Dataset Information

Outcomes of off-label drug uses in hospitals: a multicentric prospective study.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The study aims to assess the clinical evidence, outcome and cost of off-label use of medicines in the hospital setting.

Methods

A multicentric prospective cohort study of patients treated with off-label medicines was carried out in five tertiary hospitals from May 2011 to May 2012. Information on clinical characteristics of patients, drugs, outcomes and costs was collected. Patients were followed up to 6 months, and information was assessed by reviewing clinical records and interviewing physicians.

Results

A total of 226 patients were included. The median (interquartile range (IQR)) age of patients was 46 (33-62) years; 59 % were women. Patients had received a median of three previous treatments, and a lack of response (or suboptimal) was the main reason for off-label use (72.1 %). A total of 232 off-label medicines were administered for 102 different indications. The most frequent medicines were rituximab (49; 21.1 %), botulinum toxin (25; 10.7 %) and omalizumab (14; 6.0 %). In 117 (51.8 %) cases, the level of clinical evidence for their use was low. A partial clinical response was observed in 82 patients (36.3 %), complete response in 71 (31.4 %) and stabilization in 11 (4.9 %). A total of 58 (26.5 %) patients had adverse effects, which in 11 (4.9 %) were severe. The median (IQR) cost per patient was 2,943.07 (541.9-5,872.54).

Conclusions

There was a high variability of off-label medicines and indications. Although the clinical evidence of off-label medicines was often low, clinical response was observed in many patients with previous multiple treatment failure, but at the expense of some adverse effects and a high cost. Registers of patients would be helpful for clinical decisions, although clinical trials are needed.

SUBMITTER: Danes I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4198805 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWhile SBRT to the prostate has become a valuable option as a radical treatment, limited data support its use in the postoperative setting. Here, we report the updated results of the multicentric Post-Prostatectomy Ablative Radiation Therapy (POPART) trial, investigating possible predictors of toxicities and patient-reported outcomes.MethodsPatients with PSA levels between 0.1-2.0 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy received Linac-based SBRT to the prostate bed in five fractions every other day for a total dose of 32.5 Gy (EQD21.5 = 74.3 Gy). Late toxicity was assessed using CTCAE v.5 scale, while EPIC-CP, ICIQ-SF, IIEF 5 questionnaires and PSA levels measured quality of life and biochemical control. Pre- and post-treatment scores were compared using a paired t-test, with MID established at > 0.5 pooled SD from the baseline. A logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate potential associations between specific patient/tumor/treatment factors and outcome deterioration.ResultsFrom April 2021 to April 2023 a total of 50 pts were enrolled and treated. Median follow-up was 12.2 (3-27) months. No late ≥ G2 GI or GU toxicity was registered. Late G1 urinary and rectal toxicities occurred in 46 % and 4 % of patients, respectively. Among 47 patients completing all EPIC-CP domains, four (9 %) showed worsened QoL, and eleven (26 %) developed erectile dysfunction correlating with PTV D2% (P = 0.032). At Multivariate analysis bladder wall D10cc independently correlated with late G1 GU toxicity (P = 0.034). Median post-treatment PSA nadir was 0.04 ng/mL (0.00 - 0.84). At the last follow-up, six patients presented with biochemical failure, including two nodal relapses.ConclusionsOur findings show that post-prostatectomy SBRT did not result in increased toxicity nor a significant decline in QoL measures, thus showing that it can be safely extended to the postoperative setting. Long-term follow-up and randomized comparisons with different RT schedules are needed to validate this approach.

Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate disease-activity-guided stepwise tapering or discontinuation of rhTNFR:Fc, an etanercept biosimilar, in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in a prospective, randomized, open-label, multicentric study.MethodsActive AS patients with AS disease activity score (ASDAS) ⩾2.1 recruited from 10 hospitals were treated with rhTNFR:Fc 50 mg weekly for 12 weeks, and further randomized into different tapering or discontinuation groups according to ASDAS at week 12. Patients who achieved clinical remission (ASDAS < 1.3) were assigned randomly to stepwise tapering group or discontinuation group. Patients who achieved low disease activity (LDA, 1.3⩽ASDAS < 2.1) were assigned randomly to stepwise tapering, delayed tapering, or discontinuation group. All patients were evaluated every 12 weeks until week 48. The primary endpoint was cumulative flare rates in different groups at week 48.ResultsA total of 311 patients were enrolled with an average ASDAS of 3.6 ± 1.0, and 259 completed 12 weeks of rhTNFR:Fc induction therapy, with 148 patients (57.1%) achieved clinical remission, 100 (38.6%) achieved LDA, and 11 (4.3%) remained as high disease activity (ASDAS⩾2.1). In patients who achieved clinical remission at week 12, stepwise tapering of rhTNFR:Fc demonstrated significantly lower flare rates at each evaluation compared with discontinuation. In patients who achieved LDA, there was no significant difference of flare rates between stepwise tapering, delayed tapering, and discontinuation. With stepwise tapering of rhTNFR:Fc, flare rates were comparable in AS patients, irrespective of initial ASDAS before tapering.ConclusionStepwise tapering of rhTNFR:Fc when patients achieved clinical remission was able to maintain favorable low flare rates in 48 weeks. LDA was an alternative therapeutic target, as well as an viable timing for initiation of rhTNFR:Fc tapering. rhTNFR:Fc 25 mg monthly maintained flare-free status in a considerable number of patients. However, abrupt discontinuation of rhTNFR:Fc even if patients achieved clinical remission should be avoided.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03880968,URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03880968.