Off-Label Prescription of COVID-19 Vaccines in Children: Clinical, Ethical, and Legal Issues.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the biologics license application for the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine (Comirnaty) on August 23, 2021, opened the door to the off-label vaccination of children younger than the age range currently covered by either the biologics license application (16 years old and older) or the emergency use authorization (12 to 15 years old). Although prescribing medications at doses, for conditions, or in populations other than those approved by the FDA is generally legal and is common in pediatrics, the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the American Academy of Pediatrics have recommended against off-label prescription of the coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine. Several commentaries consider a case in which parents ask their child's pediatrician to prescribe the vaccine for their 11-year-old with special health care needs before approval or authorization in her age group. The first commentary considers the potential benefits and risks to the patient, as well as to the family, the provider, and society, emphasizing the unknown risks in younger patients and the need for adequate informed consent. The second commentary describes an algorithm and principles for evaluating off-label prescribing and argues that the current benefits of prescribing Comirnaty off label to children <12 do not outweigh the risks. The third commentary addresses ethical and legal issues, ultimately calling on federal agencies to remove legal barriers to making the vaccine available to children in age groups that currently lack authorization.

Hospital pharmacist challenges in evaluation of scientific evidence and its incorporation to pharmacotherapeutic protocols through therapeutic committees in COVID-19 times.

Type 2 coronavirus pandemics that is plaguing almost all the world has caused  qualitative and quantitative strains in health systems that have had to be responded to. The lack of known vaccines and effective treatments has generated the need to  use drugs with very little evidence for their incorporation into pharmacotherapeutic  protocols agreed by the clinical team. The hospital pharmacist, within the  multidisciplinary team, has been responsible for critically evaluating the alternatives and positioning them in these protocols. Finally, some ethical and legal questions  that should be considered in this scenario are analyzed in this article.

La pandemia por coronavirus tipo 2 que está azotando prácticamente todo el mundo ha provocado en los sistemas sanitarios tensiones cualitativas y cuantitativas a las  que ha habido que dar respuesta. La inexistencia de vacunas y de tratamientos  eficaces conocidos ha generado la necesidad de utilizar fármacos con muy escasa  evidencia para su incorporación en protocolos farmacoterapéuticos consensuados  por el equipo clínico. El farmacéutico de hospital, dentro del equipo multidisciplinar,  ha sido en muchas ocasiones el responsable de evaluar críticamente las alternativas para su posicionamiento en estos protocolos. Se analizan en el presente artículo algunas cuestiones éticas y legales que deben ser consideradas en este  escenario.

Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine for the Prevention or Treatment of COVID-19 in Africa: Caution for Inappropriate Off-label Use in Healthcare Settings.

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 pandemic has spread to Africa, where nearly all countries have reported laboratory-confirmed cases of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Although there are ongoing clinical trials of repurposed and investigational antiviral and immune-based therapies, there are as yet no scientifically proven, clinically effective pharmacological treatments for COVID-19. Among the repurposed drugs, the commonly used antimalarials chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have become the focus of global scientific, media, and political attention despite a lack of randomized clinical trials supporting their efficacy. Chloroquine has been used worldwide for about 75 years and is listed by the WHO as an essential medicine to treat malaria. Hydroxychloroquine is mainly used as a therapy for autoimmune diseases. However, the efficacy and safety of CQ/HCQ for the treatment of COVID-19 remains to be defined. Indiscriminate promotion and widespread use of CQ/HCQ have led to extensive shortages, self-treatment, and fatal overdoses. Shortages and increased market prices leave all countries vulnerable to substandard and falsified medical products, and safety issues are especially concerning for Africa because of its healthcare system limitations. Much needed in Africa is a cross-continental collaborative network for coordinated production, distribution, and post-marketing surveillance aligned to low-cost distribution of any approved COVID-19 drug; this would ideally be piggybacked on existing global aid efforts. Meanwhile, African countries should strongly consider implementing prescription monitoring schemes to ensure that any off-label CQ/HCQ use is appropriate and beneficial during this pandemic.

COVID-19 and off label use of drugs: an ethical viewpoint.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 outbreak is rapidly spread over the world and kills infected patients. There is no proven medication for its treatment, so, all of the medications used for treatment are considered to be off-label. Off-label uses are not under regulation in the outbreak because there is no specific regulation for this condition. OBJECTIVES: In this short communication we aim at describing two ways of off-label use as clinical practice or investigational use. Further, we will describe the third way of off-label use, we named it pseudo-research and then we will state the most possible ethical challenges of off-label use for better perceptions and responsibility. RESULTS: The WHO considers off-label uses as country-specific. All international regulatory bodies consider off-label prescription as the physician's responsibility and legal by necessitating some requirements. There is no international guideline for regulating investigational off-label uses as clinical practice. CONCLUSION: There are different types of approaches, none of them is comprehensive and conclusive. Furthermore, respecting the four ethical principles necessitates codification and strict regulation of off-label uses either as clinical practice or investigational. Besides, compilation of a special guideline based on ethical principles especially non-maleficence and autonomy for investigational off-label uses in disasters is highly recommended.

Balancing evidence and frontline experience in the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic: current position of the Italian Society of Anti-infective Therapy (SITA) and the Italian Society of Pulmonology (SIP).

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has rapidly become epidemic in Italy and other European countries. The disease spectrum ranges from asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic presentations to acute respiratory failure. At the present time the absolute number of severe cases requiring ventilator support is reaching or even surpassing the intensive care unit bed capacity in the most affected regions and countries. OBJECTIVES: To narratively summarize the available literature on the management of COVID-19 in order to combine current evidence and frontline opinions and to provide balanced answers to pressing clinical questions. SOURCES: Inductive PubMed search for publications relevant to the topic. CONTENT: The available literature and the authors' frontline-based opinion are summarized in brief narrative answers to selected clinical questions, with a conclusive statement provided for each answer. IMPLICATIONS: Many off-label antiviral and anti-inflammatory drugs are currently being administered to patients with COVID-19. Physicians must be aware that, as they are not supported by high-level evidence, these treatments may often be ethically justifiable only in those worsening patients unlikely to improve only with supportive care, and who cannot be enrolled onto randomized clinical trials. Access to well-designed randomized controlled trials should be expanded as much as possible because it is the most secure way to change for the better our approach to COVID-19 patients.