印度固定剂量复合精神药物的销售和监管状况:一项回顾性纵向研究。

IF 3.3 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2024-08-06 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20523211.2024.2372089
Paul Bogowicz, Aashna Mehta, Shruti Choudhary, Petra Brhlikova, Peter Roderick, Patricia McGettigan, Habib Hasan Farooqui, Aditya Narain Sharma, Allyson M Pollock
{"title":"印度固定剂量复合精神药物的销售和监管状况:一项回顾性纵向研究。","authors":"Paul Bogowicz, Aashna Mehta, Shruti Choudhary, Petra Brhlikova, Peter Roderick, Patricia McGettigan, Habib Hasan Farooqui, Aditya Narain Sharma, Allyson M Pollock","doi":"10.1080/20523211.2024.2372089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is limited evidence to support use of fixed dose combination (FDC) drugs in the treatment of psychiatric disorders. This study aimed to examine the sales and regulatory status of psychotropic FDCs in India, in the context of two government regulatory initiatives.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Official documents were searched to establish an account of the initiatives and measures targeting psychotropic FDCs. This was integrated with private market data (2008 to 2020). Descriptive statistics were used to examine changes in FDC numbers/formulations and sales volumes in standard units (SU) over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Psychotropic FDC sales volumes (percentage market share) increased from 0.8 billion SU (18.4%) in 2008 to 1.4 billion SU (20.1%) in 2020. The numbers (formulations) of FDCs also increased, from 28 (101) in 2008 to 33 (143) in 2020. Unapproved FDCs accounted for 69.3% of psychotropic FDC sales in 2008, decreasing slightly to 60.3% in 2020. Of 21 psychotropic FDCs considered under the regulatory initiatives, three went on to be banned, and two of these remained on the market in 2020.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Unapproved FDCs continue to account for most psychotropic FDC sales, potentially putting the public at risk because their safety and efficacy have not been evaluated.</p>","PeriodicalId":16740,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","volume":"17 1","pages":"2372089"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11573336/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sales and regulatory status of fixed dose combination psychotropic drugs in India: a retrospective longitudinal study.\",\"authors\":\"Paul Bogowicz, Aashna Mehta, Shruti Choudhary, Petra Brhlikova, Peter Roderick, Patricia McGettigan, Habib Hasan Farooqui, Aditya Narain Sharma, Allyson M Pollock\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20523211.2024.2372089\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is limited evidence to support use of fixed dose combination (FDC) drugs in the treatment of psychiatric disorders. This study aimed to examine the sales and regulatory status of psychotropic FDCs in India, in the context of two government regulatory initiatives.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Official documents were searched to establish an account of the initiatives and measures targeting psychotropic FDCs. This was integrated with private market data (2008 to 2020). Descriptive statistics were used to examine changes in FDC numbers/formulations and sales volumes in standard units (SU) over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Psychotropic FDC sales volumes (percentage market share) increased from 0.8 billion SU (18.4%) in 2008 to 1.4 billion SU (20.1%) in 2020. The numbers (formulations) of FDCs also increased, from 28 (101) in 2008 to 33 (143) in 2020. Unapproved FDCs accounted for 69.3% of psychotropic FDC sales in 2008, decreasing slightly to 60.3% in 2020. Of 21 psychotropic FDCs considered under the regulatory initiatives, three went on to be banned, and two of these remained on the market in 2020.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Unapproved FDCs continue to account for most psychotropic FDC sales, potentially putting the public at risk because their safety and efficacy have not been evaluated.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16740,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"2372089\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11573336/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20523211.2024.2372089\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20523211.2024.2372089","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:支持使用固定剂量复方制剂(FDC)治疗精神疾病的证据有限。本研究旨在结合政府的两项监管举措,考察印度精神药物固定剂量复方制剂的销售和监管状况:方法:搜索官方文件,以了解针对精神药物 FDC 的举措和措施。这与私人市场数据(2008 年至 2020 年)相结合。使用描述性统计来研究 FDC 数量/剂型和以标准单位(SU)计算的销售量随时间推移而发生的变化:结果:精神药物 FDC 的销售量(市场份额百分比)从 2008 年的 8 亿 SU(18.4%)增至 2020 年的 14 亿 SU(20.1%)。FDC 的数量(剂型)也从 2008 年的 28 种(101 种)增至 2020 年的 33 种(143 种)。2008 年,未经批准的复方制剂占精神药物复方制剂销售额的 69.3%,2020 年略有下降,为 60.3%。在根据监管举措审议的 21 种精神药物 FDC 中,有 3 种被禁用,其中 2 种在 2020 年仍在市场上销售:结论:未经批准的 FDC 仍占精神药物 FDC 销售的大部分,由于其安全性和有效性尚未得到评估,可能会给公众带来风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Sales and regulatory status of fixed dose combination psychotropic drugs in India: a retrospective longitudinal study.

Background: There is limited evidence to support use of fixed dose combination (FDC) drugs in the treatment of psychiatric disorders. This study aimed to examine the sales and regulatory status of psychotropic FDCs in India, in the context of two government regulatory initiatives.

Methods: Official documents were searched to establish an account of the initiatives and measures targeting psychotropic FDCs. This was integrated with private market data (2008 to 2020). Descriptive statistics were used to examine changes in FDC numbers/formulations and sales volumes in standard units (SU) over time.

Results: Psychotropic FDC sales volumes (percentage market share) increased from 0.8 billion SU (18.4%) in 2008 to 1.4 billion SU (20.1%) in 2020. The numbers (formulations) of FDCs also increased, from 28 (101) in 2008 to 33 (143) in 2020. Unapproved FDCs accounted for 69.3% of psychotropic FDC sales in 2008, decreasing slightly to 60.3% in 2020. Of 21 psychotropic FDCs considered under the regulatory initiatives, three went on to be banned, and two of these remained on the market in 2020.

Conclusions: Unapproved FDCs continue to account for most psychotropic FDC sales, potentially putting the public at risk because their safety and efficacy have not been evaluated.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Health Professions-Pharmacy
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
9.50%
发文量
81
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Assessment of community pharmacists' experiences and perceptions on gabapentin abuse in Jordan: a cross-sectional study. Assessment of knowledge, perceptions, and readiness of healthcare professionals towards clinical pharmacogenomics implementation in Qatar: a mixed-method study. Exploring Jordanian medical students' perceptions and concerns about ChatGPT in medical education: a cross-sectional study. Pharmaceutical multinational corporations (MNCs) and their exit from low and middle income countries (LMICs): analysing the causes and consequences. Prescriber perceptions of the safety and efficacy of unfractionated heparin versus low molecular weight heparin in the acute treatment phase: a qualitative study.
×
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:481959085
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