Pharmaceutical Medicine最新文献

Antiseizure medications can cause serious adverse reactions and have deleterious drug interactions that often complicate the clinical management of patients. When the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) wants to alert healthcare providers and patients about the risk of potentially serious or fatal drug reactions, the FDA requires the manufacturers of these medications to format these warnings within a "black-box" border, and prominently display this box on the first section of the package insert; such warnings are called "black-box warnings (BBWs)". The BBW is a way for the FDA to urge physicians to evaluate patients more rigorously and carefully weigh the risks and benefits, before prescribing medication that has the potential to cause serious adverse reactions, and to formulate a plan for close monitoring during therapy. The FDA BBW provides the extra layer of safety but many healthcare providers fail to comply with these warnings. Currently, there are 26 FDA-approved antiseizure medications in the US market, 38% of which have received BBWs, and most of the antiseizure medications with BBWs are older-generation drugs. Some antiseizure medications have multiple BBWs; for example, valproic acid has three BBWs including hepatotoxicity, fetal risk, and pancreatitis, carbamazepine has BBWs of serious skin and hematological reactions, and felbamate also has two BBWs including hepatic failure and aplastic anemia. The purpose of this review is to provide insight into each BBW received by antiseizure medications and discuss the FDA recommendations for evaluating the drug benefit/risk, and for monitoring parameters before the initiation of and during treatment.

Monoclonal antibodies are an effective and growing class of pharmaceuticals for the treatment and prevention of a broad range of non-communicable and infectious diseases; however, most low- and middle-income countries have limited access to these innovative products. Many factors contribute to the global inequity of access to these products; however, in this report, we focus on clinical and regulatory complexities as further highlighted by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Despite a higher prevalence of many diseases in low- and middle-income countries, only 12% of clinical trials for monoclonal antibodies are conducted in these countries. Additionally, only a fraction of the available monoclonal antibodies in the USA and European Union are authorized for use in low- and middle-income countries. Through learnings from desk research and global symposia with international partners, we present recommendations to harmonize processes and facilitate regional and international collaborations for more rapid approval of fit-for-purpose innovative monoclonal antibodies and biosimilars in low- and middle-income countries.

Clinical experts are embracing the use of social media platforms for medical education, outreach, data sharing, and content dissemination within the medical community. In this interview, Dr. Khoi Than, a specialist in minimally invasive spinal surgery explains his role as a content creator and curator on social media platforms and describes how he uses surgical videos and opinion polls to educate and explore decision making behind surgical interventions. Dr. Than shares neurosurgery and spinal surgery techniques in the USA and internationally with trainees using interactivity and images to engage his followers. He believes that the ability to share operative techniques and research findings widely and instantly at the click of a button offers substantial benefits for patients. In this interview, Dr. Than reflects on how he engages with peers, students, and patients, how digital opinion leaders are making research more accessible, how social media has affected virtual conferences, and what advantages digital opinion leaders have over traditional key opinion leaders.

Aggregate safety assessment involves evaluation of the totality of safety data to characterize the emerging safety profile of a product. The Drug Information Association-American Statistical Association Interdisciplinary Safety Evaluation scientific working group recently published an approach to developing an Aggregate Safety Assessment Plan (ASAP). Creation of an ASAP facilitates a consistent approach to safety data collection and analysis across studies and minimizes important missing data at the time of regulatory submission. A critical aspect of the ASAP is identification of the Safety Topics of Interest (STOI). The STOI, as defined in the ASAP, comprises adverse events (AEs), which have the potential to impact the benefit: risk profile of a product and typically require specialized data collection or analyses. While there are clear benefits to developing an ASAP for a drug development program, multiple concerns may be encountered with implementation. This article uses the examples of two STOIs to demonstrate the benefits and efficiencies gained with implementation of the ASAP in safety planning as well as in optimally characterizing the emerging safety profile of a product.

Multiple components factor into the assessment of combination safety risks when two or more novel individual products are used in combination in clinical trials. These include, but are not limited to, biology, biochemistry, pharmacology, class effects, and preclinical and clinical findings (such as adverse drug reactions, drug target and mechanism of action, target expression, signaling, and drug-drug interactions). This paper presents a science-based methodology framework for the assessment of combination safety risks when two or more investigational products are used in clinical trials. The aim of this methodology framework is to improve prediction of the risks, to enable the appropriate safety risk mitigation and management to be put in place for the combination, and the development of the project combination safety strategy.

Background: Despite the worldwide need for increased access to safe and effective medicines, there is a lack of innovative medicines in many low- to middle-income countries. On the African continent, this is partly due to capacity limitations of National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs). One important approach to address this issue is work sharing and regulatory reliance. Therefore, the aim of this study of regulatory authorities on the African continent was to identify which risk-based approaches are being used as well as their foreseen role in the future.

Methods: The study employed a questionnaire to identify which risk-based models are used for the regulatory approval of medicines and to determine which frameworks are in place to enable a risk-based approach, as well as to provide insight into the future direction for risk-based models. The questionnaire was sent electronically to 26 NRAs in the African Continent.

Results: Twenty-one authorities (80%) completed the questionnaire. Work sharing was the most commonly used model, followed closely by unilaterial reliance, information sharing, and collaborative review. These methods were perceived to be an effective and efficient use of resources, enabling faster medicine availability for patients. The unilateral reliance approach by the authorities included abridged (85%), verification (70%) and recognition (50%) models for a range of products. However, challenges included a lack of guidelines to undertake a reliance review together with resource constraints, while access to assessment reports was the most common barrier to using a unilateral reliance model.

Conclusions: Many authorities in Africa have adopted a risk-based approach to medicines registration and created work sharing, unilateral reliance pathways and regionalisation models to facilitate the availability of medicines. The authorities believe that in future, assessment routes should move from stand-alone reviews to risk-based models. However, this study indicated that there would be challenges to implement this approach in practice, which would include improving resource capacity and the number of expert reviewers as well as implementing electronic tracking systems.

Suicide is a serious and growing public health concern yet randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that inform pharmacologic treatment remain limited. We emphasize the overall need for such trials and review the literature to highlight examples of trials that have aimed to study patients at elevated risk of suicide. We discuss key examples of existing psychotropic medication trials as well as psychotherapy intervention studies that can yield important design insights. Medications that have been studied in individuals at risk for suicide include lithium, clozapine, zolpidem, prazosin, ketamine, esketamine, and aripiprazole. While important design challenges should be considered-RCTs to study suicide are feasible and much needed. Issues such as overall trial design, patient-selection criteria, and the scales/tools used to assess suicidality are discussed.

The approach to patient engagement (PE) in drug development has changed rapidly due to many factors, including the complexity of innovative drugs and the need to demonstrate outcomes of relevance to patients, the desire to show 'value add' of PE, and the pandemic-related changes to how clinical trials are run, e.g., decentralised studies. In parallel, there have been changes in technology-assisted ways of running clinical trials, capturing patient health outcomes and preferences, an increasing societal demand for diversity and inclusion, and efforts to improve clinical trial efficiency, transparency, and accountability. Organisations are beginning to monitor PE activities and outcomes more effectively to learn and inform future PE strategies. As a result, these factors are facilitating the incorporation of patients' lived experience, preferences and needs into the design and running of clinical trials more than ever before. In this paper, the authors reflect upon these last few years, the emerging trends and their drivers, and where we may expect PE in clinical research to progress in the near future.