Search

Aims: The aim of this study was to present the first nation‐wide, systematic, repeated assessment of doctor‐shopping (i.e. visiting multiple physicians to be prescribed the same drug) during 10 years for more than 200 psychoactive prescription drugs in the 67 million inhabitants in France. Design: This was a nation‐wide, repeated cross‐sectional study. Setting and Participants: Data are from the French National Health Data System in 2010, 2015 and 2019 for 214 psychoactive prescription drugs (i.e. anaesthetics, analgesics, antiepileptics, anti‐Parkinson drugs, psycholeptics, psychoanaleptics, other nervous system drugs and antihistamines for systemic use). Measurements The detection and quantification of doctor‐shopping relied upon an algorithm that detects overlapping prescriptions from repeated visits to different physicians. We used two doctor‐shopping indicators aggregated at population level for each drug dispensed to more than 5000 patients: (i) the quantity doctor‐shopped, expressed in defined daily doses (DDD), which measures the total quantity doctor‐shopped by the study population for a given drug; and (ii) the proportion doctor‐shopped, expressed as a percentage, which standardizes the quantity doctor‐shopped according to the use level of the drug. Findings The analyses included approximately 200 million dispensings to approximately 30 million patients each year. Opioids (e.g. buprenorphine, methadone, morphine, oxycodone and fentanyl), benzodiazepines and non‐benzodiazepine hypnotics (Z‐drugs) (e.g. diazepam, oxazepam, zolpidem and clonazepam) had the highest proportions doctor‐shopped during the study period. In most cases, the proportion and the quantity doctor‐shopped increased for opioids and decreased for benzodiazepines and Z‐drugs. Pregabalin had the sharpest increase in the proportion doctor‐shopped (from 0.28 to 1.40%), in parallel with a sharp increase in the quantity doctor‐shopped (+843%, from 0.7 to 6.6 DDD/100 000 inhabitants/day). Oxycodone had the sharpest increase in the quantity doctor‐shopped (+1000%, from 0.1 to 1.1 DDD/100 000 inhabitants/day), in parallel with a sharp increase in the proportion doctor‐shopped (from 0.71 to 1.41%). Detailed results for all drugs during the study period can be explored interactively at: https://soeiro.gitlab.io/megadose/. Conclusions: In France, doctor‐shopping occurs for many drugs from many pharmacological classes, and mainly involves opioid maintenance drugs, some opioids analgesics, some benzodiazepines and Z‐drugs and pregabalin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prominent features of esketamine (e.g., similar mechanism of action as ketamine and target population) require to be vigilant regarding its benefits/risks balance and its risks of abuse in real‐life settings. The aim of this study was to review all available pharmacological and clinical data to assess the abuse potential of esketamine shortly after its marketing. This multidimensional study is a quantitative and qualitative analysis of complementary data sources, ranging from preauthorization data (i.e., fundamental pharmacology and clinical trials) to real‐life settings data (i.e., pharmacovigilance databases and web forums). According to esketamine pharmacology, its psychoactive effects play a role both in its therapeutic effect and its abuse potential. Only one out of the three short‐term efficacy trials found a significant difference between esketamine and placebo in treatment‐resistant depression. Beside adverse events that may be sought for abuse purpose (e.g., dissociation, sedation, euphoric mood, hallucination, feeling drunk, and derealization), clinical signs related to substance use disorder (e.g., tolerance, withdrawal syndrome, and drug dependence) and misuse (e.g., off‐label use) were also identified in pharmacovigilance databases. Analysis of pharmacovigilance narratives and web forums showed that esketamine psychoactive effects are appreciated by some patients, while they are badly experienced by others. Strict compliance with the market authorization, close monitoring of patients by psychiatrists, and surveillance of any signs of misuse, abuse, or dependence must be part of any treatment course. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accumulating evidence shows that some antidepressants are abused for their psychostimulant effects, but the extent of antidepressants abuse is unknown in subjects with opioid use disorders (OUD). The objective of this work is to assess the prevalence of antidepressant abuse and its correlates in subjects with OUD. Subjects ≥18 year‐old in an opiate maintenance treatment (OMT) program who reported using an antidepressant were selected from the OPPIDUM program from 2011 to 2020. The outcome was antidepressant abuse. Antidepressant abusers were identified as subjects reporting at least one of the following behaviors: "drug abuse," "concomitant use of alcohol," "illegal obtaining," and "dose higher than recommended in the Summary of Product Characteristics." Among the 83 040 observations of subjects ≥18 year‐old in an OMT program included in the OPPIDUM program from 2011 to 2020, 2708 (3.3%) subjects reported using an antidepressant in monotherapy. Among them, there were 385 (14.2%) abusers. The proportion of abusers was the highest for amitriptyline (n = 31, 25.0%). In multivariate analysis, antidepressant abuse was positively associated with amitriptyline (OR 2.07, 95% CI [1.16, 3.73]; p = 0.015), unemployment (OR 1.52, 95% CI [1.16, 2.01]; p = 0.003), the use of intravenous route of administration (OR 1.77, 95% CI [1.12, 2.80]; p = 0.014), and the use of benzodiazepines (OR 1.53, 95% CI [1.21, 1.94]; p < 0.001). Clinicians should be aware of the risk of antidepressant abuse when prescribing in subjects with OUD, accounting for their heterogeneous pharmacological properties that may account for their abuse potential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Doctor shopping enables subjects to receive more than the prescribed dose out of any medical management, which suggests a search for high doses and makes doctor shopping a relevant proxy for misuse and potential abuse. Therefore, this study aimed to identify and characterize profiles of subjects with doctor‐shopping behavior for methylphenidate in the entire French population. This study is a cross‐sectional study of doctor‐shopping behavior for methylphenidate in France, in 2016, using the Système national des données de santé, and accounting for overlapping prescriptions. Subjects who obtained >840 mg by doctor shopping were defined as subjects with heavy doctor‐shopping behavior, and subjects who obtained >0 mg and ≤840 mg by doctor shopping were defined as subjects with light doctor‐shopping behavior. A total of 63 739 subjects were included, and received 339.6 kg of methylphenidate. Among them, 216 (0.3%) subjects had heavy doctor‐shopping behavior, and 313 (0.5%) subjects had light doctor‐shopping behavior. Compared with subjects with light doctor‐shopping behavior, subjects with heavy doctor‐shopping behavior were older (64% of 30‐ to 49‐year‐old subjects vs. 77% of ≤17‐year‐old subjects; P < 0.001), received more concomitant dispensings of antipsychotics (37% vs. 26%; P = 0.008) and opioid maintenance treatments (50% vs. 6%; P < 0.001), and had more prescribers (4 [IQR = 2‐5] vs. 2 [IQR = 2–3]; P < 0.001). In the French context where prescription and dispensing of methylphenidate are highly regulated and methylphenidate is much less used than in other countries, these results are a warning signal to avoid trivializing methylphenidate in adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This nationwide study aimed to compare use of oxycodone and doctor shopping for oxycodone in 2010 and 2016, and to quantify doctor shopping for oxycodone by sex, age, formulation, and dosage in 2010 and 2016. This study is a cross-sectional comparative analysis of doctor shopping based on all dispensings of oxycodone in France, in 2010 and 2016. Dispensings of oxycodone were extracted from the Système national des données de santé, which covers the 67 million inhabitants in France. Quantification of doctor shopping relies on an algorithm accounting for overlapping prescriptions, which is a proxy for potential misuse or abuse. The number of subjects who received oxycodone increased by 214% from 67,838 subjects in 2010 to 212,753 subjects in 2016, and the number of subjects with doctor-shopping behavior increased by 197%, from 1066 subjects in 2010 to 3163 subjects in 2016. For 30- to 44-year-old men, the total quantity of oxycodone obtained by doctor shopping increased by 391%, from 4582 defined daily doses in 2010 to 22,517 defined daily doses in 2016. By formulation and dosage, the total quantity of oxycodone obtained by doctor shopping increased with the dosage for both immediate-release and extended-release tablets in 2010 and 2016. The widespread extent of doctor shopping and its 3-fold increase in line with population exposure is a strong signal in the French context. These results are another argument to avoid trivializing oxycodone to prevent misuse, potential abuse, and potential oxycodone-related deaths, but it requires caution to prevent compromising effective treatment of pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A response is provided to the article "New means, new measures: assessing prescription drug-seeking indicators over 10 years of the opioid epidemic" by B.L Perry, M. Odabaş, K. Yang, and others which appears in the same issue of the journal. According to the article, multi-dimensional analyses of data sources are a key factor in examinations of issues such as prescription drug abuse. The monitoring of prescription drug-seeking (PDS) is assessed.

This document is a correction to an article titled "Patterns of Pregabalin Users from Substance Abuse Treatment Facilities: Results from the French OPPIDUM Program from 2008 to 2022." The correction addresses an error in the given and family names of Maryse Lapeyre Mestre, which were incorrectly structured. The correct structuring is "Given name: Maryse" and "Family name: Lapeyre-Mestre." The original article has been corrected and can be found online. The authors are affiliated with various institutions in France. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Methylphenidate is indicated for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Several studies have evaluated its abuse in specific populations (students, drug users) and few in the general population. This work describes the extent of its abuse in a region of more than 5 million inhabitants., Method: Based on regional health insurance data from 2005 to 2017, the clustering method identifies different methylphenidate use profiles according to several characteristics (number of different prescribers and pharmacies, number of dispensations, number of defined daily dose dispensed). The groups characterised by high values of these variables will be qualified as "deviant"., Results: In 13 years, the number of patients with at least one dispensation in the first quarter has been multiplied by 5.8 times. The proportion of adults has increased (20% in 2017) and their number has been multiplied by 10. Five groups are identified, three of them are characterised by "deviant" behaviour. Group 5 (n=11, 0.04%) has higher values than 4 (n=112, 0.4%) and 3 (n=407, 1.6%). These patients are older and more frequently use benzodiazepines and opiate substitution drugs. Groups 1 (n=13,132, 51%) and 2 (n=11,941, 46.7%) are more likely to be taken up by young subjects. The number of subjects with "deviant" behaviour increased until 2011 and after a decrease, the highest number of subjects concerned has been observed since 2015., Conclusion: In view of the increase of subjects with "deviant" behaviour, it is necessary to make the medical community and patients aware on the risk of abuse of methylphenidate. The recent extension of the indication for ADHD in adults and the broadening of the conditions of prescription require increased vigilance., (Copyright © 2022 Société française de pharmacologie et de thérapeutique. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)