Marta Monreal‐Di Bello, Diana González‐Bermejo, Belén Castillo‐Cano, Alfonso Rodriguez‐Pascual, Dolores Montero‐Corominas
{"title":"监管干预对西班牙醋酸乌利司他 5 毫克(Esmya)使用的影响:间断时间序列分析","authors":"Marta Monreal‐Di Bello, Diana González‐Bermejo, Belén Castillo‐Cano, Alfonso Rodriguez‐Pascual, Dolores Montero‐Corominas","doi":"10.1002/pds.70004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeSince late 2017, the use of ulipristal acetate 5 mg (UPA; Proprietary name: Esmya) has been under review in the European Union, due to an emerging hepatic risk. In February 2018 and in July 2018, the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices and the marketing authorization holder put two risk minimization measures (RMM) in place, in order to inform about new safety information and to mitigate this risk. This study aims to assess RMM effectiveness in Spain, by performing an interrupted time‐series (ITS) analyses, between 2014 and 2019.MethodTwo quasi‐experimental ITS analyses to examine the use of UPA before and after the RMM release were performed: (a) an ecological study using aggregated data from a drug consumption database; and (b) a study using primary healthcare data gathered from electronic clinical records.ResultsRegulatory interventions were associated with an immediate and significant decrease level of DID (the number of DDD dispensed per 100 000 inhabitants and day) and incidence. The DID was 70% less than expected 12 months after the interventions. This value was 59% for the incidence. However, a change in the slope was not observed and the use started rising again in the last segment of the study period.ConclusionDespite RMM had an immediate strong impact on UPA use, the last segment upward trend in the long‐term might have been affected by the lack of comparable therapeutic alternatives. Further studies should be performed to confirm the increase trend observed and analyze subsequent measures and additional data.","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"18 1","pages":"e70004"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Regulatory Interventions on Ulipristal Acetate 5 mg (Esmya) Use in Spain: An Interrupted Time‐Series Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Marta Monreal‐Di Bello, Diana González‐Bermejo, Belén Castillo‐Cano, Alfonso Rodriguez‐Pascual, Dolores Montero‐Corominas\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pds.70004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeSince late 2017, the use of ulipristal acetate 5 mg (UPA; Proprietary name: Esmya) has been under review in the European Union, due to an emerging hepatic risk. In February 2018 and in July 2018, the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices and the marketing authorization holder put two risk minimization measures (RMM) in place, in order to inform about new safety information and to mitigate this risk. This study aims to assess RMM effectiveness in Spain, by performing an interrupted time‐series (ITS) analyses, between 2014 and 2019.MethodTwo quasi‐experimental ITS analyses to examine the use of UPA before and after the RMM release were performed: (a) an ecological study using aggregated data from a drug consumption database; and (b) a study using primary healthcare data gathered from electronic clinical records.ResultsRegulatory interventions were associated with an immediate and significant decrease level of DID (the number of DDD dispensed per 100 000 inhabitants and day) and incidence. The DID was 70% less than expected 12 months after the interventions. This value was 59% for the incidence. However, a change in the slope was not observed and the use started rising again in the last segment of the study period.ConclusionDespite RMM had an immediate strong impact on UPA use, the last segment upward trend in the long‐term might have been affected by the lack of comparable therapeutic alternatives. Further studies should be performed to confirm the increase trend observed and analyze subsequent measures and additional data.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"e70004\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70004\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70004","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of Regulatory Interventions on Ulipristal Acetate 5 mg (Esmya) Use in Spain: An Interrupted Time‐Series Analysis
PurposeSince late 2017, the use of ulipristal acetate 5 mg (UPA; Proprietary name: Esmya) has been under review in the European Union, due to an emerging hepatic risk. In February 2018 and in July 2018, the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices and the marketing authorization holder put two risk minimization measures (RMM) in place, in order to inform about new safety information and to mitigate this risk. This study aims to assess RMM effectiveness in Spain, by performing an interrupted time‐series (ITS) analyses, between 2014 and 2019.MethodTwo quasi‐experimental ITS analyses to examine the use of UPA before and after the RMM release were performed: (a) an ecological study using aggregated data from a drug consumption database; and (b) a study using primary healthcare data gathered from electronic clinical records.ResultsRegulatory interventions were associated with an immediate and significant decrease level of DID (the number of DDD dispensed per 100 000 inhabitants and day) and incidence. The DID was 70% less than expected 12 months after the interventions. This value was 59% for the incidence. However, a change in the slope was not observed and the use started rising again in the last segment of the study period.ConclusionDespite RMM had an immediate strong impact on UPA use, the last segment upward trend in the long‐term might have been affected by the lack of comparable therapeutic alternatives. Further studies should be performed to confirm the increase trend observed and analyze subsequent measures and additional data.
期刊介绍:
The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report.
Particular areas of interest include:
design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology;
comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world;
methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology;
assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy;
patterns of drug utilization;
relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines;
evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.