Search

Background: Relevant safety signals in the EU are regularly communicated in so-called 'Direct Healthcare Professional Communications' (DHPCs) or European Medicines Agency (EMA) press releases. Trends of a decrease in the use of rosiglitazone following regulatory safety warnings have been described in the US. In the EU, however, relatively little is known about dispensing patterns following DHPCs or other safety signals such as EMA press releases.Objective: The objective of this study was to analyse trends in dispensing patterns of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone following DHPCs and EMA press releases in the EU member state, the Netherlands.Methods: Data for this study were obtained from the PHARMO Record Linking System, which includes drug dispensing records from community pharmacies of approximately 2.5 million individuals in the Netherlands. Over the period 1998-2008 an auto-regressive, integrated, moving average model (ARIMA) was fitted. The DHPC letters or EMA press releases were used as determinants. Adjustments were made for publication of certain literature. Stratification was performed for dispensings prescribed by general practitioners (GPs) and those prescribed by specialists.Results: For rosiglitazone, four EMA press releases and two DHPCs were issued; for pioglitazone, one DHPC was issued. The number of rosiglitazone dispensings prescribed by GPs decreased significantly after publication of DHPCs and EMA press releases concerning the risk of macular oedema and risk of fractures (both p-values 0.001). The number of rosiglitazone dispensings decreased statistically significantly after publication of EMA press releases 2 and 3 concerning cardiovascular risks but not for EMA press release 4. Adjustment for certain publications in the literature reduced the effect of communicated safety issues on the proportion of dispensings.Conclusions: Although it is difficult to disentangle the effect of DHPCs and EMA press releases from the effect of reports published in the literature, our results suggest that prescribers may react to such safety communications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Isotretinoin is very effective in the treatment of severe acne. However, because of the teratogenic properties of this agent an isotretinoin Pregnancy Prevention Programme (PPP) was implemented in the Netherlands to guarantee that treatment is contraindicated in women of reproductive age unless at least one effective method of contraception is used. Furthermore, the PPP stipulates that isotretinoin treatment should be managed by physicians or specialists experienced in treatment with this drug and that only monthly prescriptions are issued.Objective: To assess compliance with the Dutch isotretinoin PPP in women of reproductive age during the study period of 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2008.Methods: Detailed information on dispensed medication and co-medication was available from the Dutch Foundation of Pharmaceutical Statistics. Four types of outcome were studied: concomitant dispensing of hormonal contraceptive with isotretinoin; the proportion of specialist prescribing of isotretinoin; prescribing of conventional acne therapy prior to isotretinoin initiation; and isotretinoin dispensing exceeding the maximum amount. The use of contraceptives in women aged between 15 and 45 years was defined as concomitant if the period of systemic contraceptive use overlapped the period of isotretinoin dispensing for at least 10 days, or if any dispensing of an intrauterine or intravaginal contraceptive was recorded since the year 2000. Dispensings were separated into those prescribed by either specialists or general practitioners (GPs). The use of antibacterials, antiandrogens or topical agents against acne was checked 4 months prior to an isotretinoin dispensing, and a possible excess of the maximum amount of isotretinoin was defined as prescriptions of more than 100 defined daily doses.Results: During the study period, data were available for 442 Dutch pharmacies encompassing 4881 women of reproductive age using isotretinoin at least once during study period. Among women of reproductive age, the use of isotretinoin increased during the study period. The proportion of isotretinoin initiation with concomitant oral hormonal or intrauterine contraceptives was low (59.3% [95% CI 57.6, 61.0]). Initiation of isotretinoin by a specialist increased the chance for concomitant contraception by 26% (95% CI 6.0, 49.0); in 78.2% (95% CI 76.8, 79.6) of women, isotretinoin was initiated by a specialist. Conventional acne therapy up to 16 months prior to isotretinoin initiation was found in 70% of the women (70.3% [95% CI 66.0, 74.6]). In 1.4% (95% CI 1.0, 1.8) of cases of treatment initiation, the amount of isotretinoin dispensed on one prescription seemed too high.Conclusion: Attention should be paid to improving the implementation of the isotretinoin PPP. Despite clear guidelines and warnings in the product information, our study strongly suggests that concomitant use of isotretinoin and contraceptives is too low. Even though we will have missed non-pharmacological forms of contraception, these results raise doubts about the safe use of isotretinoin in women of reproductive age in the Netherlands. Furthermore, isotretinoin does not seem to be used in cases of severe acne only. Reserving isotretinoin prescribing to specialists may improve adherence to the PPP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]