Cohort Profile: the European Unified Registries On Heart care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart) - Acute Coronary Syndrome and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

AIMS: The European Unified Registries On Heart care Evaluation And Randomized Trials (EuroHeart) aims to improve the quality of care and clinical outcomes for patients with cardiovascular disease. The collaboration of acute coronary syndrome/percutaneous coronary intervention (ACS/PCI) registries is operational in seven vanguard European Society of Cardiology member countries. METHODS AND RESULTS: Adults admitted to hospitals with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) are included, and individual patient-level data collected and aligned according to the internationally agreed EuroHeart data standards for ACS/PCI. The registries provide up to 155 variables spanning patient demographics and clinical characteristics, in-hospital care, in-hospital outcomes, and discharge medications. After performing statistical analyses on patient data, participating countries transfer aggregated data to EuroHeart for international reporting.Between 1st January 2022 and 31st December 2022, 40 021 admissions (STEMI 46.7%, NSTEMI 53.3%) were recorded from 192 hospitals in the seven vanguard countries: Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, and Sweden. The mean age for the cohort was 67.9 (standard deviation 12.6) years, and it included 12 628 (31.6%) women. CONCLUSION: The EuroHeart collaboration of ACS/PCI registries prospectively collects and analyses individual data for ACS and PCI at a national level, after which aggregated results are transferred to the EuroHeart Data Science Centre. The collaboration will expand to other countries and provide continuous insights into the provision of clinical care and outcomes for patients with ACS and undergoing PCI. It will serve as a unique international platform for quality improvement, observational research, and registry-based clinical trials.

The ecosystem of health decision making: from fragmentation to synergy.

Clinicians, patients, policy makers, funders, programme managers, regulators, and science communities invest considerable amounts of time and energy in influencing or making decisions at various levels, using systematic reviews, health technology assessments, guideline recommendations, coverage decisions, selection of essential medicines and diagnostics, quality assurance and improvement schemes, and policy and evidence briefs. The criteria and methods that these actors use in their work differ (eg, the role economic analysis has in decision making), but these methods frequently overlap and exist together. Under the aegis of WHO, we have brought together representatives of different areas to reconcile how the evidence that influences decisions is used across multiple health system decision levels. We describe the overlap and differences in decision-making criteria between different actors in the health sector to provide bridging opportunities through a unifying broad framework that we call theory of everything. Although decision-making activities respond to system needs, processes are often poorly coordinated, both globally and on a country level. A decision made in isolation from other decisions on the same topic could cause misleading, unnecessary, or conflicted inputs to the health system and, therefore, confusion and resource waste.

Effectiveness and feasibility of cardiovascular disease personalized prevention on high polygenic risk score subjects: a randomized controlled pilot study.

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the intervention by proactively sharing a patient's high polygenic risk score (PRS) for coronary artery disease (CAD). Outcomes included: (i) reduction in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors over 12 months; (ii) difference in purchased prescriptions of lipid-lowering and anti-hypertensive drugs between intervention group and control group subjects; and (iii) opinion of the participating physicians and subjects on PRS usefulness. Methods and results: This randomized controlled trial was conducted among middle-aged subjects with a top 20% CAD PRS in a family medicine setting. Participants were selected from 26 953 Estonian Biobank cohort participants. Subjects were informed and counselled about their PRS score and CAD risk using the visual tool at baseline (Visit I), counselling session (Visit II), and on the final Visit III at 12 months. The primary endpoint was not significantly different. However, the intervention group participants had a significantly higher probability of initiating statin treatment compared with the controls. Their levels of LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) were significantly decreased compared with baseline on Visit III and significantly lower than in the control group. The vast majority of participating family physicians believe that finding out about genetic risks will affect the subject's lifestyle and medication compliance. Conclusion: Most of our outcome measures were in favour of this intervention. Participants achieved larger changes in cholesterol and blood pressure values. The vast majority (98.4%) of family physicians are interested in continuing to use genetic risk assessment in practice.

Recall by genotype and cascade screening for familial hypercholesterolemia in a population-based biobank from Estonia.

PURPOSE: Large-scale, population-based biobanks integrating health records and genomic profiles may provide a platform to identify individuals with disease-predisposing genetic variants. Here, we recall probands carrying familial hypercholesterolemia (FH)-associated variants, perform cascade screening of family members, and describe health outcomes affected by such a strategy. METHODS: The Estonian Biobank of Estonian Genome Center, University of Tartu, comprises 52,274 individuals. Among 4776 participants with exome or genome sequences, we identified 27 individuals who carried FH-associated variants in the LDLR, APOB, or PCSK9 genes. Cascade screening of 64 family members identified an additional 20 carriers of FH-associated variants. RESULTS: Via genetic counseling and clinical management of carriers, we were able to reclassify 51% of the study participants from having previously established nonspecific hypercholesterolemia to having FH and identify 32% who were completely unaware of harboring a high-risk disease-associated genetic variant. Imaging-based risk stratification targeted 86% of the variant carriers for statin treatment recommendations. CONCLUSION: Genotype-guided recall of probands and subsequent cascade screening for familial hypercholesterolemia is feasible within a population-based biobank and may facilitate more appropriate clinical management.

Report of the European Society of Cardiology Cardiovascular Round Table regulatory workshop update of the evaluation of new agents for the treatment of acute coronary syndrome: Executive summary.

Regulatory authorities interpret the results of randomized controlled trials according to published principles. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is planning a revision of the 2000 and 2003 guidance documents on clinical investigation of new medicinal products for the treatment of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) to achieve consistency with current knowledge in the field. This manuscript summarizes the key output from a collaborative workshop, organized by the Cardiovascular Round Table and the European Affairs Committee of the European Society of Cardiology, involving clinicians, academic researchers, trialists, European and US regulators, and pharmaceutical industry researchers. Specific questions in four key areas were selected as priorities for changes in regulatory guidance: patient selection, endpoints, methodologic issues and issues related to the research for novel agents. Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) should be studied separately for therapies aimed at the specific pathophysiology of either condition, particularly for treatment of the acute phase, but can be studied together for other treatments, especially long-term therapy. Unstable angina patients should be excluded from acute phase ACS trials. In general, cardiovascular death and reinfarction are recommended for primary efficacy endpoints; other endpoints may be considered if specifically relevant for the therapy under study. New agents or interventions should be tested against a background of evidence-based therapy with expanded follow-up for safety assessment. In conclusion, new guidance documents for randomized controlled trials in ACS should consider changes regarding patient and endpoint selection and definitions, and trial designs. Specific requirements for the evaluation of novel pharmacological therapies need further clarification.

Regulatory approval of pharmaceuticals without a randomised controlled study: analysis of EMA and FDA approvals 1999-2014.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of pharmaceuticals is most often demonstrated by randomised controlled trials (RCTs); however, in some cases, regulatory applications lack RCT evidence. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the number and type of these approvals over the past 15 years by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). METHODS: Drug approval data were downloaded from the EMA website and the 'Drugs@FDA' database for all decisions on pharmaceuticals published from 1 January 1999 to 8 May 2014. The details of eligible applications were extracted, including the therapeutic area, type of approval and review period. RESULTS: Over the period of the study, 76 unique indications were granted without RCT results (44 by the EMA and 60 by the FDA), demonstrating that a substantial number of treatments reach the market without undergoing an RCT. The majority was for haematological malignancies (34), with the next most common areas being oncology (15) and metabolic conditions (15). Of the applications made to both agencies with a comparable data package, the FDA granted more approvals (43/44 vs 35/44) and took less time to review products (8.7 vs 15.5 months). Products reached the market first in the USA in 30 of 34 cases (mean 13.1 months) due to companies making FDA submission before EMA submissions and faster FDA review time. DISCUSSION: Despite the frequency with which approvals are granted without RCT results, there is no systematic monitoring of such treatments to confirm their effectiveness or consistency regarding when this form of evidence is appropriate. We recommend a more open debate on the role of marketing authorisations granted without RCT results, and the development of guidelines on what constitutes an acceptable data package for regulators.

Antibiotic prescription preferences in paediatric outpatient setting in Estonia and Sweden.

Aims of the study were to compare the paediatric outpatient antibiotic use in two countries with low overall antibiotic consumption and antibacterial resistance levels - Sweden and Estonia - and to describe the adherence to Estonian treatment guideline. All prescriptions for systemic antibiotics for children less than 18 years during 2007 from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register and Estonian Health Insurance Fund database were identified to conduct a descriptive drug utilisation study. The total paediatric antibiotic use was 616 and 353 per 1000 in Estonia and Sweden, respectively. The greatest between country differences occurred in the age group 2 to 6 years -Estonian children received 1184 and Swedish children 528 prescriptions per 1000. Extended spectrum penicillin amoxicillin (189 per 1000) or its combination with beta-lactamase inhibitor (81 per 1000) and a newer macrolide clarithromycin (127 per 1000) were prescribed most often in Estonia whereas narrow spectrum penicillin phenoxymethylpenicillin (169 per 1000) and older generation macrolide erythromycin (21 per 1000) predominated in Sweden. For acute bronchitis, 17 different antibiotics (most commonly clarithromycin) were prescribed in Estonia despite the guideline recommendation not to use antibiotics. The higher rate of antibiotic use especially of extended spectrum antibiotics in Estonia compared to Sweden emphasizes the need for national activities to promote appropriate use of antibiotics while treating children, even when the overall antibiotic consumption is low.

Off label use of prescription medicines in children in outpatient setting in Estonia is common.

PURPOSE: We aimed to analyse the availability of paediatric information in Summaries of Product Characteristics (SPC) of ambulatory prescription medicines used in children and to compare the SPC information with other information sources. METHODS: In a cross-sectional drug utilisation study based on national prescription database, we analysed all dispensed prescriptions to subjects of <19 years in 2007. We reviewed SPCs of drugs for paediatric information and categorised them as being labelled, off-label and unlicensed. RESULTS: Of 467,334 prescriptions dispensed to 151, 476 children, 69% were for labelled, 31% for off-label and 0.05% for unlicensed drugs. The proportion of prescriptions for drugs being off-label because of missing data was the highest in genitourinary group (97%) and dermatologicals (74%); off-label use because of contraindication in the musculoskeletal group (69%). The highest proportion of off-label drugs was among children aged less than 2 years and the lowest for 2-6-year-olds. Contraindicated medicines were most often prescribed to adolescents. Systemic drugs were more frequently prescribed according to the label than topical agents. SPCs were found often not to be comparable with the other information sources. CONCLUSIONS: We show that one-third of Estonian children treated with prescription medicines are exposed to drugs not labelled for paediatric use. We believe that this is not only partly due to the limited number of paediatric trials but also due to lack of up-to-date information in the SPCs. We suggest that paediatric information should be regularly updated in SPCs to ensure that it is based on the best currently available evidence.

Response rate or time to progression as predictors of survival in trials of metastatic colorectal cancer or non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The duration and cost of cancer clinical trials could be reduced if a surrogate endpoint were used in place of survival. We did a meta-analysis to assess the extent to which two surrogates, tumour response and time to progression, are predictive of mortality in metastatic colorectal cancer and non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: Summary data (median time to progression, proportion of patients responding to treatment, and median overall survival) from randomised trials of first-line treatment in colorectal cancer (146 trials) and lung cancer (191 trials) were identified. Data were extracted and analysed by linear regression. We used prediction bands for trials with 250, 500, and 750 patients to identify the surrogate threshold effect that would predict a significant difference in survival. FINDINGS: Response to treatment and time to progression correlated with improvement in survival for both lung cancer (p<0.0001 and p=0.0003, respectively) and colorectal cancer (p<0.0001 for both). To predict a significant survival gain in colorectal cancer trials, an improvement of 20% in the number of patients responding to treatment was required in trials with 750 patients, increasing to 26% in trials with 500 patients and 38% in trials with 250 patients. In lung cancer trials, the same prediction required differences in response of 18% for 750 patients, 21% for 500 patients, and 30% for 250 patients. For time to progression for both cancer types, the incremental gain needed to predict a survival improvement was a median of 1.8 months for trials with 750 patients, 2.2 months for 500 patients, and 3.3 months for 250 patients. INTERPRETATION: Irrespective of trial size, large differences in tumour response rate are needed to predict a significant survival benefit. If surrogates are chosen as the primary endpoint in a clinical trial, time to progression is the preferred measure because more modest and achievable differences are needed for a significant survival benefit. Trials in metastatic lung cancer and colorectal cancer should measure survival as their primary outcome unless the surrogate outcome difference is anticipated to exceed the threshold effect size.

Determination of drug information needs of health care professionals in Estonia.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the current sources and perceived needs of drug information among Estonian physicians and pharmacists. METHODS. A survey was conducted among 2000 health care professionals subscribing to a drug information bulletin. The questionnaire addressed the most important areas of drug information for the respondent, the areas of drug information most difficult to access, the main sources of drug information currently used, the quality of information received from the representatives of drug manufacturers, and the need for an independent drug information center (DIC). RESULTS: A total of 457 (23%) questionnaires were returned. Of all the respondents, 82% were physicians and 18%--pharmacists. More than half of respondents (59%) had over 20 years, 30% had 10-20, and 11% up to 10 years of professional experience. The most important areas of information identified by the respondents were pharmacological action, indications, dosing, and contraindications. The same were considered to be the most difficult areas to find data about. The main sources of drug information were datasheet compendium Pharmaca Estica, specialty handbooks, medical journals, and drug manufacturers' representatives. Manufacturers' representatives provided mainly data about pharmacological action, indications, and dosing (respectively, 66, 64, and 58% of respondents always got this information). Most respondents (89%) considered the information from the manufacturers sufficient; 88% of respondents still considered a drug information center necessary. CONCLUSION: The most important areas of drug information (pharmacological action, indications, dosing, and contraindications), the areas difficult to access (medical questions of use in the elderly, drug interactions, use during pregnancy and lactation), the main sources of drug information (Pharmaca Estica, specialty handbooks, medical journals, etc.) and the most favored ways of getting information from the drug information center (by phone, by e-mail) were determined. There were limited differences in the opinions of different professionals and a very high proportion of respondents considered the drug information center necessary.

Health care systems in transition: Estonia

The Health Systems in Transition (HiT) series provide detailed descriptions of health systems in the countries of the WHO European Region as well as some additional OECD countries. An individual health system review (HiT) examines the specific approach to the organization, financing and delivery of health services in a particular country and the role of the main actors in the health system. It describes the institutional framework, process, content, and implementation of health and health care policies. HiTs also look at reforms in progress or under development and make an assessment of the health system based on stated objectives and outcomes with respect to various dimensions (health status, equity, quality, efficiency, accountability).