Alert prescribing of clozapine: a comparison of five drug-drug interaction sources.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety Pub Date : 2024-12-02 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20420986241233842
Jeroen Govaerts, Annelies Verluyten, Filip Bouckaert, Marc A F De Hert, Franciska A M Desplenter
{"title":"Alert prescribing of clozapine: a comparison of five drug-drug interaction sources.","authors":"Jeroen Govaerts, Annelies Verluyten, Filip Bouckaert, Marc A F De Hert, Franciska A M Desplenter","doi":"10.1177/20420986241233842","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Clozapine, an antipsychotic used in the treatment of schizophrenia, is known for its serious side effects. In order to promote patient safety, drug-drug interaction (DDI) databases can be consulted by clinicians. In this study, the degree of consensus between five sources on DDIs with clozapine is determined.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The summary of product characteristics of clozapine, Delphicare interaction database, Stockley's interaction checker, the Lexicomp interaction database, and the interaction database of Clinical Pharmacology are included. By comparing the original categories assigned to interactions with clozapine by the included DDI sources, a degree of consensus between sources is determined. Furthermore, based on the combined information, an evaluation on the severity of each potential interaction is made.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred eighty-three potential DDIs with clozapine are retrieved from the five included sources. A consensus between sources is found in 47.5% (<i>n</i> = 87) of DDIs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study shows major discrepancies between five different sources on DDIs with clozapine. The potential impact of the use of one specific database on patient safety and prescribing behavior could prove to be problematic.</p>","PeriodicalId":23012,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety","volume":"15 ","pages":"20420986241233842"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11613245/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20420986241233842","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Clozapine, an antipsychotic used in the treatment of schizophrenia, is known for its serious side effects. In order to promote patient safety, drug-drug interaction (DDI) databases can be consulted by clinicians. In this study, the degree of consensus between five sources on DDIs with clozapine is determined.

Methods: The summary of product characteristics of clozapine, Delphicare interaction database, Stockley's interaction checker, the Lexicomp interaction database, and the interaction database of Clinical Pharmacology are included. By comparing the original categories assigned to interactions with clozapine by the included DDI sources, a degree of consensus between sources is determined. Furthermore, based on the combined information, an evaluation on the severity of each potential interaction is made.

Results: One hundred eighty-three potential DDIs with clozapine are retrieved from the five included sources. A consensus between sources is found in 47.5% (n = 87) of DDIs.

Conclusion: This study shows major discrepancies between five different sources on DDIs with clozapine. The potential impact of the use of one specific database on patient safety and prescribing behavior could prove to be problematic.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
氯氮平的警示处方:五种药物相互作用来源的比较。
氯氮平,一种用于治疗精神分裂症的抗精神病药物,以其严重的副作用而闻名。为了促进患者安全,临床医生可以查阅药物-药物相互作用(DDI)数据库。在本研究中,确定了五个来源对氯氮平ddi的一致程度。方法:总结氯氮平的产品特点,采用Delphicare相互作用数据库、Stockley相互作用检查器、Lexicomp相互作用数据库和临床药理学相互作用数据库。通过比较纳入的DDI来源分配给氯氮平相互作用的原始类别,确定了来源之间的共识程度。在此基础上,对各潜在相互作用的严重程度进行了评价。结果:从5个纳入的来源中检索到含有氯氮平的潜在ddi 183例。47.5% (n = 87)的ddi的来源一致。结论:本研究显示了氯氮平对ddi的5种不同来源之间的主要差异。使用一个特定数据库对患者安全和处方行为的潜在影响可能被证明是有问题的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety
Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety Medicine-Pharmacology (medical)
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
4.50%
发文量
31
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies pertaining to the safe use of drugs in patients. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at clinicians and researchers in drug safety, providing a forum in print and online for publishing the highest quality articles in this area. The editors welcome articles of current interest on research across all areas of drug safety, including therapeutic drug monitoring, pharmacoepidemiology, adverse drug reactions, drug interactions, pharmacokinetics, pharmacovigilance, medication/prescribing errors, risk management, ethics and regulation.
期刊最新文献
Medication errors and associated serious outcomes in COVID-19 antivirals: a real-world study based on FDA Adverse Event Reporting System database. Complex chronic adverse events following immunization: a systemic critique and reform proposal for vaccine pharmacovigilance. Orchestrating generative AI in pharmacovigilance: predicting and preempting the unpredictable. Transformer-based models for ADR detection: cross-drug validation and benchmarking against large language models. Differential risk of adverse drug reactions with baricitinib across age groups: integrating real-world pharmacovigilance and genetic causal inference.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1