Search

Many adverse effects of medicines only become known after approval, prompting regulatory agencies to issue post-market safety advisories to support safer care. Our team evaluated advisories issued by national regulators in Australia, Canada, Denmark, the United Kingdom, and the United States from 2007 to 2016 inclusive, comparing regulators' decisions to warn, effects on prescribing, doctors' awareness and responses to warnings, relevant regulatory policies, and specific case studies.Based mainly on our research program and a narrative review, this commentary describes how often regulators issue safety advisories and effects on clinical practice. We found extensive differences in decisions to warn, timing and content of warnings. Monitoring advice is often inadequate. The most systematic estimate suggests an average reduction in prescribing of around 6% compared with settings with no advisory. Interviews with doctors suggest limited awareness, uptake, and at times belief in these warnings.Post-market safety advisories are an important intervention aiming to improve prescribing and use of medicines. However, differing warnings mean that some patients may be exposed to riskier prescribing than others. Better integration of safety information into clinical practice is needed, as well as improved transparency, independence, and public engagement in regulatory decision-making.

Approximately 40% of randomized controlled trials are not published, leading to publication bias and less informed clinical decision-making. Qualitative interviews were conducted to understand whether and how industry sponsors of clinical trials of drugs and biologics in Canada influence decisions to report trial results.Participants eligible for an interview included clinical trial investigators and research coordinators with experience in drug research, research ethics board members with at least 1 year of experience in ethical review of trials, research administrators with knowledge of dissemination of clinical trial findings or relations with trial sponsors, and trial participants who had taken part in a drug trial as an adult in the 5 years before their interview. Semi-structured interviews were held in person or by telephone between March 2019 and April 2021 with participants in Alberta, British Columbia, and Ontario, Canada. Qualitative analysis included coding of interview transcripts and identification of key themes.Interviews were conducted with 34 participants, including 17 clinical trial investigators, 1 clinical research coordinator, 3 research administrators, 3 research ethics board members, and 10 clinical trial participants. Participants involved in the conduct, administration, or ethical review of trials represented a range of medical disciplines. Interview participant accounts indicated that in some cases, industry sponsors influence whether results are reported. A core theme was that companies have a weaker incentive to publish trials with unfavorable findings and trials for products that they have decided not to develop further. Companies may influence reporting in various ways, including stopping trials early and not reporting results of stopped trials, owning and controlling access to data, and negotiating clinical trial agreements in multicenter trials that do not fully protect the ability of investigators to publish. Internal company trials represent an additional source of unpublished trials. More broadly, the research system creates a dependency on funding from industry sponsors that may weaken the ability of researchers and research institutions to negotiate terms with industry sponsors that would fully protect publication rights.Interviews with trial investigators and others connected to trial research indicate that in some cases, industry sponsors of clinical trial research in Canada influence whether results are reported. Policies aiming to bring about full reporting of trials could benefit from considering the commercial incentives of companies and the ways in which industry sponsors may influence clinical trial reporting. Future research could examine the generalizability of these findings to other jurisdictions.

This study aims to understand factors contributing to nonpublication and publication bias in clinical trials in Canada.Qualitative interviews were conducted between March 2019 and April 2021 with 34 participants from the Canadian provinces of Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario, including 17 clinical trial investigators, 1 clinical research coordinator, 3 research administrators, 3 research ethics board members and 10 clinical trial participants. We conducted a thematic analysis involving coding of interview transcripts and memo-writing to identify key themes.Several factors contribute to nonpublication and publication bias in clinical trial research. A core theme was that reporting practices are shaped by incentives within the research system taht favour publication of positive over negative trials. Investigators are discouraged from reporting by experiences or perceptions of difficulty in publishing negative findings but rewarded for publishing positive findings in various ways. Trial investigators more strongly associated positive clinical trials than negative trials with opportunities for industry and nonindustry funding and with academic promotion, bonuses and recognition. Research institutions and ethics boards tended to lack well-resourced, proactive policies and practices to ensure trial findings are reported in registries or journals.Clinical trial reporting practices in Canada are shaped by incentives favouring reporting of positive over negative trials, such as funding opportunities and academic promotion, bonuses and recognition. Research institutions could help change incentives by adopting performance metrics that emphasize full reporting of results in journals or registries.

Oral anticoagulants (OACs) are high-priority medications, frequently used with clinically important benefit and serious harm. Our objective was to compare the safety and effectiveness of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus warfarin in a population where anticoagulation management and DOACs were readily available. A retrospective cohort study of all adults living in British Columbia with a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation and a first prescription for an OAC was conducted. Co-primary outcomes were ischemic stroke and systemic embolism, and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included a net clinical outcome composite and analysis of discontinuation, switching, and key subgroups. We estimated the effects of treatment using time-to-event models with high-dimensional propensity score adjustment to control confounding. After adjustment for prescribing bias, a cohort (n = 20,113, 43.8% female, mean age 72.4 years) with a mean follow-up of 18.1 months showed that patients taking warfarin tended to be poorer, sicker, and less likely to have a cardiologist prescriber. Outcome event rates were not significantly different for DOACs compared to warfarin [adjusted rate ratio of 1.15 (0.91, 1.46) for systemic embolism, 0.94 (0.82, 1.08) for major bleeding, and 0.98 (0.90, 1.06) for net clinical outcome]. Only the effect of age on net clinical outcome met our strict criteria for predicting which group might be superior. Switch of drug class was associated with increased risk of events (p < 0.003). In this population, we found no difference in important clinical outcomes between warfarin and DOACs. Switching compared to not switching was associated with harm.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other major regulators regularly issue safety advisories about licensed drugs with new adverse effects that have been documented through observational studies, clinical trials, and spontaneously reported adverse drug events. To assess the possible effects of a representative group of FDA Drug Safety Communications on the reporting of the specific adverse effect featured in the advisory on new cases reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). We examined 16 FDA Drug Safety Communications issued from 2010 to 2015 that had not previously been the focus of advisories from regulators in the UK, Canada, or Australia. We compared the reports of the adverse effect in the 8 calendar quarters preceding the advisory and in the 4 quarters following. We measured change in reporting frequency by calculating the event reporting odds ratio (ROR) for the post-warning compared to the pre-warning periods. We defined a credible association of the advisory with increased reporting as a ROR ≥ 2.0 and p value of

Background The College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia introduced opioid prescribing standards and guidelines in mid-2016 in British Columbia. We evaluated impacts of the standards and guidelines on health outcomes. Methods We conducted a longitudinal study with repeated measures using administrative data from December 2013 to March 2017. The study included BC patients with long-term use of prescription opioids. Those with a history of long-term care, palliative care or cancer were excluded. Patients were followed for a 12-month prepolicy period and 10-month postpolicy period and compared with historical controls. We estimated changes in level (sudden changes) and monthly trend (gradual changes) of rates of opioid overdose hospital admission, and secondary outcomes of all-cause hospital admission, all-cause emergency department visits, opioid overdose mortality and all-cause mortality. Results The study included 68 113 patients in the main cohort and 68 429 historical controls. We did not find significant changes to opioid overdose hospital admissions in level (adjusted rate ratio [RR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-1.54) or in trend (adjusted RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91-1.10). All-cause hospital admissions declined in level but may have increased in trend, suggesting that a temporary decrease in hospital admissions may have occurred. We found no significant changes in all-cause emergency department visits, opioid overdose mortality or all-cause mortality. Interpretation Among patients with a history of long-term prescription opioid use, the regulatory prescribing standards and guidelines were not associated with changes in opioid overdose hospital admissions, all-cause emergency department visits, opioid overdose mortality or all-cause mortality, or with a sustained reduction in all-cause hospital admissions, over a 10-month period after they were introduced. Future research should investigate whether opioid prescribing standards or guidelines are associated with use of nonopioid analgesic medications or nonpharmacologic treatments.

BACKGROUND: The College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia introduced opioid prescribing standards and guidelines in mid-2016 in British Columbia. We evaluated impacts of the standards and guidelines on health outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal study with repeated measures using administrative data from December 2013 to March 2017. The study included BC patients with long-term use of prescription opioids. Those with a history of long-term care, palliative care or cancer were excluded. Patients were followed for a 12-month prepolicy period and 10-month postpolicy period and compared with historical controls. We estimated changes in level (sudden changes) and monthly trend (gradual changes) of rates of opioid overdose hospital admission, and secondary outcomes of all-cause hospital admission, all-cause emergency department visits, opioid overdose mortality and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: The study included 68 113 patients in the main cohort and 68 429 historical controls. We did not find significant changes to opioid overdose hospital admissions in level (adjusted rate ratio [RR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45–1.54) or in trend (adjusted RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91–1.10). All-cause hospital admissions declined in level but may have increased in trend, suggesting that a temporary decrease in hospital admissions may have occurred. We found no significant changes in all-cause emergency department visits, opioid overdose mortality or all-cause mortality. INTERPRETATION: Among patients with a history of long-term prescription opioid use, the regulatory prescribing standards and guidelines were not associated with changes in opioid overdose hospital admissions, all-cause emergency department visits, opioid overdose mortality or all-cause mortality, or with a sustained reduction in all-cause hospital admissions, over a 10-month period after they were introduced. Future research should investigate whether opioid prescribing standards or guidelines are associated with use of nonopioid analgesic medications or nonpharmacologic treatments.

ObjectivesTramadol is a widely prescribed analgesic that influences both opioid and monoamine neurotransmission. While seizures have been reported with its use, the risk in clinical practice has not been well characterised. We examined risk of seizure with tramadol relative to codeine, a comparable opioid analgesic.DesignRetrospective nested case-control study. For each case, we identified up to 10 controls matched on age, sex, US state of residence and date of cohort entry (±365 days). We calculated ORs to determine the association between seizure and exposure to tramadol, codeine (≥15 mg), both or neither, in the preceding 30 days.SettingCohort of patients, who had continuous health coverage and resided in the same state for≥3 years, identified from linked administrative health data in US MarketScan databases from 2009 to 2012.ParticipantsWe identified 96 753 patients with seizure and 888 540 matched controls.Primary and secondary outcome measuresIn the primary analysis, we defined cases using a broad definition of seizure (based on either an outpatient physician claim for seizure disorder or a seizure-related emergency department visit or hospitalisation). In a secondary analysis, we used a more specific definition of seizure restricted to a hospital visit with a principal diagnosis of seizure.ResultsIn the primary analysis, we found no association between risk of seizure and exposure to tramadol compared with codeine (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.15). However, in the secondary analysis (using a more specific definition of seizure), this association was statistically significant (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.79).ConclusionsTramadol was not associated with an increased risk of seizure defined by inpatient and outpatient diagnoses. However, this finding was sensitive to the outcome definition used and requires further study.

It has been anecdotally reported that nocturnal leg cramps in pregnant women are worse in summer. We analyzed population-level data to determine whether the symptom burden of nocturnal leg cramps is seasonal in the general population.We examined time-series data for 2 independent measures of the symptom burden of leg cramps: (a) new quinine prescriptions (reflecting new or escalating treatment of leg cramps) from December 2001 to October 2007 among adults aged 50 years and older, which were obtained from linked health care databases that contain the prescribing information for the 4.2 million residents of British Columbia, Canada; and (b) the Internet search volume from February 2004 to March 2012 for the term "leg cramps" (reflecting public interest), which we obtained from Google Trends data and geographically limited to the United States and Australia. We assessed seasonality by determining how well a least-squares sinusoidal model predicted variability in the outcomes.New quinine prescriptions and Internet searches related to leg cramps were both seasonal, with highs in mid-summer and lows in mid-winter, and a peak-to-peak variability that was about two-thirds of the mean. Seasonality accounted for 88% of the observed monthly variability in new quinine prescriptions (p0.001) and 70% of the observed variability in Internet searches related to leg cramps (p0.001).New quinine prescriptions and Internet searches related to leg cramps were seasonal and roughly doubled between the winter lows and summer highs. Why a disorder of peripheral motor neurons displays such strong seasonality warrants exploration.

ObjectivesTo study the association between accidental opioid overdose and neurological, respiratory, cardiac and other serious adverse events and whether risk of these adverse events was elevated during hospital readmissions compared with initial admissions.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingPopulation-based study using linked administrative data in British Columbia, Canada.ParticipantsThe primary analysis included 2433 patients with 2554 admissions for accidental opioid overdose between 2006 and 2015, including 121 readmissions within 1 year of initial admission. The secondary analysis included 538 patients discharged following a total of 552 accidental opioid overdose hospitalizations and 11 040 matched controls from a cohort of patients with ≥180 days of prescription opioid use.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome was encephalopathy; secondary outcomes were adult respiratory distress syndrome, respiratory failure, pulmonary haemorrhage, aspiration pneumonia, cardiac arrest, ventricular arrhythmia, heart failure, rhabdomyolysis, paraplegia or tetraplegia, acute renal failure, death, a composite outcome of encephalopathy or any secondary outcome and total serious adverse events (all-cause hospitalisation or death). We analysed these outcomes using generalised linear models with a logistic link function.Results3% of accidental opioid overdose admissions included encephalopathy and 25% included one or more adverse events (composite outcome). We found no evidence of increased risk of encephalopathy (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.13 to 2.49) or other outcomes during readmissions versus initial admissions. In the secondary analysis, ConclusionsWe found no evidence that risk of encephalopathy or other adverse events was higher in readmissions compared with initial admissions for accidental opioid overdose. Risk of serious morbidity and mortality may be elevated in the year following an accidental opioid overdose.

Limited evidence suggests that isotretinoin may be associated with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). To explore this association, we conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study in British Columbia, Canada, among participants who were newly treated with isotretinoin or topical acne medications. The entire population of untreated provincial residents aged 12–29 years served as the reference group. During the 12-year study period, we identified 46,922 participants treated with isotretinoin, 184,824 treated with a topical acne medication, and 1,526,946 untreated individuals. Compared with untreated individuals, we observed no significant association between isotretinoin use and IBD (rate ratio (RR) 1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92–1.41). As expected, we found no association with topical acne medications (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.99–1.24). In prespecified secondary analyses, isotretinoin was associated with IBD among individuals aged 12–19 years (RR 1.39; 95% CI 1.03–1.87) and topical acne medications were associated with ulcerative colitis (RR 1.19; 95% CI 1.00–1.42). Our primary analyses found no association between isotretinoin and IBD. In prespecified secondary analyses, some evidence was found of associations with isotretinoin as well as topical acne medications, suggesting a possible association between IBD and acne itself. Additional research is needed to explore this possibility.

Background: The annual cut-off date of birth for entry to school in British Columbia, Canada, is Dec. 31. Thus, children born in December are typically the youngest in their grade. We sought to determine the influence of relative age within a grade on the diagnosis and pharmacologic treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children. Methods: We conducted a cohort study involving 937 943 children in British Columbia who were 6–12 years of age at any time between Dec. 1, 1997, and Nov. 30, 2008. We calculated the absolute and relative risk of receiving a diagnosis of ADHD and of receiving a prescription for a medication used to treat ADHD (i.e., methylphenidate, dextroamphetamine, mixed amphetamine salts or atomoxetine) for children born in December compared with children born in January. Results: Boys who were born in December were 30% more likely (relative risk [RR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23–1.37) to receive a diagnosis of ADHD than boys born in January. Girls born in December were 70% more likely (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.53–1.88) to receive a diagnosis of ADHD than girls born in January. Similarly, boys were 41% more likely (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.33–1.50) and girls 77% more likely (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.57–2.00) to be given a prescription for a medication to treat ADHD if they were born in December than if they were born in January. Interpretation: The results of our analyses show a relative-age effect in the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD in children aged 6–12 years in British Columbia. These findings raise concerns about the potential harms of overdiagnosis and overprescribing. These harms include adverse effects on sleep, appetite and growth, in addition to increased risk of cardiovascular events.

The use of diuretics, statins, and inhaled long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) is linked to muscle cramps but largely by anecdotal evidence. This study sought population-level data to better evaluate these associations.Linked health care databases containing prescribing information (December 1, 2000, to November 30, 2008) about 4.2 million residents of British Columbia, Canada, were evaluated using sequence symmetry analysis to determine in adults 50 years or older whether new quinine prescriptions (initiations of cramp treatment) increase in the year following diuretic, statin, or LABA starts. The statistic of interest was the sequence ratio: the number of quinine starts in the year following index drug introduction compared with the number of quinine starts in the preceding year (adjusted for age and time trends in population prescribing).Adjusted sequence ratios (95% CIs) for the 3 drug classes were 1.47 (1.33-1.63 [P.001]) for diuretics, 1.16 (1.04-1.29 [P = .004]) for statins, and 2.42 (2.02-2.89 [P.001]) for LABAs. For diuretic subclasses, adjusted sequence ratios (95% CIs) were 2.12 (1.61-2.78 [P.001]) for potassium sparing, 1.48 (1.29-1.68 [P.001]) for thiazidelike, and 1.20 (1.00-1.44 [P = .07]) for loop. For LABA subclasses, adjusted sequence ratios (95% CIs) were 2.17 (1.56-3.02) for LABAs alone and 2.55 (2.06-3.12) for LABAs-corticosteroids (P.001 for both).Cramp treatment was substantially more likely in the year following introduction of LABAs, potassium-sparing diuretics, or thiazidelike diuretics, and 60.3% of quinine users (individuals experiencing cramp) received at least 1 of these medications during a 13-year period. In contrast, statin and loop diuretic associations were small. Physicians should be mindful that the use of these medications may worsen symptoms in patients experiencing nocturnal leg cramps.

Objectives To examine the use and cost of health-care services in British Columbia, Canada, before and after public drug coverage for tiotropium bromide. Methods A time series analysis was performed using data from British Columbia's centralized administrative health-care databases. Linear regression on data from a stable 3-year prepolicy period was used to predict future use of inhaled anticholinergic (IAC) medications, visits to physicians, emergency hospitalizations, and costs. For each use measure, we estimated the policy effect as the difference between observed use in the postpolicy period and predicted use obtained from the prepolicy period. Results In total, over the 2.5-year period after public coverage, tiotropium use increased by 24.4% more than predicted (95% confidence interval [CI] 23.9%–24.8%). Visits to physicians were unchanged, but there were between 596 and 948 more emergency admissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and between 582 and 1940 more hospital admissions of any kind than were predicted from prepolicy data. Total cost of inhaled IAC medications increased slightly more than predicted, by between an additional CDN$1.30 million and CDN$1.71 million, but total out-of-pocket spending by patients on IAC medications was reduced by between CDN$2.83 million and CDN$3.11 million because of public coverage. Hospital costs were between CDN$3.88 million and CDN$12.93 million greater than anticipated based on prepolicy data. Conclusions Public drug plan coverage for tiotropium in British Columbia reduced out-of-pocket costs for patients and their private insurers. Before versus after time series analysis did not show a reduction in hospitalizations or physician visits, or costs associated with those services.