Therapie最新文献

The French health insurance data warehouse named SNDS is one of the largest medico-administrative in the world allowing for powerful pharmacoepidemiological studies, based on real-life data collected prospectively. In addition to the absolute necessity of a strong pharmacological rationale, recommendations have been thought to improve the quality of pharmacoepidemiological studies. These guidelines emphasize the importance of an accurate definition of the study population, outcome and exposure, especially for studies performed on medico-administrative databases. Compliance with certain guidelines, particularly those concerning the identification of a specific population or an outcome and the definition of risk periods or exposure periods, may be difficult when performing studies on the SNDS because of its structure and the nature of the data recorded. The objective of this article is to provide advice for the conduct of pharmacoepidemiological studies according to the recommendationswhen using the SNDS, given its specificities. The performing of reliable studies from this rich but complex data warehouse requires the expertise of researchers with deep knowledge both in the SNDS and in pharmacological reasoning.

Le système national des données de santé (SNDS) est l’un des plus grands entrepôts de données médico-administratives au monde, permettant la réalisation d’études pharmaco-épidémiologiques puissantes, basées sur des données de vie réelle recueillies de manière prospective. En plus de l’importance d’un rationnel pharmacologique fort dans la réalisation de toutes études pharmacoépidémiologiques, des recommandations ont été élaborées afin d’améliorer la qualité de ces études. Ces recommandations soulignent l’importance d’une définition précise de la population étudiée, de l’évènement et de l’exposition, lors de la réalisation d’études sur les bases de données médico-adminsitratives. Le respect de certaines recommandations, notamment celles concernant l’identification d’une population ou d’un évènement spécifique ou celles sur la définition des périodes d’exposition ou des périodes à risque, peut être difficile lors de la réalisation d’études sur le SNDS en raison de sa structure et de la nature des données enregistrées. L’objectif de cet article est d’aider à l’application de ces recommandations lors de la réalisation d’études pharmacoépidémiologiques sur le SNDS en prenant en compte ses spécificités. La réalisation d’études robustes à partir de cette source de données riche mais complexe implique de combiner l’expertise de chercheurs ayant une connaissance approfondie à la fois de la structuration du SNDS et du raisonnement pharmacologique.

Objectives

Alprazolam, a high-potency and short-acting anxiolytic benzodiazepine, is one of the most misused benzodiazepines in France. In the context of various reports on alprazolam misuse during the COVID-19 pandemic, the objective of this study was to assess alprazolam abuse potential by analyzing French addictovigilance and international data.

Methods

Data collected from 2011 to 2020 using the following epidemiological tools of the French Addictovigilance Network were analyzed: spontaneous reports (SRs), OPPIDUM (addiction care center data), OSIAP (falsified prescriptions), DRAMES (substance-related deaths), and chemical submission surveys. Moreover, the VigiBase™ database was analyzed to evaluate alprazolam abuse liability worldwide.

Results

During the study period, 675 SRs concerning alprazolam misuse were recorded (sex ratio: ̴1; median age: 39 years). The desired effects were intensification of the therapeutic anxiolytic effect, euphoric effect, and management of substance withdrawal. Alprazolam was the third and first benzodiazepine listed in OPPIDUM and OSIAP surveys. Analysis of the SR and OPPIDUM data showed a recent increase in the alprazolam-opioid combination. In DRAMES data, alprazolam was directly linked to 11 deaths (associated with opioids in 10/11). VigiBase™ data analysis highlighted that France was the third country with the most cases of alprazolam misuse. The disproportionality analysis showed that in France, alprazolam was associated with higher risk of misuse and dependence compared with other benzodiazepines: reporting odds ratio = 1.43, (95% CI: 1.04–1.95) and = 1.97 (95% CI:1.50–2.59), respectively.

Conclusions

This study highlighted an increase in various signals of alprazolam abuse in France, and an increased use of the alprazolam-opioid combination that was also linked to most of the recorded alprazolam-linked deaths. These signals have been reported also in the international literature, and should be thoroughly investigated.

Background

Baclofen is widely used for spastic disorders and, most recently, for addictive disorders. The first signals of baclofen abuse occurred in the last decade. This study aims to assess the motives, diversion sources, and routes of administration associated with the non-medical use of baclofen and examine health problems related to the non-medical use of baclofen.

Methods

Spontaneous reports of baclofen abuse reported to the addictovigilance centre of East France were analysed. A literature search was conducted using PubMed®, Web of Sciences®, and Google Scholar® databases. Both investigations were performed in February 2021 without a time limit.

Results

Forty-six cases were analysed (33 from the literature review and 13 from the addictovigilance base). Baclofen's non-medical use mainly affected male subjects with addictive history, but issues of primary abuse in subjects without any substance abuse history were also observed. Euphoria search was the most common reason for misuse. The route of administration included oral, snorting, and sublingual use. Some cases involving illegal sources were also observed. Most patients misusing baclofen presented severe complications, mainly represented by neurological and respiratory disturbances. Physical and psychological dependence on baclofen was observed in three persons.

Conclusions

Although baclofen abuse remains relatively infrequent or (most likely) underestimated, this study helped confirm baclofen's intrinsic abuse potential and make visible the baclofen-abuse-related health visible harms. Careful consideration and benefit-risk analysis should be employed when prescribing baclofen, and emergency departments should be aware of baclofen dangers in abuse situations.

Introduction

The evaluation of clinical trial (CT) safety is the main task of CT vigilance units. In addition to the management of adverse events, the units must review the literature to identify information that may impact the benefit-risk assessment of studies. In this survey, we investigated the literature monitoring (LM) activity of French Institutional Vigilance Units (IVU) from the working group “REflexion sur la VIgilance et la SEcurite des essais cliniques” (REVISE).

Material and methods

We sent a questionnaire of 26 questions, divided into four themes, to the 60 IVU: (1) Presentation of the IVU and the LM activity; (2) Used sources, queries and criteria for selecting articles; (3) Valuation of the LM and (4) Practical organisation.

Results

Of the 27 IVU that responded to the questionnaire, 85% of them carried out LM. This was mainly provided by medical staff to improve general knowledge (83%), to detect Adverse Reactions (AR) not listed in the reference documents (70%) and to detect new safety information (61%). Due to lack of time, staff, available recommendations and sources, only 21% of IVU conducted LM for all CT. On average, units reported four sources: ANSM information (96%), PubMed database (83%), EMA alerts (57%) and the subscription to APM international (48%). The LM had an impact on the CT of 57% of the IVU such as changing the conditions of a study (39%) or suspending a study (22%).

Discussion/Conclusion

LM is an important but time-consuming activity with heterogeneous practices. According to the results of this survey, we proposed seven ways to improve this practice: (1) Target the highest risk CT; (2) Refine the PubMed queries; (3) Use other tools; (4) Create a decision flowchart for the selection of PubMed articles; (5) Improve training; (6) Value the activity and (7) Outsource the activity.