使用品牌氟西汀和非专利氟西汀的患者的自杀相关风险:在台湾进行的倾向得分匹配新用户设计。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY BMC Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-11-22 DOI:10.1186/s12888-024-06293-y
Cong-Wei Zheng, Yu-Chieh Huang, Yuan-Liang Wen, Hui-Wen Yang, Sheng-Yin To, Li-Ting Kao
{"title":"使用品牌氟西汀和非专利氟西汀的患者的自杀相关风险:在台湾进行的倾向得分匹配新用户设计。","authors":"Cong-Wei Zheng, Yu-Chieh Huang, Yuan-Liang Wen, Hui-Wen Yang, Sheng-Yin To, Li-Ting Kao","doi":"10.1186/s12888-024-06293-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To date, the clinical equivalence between branded and generic medications remains debate and may sometimes be a reason why psychiatrists are hesitant to prescribe generic medications. Depression is recognized to exacerbate suicide risk globally and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, such as fluoxetine are common treatment options. Therefore, this study aimed to explores differences in suicidal risks between users of branded and generic fluoxetine in Taiwan.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cohort study used Taiwan Longitudinal Health Insurance Database, encompassing 2 million individuals covered by National Health Insurance (NHI) program. The full cohort consisted of 32,298 fluoxetine new users. Then, 7,380 branded and 7,380 propensity score matched (PSM) generic fluoxetine new users were identified. The study further utilized Cox proportional hazards models to assess risk of 5-year suicidal ideation, suicide mortality, and all-cause mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study revealed that the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for suicidal ideation, suicide mortality and all-cause mortality in branded users were 0.766 (95% CI, 0.497 - 1.181), 0.660 (95% CI, 0.447 - 0.975), and 0.942 (95% CI, 0.849 - 1.045), respectively, when compared with matched generic fluoxetine users. Stratified and sensitivity analyses showed the lower risk of suicide mortality in specific subgroups, such as male (adjusted HRs = 0.536, 95% CI = 0.306-0.939) and young branded users (adjusted HRs = 0.549, 95% CI = 0.334-0.904).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study observed trends in the prevention effects of suicide-related risks. However, only suicide mortality was statistically significant, especially in males and those aged < 40 years. These insights may assist clinicians and policymakers in decision-making.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>NA (This study is a cohort study utilizing the national health insurance database, not a clinical trial).</p>","PeriodicalId":9029,"journal":{"name":"BMC Psychiatry","volume":"24 1","pages":"844"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11583744/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Suicide-related risk among patients using branded and generic fluoxetine: a propensity score-matched, new-user design in Taiwan.\",\"authors\":\"Cong-Wei Zheng, Yu-Chieh Huang, Yuan-Liang Wen, Hui-Wen Yang, Sheng-Yin To, Li-Ting Kao\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12888-024-06293-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To date, the clinical equivalence between branded and generic medications remains debate and may sometimes be a reason why psychiatrists are hesitant to prescribe generic medications. Depression is recognized to exacerbate suicide risk globally and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, such as fluoxetine are common treatment options. Therefore, this study aimed to explores differences in suicidal risks between users of branded and generic fluoxetine in Taiwan.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cohort study used Taiwan Longitudinal Health Insurance Database, encompassing 2 million individuals covered by National Health Insurance (NHI) program. The full cohort consisted of 32,298 fluoxetine new users. Then, 7,380 branded and 7,380 propensity score matched (PSM) generic fluoxetine new users were identified. The study further utilized Cox proportional hazards models to assess risk of 5-year suicidal ideation, suicide mortality, and all-cause mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study revealed that the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for suicidal ideation, suicide mortality and all-cause mortality in branded users were 0.766 (95% CI, 0.497 - 1.181), 0.660 (95% CI, 0.447 - 0.975), and 0.942 (95% CI, 0.849 - 1.045), respectively, when compared with matched generic fluoxetine users. Stratified and sensitivity analyses showed the lower risk of suicide mortality in specific subgroups, such as male (adjusted HRs = 0.536, 95% CI = 0.306-0.939) and young branded users (adjusted HRs = 0.549, 95% CI = 0.334-0.904).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study observed trends in the prevention effects of suicide-related risks. However, only suicide mortality was statistically significant, especially in males and those aged < 40 years. These insights may assist clinicians and policymakers in decision-making.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>NA (This study is a cohort study utilizing the national health insurance database, not a clinical trial).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9029,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"844\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11583744/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-024-06293-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-024-06293-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:迄今为止,品牌药和非专利药之间的临床等效性仍存在争议,有时这可能是精神科医生不愿开具非专利药处方的原因。抑郁症被认为会在全球范围内加剧自杀风险,而选择性血清素再摄取抑制剂(如氟西汀)是常见的治疗选择。因此,本研究旨在探讨台湾使用品牌和非专利氟西汀的患者自杀风险的差异:这项队列研究使用了台湾纵向健康保险数据库,该数据库涵盖了参加国民健康保险(NHI)计划的 200 万人。整个队列包括 32,298 名氟西汀新用户。然后,又确定了 7380 名品牌氟西汀新用户和 7380 名倾向得分匹配(PSM)的非专利氟西汀新用户。研究进一步利用考克斯比例危险模型评估了5年自杀意念、自杀死亡率和全因死亡率的风险:研究显示,与匹配的普通氟西汀使用者相比,品牌使用者的自杀意念、自杀死亡率和全因死亡率的调整危险比(HRs)分别为 0.766(95% CI,0.497 - 1.181)、0.660(95% CI,0.447 - 0.975)和 0.942(95% CI,0.849 - 1.045)。分层和敏感性分析表明,特定亚组的自杀死亡风险较低,如男性(调整后HRs = 0.536,95% CI = 0.306-0.939)和年轻的品牌使用者(调整后HRs = 0.549,95% CI = 0.334-0.904):本研究观察到了预防自杀相关风险的效果趋势。结论:本研究观察到了预防自杀相关风险的效果趋势,但只有自杀死亡率具有统计学意义,尤其是在男性和年龄较大的人群中:NA(本研究是一项利用国家健康保险数据库进行的队列研究,并非临床试验)。
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
Suicide-related risk among patients using branded and generic fluoxetine: a propensity score-matched, new-user design in Taiwan.

Background: To date, the clinical equivalence between branded and generic medications remains debate and may sometimes be a reason why psychiatrists are hesitant to prescribe generic medications. Depression is recognized to exacerbate suicide risk globally and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, such as fluoxetine are common treatment options. Therefore, this study aimed to explores differences in suicidal risks between users of branded and generic fluoxetine in Taiwan.

Methods: This cohort study used Taiwan Longitudinal Health Insurance Database, encompassing 2 million individuals covered by National Health Insurance (NHI) program. The full cohort consisted of 32,298 fluoxetine new users. Then, 7,380 branded and 7,380 propensity score matched (PSM) generic fluoxetine new users were identified. The study further utilized Cox proportional hazards models to assess risk of 5-year suicidal ideation, suicide mortality, and all-cause mortality.

Results: The study revealed that the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for suicidal ideation, suicide mortality and all-cause mortality in branded users were 0.766 (95% CI, 0.497 - 1.181), 0.660 (95% CI, 0.447 - 0.975), and 0.942 (95% CI, 0.849 - 1.045), respectively, when compared with matched generic fluoxetine users. Stratified and sensitivity analyses showed the lower risk of suicide mortality in specific subgroups, such as male (adjusted HRs = 0.536, 95% CI = 0.306-0.939) and young branded users (adjusted HRs = 0.549, 95% CI = 0.334-0.904).

Conclusion: This study observed trends in the prevention effects of suicide-related risks. However, only suicide mortality was statistically significant, especially in males and those aged < 40 years. These insights may assist clinicians and policymakers in decision-making.

Clinical trial number: NA (This study is a cohort study utilizing the national health insurance database, not a clinical trial).

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
BMC Psychiatry
BMC Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
716
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Psychiatry is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of psychiatric disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the connectivity of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the modulatory impact of transcranial magnetic stimulation in adolescents with depression: a focus on pain-related cognitive processing. Investigating sex-related differences in brain structure and function in bipolar I disorder using multimodal MRI. Prevalence and factors associated with tramadol use among university students in Ghana: a cross-sectional survey. Remote school instruction in Fall 2020 and psychiatric emergencies among adolescents in Los Angeles County. Abnormal stability of dynamic functional architecture in drug-naïve children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
×
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