population-based study was performed on persons ≥15 years old, living in the catchment area of Caserta (Southern Italy), and registered in Arianna database between 2004 and 2010. Prevalence and incidence of new treatments with statins were calculated for each year and stratified by drug. Adherence to therapy was measured by Medication Possession Ratio. Sub-analyses by individual compound and type of cardiovascular prevention were performed. Results: From 2004 to 2010, the one-year prevalence of statin use increased from 44.9/1,000 inhabitants to 79.8/1,000, respectively, consistently with the incidence of new use from 16.2/1,000 to 19.5/1,000, except a slight decrease after criteria reimbursement revision

Liver injury due to amoxicillin vs. amoxicillin/clavulanate: a subgroupnalysis of a drug-induced liver injury case-control study in Italy

Several studies showed that amoxicillin plus clavulanic acid (co-amoxiclav) is one of the most common agents associated to serious Drug Induced Liver Injury (DILI). We estimated the risk of acute serious DILI associated with amoxicillin alone compared with co-amoxiclav, through a multicenter case-control study carried out in nine Italian hospitals from October 2010 to January 2014.Cases were adults, with a diagnosis of acute liver injury. Controls presented acute clinical disorders, not related to chronic conditions and not involving the liver. Adjusted Odds Ratio (ORs) with 95% CI were calculated initially with a bivariate and then multivariate analysis. We analysed 179 cases matched to 1770 controls. Seven cases were exposed to amoxicillin (adjusted OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.72-3.98) and 22 cases to co-amoxiclav (adjusted OR 3.00, 95% CI 1.76-5.40). Co-amoxiclav almost doubled the risk of serious acute liver injury compared to amoxicillin alone. The incidence of co-amoxiclav induced DILI is very low but the widespread use of this drug by the general population makes the risk clinically relevant. The often inappropriate prescription of antimicrobial agents, and in particular of co-amoxiclav, could expose a given patient to a life-threatening risk compared to a negligible clinical benefit

Overview of Antiviral Drug Therapy for COVID-19: Where Do We Stand?

The vaccine weapon has resulted in being essential in fighting the COVID-19 outbreak, but it is not fully preventing infection due to an alarming spreading of several identified variants of concern. In fact, the recent emergence of variants has pointed out how the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still represents a global health threat. Moreover, oral antivirals also develop resistance, supporting the need to find new targets as therapeutic tools. However, cocktail therapy is useful to reduce drug resistance and maximize vaccination efficacy. Natural products and metal-drug-based treatments have also shown interesting antiviral activity, representing a valid contribution to counter COVID-19 outbreak. This report summarizes the available evidence which supports the use of approved drugs and further focuses on significant clinical trials that have investigated the safety and efficacy of repurposing drugs and new molecules in different COVID-19 phenotypes. To date, there are many individuals vulnerable to COVID-19 exhibiting severe symptoms, thus characterizing valid therapeutic strategies for better management of the disease is still a challenge

Notification of undesirable effects of cosmetics and toiletries

An undesirable effect (UE) of a cosmetic product is a harmful reaction attributable to its normal or reasonably foreseeable use. However, the knowledge of UEs, at the population level, is limited by the absence of formal and reliable cosmetovigilance systems, which nevertheless are characterized by underreporting. To test the feasibility of the collection of UEs in our territory we have carried out a pilot project aimed to assess either the notification procedures or the validation/evaluation of the collected forms in our territory. As reporting categories, we have chosen dermatologists and community pharmacists who were asked to notify UEs to cosmetics through a reporting form we have set up. During the period July 2006-December 2007, we have registered 76 reporting forms. Dermatologists who have sent 47 reporting forms represented the main reporting category, followed by community pharmacists (15 reports), other health professionals (9 reports) and consumers (5 reports). Several drawbacks, mainly represented by the incompleteness and inaccuracy of the filled in forms, affected the validation process. Thus, on receipt, we could validate only 34 forms and only after a careful check with each single reporter, we could include in the study other 36 forms. The validation of the collected reports has stressed the importance of a well-structured reporting form, an easy access to notification procedures as well as education and training programme. The evaluation of the validated forms has revealed the need of a controlled term vocabulary for the classification of the observed events and diagnosis, especially with regard to cutaneous reactions that represented almost the totality of the reported events (95.7%). Among the events (n = 45) reported by dermatologists, 22 were diagnosed as allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and 18 as irritant contact dermatitis (ICD). Facial care products (19.7%), followed by body care products (16.9%), perfumes (12.7%) and eye care products (11.3%) were the cosmetics mainly suspected to be responsible for the observed events. Correspondingly, face (n = 37), including periorbital and perioral area, forehead, ocular mucous membrane and lips, followed by entire body (n = 9) were the body sites reported as more involved. In conclusions, our experience allowed us to identify the main pitfalls of the system we have experienced. These are setting/formulation of the reporting form, notification step, description of the event and diagnosis. A careful settlement of these aspects could substantially contribute to the establishment of an efficient reporting system, although the bias due to underreporting is difficult to eliminate. © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

The importance of Pharmacovigilance for the drug safety: Focus on cardiovascular profile of incretin-based therapy

With the recent introduction of the new European Pharmacovigilance legislation, all new drugs must be carefully monitored after admission on the European market, in order to assess the long safety profile. Currently, special attention is given to several hypoglycemic agents with recent market approval (agonists of glucagon-like peptide-1 [GLP-1] receptor and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors [DPP-4i]), which act through the potentiation of incretin hormone signaling. Their inclusion in European additional monitoring is also due to safety problems, which seem to characterize their pharmacological class. In fact, these drugs initially showed a good tolerability profile with mainly gastrointestinal adverse events, low risk of hypoglycemia and minor effects on body weight. But, new concerns such as infections, pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer and above all cardiovascular events (especially risk of heart failure requiring hospitalization) are now arising. In this review, we highlighted aspects of the new Pharmacovigilance European dispositions, and then we investigated the tolerability profile of incretin-based therapies, in particular DPP-4 inhibitors. Notably, we focused our attention on new safety concerns, which are emerging mostly in the post-marketing period, as the cardiovascular risk profile. Evidence in literature and opinions of regulatory agencies (e.g., European Medicines Agency and Food and Drug Administration) about risks of incretin-based therapies are yet controversial, and there are many open questions in particular on cancer and cardiovascular effects. Thus, it is important to continue to monitor closely the use of these drugs in clinical practice to improve the knowledge on their long-term safety and their place in diabetes therapy

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes therapy--focus on alogliptin.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a complex and progressive disease that is showing an apparently unstoppable increase worldwide. Although there is general agreement on the first-line use of metformin in most patients with type 2 diabetes, the ideal drug sequence after metformin failure is an area of increasing uncertainty. New treatment strategies target pancreatic islet dysfunction, in particular gut-derived incretin hormones. Inhibition of the enzyme dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) slows degradation of endogenous glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and thereby enhances and prolongs the action of the endogenous incretin hormones. The five available DPP-4 inhibitors, also known as ‘gliptins’ (sitagliptin, vildagliptin, saxagliptin, linagliptin, alogliptin), are small molecules used orally with similar overall clinical efficacy and safety profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes. The main differences between the five gliptins on the market include: potency, target selectivity, oral bioavailability, long or short half-life, high or low binding to plasma proteins, metabolism, presence of active or inactive metabolites, excretion routes, dosage adjustment for renal and liver insufficiency, and potential drug–drug interactions. On average, treatment with gliptins is expected to produce a mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) decrease of 0.5%–0.8%, with about 40% of diabetic subjects at target for the HbA(1c) goal <7%. There are very few studies comparing DPP-4 inhibitors. Alogliptin as monotherapy or added to metformin, pioglitazone, glibenclamide, voglibose, or insulin therapy significantly improves glycemic control compared with placebo in adult or elderly patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes. In the EXAMINE trial, alogliptin is being compared with placebo on cardiovascular outcomes in approximately 5,400 patients with type 2 diabetes. In clinical studies, DPP-4 inhibitors were generally safe and well tolerated. However, there are limited data on their tolerability, due to their relatively recent marketing approval. Alogliptin will be used most when avoidance of hypoglycemic events is paramount, such as in patients with congestive heart failure, renal failure, and liver disease, and in the elderly