Use of the recommended drug combination for secondary prevention after a first occurrence of acute coronary syndrome in France.

PURPOSE: The recommended pharmacotherapy for secondary prevention of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is long-term treatment with a combination of four therapeutic classes: beta-blockers, antiplatelet agents (including aspirin), statins or other lipid-lowering agents, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers. The aim of this study was to describe use and persistence of the recommended drug combination after the first occurrence of ACS in France. METHODS: This was a database cohort study of patients with first registration for ACS between 2004 and 2007 in a representative sample of the French healthcare insurance database (Echantillon Généraliste de Bénéficiaires, EGB). The drugs of interest were those recommended. Persistence was assessed for patients dispensed three or all four drug classes within 2 months following ACS. Discontinuation was defined by a gap of more than 6 weeks between two dispensations. The follow-up period was 24 months after ACS occurrence. RESULTS: Of 2,057 patients with incident ACS, 872 (42.4 %) had at least one dispensation of each of the four recommended drug classes, and 684 (33.3 %) had three of the four classes. Persistence to treatment at 24 months was 57.4 % (95 % CI [54.0-60.6]) for patients with four classes, and 55.5 % (95 % CI [51.6-59.1]) with three classes. Discontinuation of initial combination was higher in patients aged ≥ 65 years at ACS occurrence, those with associated ongoing chronic disease, and in those who did not suffer myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: Post-ACS secondary prevention in France is not optimal, especially in patients who did not have myocardial infarction.

Insulin glargine and risk of cancer: a cohort study in the French National Healthcare Insurance Database.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Using the Echantillon Généraliste de Bénéficiaires: random 1/97 permanent sample of the French national healthcare insurance system database (EGB), we investigated whether, as previously suspected, the risk of cancer in insulin glargine (A21Gly,B31Arg,B32Arg human insulin) users is higher than in human insulin users. The investigation period was from 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2010. METHODS: We used Cox proportional hazards time-dependent models that were stratified on propensity score quartiles for use of insulin glargine vs human insulin, and adjusted for insulin, biguanide and sulfonylurea possession rates to assess the risk of cancer or death in all or incident exclusive or predominant (≥ 80% use time) users of insulin glargine compared with equivalent human insulin users. RESULTS: Only type 2 diabetic patients were studied. Exposure rates varied from 2,273 and 614 patient-years for incident exclusive users of insulin glargine or human insulin, respectively, to 3125 and 2341 patient-years for all patients predominantly using insulin glargine or human insulin, respectively. All-type cancer HRs with insulin glargine vs human insulin ranged from 0.59 (95% CI 0.28, 1.25) in incident exclusive users to 0.58 (95% CI 0.34, 1.01) in all predominant users. Cancer risk increased with exposure to insulin or sulfonylureas in these patients. Adjusted HRs for death or cancer associated with insulin glargine compared with human insulin ranged from 0.58 (95% CI 0.32, 1.06) to 0.56 (95% CI 0.36, 0.87). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: There was no excess risk of cancer in type 2 diabetic patients on insulin glargine alone compared with those on human insulin alone. The overall risk of death or cancer in patients on insulin glargine was about half that of patients on human insulin, thereby excluding a competitive risk bias.

Prognostic impact of psychoactive substances use during hospitalization for intentional drug overdose.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether current use of psychoactive substance(s) is a prognostic factor during hospitalization for intentional drug overdose (IDO). METHOD: Current intoxication with psychoactive substance(s) [cannabis, opiate, buprenorphine, amphetamine/ecstasy, cocaine, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD)] was identified using toxicological urinalysis in 671 patients with IDO. An IDO was a priori defined as serious if associated with one of the following events: death, hospitalization in intensive care unit longer than 48 h, respiratory support, use of vasopressive drugs, cardiac massage or dialysis. RESULTS: Subjects positive for toxicological assays were twice as likely to present with serious IDO (OR = 1.9, 95% CI: 1.3-2.8, P = 0.001), independently from a large range of confounding factors. The risk of serious IDO was especially marked in subjects using LSD, buprenorphine or opiates. CONCLUSION: Systematic investigation of substance use could be important to adapt medical management of subjects with IDO in general hospital, but also in primary care and psychiatric settings.

Accuracy of self-report and toxicological assays to detect substance misuse disorders in parasuicide patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of self-reported substance use and toxicological assays in subjects admitted for Intentional Drug Overdose (IDO), using as a reference diagnosis of substance use disorder. METHOD: Self-reported substance use was collected and toxicological assays were carried out in urine samples in 507 patients with IDO. A standardized psychiatric evaluation was performed in 100 randomly selected subjects. RESULTS: In routine practice, the emergency department staff did not investigate substance use in nearly one of two patients. Patients' statements and toxicological assays were more specific than sensitive, with lower scores for toxicological assays. Patients' statements made it possible to detect nearly 80% of subjects with substance use disorder. CONCLUSION: Identification of substance use disorder in subjects with IDO has strong clinical consequences regarding treatment and prevention of suicidal behaviour. Thus, emergency department staff should be made aware of the value of more systematically exploring self-reported substance use.

Assessment of handling of inhaler devices in real life: an observational study in 3811 patients in primary care.

The correct use of inhalation devices is an inclusion criterion for all studies comparing inhaled treatments. In real life, however, patients may make many errors with their usual inhalation device, which may negate the benefits observed in clinical trials. Our study was undertaken to compare inhalation device handling in real life. A total of 3811 patients treated for at least 1 month with an inhalation device (Aerolizer, Autohaler, Diskus, pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI), or Turbuhaler) were included in this observational study performed in primary care in France between February 1st and July 14th, 2002. General practitioners had to assess patient handling of their usual inhaler device with the help of a checklist established for each inhaler model, from the package leaflet. Seventy-six percent of patients made at least one error with pMDI compared to 49-55% with breath-actuated inhalers. Errors compromising treatment efficacy were made by 11-12% of patients treated with Aerolizer, Autohaler, or Diskus compared to 28% and 32% of patients treated with pMDI and Turbuhaler, respectively. Overestimation of good inhalation by general practitioners was maximal for Turbuhaler (24%), and lowest for Autohaler and pMDI (6%). Ninety percent of general practitioners felt that participation in the study would improve error detection. These results suggest that there are differences in the handling of inhaler devices in real life in primary care that are not taken into account in controlled studies. There is a need for continued education of prescribers and users in the proper use of these devices to improve treatment efficacy.

Simplified high-performance liquid chromatographic method for determination of risperidone and 9-hydroxyrisperidone in plasma after overdose.

For toxicological purposes, a HPLC assay was developed for the simultaneous determination of risperidone and 9-hydroxyrisperidone in human plasma. After a single-step liquid-liquid extraction, both compounds were separated on a C(18) column and measured at 280 nm. A good inter-assay accuracy (<116%) was achieved with inter-assay precision less than 12%. Quantification limits were 10 ng/ml. This rapid method (run time <5 min) is currently used for poison management.