Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to disruptions of healthcare delivery and may thus have impacted patterns of prescription opioid use, including risk factors for long-term use. Objective We aimed to describe changes in patterns of prescription opioid use due to the COVID-19 pandemic in community-dwelling adults without a cancer diagnosis. Methods Using administrative claims data of the province of Quebec, Canada, a random sample of adults (aged ≥18 years) was selected. These were members of the public drug plan without a cancer diagnosis who initiated a prescription opioid in the outpatient setting between 1 January, 2018 and 28 December, 2020. We assessed the daily dose of initial prescription opioids, the number of days’ supply of initial dispensing, and the total duration of opioid use over the first 6 months following initiation. We applied interrupted autoregressive integrated moving average models to examine weekly patterns of prescription opioids before and during the pandemic (starting at the lockdown). Our models included a step intervention function (immediate change) and a ramp intervention function (slope change). Results There were 112,650 and 34,261 patients who initiated opioid therapy, respectively, in the 115-week pre-pandemic period and in the 41-week pandemic period. At the start of the lockdown, there was a significant immediate decrease in opioid treatment initiation (−326; 95% confidence interval [CI] −419 to −234) and initial daily dose (−1.7 morphine milligram equivalents; 95% CI −2.7 to −0.7). Conversely, there was a significant immediate increase in the number of days’ supply of initial dispensing (1.4 days; 95% CI 1.0 to 1.8) and the total duration of opioid use over 6 months (5.7 days; 95% CI 4.6 to 6.8). All these weekly measures returned to values close to those of the pre-pandemic period 10 weeks after the start of lockdown. Conclusions Our findings showed that the COVID-19 lockdown had an impact on initial number of days’ supply, which is a risk factor for long-term use and ultimately opioid-related harm. However, over time, prescription practices and use reverted to those observed in the pre-pandemic period.

Although relapse is an important outcome to measure the effectiveness of schizophrenia treatment, no standard definition exists. This review aimed at identifying definitions and measurements of schizophrenia relapse in observational studies of long‐acting injectables (LAIs) versus oral antipsychotics (OAPs) and at determining their impact on heterogeneity of comparative effectiveness estimates. A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE and Embase (01 January 2010–11 November 2019 [date last searched]). Pragmatic searches of gray literature and snowballing were also conducted. Search outputs were screened independently by two assessors at first stage, and full‐text of potentially eligible sources at second stage. For each retained source, definition and measurement of relapse, study methods, and comparative effectiveness estimates were extracted. Heterogeneity of estimates was assessed using I2 statistic with a threshold of 50% for substantial heterogeneity. Literature search yielded 543 sources and pragmatic searches, 21, of which 35 were eligible. Twelve definitions of relapse were found based on hospitalization/emergency department (ED) data (28 studies) or clinical assessment (5 studies). No definition was provided in five studies. According to quantitative analyses, in studies defining relapse as schizophrenia‐related hospitalization and/or ED visits over 1‐year follow‐up, LAIs were significantly more effective than OAPs. For studies measuring relapse based on all‐cause hospitalization, heterogeneity was too high for pooling; yet this definition is the most frequently found in pooled estimates published in the literature. Schizophrenia relapse definitions led to substantial heterogeneity of comparative effectiveness estimates of LAIs versus OAPs. Creating study subgroups based on relapse definition effectively reduces statistical heterogeneity. Definition of schizophrenia relapse is a major source of heterogeneity in observational studies comparing long‐acting injectables with oral antipsychotic drugs. Hence, standardization of criteria to ascertain relapse as an outcome would be needed to allow synthesis of available findings.

In Canada, interventions and policies have been implemented to minimize the risk of opioid-related harms. This mixed methods study aimed at describing trends over time in implementation, as well as in awareness and health outcomes. For implementation, we conducted a scoping review to identify opioids interventions and policies implemented in Canada between 1 January 2016 and 15 November 2019. Awareness was measured through a descriptive analysis of opioid-related harm cases reported by consumers and health care professionals (HCPs) to the national spontaneous reporting system and of social media coverage, while health outcome consisted of opioid-related deaths recorded in the coroner’s reports database of the province of Quebec, Canada. Trends over time in implementation of interventions were compared to trends in awareness and opioid-related deaths, without implying causality. There were 413 national or provincial interventions on opioids implemented over the study period, with a four-fold increase in 2016. The most common (31.5%) was harm reduction strategies, such as naloxone distribution. The reporting rate of opioid-related harms ranged between 0.1 and 0.2 per 100,000 persons with no observed time trend. Compared to 2015, the number of social media posts increased in 2016 by 35.4% (Reddit), 329.0% (Facebook), and 381.5% (Twitter). Between 2016 and 2019, there was a slight decrease in the number of opioid-related deaths recorded in the coroner’s database. Overall, the increase in the number of policies did not see a parallel increase in spontaneous reports of opioid-related harms as an indicator of consumer or HCP awareness. Conversely, the dramatic increase in social media coverage was consistent with heightened public awareness. Although no inferences of causality were made in this study, the decrease in opioid-related deaths observed in the recent years may indicate a potential effectiveness of interventions and policies.

Introduction Some adverse drug reactions (ADRs) may involve direct social issues, such as impaired quality of life, work productivity, or social functioning, as opposed to being social consequences of medical adverse events. Data on ADRs with a direct social impact remain scarce in the literature. Objective Our objective was to describe the ADRs consisting of direct social issues that have been recorded in the Canadian national spontaneous reporting system (Canada Vigilance). Methods We conducted an analysis of the online Canada Vigilance spontaneous reporting database from 1 January 1965 (inception) to 31 December 2015 (last date available). We manually examined all Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) preferred terms (PTs) found in the Canada Vigilance database to identify those that involved direct social issues. We then used those PTs to search for relevant individual case safety reports (ICSRs). We conducted a descriptive analysis of the following ICSR characteristics: patient and reporter characteristics, type of ADR, seriousness (as assessed by the reporter and according to the International Conference on Harmonisation criteria of seriousness), and suspected drug(s). We compared the characteristics of ADRs with and without direct social impact. Results Among the 11,946 MedDRA PTs recorded in Canada Vigilance, we retained 40 that had a direct social impact. Using these PTs, we identified 9557 relevant ICSRs (corresponding to 6670 patients). The proportion of ADRs consisting of direct social issues increased over time, with a sharp transient peak in 2008. The majority were reported by healthcare professionals and consumers (56.7 and 37.8%, respectively). The mean age of patients was 45.4 years, and 53.3% were females. Direct social issues consisted of personality disorders and behaviour disturbances (41.6%) followed by neurological disorders (34.2%). The majority of ADRs were considered serious by reporters (76.5%), with 26.8% resulting in hospitalization. Commonly suspected health products included nervous system drugs (63.3%) and antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents (23.6%). Compared with other ADRs, those with a direct social impact were more often reported by consumers, involved patients who were on average 5 years younger, and were more frequently assessed as being serious by the reporters. Conclusions Findings from this study support the consideration of direct social issues as ADRs in the detection of drug safety signals.

Aim/Objective: To explore the trends in the number and types of spontaneous reports before and after (i) the COVID-19 lockdown in the United States (US) and the European Economic Area (EEA), (ii) Brexit in the EEA, and to quantitatively assess the impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on safety signal detection. Methods: We analyzed spontaneous reports from the US and EEA, dated 01 Jan. 2018 to 26 Dec. 2021, obtained from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). Time series analyses were performed, based on type of reporter (health care professionals [HCP], consumers) and AE seriousness, using interrupted autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models with step (short-term effect) and ramp (long-term effect) intervention functions. The study also compared reporting odds ratios (RORs) estimated until the start of the pandemic and up to the date of FDA publication for two signals–(i) hypersensitivity to apremilast (end of Sep. 2020) and (ii) diabetic ketoacidosis linked to SGLT2 inhibitors in type 1 diabetic patients (end of Dec. 2020)–to assess potential delays in signal detection due to the COVID-19 lockdown. Results: Significant and immediate reductions in weekly serious HCP reports of -746 (95% CI: -1,267; -225) in the US, and -1,064 (95% CI: -1,709; -419) in the EEA were present during the first week of lockdown. Similarly analyses showed a significant immediate decrease in weekly serious reports from the EEA of -1,009 (95% CI: - 1,509; -509) following Brexit. Additionally, the ROR for SGLT2 inhibitors was significant at the onset of the pandemic. Conclusion: An immediate decline in the number of weekly spontaneous reports of serious events followed both the COVID-19 lockdown and Brexit. These trends did not revert by the end of their respective study periods. Moreover, the COVID-19 lockdown may have delayed the detection of safety signals. Overall, these findings provide an empirical demonstration of the effects of external factors on spontaneous reporting practices.

Incidence and prevalence estimates for Gaucher disease (GD) are scarce for this rare disease and can be variable within the same region. This review provides a qualitative synthesis of global GD incidence and prevalence estimates, GD1–3 type-specific and overall, published in the last 10 years. A targeted literature search was conducted across multiple databases from January 2011 to September 2020, including web-based sources and congress proceedings to May 2021. Searches yielded 490 publications, with 31 analyzed: 20 cohort studies (15 prospective, 5 retrospective), 6 cross-sectional studies, 5 online reports (most from Europe (n = 11) or North America (n = 11); one multiregional). Across all GD types, incidence estimates ranged 0.45–25.0/100,000 live births (16 studies), lowest for Asia-Pacific. Incidence of GD1: 0.45–22.9/100,000 live births (Europe and North America) and GD3: 1.36/100,000 live births (Asia-Pacific only). GD type-specific prevalence estimates per 100,000 population were GD1: 0.26–0.63; GD2 and GD3: 0.02–0.08 (Europe only); estimates for GD type unspecified or overall ranged 0.11–139.0/100,000 inhabitants (17 studies), highest for North America. Generalizability was assessed as “adequate”or “intermediate” for all regions with data. GD incidence and prevalence estimates for the last 10 years varied considerably between regions and were poorly documented outside Europe and North America. Data for GD2 and GD3 were limited.

Canada and the United States have the highest levels of prescription opioid consumption in the world. In an attempt to curb the opioid epidemic, a variety of interventions have been implemented. Thus far, evidence regarding their effectiveness has not been consolidated. The objectives of this study were to: 1) identify interventions that target opioid prescribing; 2) assess and compare the effectiveness of interventions on opioid prescription and related harms; 3) determine the methodological quality of evaluation studies. The study involved a systematic review of the literature including bibliographical databases and gray literature sources. Systematic review including bibliographical databases and gray literature sources. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS databases from January 1, 2005 to September 23, 2016 for any intervention that targeted the prescription of opioids. We also examined websites of relevant organizations and scanned bibliographies of included articles and reviews for additional references. The target population was that of all health care providers (HCPs) or users of opioids with no restriction on indication. Endpoints were those related to process (implementation), outcomes (effectiveness), or impact. Sources were screened independently by 2 reviewers using pre-defined eligibility criteria. Synthesis of findings was qualitative; no pooling of results was conducted. Literature search yielded 12,278 unique sources. Of these, 142 were retained. During full-text review, 75 were further excluded. Searches of the gray literature and bibliographies yielded 49 additional sources. Thus, a total of 95 distinct interventions were identified. Over half consisted of prescription monitoring programs (PMPs) and mainly targeted HCPs. Evaluation studies addressed mainly opioid prescription rate (30.6%), opioid use (19.4%), or doctor shopping or diversion (9.7%). Fewer studies considered overdose death (9.7%), abuse (9.7%), misuse (4.2%), or diversion (5.6%). Study designs consisted of cross-sectional surveys (23.3%), pre-post intervention (26.7%), or time series without a comparison group (13.3%), which limit the robustness of the evidence. Although PMPs and policies have been associated with a reduction in opioid prescription, their impact on appropriateness of use according to clinical guidelines and restriction of access to patients in need is inconsistent. Continuing medical education (CME) and pain management programs were found effective in improving chronic pain management, but studies were conducted in specific settings. The impact of interventions on abuse and overdose-death is conflicting. Due to the very large number of publications and programs found, it was difficult to compare interventions owing to the heterogeneity of the programs and to the methodologies of evaluation studies. No assessment of publication bias was done in the review. Evidence of effectiveness of interventions targeting the prescription of opioids is scarce in the literature. Although PMPs have been associated with a reduction in the overall prescription rates of Schedule II opioids, their impact on the appropriateness of use taking into consideration benefits, misuse, legal and illegal use remains elusive. Our review suggests that existing interventions have not addressed all determinants of inappropriate opioid prescribing and usage. A well-described theoretical framework would be the backdrop against which targeted interventions or policies may be developed. Opioid, prescription, abuse, misuse, diversion, interventions, prescription monitoring programs.

Introduction Published data on the safety of natural medical cannabis (MC) when used in the real-world clinical practice setting are lacking. This study aimed to describe adverse events (AEs) reported across three years following MC initiation. Methods The Quebec Cannabis Registry (QCR) was a prospective registry of adults enrolled through participating physicians when they initiated MC between May 2015 and October 2018. Follow-up ended at MC discontinuation, loss to follow-up, three years, or end of data collection (May 2019). Data were collected at baseline and at follow-up visits every three months for the first two years, then once in the third year. Physicians filled adverse event (AE) reports, which were coded using MedDRA® preferred terms (PTs), and descriptive analyses were conducted. Results A total of 2991 patients were enrolled (mean age 50.9 years, 50.2% females). During follow-up, 108 patients (3.6%) experienced moderate or severe AEs, yielding 111 AE reports (three patients had two reports) and 214 AEs (average 1.9 AEs per report). Mild AEs were recorded as a reason for MC discontinuation for nine patients, but no AE reports were available. The most common PTs for ingested MC (62 reports) were dizziness (12.9%), nausea (11.3%), somnolence (9.7%), and vomiting (8.1%), and for inhaled MC (23 reports), headache (13.0%) was the most common. The most frequent PTs associated with tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-dominant MC (25 reports) were dizziness and somnolence (12.0% each); for cannabidiol (CBD)-dominant MC (20 reports), vomiting (20.0%) was most common; and dizziness (17.2%), nausea (13.8%), somnolence (10.3%), and headache (8.6%) were the most frequent for balanced MC (58 reports). Conclusion No new safety concerns were identified relative to the published literature, although notable differences in AE profile between modes of administration and cannabinoid content ratios should be considered by health professionals. Further work identifying and managing risk factors for AEs is warranted to maintain a favorable benefit-risk balance for MC.

Introduction Published data on the safety of natural medical cannabis (MC) when used in the real-world clinical practice setting are lacking. This study aimed to describe adverse events (AEs) reported across three years following MC initiation. Methods The Quebec Cannabis Registry (QCR) was a prospective registry of adults enrolled through participating physicians when they initiated MC between May 2015 and October 2018. Follow-up ended at MC discontinuation, loss to follow-up, three years, or end of data collection (May 2019). Data were collected at baseline and at follow-up visits every three months for the first two years, then once in the third year. Physicians filled adverse event (AE) reports, which were coded using MedDRA ® preferred terms (PTs), and descriptive analyses were conducted. Results A total of 2991 patients were enrolled (mean age 50.9 years, 50.2% females). During follow-up, 108 patients (3.6%) experienced moderate or severe AEs, yielding 111 AE reports (three patients had two reports) and 214 AEs (average 1.9 AEs per report). Mild AEs were recorded as a reason for MC discontinuation for nine patients, but no AE reports were available. The most common PTs for ingested MC (62 reports) were dizziness (12.9%), nausea (11.3%), somnolence (9.7%), and vomiting (8.1%), and for inhaled MC (23 reports), headache (13.0%) was the most common. The most frequent PTs associated with tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-dominant MC (25 reports) were dizziness and somnolence (12.0% each); for cannabidiol (CBD)-dominant MC (20 reports), vomiting (20.0%) was most common; and dizziness (17.2%), nausea (13.8%), somnolence (10.3%), and headache (8.6%) were the most frequent for balanced MC (58 reports). Conclusion No new safety concerns were identified relative to the published literature, although notable differences in AE profile between modes of administration and cannabinoid content ratios should be considered by health professionals. Further work identifying and managing risk factors for AEs is warranted to maintain a favorable benefit-risk balance for MC.

Our study evaluated adverse events of therapeutic failure (and specifically reduced duration of action) with the use of a branded product, Osmotic Release Oral System (OROS) methylphenidate, which is approved for the treatment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and a generic product (methylphenidate, methylphenidate ER-C), which was approved for marketing in Canada based on bioequivalence to OROS methylphenidate. This study was initiated following reports that some US-marketed generic methylphenidate ER products had substantially higher reporting rates of therapeutic failure than did the referenced brands. Through methodology similar to that used by the US Food and Drug Administration to investigate the issue with the US-marketed generic, reporting rates were calculated from cases of therapeutic failure identified in the Canadian Vigilance Adverse Reaction Online database for a 1-year period beginning 8 months after each product launch. Corresponding population exposure was estimated from the number of tablets dispensed. An in-depth analysis of narratives of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) with the use of the generic product was conducted in duplicate by 2 physicians to assess causality and to characterize the potential safety risk and clinical pattern of therapeutic failure. Similar secondary analyses were conducted on the US-marketed products. Reporting rates of therapeutic failure with the use of methylphenidate ER-C (generic) and OROS methylphenidate (brand name) were 411.5 and 37.5 cases per 100,000 patient-years, respectively (reporting rate ratio, 10.99; 95% CI, 5.93–22.21). In-depth analysis of narratives of 230 ICSRs of therapeutic failure with the Canadian-marketed generic determined that all ICSRs were either probably (60 [26%]) or possibly (170 [74%]) causally related to methylphenidate ER-C. Clinical symptoms suggestive of overdose were present in 31 reports of loss of efficacy (13.5%) and occurred primarily in the morning, and premature loss of efficacy (shorter duration of action) was described in 98 cases (42.6%) and occurred primarily in the afternoon. Impacts on social functioning, such as disruption in work or school performance or adverse social behaviors, were found in 51 cases (22.2%). The ~10-fold higher reporting rate of therapeutic failure with the generic product relative to its reference product in the present Canadian study resembles findings with US-marketed generic products. While these results should be interpreted with caution due to the limitations of spontaneous adverse event reporting, which may confound comparisons across products, similar findings nonetheless led the US Food and Drug Administration to declare in 2014 that 2 methylphenidate ER generic products in the United States were neither bioequivalent nor interchangeable with OROS methylphenidate—their reference product. Our results indicate a potential safety issue with the Canadian-marketed generic and suggest a need for further investigation by Health Canada.