Competing Benefits and Competing Hazards: The Benefit to Harm Balance in Individual Patients in Rational Therapeutics.

For any therapeutic intervention in an individual, there is a balance between the potential benefits and the possible harms. The extent to which the benefits are desirable in a given condition depends on the efficacy of the intervention, the chance of obtaining it and the seriousness and intensity of the condition. The extent to which the harms are undesirable depends on the nature of the hazard that can lead to harm, the chance that the harm will occur and its seriousness and intensity. Rational therapeutic decisions require clinicians to consider competing courses of action, with potential benefits of different desirability and potential harms of different undesirability. They also have a duty to explain to the patient, for the contemplated interventions, both the possible benefits and the potential harms that the patient may consider significant. In an individual patient, it is necessary to consider (a) the probabilities of benefit from both intervention and non-intervention and (b) the probabilities of harm from both intervention and non-intervention. However, there are several potential problems. Here, we consider how failure to distinguish maximum benefits from probable benefits, or hazards (potential harms) from probable harms, and failure to consider all the competing probabilities may lead to imperfect therapeutic decisions. We also briefly discuss methods to assess the benefit to harm balance.

Preventable deaths involving opioids in England and Wales, 2013-2022: a systematic case series of coroners' reports.

BACKGROUND: Opioid deaths have increased in England and Wales. Coroners' Prevention of Future Deaths reports (PFDs) provide important insights that may enable safer use and avert harms, yet reports implicating opioids have not been synthesized. We aimed to identify opioid-related PFDs and explore coroners' concerns to prevent future deaths. METHODS: In this systematic case series, we screened 3897 coronial PFDs dated between 01 July 2013 and 23 February 2022, obtained by web scraping the UK's Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website. PFDs were included when an opioid was implicated in the death. Included PFDs were descriptively analysed, and content analysis was used to assess concerns reported by coroners. RESULTS: Opioids were involved in 219 deaths reported in PFDs (5·6% of PFDs), equating to 4418 years of life lost (median 33 years/person). Morphine (29%), methadone (23%) and diamorphine (16%) were the most common implicated opioids. Coroners most frequently raised concerns regarding systems and protocols (52%) or safety issues (15%). These concerns were most often addressed to National Health Service (NHS) organizations (51%), but response rates were low overall (47%). CONCLUSIONS: Opioids could be used more safely if coroners' concerns in PFDs were addressed by national organizations such as NHS bodies, government agencies and policymakers, as well as individual prescribing clinicians.

Effectiveness of biosimilar adoption within a UK tertiary hospital: 6-year follow-up.

Health systems encourage switching from originators to biosimilars as biosimilars are more cost-effective. The speed and completeness of biosimilar adoption is a measure of efficiency. We describe the approach to biosimilar adoption at a single hospital Trust and compare its efficiency against the English average. We additionally follow up patients who reverted to a previously used biologic, having switched to a biosimilar, to establish whether they benefitted from re-establishing prior treatment. The approach we describe resulted in a faster and more complete switch to biosimilars, which saved an additional £380 000 on drug costs in 2021/2022. Of patients who reverted to their original biologic, 87% improved short-term, and a time on treatment analysis showed the benefit was retained long term. Our approach to biosimilar adoption outperformed the English average and permits patients to revert to their original biosimilar post-switch if appropriate.

Recognition of Coroners' Concerns to Prevent Future Deaths from Medicines: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Coroners, who hold inquests to determine the causes of unnatural deaths in England and Wales, having recognised factors that could cause other deaths, are legally obliged to signal concerns by sending 'Reports to Prevent Future Deaths' (PFDs) to interested persons. We aimed to establish whether Coroners' concerns about medications are widely recognised. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science up to 30 November, 2022 for publications linking PFDs and medications using a combination of search terms "coroner*", "inquest*", "medicine*", "medication*" and "prevent*". We also searched the BMJ, a UK journal that carries news items; and the databases Nexis Advance and News On the Web for reports in national newspapers between 2013 and 2022, using the search terms ("regulation 28" OR "prevent future deaths" OR "prevention of future deaths") AND "coroner". We recorded the number of publications, as well as their citations in Google Scholar at 23 May, 2023. RESULTS: Only 11 published papers on medicines referenced UK PFDs, nine of which were from our group. The BMJ carried 23 articles mentioning PFDs, five related to medicines. Of 139 PFDs (out of over 4000) mentioned in national newspapers, only nine related to medicines. CONCLUSIONS: The PFDs related to medicines are not widely referred to in medical journals or UK national newspapers. By contrast, the Australian and New Zealand National Coronial Information System has contributed cases to 206 publications cited in PubMed, of which 139 are related to medicines. Our search suggests that information from English and Welsh Coroners' PFDs is under-recognised, even though it should inform public health. The results of inquiries by Coroners and medical examiners worldwide into potentially preventable deaths involving medicines should be used to strengthen the safety of medicines.

Drug shortages. Part 1. Definitions and harms.

Drug shortages are repeatedly in the news. The earliest drug shortages were reported during the First World War, but the numbers of shortages have increased in recent years. In the first part of this two-part review, we discuss definitions of drug shortages and so-called stockouts, which are localized shortages, and the harms that they can cause. Drug shortages make it difficult or impossible to meet the therapeutic needs of individual patients or populations, but we lack an adequate definition. The problems are too complicated to be encompassed in a brief intensional dictionary-style definition, and that is reflected in the many different attempts at definition that have been proposed. We therefore propose an extensional operational definition that incorporates the processes by which products are manufactured, the causes of shortages and the contributory factors. A definition of this sort allows one to identify the main causes of a particular drug shortage and therefore the remedies that might prevent, mitigate or manage it. In the second part of the review we discuss the causes and solutions in more detail. Adverse drug reactions and medication errors attributable to shortages occur but are not often reported. Adverse reactions to substitute medicines are possible, and errors can occur because of unfamiliarity or unnecessary treatment with replacement medicines. Other harmful outcomes include withdrawal reactions, undertreatment, treatment delays and cancellations, failure of alternatives and disruption of clinical trials.

Drug shortages. Part 2: Trends, causes and solutions.

Drug shortages make it difficult or impossible to meet the therapeutic needs of individual patients or populations. In the first part of this review we proposed an operational definition that incorporates the processes by which products are manufactured, the causes of shortages and stock-outs (local shortages), and the contributory factors. Here we discuss causes and possible solutions. Drug shortages have complex causes, and a single cause cannot always be identified. Reasons include lack or shortage of raw materials, manufacturing difficulties, regulatory and political actions, voluntary recalls, just-in-time inventory systems, halts in production for financial or other business reasons, low demand (eg, orphan products, reduced usage), mergers, market shifts (eg, diversion to home markets) and unexpected increases in demand (eg, improved diagnosis, new trial information, epidemics and pandemics, inappropriate use, off-label use). Potential solutions are as diverse as the potential causes. Prevention is hard, because shortages are not easily predicted. Everyone in the supply chain is involved in anticipating and managing shortages, with responsibilities for preventing them or at least trying to mitigate their effects. This includes manufacturers and suppliers, particularly of generic formulations, pharmacists, prescribers, patients and governments. Solutions can therefore be linked to the causes and classified according to where the responsibility for implementing them lies.

How to assess pharmacogenomic tests for implementation in the NHS in England.

AIMS: Pharmacogenomic testing has the potential to target medicines more effectively towards those who will benefit and avoid use in individuals at risk of harm. Health economies are actively considering how pharmacogenomic tests can be integrated into health care systems to improve use of medicines. However, one of the barriers to effective implementation is evaluation of the evidence including clinical usefulness, cost-effectiveness, and operational requirements. We sought to develop a framework that could aid the implementation of pharmacogenomic testing. We take the view from the National Health Service (NHS) in England. METHODS: We used a literature review using EMBASE and Medline databases to identify prospective studies of pharmacogenomic testing, focusing on clinical outcomes and implementation of pharmacogenomics. Using this search, we identified key themes relating to the implementation of pharmacogenomic tests. We used a clinical advisory group with expertise in pharmacology, pharmacogenomics, formulary evaluation, and policy implementation to review data from our literature review and the interpretation of these data. With the clinical advisory group, we prioritized themes and developed a framework to evaluate proposals to implement pharmacogenomics tests. RESULTS: Themes that emerged from review of the literature and subsequent discussion were distilled into a 10-point checklist that is proposed as a tool to aid evidence-based implementation of pharmacogenomic testing into routine clinical care within the NHS. CONCLUSION: Our 10-point checklist outlines a standardized approach that could be used to evaluate proposals to implement pharmacogenomic tests. We propose a national approach, taking the view of the NHS in England. Using this approach could centralize commissioning of appropriate pharmacogenomic tests, reduce inequity and duplication using regional approaches, and provide a robust and evidence-based framework for adoption. Such an approach could also be applied to other health systems.

Treatment of insulin poisoning: A 100-year review.

BACKGROUND: Insulin poisoning, as opposed to hypoglycaemia induced by therapeutic doses of insulin, is rare, and guidelines on management differ. We have reviewed the evidence on treatment of insulin poisoning. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and J-Stage with no restrictions of date or language for controlled studies on treatment of insulin poisoning, collected published cases of insulin poisoning from 1923, and used data from the UK National Poisons Information Service. RESULTS: We identified no controlled trials of treatment in insulin poisoning and few relevant experimental studies. Case reports described 315 admissions (301 patients) with insulin poisoning between 1923 and 2022. The insulin with the longest duration of action was long-acting in 83 cases, medium-acting in 116, short-acting in 36 and a rapid-acting analogue in 16. Decontamination by surgical excision of the injection site was reported in six cases. To restore and maintain euglycaemia, almost all cases were treated with glucose, infused for a median 51 hours, interquartile range 16-96 h in 179 cases; 14 patients received glucagon and nine octreotide; adrenaline was tried occasionally. Both corticosteroids and mannitol were occasionally given to mitigate hypoglycaemic brain damage. There were 29 deaths reported, 22/156 (86% survival) up to 1999 and 7/159 (96% survival) between 2000 and 2022 (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: There is no randomized controlled trial to guide treatment of insulin poisoning. Treatment with glucose infusion, sometimes supplemented with glucagon, is almost always effective in restoring euglycaemia, but optimum treatments to maintain euglycaemia and restore cerebral function remain uncertain.

Preventable Deaths Involving Medicines: A Systematic Case Series of Coroners' Reports 2013-22.

INTRODUCTION: Medicines cause over 1700 preventable deaths annually in England. Coroners' Prevention of Future Death reports (PFDs) are produced in response to preventable deaths to facilitate change. The information in PFDs may help reduce medicine-related preventable deaths. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify medicine-related deaths in coroners' reports and to explore concerns to prevent future deaths. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective case series of PFDs across England and Wales, dated between 1 July, 2013 and 23 February, 2022, collected from the UK's Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website using web scraping, generating an openly available database: https://preventabledeathstracker.net/ . We used descriptive techniques and content analysis to assess the main outcome criteria: the proportion of PFDs in which coroners reported that a therapeutic medicine or drug of abuse had caused or contributed to a death; the characteristics of included PFDs; coroners' concerns; the recipients of PFDs; and the timeliness of their responses. RESULTS: There were 704 PFDs (18%; 716 deaths) that involved medicines, representing an estimated 19,740 years of life lost (average of 50 years lost per death). Opioids (22%), antidepressants (9.7%), and hypnotics (9.2%) were the most common drugs involved. Coroners expressed 1249 concerns, primarily around the major themes of patient safety (29%) and communication (26%), including minor themes of failures of monitoring (10%) and poor communication between organizations (7.5%). Most expected responses to PFDs (51%; 630/1245) were not reported on the UK's Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website. CONCLUSIONS: One in five coroner-reported preventable deaths involved medicines. Addressing coroners' concerns, including problems with patient safety and communication, should reduce harms from medicines. Despite concerns being raised repeatedly, half of the PFD recipients failed to respond, suggesting that lessons are not generally learned. The rich information in PFDs should be used to foster a learning environment in clinical practice that may help reduce preventable deaths. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TX3CS .

Are high-cost drug funding mechanisms fit for purpose? A retrospective study of individual funding requests in an NHS tertiary hospital.

AIMS: To report on a retrospective study of individual funding request (IFR) submissions from a large tertiary hospital and describe gaps in current mechanisms for funding of high-cost medicines in England. METHODS: Data on the number and outcome of IFR submissions submitted to commissioners between 2014/15 and 2018/19 was extracted from the electronic patient health record and a local high-cost drug database. RESULTS: In total, 230 IFRs were submitted: 112 to NHS England and 118 to a Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). The decline rate for IFRs was 71% for NHS England and 34% for CCGs. Lack of exceptionality was the primary reason cited for declining IFRs submitted between 2016-18 (n = 42/45; 93%). Half of the patients whose IFR was declined received treatment funded through other routes, the majority (13/23; 57%) from internal hospital budget. This was governed via a local high-cost drug panel. Positive clinical outcomes were observed in 50% (4/8) of patients who received NHS England IFR-funded treatment, 54% (19/35) who received CCG IFR-funded treatment and 91% (21/23) who were funded via other routes. CONCLUSION: The high rate of IFR decline signals inefficient use of resource expended in the IFR process. Gaps in access to high-cost medicines remain for patients with rare and refractory disease requiring urgent treatment, largely due to the demand for exceptionality from NHS commissioners. Local mechanisms address this unmet need but have limitations. An outcomes-based evaluation approach to commissioning and greater transparency of previous funding decisions by commissioners may improve efficiency and equity in the IFR system.

Medicines legislation and regulation in the United Kingdom 1500-2020.

The initial purposes of regulation of medicines in England, and latterly in the United Kingdom, were principally to raise government revenue, to discourage murder by poisoning and to regulate the activities of pharmacists. It was only much later that regulators sought to ensure that medicines were of good quality, reasonably safe, and at least somewhat effective, and to curtail misuse of drugs. Here we survey the history of the regulation of medicines and poisons in England from the perspective of clinicians with an interest in therapeutics.

Prescribing direct-acting oral anticoagulants - Mind the evidence gap.

Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are licensed for the prevention of thromboembolism in non-valvular atrial fibrillation, amongst other indications. Prescribers use information derived from the summary of product characteristics which is based on the key trials supporting the DOAC's market authorisation. However, prescribers may not be aware of the limitations within these trials regarding underrepresentation of patient populations commonly encountered in clinical practice and how this may adversely impact them. This review highlights the gaps in the licensing evidence using four clinical vignettes that explore prescribing challenges in older adults, female patients, patients with obesity and patients from non-Europid ethnic backgrounds.

Phenytoin and damage to the cerebellum - a systematic review of published cases.

INTRODUCTION: The antiseizure medication phenytoin has been associated with changes in the cerebellum, cerebellar signs, and permanent cerebellar damage. We have systematically reviewed the clinical and radiological features, and their correlation. AREAS COVERED: We identified sixty case reports and case series of the effects of phenytoin on the cerebellum by searching Medline and Embase and relevant reference lists. The reports described 92 [median 1, range 1-5] cases, documented median age 28 [2.7-78] years. Eighty-one cases described one or more clinical sign of ataxia (present in 96%), dysarthria (63%), and nystagmus (70%). The neurological outcome (in 76 cases): 10 (13%) recovered by 12 months; 55 (72%) suffered residual disability; and 11 (14%) died. Median serum phenytoin concentration (48 cases) was 50 (interquartile range 31-66) mg/L; only three values were below 20 mg/L. The radiological findings included cerebellar atrophy in 41 of 61 patients (67%) with at least one scan. EXPERT OPINION: Evidence mainly comes from case reports, and is inevitably biased. Most patients with cerebellar dysfunction have phenytoin concentrations above the reference range. Clinical signs of ataxia can persist without radiological evidence of cerebellar atrophy, and cerebellar atrophy is seen without any clinical evidence of cerebellar dysfunction.

Spontaneous Reporting to Regulatory Authorities of Suspected Adverse Drug Reactions to COVID-19 Vaccines Over Time: The Effect of Publicity.

INTRODUCTION: The UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has published frequent summaries of spontaneous reports of suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) (Yellow Cards) to vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The EudraVigilance database has provided similar data for the European Economic Area. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to characterize the evolution over time of spontaneous reports of suspected ADRs to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and to observe the effect of a publicized reaction (cerebral venous and sinus thrombosis [CVST]) on reporting rates. METHODS: We used publicly available data on reports of suspected ADRs and doses of vaccine administered, published by the MHRA, EudraVigilance, and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control to calculate reporting rates. RESULTS: Approximately 4814 Yellow Card reports (23 fatal) per million doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca) and 2890 (13 fatal) per million doses of tozinameran (Pfizer/BioNTech) have been lodged. Between 15 March and 31 October 2021, cumulative European reports of CVST rose from 0 to 443 (183 with thrombocytopenia, 72 fatal) with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and from 2 to 315 (9 with thrombocytopenia, 28 fatal) with tozinameran. European cases of retinal vein occlusion and thrombosis rose from 0 to 168 with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and from 1 to 220 with tozinameran; four of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 cases were associated with thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSION: Reports of fatal adverse reactions to coronavirus vaccines are very rare. Reports of CVST have been made in relation to both vaccines. Most were submitted after the reaction had been publicized. Thrombocytopenia occurred in a minority of cases. Reports linked both vaccines to cases of retinal vein thrombosis, just four cases with thrombocytopenia. This suggests two different mechanisms of thrombosis associated with the vaccines.

Free-of-charge medicine schemes in the NHS: A local and regional drug and therapeutic committee's experience.

INTRODUCTION: Free-of-charge (FoC) medicine schemes are increasingly available and allow access to investigational treatments outside clinical trials or in advance of licensing or NHS commissioning. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed FoC medicine schemes evaluated between 2013 and 2019 by a single NHS trust and a regional drug and therapeutics committee (DTC). The details of each locally reviewed FoC scheme, and any nationally available Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency Early Access to Medicines Scheme (MHRA EAMS) in the same period, were recorded and categorised. RESULTS: Most FoC schemes (95%) allowed access to medicines intended to address an unmet clinical need. Over 7 years, 90% were company-FoC schemes and 10% were MHRA EAMS that were locally reviewed. Phase 3 clinical trial data were available for 44% of FoC schemes, 37% had phase 2 data and 19% were supported only by phase 1 data, retrospective observational studies or preclinical data. Utilisation of company-FoC schemes increased on average by 50% per year, while MHRA EAMS schemes showed little growth. CONCLUSION: Company-FoC medicine schemes are increasingly common. This may indicate a preference for pharmaceutical companies to independently co-ordinate schemes. Motivations for company-FoC schemes remain unclear and many provide access to treatments that are yet to be evaluated in appropriately conducted clinical trials, and whose efficacy and risk of harm remain uncertain. There is no standardisation of this practice and there is no regulatory oversight. Moreover, no standardised data collection framework is in place that could demonstrate the utility of such programmes in addressing unmet clinical need or to allow generation of further evidence.

Coping with COVID: Preparing prescribers during the pandemic.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Health Education England (HEE) and the University of Birmingham provided National Health Service (NHS) staff free access to SCRIPT, a national eLearning programme for safer prescribing and therapeutics. The eLearning was particularly for those returning to work or being redeployed. In the year March 2020-21, 3412 users registered to access portfolios and opened an aggregate of 17 198 modules. Each user completed a median of 2 (range 1-50, interquartile range [IQR] 1-7) assessed learning modules. Marks improved from pre-test to post-test by a median of 2 (IQR 0-3) marks out of 10. The most frequently selected modules were Adherence and Concordance (1109 users), Fluids (981 users) and Diabetic Emergencies (818 users). A total of 878 users accessed the unassessed COVID-19 module. The SCRIPT modules provided standardised education in core principles relating to prescribing and therapeutics, and were used by professionals from many healthcare disciplines.