Alasdair Breckenridge

Adverse drug reactions as cause of admission to hospital: prospective analysis of 18 820 patients

Abstract Objective To ascertain the current burden of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) through a prospective analysis of all admissions to hospital. Design Prospective observational study. Setting Two large general hospitals in Merseyside, England. Participants 18 820 patients aged > 16 years admitted over six months and assessed for cause of admission. Main outcome measures Prevalence of admissions due to an ADR, length of stay, avoidability, and outcome. Results There were 1225 admissions related to an ADR, giving a prevalence of 6.5%, with the ADR directly leading to the admission in 80% of cases. The median bed stay was eight days, accounting for 4% of the hospital bed capacity. The projected annual cost of such admissions to the NHS is £466m (€706m,

CIMETIDINE: INTERACTION WITH ORAL ANTICOAGULANTS IN MAN

847m). The overall fatality was 0.15%. Most reactions were either definitely or possibly avoidable. Drugs most commonly implicated in causing these admissions included low dose aspirin, diuretics, warfarin, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs other than aspirin, the most common reaction being gastrointestinal bleeding. Conclusion The burden of ADRs on the NHS is high, accounting for considerable morbidity, mortality, and extra costs. Although many of the implicated drugs have proved benefit, measures need to be put into place to reduce the burden of ADRs and thereby further improve the benefit:harm ratio of the drugs.

Fortnightly review: Adverse drug reactions

In 6 patients anticoagulated with warfarin, nicoumalone, or phenindione the addition of cimetidine prolonged the prothrombin-time (PT) by a mean of 12.6 s (range 5--23 s). In 7 volunteers taking daily subtherapeutic doses of warfarin the addition of cimetidine increased the PT from 19.4 to 22.9 s and the plasma-warfarin concentration from 0.96 to 1.76 microgram/ml. Cimetidine reduced the single-dose clearance of warfarin and antipyrine. The basis of the interaction between cimetidine and oral anticoagulants is probably inhibition of drug metabolism. Care should be exercised in concomitant therapy.

Saquinavir pharmacokinetics alone and in combination with nelfinavir in HIV-infected patients.

An adverse drug reaction is any undesirable effect of a drug beyond its anticipated therapeutic effects occurring during clinical use. In contrast, an adverse drug event is an untoward occurrence after exposure to a drug that is not necessarily caused by the drug.1 When a drug is marketed little is known about its safety in clinical use because only about 1500 patients are likely to have been exposed to it.1,2 Thus drug safety assessment should be considered an integral part of everyday clinical practice since detection and diagnosis often depend on clinical acumen. In this article we review the current status of adverse drug reactions, briefly describing the complexity of the more bizarre reactions and outlining a strategy to eliminate serious adverse drug reactions. Summary points Adverse drug reactions are a common clinical problem They are diagnosed on clinical grounds from the temporal relation between the start and finish of drug treatment and the onset and offset of the reaction Pharmacological adverse reactions are generally dose-dependent, related to the pharmacokinetic properties of the drug, and resolve when the dose is reduced Idiosyncratic adverse reactions are not related to the known pharmacology of the drug, do not show any simple dose-response relation, and resolve only when treatment is discontinued Vigilance by clinicians in detecting, diagnosing, and reporting adverse reactions is important for continued drug safety monitoring

Efficacy and safety of intermittent preventive treatment with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine for malaria in African infants: a pooled analysis of six randomised, placebo-controlled trials

Objective:To investigate the pharmacokinetics of saquinavir (SQV) hard gel when administered alone and in combination with nelfinavir (NLF) to HIV-positive patients. Design:Six patients receiving triple therapy (dual nucleoside plus SQV 600 mg three times daily) were studied. On the first study day blood samples were drawn for assay of SQV. Prior to the second study day, patients received their usual medication plus NLF 750 mg three times daily for 2 days. Methods:Blood samples were obtained at times 0, 1, 2, 4, 6 and 8 h after dosing on study days 1 and 2. Following centrifugation, separated plasma was heated at 58°C for at least 30 min to inactivate HIV and stored at −80°C until analysis using high performance liquid chromatography. Results:The geometric mean Cmax and AUC0–8h on the first study day were 253 ng/ml (range, < 25–1200 ng/ml) and 1106 ng/ml•h (range, < 100–3479 ng/ml•h), respectively, and on the second study day were 1204 ng/ml (range, 379–2755 ng/ml) and 5472 ng/ml•h (range, 1434–12538 ng/ml•h), respectively. The geometric mean ratio for Cmax was 4.75 and for AUC0–8h was 4.94. Conclusions:NLF increases the oral bioavailability of SQV (hard gel) approximately fivefold. For some patients the addition of NLF to SQV will increase the drug levels from subtherapeutic to the therapeutic range. In one of our patients the addition of NLF resulted in SQV levels that were much higher than previous work suggests are necessary for maximum antiviral effect. The variability in SQV concentrations both at baseline and following addition of NLF suggest that dosing may best be adjusted by individual therapeutic drug monitoring.

Bridging the efficacy–effectiveness gap: a regulator's perspective on addressing variability of drug response

BACKGROUND Intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) is a promising strategy for malaria control in infants. We undertook a pooled analysis of the safety and efficacy of IPT in infants (IPTi) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine in Africa. METHODS We pooled data from six double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials (undertaken one each in Tanzania, Mozambique, and Gabon, and three in Ghana) that assessed the efficacy of IPTi with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine. In all trials, IPTi or placebo was given to infants at the time of routine vaccinations delivered by WHOs Expanded Program on Immunization. Data from the trials for incidence of clinical malaria, risk of anaemia (packed-cell volume <25% or haemoglobin <80 g/L), and incidence of hospital admissions and adverse events in infants up to 12 months of age were reanalysed by use of standard outcome definitions and time periods. Analysis was by modified intention to treat, including all infants who received at least one dose of IPTi or placebo. FINDINGS The six trials provided data for 7930 infants (IPTi, n=3958; placebo, n=3972). IPTi had a protective efficacy of 30.3% (95% CI 19.8-39.4, p<0.0001) against clinical malaria, 21.3% (8.2-32.5, p=0.002) against the risk of anaemia, 38.1% (12.5-56.2, p=0.007) against hospital admissions associated with malaria parasitaemia, and 22.9% (10.0-34.0, p=0.001) against all-cause hospital admissions. There were 56 deaths in the IPTi group compared with 53 in the placebo group (rate ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.72-1.54, p=0.79). One death, judged as possibly related to IPTi because it occurred 19 days after a treatment dose, was subsequently attributed to probable sepsis. Four of 676 non-fatal hospital admissions in the IPTi group were deemed related to study treatment compared with five of 860 in the placebo group. None of three serious dermatological adverse events in the IPTi group were judged related to study treatment compared with one of 13 in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION IPTi with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine was safe and efficacious across a range of malaria transmission settings, suggesting that this intervention is a useful contribution to malaria control. FUNDING Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Clinical Implications of Enzyme Induction and Enzyme Inhibition

Drug regulatory agencies should ensure that the benefits of drugs outweigh their risks, but licensed medicines sometimes do not perform as expected in everyday clinical practice. Failure may relate to lower than anticipated efficacy or a higher than anticipated incidence or severity of adverse effects. Here we show that the problem of benefit–risk is to a considerable degree a problem of variability in drug response. We describe biological and behavioural sources of variability and how these contribute to the long-known efficacy–effectiveness gap. In this context, efficacy describes how a drug performs under conditions of clinical trials, whereas effectiveness describes how it performs under conditions of everyday clinical practice. We argue that a broad range of pre- and post-licensing technologies will need to be harnessed to bridge the efficacy–effectiveness gap. Successful approaches will not be limited to the current notion of pharmacogenomics-based personalized medicines, but will also entail the wider use of electronic health-care tools to improve drug prescribing and patient adherence.

Balancing early market access to new drugs with the need for benefit/risk data: a mounting dilemma

SummaryThe pharmacological effect of a drug is partly dependent upon its concentration at its site of action, which in turn is partly dependent upon its rate of elimination. The rate of elimination of many lipophilic drugs is governed by the activity of the hepatic microsomal mixed-function oxidases. Consequently any alteration in the activity of these enzymes may result in a modification of drug action. A wide range of chemically unrelated substances may stimulate the activity of the mixedfunction oxidases by enzyme induction. The drugs most frequently encountered as enzymeinducing agents in man are barbiturates, rifampicin and Phenytoin. Enhancement of drug metabolism by ethanol, tobacco smoking and diet may also involve enzyme induction. Enzyme induction is normally associated with a reduction in drug efficacy but may also alter the toxicity of certain substances.Enzyme induction has been assessed in man by measuring changes in the pharmacokinetics of a marker drug, or changes in the disposition of endogenous compounds such as γ-glutamyltranspeptidase, D-glucaric acid and 6β-hydroxycortisol.The therapeutic problems associated with enzyme inhibition have received much less attention than those associated with enzyme induction. The effect on the rate of elimination of a particular drug will depend upon the fraction of the dose that is normally metabolised by the inhibited enzyme and on the affinity of the enzyme for the drug and the inhibitor. An alteration in the dosage schedule is usually only necessary for drugs with a small therapeutic ratio.

Clinical pharmacokinetics of oral contraceptive steroids.

Drug regulatory agencies are increasingly pressed by the challenge of finding the appropriate balance between the need for rapid access to new drugs and the need to ensure comprehensive data on their benefits and risks. This dilemma is not new, but has been made more prominent by recent high-profile drug withdrawals and conflicting demands, including the need to improve the efficiency of drug development on one hand, and the need to avoid exposing patients to unnecessary risks or possibly ineffective treatments on the other. Here, we summarize the current demands by stakeholders and the scientific and regulatory issues at stake, describe existing and emerging regulatory approaches, and speculate on future directions, such as evolution of the current regulatory model from a one-off marketing authorization to a life-cycle approach.

An investigation of the pharmacokinetics of ethynylestsadiol in women using badioimmunoassay

SummaryOral contraceptive steroids are of 2 types: oestrogens, of which ethinyloestradiol is the most important, and progestagens, of which levonorgestrel and norethisterone are the most commonly used. All these steroids can be measured by a number of analytical techniques but there is little doubt that radioimmunoassay is the most convenient. All the steroids are well absorbed in humans but while levonorgestrel is completely bioavailable, norethisterone has an average bioavailability of 70%. Ethinyloestradiol, too, is subject to presystemic metabolism with a mean bioavailability of 40 to 45%. The main site of presystemic metabolism is the gut wall, with the production of ethinyloestradiol sulphate. The progestagens norethynodrel, ethynodiol diacetate and lynoestrenol are quantitatively metabolised to norethisterone.The pharmacokinetics of the contraceptive steroids are best described by a 2-compartment open model. The terminal plasma half-life of levonorgestrel varies from 11 to 45 hours and of norethisterone from 5 to 14 hours. The β-phase half-life of ethinyloestradiol varies from 6 to 20 hours. The apparent volume of distribution of these contraceptive steroids (after intravenous administration) is between 1.5 and 4.3 L/kg. During long term treatment with oral contraceptive steroids, steady-state plasma concentrations of ethinyloestradiol (24 hours after administration) are between 10 and 200 pg/ml. Plasma concentrations of norethisterone and levonorgestrel at steady-state are higher than predicted from the single-dose kinetics because of enhanced binding of the progestagens following the induction of sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) by ethinyloestradiol. Concentrations are in the range of 1.6 to 15.2 ng/ml for norethisterone and 0.8 to 4.5 ng/ml for levonorgestrel.All the contraceptive steroids are bound to proteins in plasma. Ethinyloestradiol is 97 to 98% bound to plasma albumin. The progestagens are bound both to albumin (levonorgestrel 93 to 95%; norethisterone 79 to 80%) and more specifically to SHBG. The binding capacity of SHBG can be enhanced by treatment with ethinyloestradiol or with more conventional enzyme-inducing drugs such as phenobarbitone, carbamazepine or rifampicin.Norethisterone and levonorgestrel are chiefly metabolised by reduction in the A ring and this is followed by conjugation with glucuronide or sulphate. The metabolism of levonorgestrel is stereoselective. Ethinyloestradiol is primarily hydroxylated at the 2 position but a wide variety of hydroxylated and methylated metabolites are formed and these are present both free and as glucuronide and sulphate conjugates. Ethinyloestradiol is conjugated directly at the 3 position (unlike the progestagens) and thus is liable to enterohepatic recirculation. Ethinyloestradiol sulphate concentrations in plasma are many times higher than that of the unchanged drug.The oral contraceptive steroids are involved in drug interactions of clinical significance. While the effect of contraceptive steroids on other drugs is small and unlikely to be of clinical significance, failure of contraception often occurs if enzyme-inducing agents such as rifampkin, phenobarbitone or carbamazepine are coadministered. Oral antibiotics do not seem to cause a significant loss of contraception in the large majority of women. Vitamin C will enhance the effect of contraceptive steroids by competing for sulphate conjugation in the gut wall, thus leading to increased bioavailability of ethinyloestradiol.