Screening for Adverse Drug Events: a Randomized Trial of Automated Calls Coupled with Phone-Based Pharmacist Counseling.

BACKGROUND: Medication adverse events are important and common yet are often not identified by clinicians. We evaluated an automated telephone surveillance system coupled with transfer to a live pharmacist to screen potentially drug-related symptoms after newly starting medications for four common primary care conditions: hypertension, diabetes, depression, and insomnia. METHODS: Cluster randomized trial with automated calls to eligible patients at 1 and 4 months after starting target drugs from intervention primary care clinics compared to propensity-matched patients from control clinics. Primary and secondary outcomes were physician documentation of any adverse effects associated with newly prescribed target medication, and whether the medication was discontinued and, if yes, whether the reason for stopping was an adverse effect. RESULTS: Of 4876 eligible intervention clinic patients who were contacted using automated calls, 776 (15.1%) responded and participated in the automated call. Based on positive symptom responses or request to speak to a pharmacist, 320 patients were transferred to the pharmacist and discussed 1021 potentially drug-related symptoms. Of these, 188 (18.5%) were assessed as probably and 479 (47.1%) as possibly related to the medication. Compared to a propensity-matched cohort of control clinic patients, intervention patients were significantly more likely to have adverse effects documented in the medical record by a physician (277 vs. 164 adverse effects, p < 0.0001, and 177 vs. 122 patients discontinued with documented adverse effects, p < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: Systematic automated telephone outreach monitoring coupled with real-time phone referral to a pharmacist identified a substantial number of previously unidentified potentially drug-related symptoms, many of which were validated as probably or possibly related to the drug by the pharmacist or their physicians. Multiple challenges were encountered using the interactive voice response (IVR) automated calling system, suggesting that other approaches may need to be considered and evaluated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02087293.

Efficacy and safety of high-dose pravastatin in hypercholesterolemic patients with well-compensated chronic liver disease: Results of a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial.

UNLABELLED: The hepatotoxic potential of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors in patients with underlying chronic liver disease remains controversial. We performed a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial that compared pravastatin (80 mg) to a placebo administered once daily to hypercholesterolemic subjects greater than 18 years of age with at least a 6-month history of compensated chronic liver disease and with a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level greater than or equal to 100 mg/dL and a triglyceride (TG) level lower than 400 mg/dL. The efficacy was determined by the percentage change in LDL-C [along with the total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and TG] from the baseline to week 12. The safety was analyzed by the proportion of subjects who developed at least 1 alanine aminotransferase (ALT) value greater than or equal to 2 times the upper limit of normal for those with normal ALT at the baseline or a doubling of the baseline ALT for those with elevated ALT at the baseline during 36 weeks of treatment. A total of 630 subjects were screened, and 326 subjects were randomized; nonalcoholic fatty liver disease was present in 64%, and chronic hepatitis C was present in 23%. In the intent-to-treat population, pravastatin (80 mg/day) significantly lowered the mean LDL-C, TC, and TG values at week 12 and at other times (weeks 4, 8, 24, and 36) in comparison with the placebo. The incidence of subjects who met the primary prespecified ALT event definition was lower in the pravastatin group at all times over the 36 weeks of therapy in comparison with the placebo group, although the difference was not statistically significant. No differences were seen on the basis of the baseline ALT values or among the different liver disease groups. CONCLUSION: High-dose pravastatin (80 mg/day) administered to hypercholesterolemic subjects with chronic liver disease significantly lowered LDL-C, TC, and TGs in comparison with the placebo and was safe and well tolerated. The concern over an increased potential for statin-induced hepatotoxicity in patients with chronic liver disease appears to be lessened on the basis of these results.

Residue-free sodium phosphate tablets (OsmoPrep) versus Visicol for colon cleansing: a randomized, investigator-blinded trial.

BACKGROUND: The bowel purgative Visicol contains microcrystalline cellulose (MCC) residue, which may impair full visibility during a colonoscopy. An MCC residue-free sodium phosphate (RF-NaP; OsmoPrep) tablet was developed. OBJECTIVE: To investigate appropriate RF-NaP dosing. DESIGN: Phase 2, randomized, investigator-blinded study. SETTING: Six research centers in the United States. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Patients undergoing a colonoscopy received Visicol (n = 34) or 1 of 6 RF-NaP regimens administered as either split (S) dosing (the evening before and the day of colonoscopy) or evening-only (E) dosing. Dosing regimens for RF-NaP were 40 tablets S, 3 every 15 minutes (n = 33); 40 tablets S, 4 every 15 minutes (n = 34); 32 tablets E, 4 every 15 minutes (n = 34); 32 tablets S, 4 every 15 minutes (n = 36); 28 tablets E, 4 every 15 minutes (n = 34); 28 tablets S, 4 every 15 minutes (n = 34). Visicol was administered as 40 tablets S, 3 every 15 minutes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Overall colon cleansing (OCC) was assessed by a physician questionnaire (4-point scale, based on colonic contents). An OCC rating of "excellent" or "good" was considered a response. Safety measures were also monitored. RESULTS: Split dosing with RF-NaP was associated with high OCC and achieved response rates of 90%, 97%, and 100% for 28, 32, and 40 tablets, respectively, compared with 86% for Visicol. In addition, RF-NaP evening-only regimen response rates were 90% (32 tablets) and 72% (28 tablets). Transient shifts in electrolyte levels were reduced, and GI adverse events were less common with lower RF-NaP dose regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of RF-NaP retains the benefits of a tablet purgative but eliminates MCC issues. Split dosing and 32-tablet evening-only dosing of RF-NaP tablets were efficacious and well tolerated, and split dosing of RF-NaP tablets is recommended.

Open-label, dose-ranging pilot study of 4 weeks of low-dose therapy with sodium phosphate tablets in chronically constipated adults.

BACKGROUND: The tablet formulation of sodium phosphate (NaP) is a prescription osmotic purgative that has been marketed since 2001. The use of NaP tablets in patients with constipation has not been studied previously. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the tolerability and efficacy of 28 days of therapy with NaP tablets (1.5 g NaP/tablet) in patients with chronic constipation. METHODS: Adults with functional constipation or constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome and Z-3 spontaneous bowel movements (BMs) during the 7-day screening/baseline period were eligible for this open-label, dose-ranging study. Patients were randomized to receive starting doses of 4 NaP tablets (group A) or 8 NaP tablets (group B) each morning for 28 days. After a minimum of 48 hours, the NaP dose could be titrated upward (in the case of no BM or no relief of symptoms) or downward (in the case of a predefined excess laxative response) by 2 tablets/d to a minimum of 2 tablets/d or a maximum of 12 tablets/d. Patients kept a diary of their BMs and gastrointestinal symptoms. A serum chemistry panel was obtained weekly. The primary end points were the constipation response (based on the change from baseline in weekly number of BMs) and the global sense response (based on daily scores for the patient's overall sense of change in their bowel problems). RESULTS: At randomization, there were 18 patients in group A and 25 in group B. Of these, 40 patients (16 group A, 24 group B) had > or 7 days of diary information while taking study treatment and were evaluable for efficacy. The constipation response rate was 100% in group A and 95.8% in group B, and the respective global sense response rates were 68.8% and 79.2%. Four patients in group B withdrew due to adverse events, none of which were serious. Five patients had occasional hypokalemia that required no treatment. Changes from baseline in serum concentrations of calcium, inorganic phosphorus, and potassium were not clinically significant and did not require treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In this small study, NaP tablets taken daily were generally well tolerated (particularly in the low-dose group) and produced prompt relief of constipation--generally within the first week of treatment--that was sustained over the 28-day treatment period. A reasonable starting dose appears to be 2 to 4 tablets (3-6 g NaP) daily.