Off-label use of drugs and devices in the neuroendovascular suite.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Summary
The off-label use of drugs and devices in neuroendovascular procedures is common. Neurointerventionalists should be well aware of the level of evidence available in support of the off-label use of drugs and devices in their practice and some of the potential adverse events associated with them. These uses are categorized as I or II if they have been evaluated as primary or ancillary interventions in prospective trials/registries of neuroendovascular procedures and III if they were evaluated in case series. Category IV use is based on evaluation as primary or ancillary interventions in prospective trials/registries of non-neuroendovascular procedures. Physicians are allowed to use off-label drugs and procedures if there is strong evidence that they are beneficial for the patient. The neurointerventional professional societies agree that off-label use of drugs and devices is an important part of the specialty, but practicing providers should base their decisions on sound evidence when using such drugs and devices.
SUBMITTER: Abdihalim MM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7964838 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:We report a novel model of arterial tortuosity in the porcine brachial artery for testing of endovascular devices in the flexed forelimb position. This provides an ideal vascular territory for an in vivo assessment of guidewires, microcatheters, and endovascular implants because it closely mimics the challenging curvature at the carotid siphon.
| S-EPMC7964512 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe optimal antiplatelet therapy regimen for certain neuroendovascular procedures remains unclear. This study investigates the safety and feasibility of intravenous dose-adjusted cangrelor in patients undergoing acute neuroendovascular interventions.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective chart review of all consecutive patients on intravenous cangrelor for neuroendovascular procedures between September 1, 2020, and March 13, 2022. We also conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library up to February 22, 2023.ResultsIn our cohort, a total of 76 patients were included [mean age (years): 57.2 ± 18.2, males: 39 (51.3), Black: 49 (64.5)]. Cangrelor was most used for embolization and intracranial stent placement (n = 24, 32%). Approximately 44% of our patients had a favorable outcome with a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0 to 2 at 90 days (n = 25/57); within 1 year, 8% of patients had recurrent or new strokes (n = 5/59), 6% had symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage [sICH] (4/64), 3% had major extracranial bleeding events (2/64), and 3% had a gastrointestinal bleed (2/64). In our meta-analysis, 11 studies with 298 patients were included. The pooled proportion of sICH and intraprocedural thromboembolic complication events were 0.07 [95% CI 0.04 to 1.13] and 0.08 [95% CI 0.05 to 0.15], respectively.ConclusionOur study found that intravenous cangrelor appears to be safe and effective in neuroendovascular procedures, with low rates of bleeding and ischemic events. However, further research is needed to compare different dosing and titration protocols of cangrelor and other intravenous agents.
| S-EPMC10728671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceIn many health systems, access to off-label drug use is controlled through reimbursement restrictions by health insurers, especially for expensive cancer drugs.ObjectiveTo determine whether evidence from randomized clinical trials is associated with reimbursement decisions for requested off-label use of anticancer drugs in the Swiss health system.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study used reimbursement requests from routinely collected health records of 5809 patients with drug treatment for cancer between January 2015 and July 2018 in 3 major cancer centers, covering cancer care of approximately 5% of the Swiss population, to identify off-label drug use. For each off-label use indication with 3 or more requests, randomized clinical trial evidence on treatment benefits was systematically identified for overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS). Data were analyzed from August 2018 to December 2020.ExposuresAvailable randomized clinical trial evidence on benefits for OS or PFS for requested off-label use indications.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was the association between evidence for treatment benefit (expressed as improved OS or PFS) and reimbursement in multivariable regression models.ResultsAmong 3046 patients with cancer, 695 off-label use reimbursement requests in 303 different indications were made for 598 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 64 [53-73] years; 420 [60%] men). Off-label use was intended as first-line treatment in 311 requests (45%). Reimbursement was accepted in 446 requests (64%). For 71 indications, including 431 requests for 376 patients, there were 3 or more requests. Of these, 246 requests (57%) had no supporting evidence for OS or PFS benefit. Reimbursement was granted in 162 of 246 requests without supporting evidence (66%). Of 117 requests supported by OS benefit, 79 (67%) were reimbursed, and of 68 requests supported by PFS benefit alone, 54 (79%) were reimbursed. Evidence of OS benefit from randomized clinical trials was not associated with a higher chance of reimbursement (odds ratio, 0.76, 95% CI, 0.45-1.27).Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that in a health care system enabling access to off-label use, it was frequently intended as a first-line treatment in cancer care. Availability of randomized clinical trial evidence showing survival benefit was not associated with reimbursement decisions for off-label anticancer drug treatment in Switzerland. A transparent process with criteria considering clinical evidence is needed for evidence-based reimbursement decisions to ensure fair access to cancer treatments.
| S-EPMC7926292 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe "Law on Doctors of the People's Republic of China," which was officially implemented on March 1, 2022, emphasizes the requirements for rational drug use and the necessity for appropriate management of off-label drug use. The safety and ethical considerations related to off-label drug use are different in children than in adults. There is so far no management guideline for pediatric off-label use of drugs in China, and the applicability of foreign guidelines is limited. Establishing a localized evidence-based management guideline for pediatric off-label use of drugs to support the national legislation and clinical practice is of critical importance.MethodsWe established a guideline working group, including experts from a broad range of disciplines and developed recommendations following the guidance of the World Health Organization Handbook and the Chinese Medical Association. The following themes were identified by questionnaires and expert interviews to be of great concern in the management of off-label drug use in children: general principles and characteristics of management of pediatric off-label drug use; establishment of expert committees; evidence evaluation; risk-benefit assessment; informed consent; monitoring and assessment of the risk; and monitoring and patient education. Two rounds of Delphi surveys were organized to determine the final recommendations of this guideline. We graded the recommendations based on the body of evidence, referring to the evaluation tool of the Evidence-based management (EBMgt) and the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine: Level of Evidence (March 2009).ResultsWe developed the first guideline for the management of pediatric off-label use of drugs in China.ConclusionsThe guideline is to offer guidance for pediatricians, pharmacists, medical managers, policymakers, and primary care physicians on how to manage off-label drug use in pediatrics and to provide recommendations for Chinese healthcare policy in the future.
| S-EPMC9307429 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Compassionate use, also called expanded access, provides an important pathway for patients with life-threatening conditions to gain access to unapproved investigational drugs, biologics and medical devices. Although the United States (US) and the countries of the Europe Union (EU) have mechanisms that are associated with the use of unapproved products, as of May 2015 there was no such mechanism in Japan. Instead, unapproved products are used under a physician's discretion in conjunction with the Japan Medical Practitioners' Act or Advanced Medical Care B. However, there are some issues and questions to consider under the current circumstances in Japan as follows: (A) it is difficult for the local regulator to monitor the use of unapproved products; (B) there is no information collected on the safety of these products to protect patients; (C) it is difficult to assure the quality of the products; (D) it is difficult for patients to obtain detailed information about unapproved products and their availability; and (E) it is not clear who should cover the cost of the unapproved products. In this paper, we assess the current compassionate use, or expanded access-related mechanisms, of the US, the EU and Japan in regard to drugs, medical devices and biologics, including human cells and tissue products, and discuss the benefits and issues of these mechanisms. The purpose of these mechanisms is principally to save patients with life-threatening condition. However, the information obtained after the compassionate use is potentially useful to facilitate marketing authorization. In fact, the data from compassionate use cases are employed in some approval review reports to indicate the product safety.
| S-EPMC6581800 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeEffective standardization of medical device labels requires objective study of varied designs. Insufficient empirical evidence exists regarding how practitioners utilize and view labeling.ObjectiveMeasure the effect of graphic elements (boxing information, grouping information, symbol use and color-coding) to optimize a label for comparison with those typical of commercial medical devices.DesignParticipants viewed 54 trials on a computer screen. Trials were comprised of two labels that were identical with regard to graphics, but differed in one aspect of information (e.g., one had latex, the other did not). Participants were instructed to select the label along a given criteria (e.g., latex containing) as quickly as possible. Dependent variables were binary (correct selection) and continuous (time to correct selection).ParticipantsEighty-nine healthcare professionals were recruited at Association of Surgical Technologists (AST) conferences, and using a targeted e-mail of AST members.ResultsSymbol presence, color coding and grouping critical pieces of information all significantly improved selection rates and sped time to correct selection (α = 0.05). Conversely, when critical information was graphically boxed, probability of correct selection and time to selection were impaired (α = 0.05). Subsequently, responses from trials containing optimal treatments (color coded, critical information grouped with symbols) were compared to two labels created based on a review of those commercially available. Optimal labels yielded a significant positive benefit regarding the probability of correct choice ((P<0.0001) LSM; UCL, LCL: 97.3%; 98.4%, 95.5%)), as compared to the two labels we created based on commercial designs (92.0%; 94.7%, 87.9% and 89.8%; 93.0%, 85.3%) and time to selection.ConclusionsOur study provides data regarding design factors, namely: color coding, symbol use and grouping of critical information that can be used to significantly enhance the performance of medical device labels.
| S-EPMC5100952 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We reported the main results of the Japanese Registry of Neuroendovascular Therapy (JR-NET) 4, a nationwide surveillance of therapy (NET) in Japan from January 2015 to December 2019. JR-NET 4 registered consecutive patients who underwent NETs by Japan Society of Neuroendovascular Therapy (JSNET) -certified specialists. The primary endpoint was functional independence (mRS score of 0-2) at 30 days post-NET, with secondary endpoints focusing on technical success and major adverse events within 30 days.A total of 63,230 patients and 60,354 NET procedures from 166 participating centers were analyzed. During the study period, NET cases have consistently increased, with an increase in the proportion of elderly patients. A significant trend shift was observed in the distribution of NET procedures, with endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke that showed a dramatic increase in 5 years. This trend aligns with key randomized clinical trials from 2015 that presented the efficacy of this treatment. Clinical outcomes at 30 days posttreatment revealed that endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke and other NETs maintained safety and effectiveness despite varying prevalence of functional independence between target diseases. The study also observed a steady increase in emergency treatment cases, reflecting the increase in acute ischemic stroke, a time-sensitive medical condition.This comprehensive surveillance highlights the trend of NET practices in Japan, driven by clinical evidence and advancements in treatment devices. Although these findings were specific to Japan, they offer valuable insights into the broader trends in NETs and acute stroke care.
| S-EPMC11374464 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNeuroendovascular therapy is typically performed via the femoral artery, but there are rare cases in which a tortuous upstream angioarchitecture makes it difficult to access the intracranial circulation via this route.MethodsIn this case series, we describe six cases treated by surgical cut-down in the neck, with puncture of the carotid artery. Antiplatelet and anticoagulation agents were used in all cases. The indications for the technique were postsurgical thoracic aortic aneurysm (two cases), postsurgical abdominal aortic aneurysm (one case), major vessel tortuosity of the common carotid artery (two cases) and aortic arch anomaly (one case).ResultsThe surgical cut-down technique permitted successful neuroendovascular therapy. Although one patient had a small cervical haematoma, he was treated without surgical evacuation.ConclusionOverall, our findings indicate that the surgical cut-down technique is safe and useful for patients in whom the femoral approach is unsuitable.
| S-EPMC6547207 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7726301 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In its 'Road map for neglected tropical diseases 2021-2030', the World Health Organization outlined its targets for control and elimination of neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) and research needed to achieve them. For many NTDs, this includes research for new treatment options for case management and/or preventive chemotherapy. Our review of small-molecule anti-infective drugs recently approved by a stringent regulatory authority (SRA) or in at least Phase 2 clinical development for regulatory approval showed that this pipeline cannot deliver all new treatments needed. WHO guidelines and country policies show that drugs may be recommended for control and elimination for NTDs for which they are not SRA approved (i.e. for 'off-label' use) if efficacy and safety data for the relevant NTD are considered sufficient by WHO and country authorities. Here, we are providing an overview of clinical research in the past 10 years evaluating the anti-infective efficacy of oral small-molecule drugs for NTD(s) for which they are neither SRA approved, nor included in current WHO strategies nor, considering the research sponsors, likely to be registered with a SRA for that NTD, if found to be effective and safe. No such research has been done for yaws, guinea worm, Trypanosoma brucei gambiense human African trypanosomiasis (HAT), rabies, trachoma, visceral leishmaniasis, mycetoma, T. b. rhodesiense HAT, echinococcosis, taeniasis/cysticercosis or scabies. Oral drugs evaluated include sparfloxacin and acedapsone for leprosy; rifampicin, rifapentin and moxifloxacin for onchocerciasis; imatinib and levamisole for loiasis; itraconazole, fluconazole, ketoconazole, posaconazole, ravuconazole and disulfiram for Chagas disease, doxycycline and rifampicin for lymphatic filariasis; arterolane, piperaquine, artesunate, artemether, lumefantrine and mefloquine for schistosomiasis; ivermectin, tribendimidine, pyrantel, oxantel and nitazoxanide for soil-transmitted helminths including strongyloidiasis; chloroquine, ivermectin, balapiravir, ribavirin, celgosivir, UV-4B, ivermectin and doxycycline for dengue; streptomycin, amoxicillin, clavulanate for Buruli ulcer; fluconazole and isavuconazonium for mycoses; clarithromycin and dapsone for cutaneous leishmaniasis; and tribendimidine, albendazole, mebendazole and nitazoxanide for foodborne trematodiasis. Additional paths to identification of new treatment options are needed. One promising path is exploitation of the worldwide experience with 'off-label' treatment of diseases with insufficient treatment options as pursued by the 'CURE ID' initiative.
| S-EPMC10619278 | biostudies-literature