Impact of European Union Label Changes for Fluoroquinolone-Containing Medicinal Products for Systemic and Inhalation Use: Post-Referral Prescribing Trends.

INTRODUCTION: Concerns of the persistence and severity of the adverse effects of fluoroquinolones, mainly involving the nervous system, muscles and joints, resulted in the 2018 referral procedure led by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). They advised to stop prescribing fluoroquinolones for infections of mild severity or of a presumed self-limiting course and for prevention of infections, plus to restrict prescriptions in cases of milder infections where other treatment options are available, and restrict in at-risk populations. We aimed to examine whether the impact of EMA regulatory interventions implemented throughout 2018-2019 had an impact on fluoroquinolone prescribing rates. METHODS: A retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted using electronic health care records from six European countries between 2016 and 2021. We analysed monthly incident fluoroquinolone use rates overall and for each fluoroquinolone active substance through flexible modelling via segmented regression to detect time points of trend changes, in monthly percentage change (MPC). RESULTS: The incidence of fluoroquinolone use ranged from 0.7 to 8.0/1000 persons per month over all calendar years. While changes in fluoroquinolone prescriptions were observed over time across countries, these were inconsistent and did not seem to be temporally related to EMA interventions (e.g., Belgium: February/May 2018, MPC - 33.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 35.9 to - 30.7; Germany: February/May 2019, MPC - 12.6%, 95% CI - 13.7 to - 11.6]; UK: January/April 2016, MPC - 4.9%, 95% CI - 6.2 to - 3.6). CONCLUSION: The regulatory action associated with the 2018 referral did not seem to have relevant effects on fluoroquinolone prescribing in primary care.

Macrolide-associated ototoxicity: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study to assess the association of macrolide use with tinnitus and hearing loss.

BACKGROUND: Macrolides are widely prescribed antibiotics for many different indications. However, there are concerns about adverse effects such as ototoxicity. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether macrolide use is associated with tinnitus and hearing loss in the general population. METHODS: Cross-sectional (n = 4286) and longitudinal (n = 636) analyses were performed within the population-based Rotterdam Study. We investigated with multivariable logistic regression models the association between macrolides and tinnitus, and with multivariable linear regression models the association between macrolides and two different hearing thresholds (both ears, averaged over 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4 and 8 kHz and 2, 4 and 8 kHz). Both regression models were adjusted for age, sex, systolic blood pressure, alcohol, smoking, BMI, diabetes, education level, estimated glomerular filtration rate and other ototoxic or tinnitus-generating drugs. Cumulative exposure to macrolides was categorized according to the number of dispensed DDDs and duration of action. RESULTS: In the fully adjusted model, ever use of macrolides was associated with a 25% higher likelihood of prevalent tinnitus (OR = 1.25; 95% CI 1.07-1.46). This association was more prominent in participants with a cumulative dose of more than 14 DDDs and among users of intermediate- or long-acting macrolides. Macrolide use in between both assessments was associated with more than a 2-fold increased risk on incident tinnitus. No general association between macrolides and hearing loss was observed. A borderline significant higher hearing threshold in very recent users (≤3 weeks) was found. CONCLUSIONS: Macrolide use was significantly associated with both prevalent and incident tinnitus. Macrolide-associated tinnitus was likely cumulative dose-dependent.