Search

Psychiatric drugs have primacy for off-label prescribing. Among those, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are highly versatile and, therefore, widely prescribed. Moreover, they are commonly considered as having a better safety profile compared to other antidepressants. Thus, when it comes to off-label prescribing, SSRIs rank among the top positions. In this review, we present the state of the art of off-label applications of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, ranging from migraine prophylaxis to SARS-CoV-2 antiviral properties. Research on SSRIs provided significant evidence in the treatment of premature ejaculation, both with the on-label dapoxetine 30 mg and the off-label paroxetine 20 mg. However, other than a serotoninergic syndrome, serious conditions like increased bleeding rates, hyponatremia, hepatoxicity, and post-SSRIs sexual dysfunctions, are consistently more prominent when using such compounds. These insidious side effects might be frequently underestimated during common clinical practice, especially by nonpsychiatrists. Thus, some points must be addressed when using SSRIs. Among these, a psychiatric evaluation before every administration that falls outside the regulatory agencies-approved guidelines has to be considered mandatory. For these reasons, we aim with the present article to identify the risks of inappropriate uses and to advocate the need to actively boost research encouraging future clinical trials on this topic.

Currently, due to the lack of specific etiotropic therapy, rituximab is widely used for the treatment of most autoimmune diseases of the central and peripheral nervous system. Rituximab is a chimeric monoclonal antibody with specificity for CD20, the antigen found on the surface of normal and malignant B-lymphocytes. It is used mainly in hematological practice. It is used off-label for the treatment of neurological diseases. The world literature describes the use of rituximab for the treatment of such pathologies as autoimmune encephalitis, neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder, multiple sclerosis, primary angiitis of the central nervous system, immune-mediated inflammatory polyneuropathy, myasthenia gravis, refractory to basic immunosuppressive therapy. This article provides an overview of the world literature on the use of rituximab in neurological practice, describes our own experience of its use on the basis of the Department of Neurology № 1 of Pavlov University (Saint Petersburg, Russia).

Jan Anker Jahnsen,1– 3 Sofia Frost Widnes,1,2 Jan Schjøtt1– 3 1Regional Medicines Information and Pharmacovigilance Centre (RELIS Vest), Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; 2Department of Clinical Biochemistry and Pharmacology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; 3Department of Clinical Science, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Bergen, Bergen, NorwayCorrespondence: Jan Anker JahnsenRegional Medicines Information and Pharmacovigilance Centre (RELIS Vest), Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, NorwayTel +47-48182071Email jan.anker.jahnsen@helse-bergen.noPurpose: The second-generation antipsychotic quetiapine has been associated with misuse and dependency. We aimed to review questions to the Norwegian network of drug information centers concerning this potential drug safety problem.Methods: We conducted a Boolean search in the database of the Regional Medicines Information and Pharmacovigilance Centres in Norway (RELIS) combining the indexed categories “quetiapine” and “adverse drug reaction” with the text words “misuse” or “dependency”. Question–answer pairs (Q/As) in the full-text, searchable RELIS database were defined as cases. Cases were analyzed for drug safety issues linked to use of quetiapine, including off-label use, polypharmacy and other patient risk factors.Results: The search resulted in 54 cases. Forty-six cases (85%) were patient-related, and a majority came from physicians working in hospitals. Twenty-nine cases (54%) concerned patients with a history of addiction, 14 cases (26%) had polypharmacy, and off-label use of quetiapine for insomnia was identified in 14 of the cases (26%). Only three of the cases included a specific question about patient dependency of quetiapine, and these cases were all associated with insomnia.Conclusion: We conclude that our case series from the Norwegian network of drug information centres reflects that quetiapine frequently involves clinical narratives of a history of addiction, polypharmacy or insomnia (off-label use). However, the case series did not reveal new information about the drug’s addictive potential.Keywords: off-label, insomnia, drug safety, addiction, abuse

Purpose To describe the use of large-diameter balloon-expandable stent-grafts (BeGraft aortic stent-graft, Bentley InnoMed GmbH, Hechingen, Germany) in the treatment of infrarenal penetrating aortic ulcer (iPAU). Materials and Methods Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing endovascular treatment with the BeGraft aortic stent-graft in 8 European centers from January 2017 to October 2020. Demographics, perioperative data, and midterm outcomes were collected. Endpoints of the study were technical feasibility, early mortality, and morbidity. Results A total of 40 patients were included. The mean age was 73.9±7.05 years and 63.2% were male. Indications for treatment included size and morphology (65%), presence of symptoms (29.5%), and contained ruptures (5.5%). Urgent treatment was performed in 5% of cases. Technical success was 97.5%. Median operation time was 58 minutes (19–170 minutes), with 27.5% of patients having additional procedures during the main intervention (1 additional repair with a C-TAG (W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc, Flagstaff, AZ, USA) thoracic endoprosthesis, 5 covered endovascular reconstruction of aortic bifurcation procedures, 3 extensions with proximal cuffs, and 2 percutaneous angioplasties of the common iliac arteries). Percutaneous femoral access was used in 72.5%, while groin cut-down was performed in 27.5%. Repair was successful with only 1 stent in 45% of cases, while 37.5% required 2 stents and nearly 17.5% required 3/4 stent-grafts. The 30-day mortality was 0%, with a 2.5% reintervention rate (1 patient required evacuation of an intra-abdominal hematoma). Median follow-up was 13.9 months (2–39 months), during which no vascular-related reinterventions or deaths were reported. In 4 patients, a type II endoleak was observed. No cases of graft migration, thrombosis, or stent-fracture were observed. Conclusions The treatment of iPAU with the BeGraft aortic stent-graft in a selective patient group is feasible with low rate of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Balloon-expandable stent-grafts offer the option to repair iPAUs with a shorter coverage of the aorta using low-profile sheath, that enables treatment in the presence of calcified access vessels and small diameter aortic bifurcations.

Primary osteoporosis is rare in children and adolescents and its optimal pharmacological management is uncertain. Bisphosphonates are commonly used while denosumab has only been administered to a few children with osteogenesis imperfecta. We studied a treatment-naive 13.5-year-old boy with severe osteoporosis and multiple vertebral deformities who presented with back pain and difficulty in walking. Causes of secondary osteoporosis were excluded and there were no abnormalities in genes known to cause bone fragility. He was treated with denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously every 3 months for 30 months, and he was pain-free within 6 weeks after the first injection. Lumbar spine BMD and femoral neck BMD increased with treatment by 65.6% and 25.3%, respectively, and deformed vertebrae regained their normal shape; linear growth was not impaired. During the second year of treatment, transient hypercalcemia (maximum 3.09 mmol/l) before the denosumab injection was observed. In conclusion, denosumab was highly effective in this case of primary pediatric osteoporosis, with remarkable clinical and radiological response. Transient hypercalcemia was probably due to amplification of the effect of growth spurt and puberty on bone remodeling by the transient, short-term discontinuation of the drug. Furthermore, our data suggest that mobilization of calcium from treatment-induced sclerotic transverse lines in bone metaphyses may contribute to the development of hypercalcemia.

Introduction: Regulatory agencies are responsible for defining the use of off-label (OL) and unlicensed (UL) drug prescription in neonatal intensive care. However, these regulatory criteria may differ between agencies in different countries. The aim of this study was to establish the frequency of OL and UL drug prescription in a sample of patients in a neonatal intensive care unit applying the criteria of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the United States and the Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA) of Brazil, analysing the differences observed in the results based on the applied criteria. Methods: Prospective cohort study in neonates admitted for more than 24 h to the NICU of a teaching maternity hospital between August 2017 and July 2018. We obtained information concerning the drugs included in the analysis of OL and UL prescriptions from the DrugDex-Micromedex® and official information on pharmaceutical products in Brazil. We used the kappa correlation coefficient to assess the agreement between the FDA and ANVISA criteria. We defined disagreement as a kappa value of less than 0.200. Results: We evaluated 220 neonates admitted to the NICU and 17,421 items prescribed during the study period. We did not find a difference in the proportion of neonates in which at least 1 drug was prescribed under OL conditions applying the FDA versus the ANVISA criteria (96.4% vs. 98.6%). We found differences between the FDA and ANVISA in the OL classification based on the authorized age of use and indications for prescription, mainly in systemic antimicrobials and cardiovascular drugs. When we compared the prescribing information provided by the FDA and the ANVISA, we found that the criteria of the ANVISA were less specific. Conclusion: Off-label and unlicensed drug prescription are frequent in neonatal intensive care applying the criteria of either agency, although the FDA has established more detailed criteria in terms of the ages and indications for which prescription is authorized. Resumen: Introducción: Las agencias reguladoras son responsables de enmarcar la prescripción de fármacos en condiciones off-label (OL) y unlicensed (UL) en los cuidados intensivos neonatales. No obstante, los criterios de aprobación establecidos pueden variar entre las agencias de distintos países. El objetivo del estudio fue determinar la frecuencia de la prescripción de fármacos OL y UL en una muestra de pacientes en cuidados intensivos neonatales según los criterios establecidos por la Food and Drug Administration (FDA) de Estados Unidos y la Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA) de Brasil, analizando las diferencias en los resultados obtenidos con los criterios de cada agencia. Métodos: Estudio prospectivo de cohortes en neonatos ingresados más de 24 horas en la unidad de cuidados intensivos neonatales (UCIN) de un hospital universitario materno infantil entre agosto de 2017 y julio de 2018. Se obtuvo información sobre los fármacos incluidos en el análisis de prescripción OL y UL de las bases de datos DrugDex-Micromedex® y de la información oficial sobre fármacos de Brasil. La concordancia entre los criterios de la FDA y de la ANVISA se evaluó por medio del índice kappa. Los valores de kappa < 0,200 se consideraron indicativos de discordancia. Resultados: Se evaluó a 220 neonatos ingresados en la UCIN y 17 421 prescripciones de fármacos individuales en el período de estudio. No hubo diferencias en la proporción de pacientes que recibieron al menos una prescripción OL según se aplicasen los criterios de la FDA o los de la ANVISA (96,4% vs. 98,6%). En cambio, se encontraron diferencias en el motivo de clasificación como OL en base a la edad o a la indicación entre las dos agencias reguladoras, principalmente en la prescripción de antiinfecciosos sistémicos y agentes cardiovasculares. Al comparar las condiciones de prescripción aprobadas por la FDA y la ANVISA, se observó que los criterios de la ANVISA eran menos específicos. Conclusiones: La prescripción de fármacos off-label y unlicensed es frecuente en los cuidados intensivos neonatales aplicando los criterios de cualquiera de las dos agencias, los criterios de la FDA son más específicos en cuanto a los grupos de edad y las indicaciones para los que se autoriza el uso de los fármacos.

The off-label use of medicines is neither prohibited nor explicitly allowed, according to the current European Union (EU) pharmaceutical legislation. This can cause confusion in physicians’ practice as well as lead to patients’ dissatisfaction. The purpose of this survey is to assess the knowledge and experience of Bulgarian physicians with the off-label use of medicines. The survey was performed at the beginning of 2020 in the biggest private hospital in South-Central Bulgaria. Ninety-six physicians from the inpatient and outpatient medical care participated in the survey and answered 10 questions. The data analysis was performed using the statistical program SPSS v19.0. The results are described as numbers and percentages for the qualitative variables and mean value (median due to their distribution) and a variance measure (range) for the quantitative ones. The distribution of the variables was tested with the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. The evaluation of the relationships between the qualitative variables was performed using the χ2 test or the Fisher's exact test, where applicable. The results showed that most of the participants (81%) have never prescribed medicines off-label and believe it is not allowed to use medicines off-label (73%). Physicians strongly support the introduction of clear rules for the off-label use (88%). In conclusion, physicians practicing outside of the capital city demonstrated good level of knowledge, but relatively low awareness and little experience with the off-label use of medicines. They feel also, uncertainty in their prescribing activities when they use medicines off-label and strongly support introduction of clear rules for the off-label use.

Use of intrathecal gadolinium for contrast-enhanced myelography and cisternography remains off-label and is currently not FDA-approved. We report a 70-year-old male who underwent CT myelogram utilizing off-label high-dose intrathecal gadolinium who developed altered mental status and bilateral hearing loss. Workup ruled out meningitis (infectious and aseptic), infectious encephalopathy, encephalitis, and hypothyroidism. MRI of the brain and lumbar spine without contrast displayed fluid collection in L4-5 interspace and diffuse cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) hyperdensity consistent with intrathecal gadolinium. The patient eventually improved with high-dose IV dexamethasone and supportive care and resolution of diffuse CSF hyperdensity was observed on repeat MRI. There are limited data demonstrating the safety of low-dose intrathecal gadolinium due to which usage remains off-label. Our case highlights the need for caution when using substances for off-label indications and reinforces the usage of less invasive and noninvasive diagnostic modalities when possible.

The potent oral inhibitor of BCL2, venetoclax (VEN), used to treat adults with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, has been approved in US for the treatment of naïve patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) unfit for intensive chemotherapy and recently in Europe, too. However, the drug has been used for years in combination with hypomethylating agents (HMAs) in patients not eligible to other treatment option, according to the so-called off-label use. We collected real-world data about patients treated with VEN + HMAs in the context of a pharmacovigilance project focused on the evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of drugs used for unapproved indication in Italian hospitals. From March to December 2020, 24 patients started treatment with VEN combined with HMAs. 21 patients have been assessed for response. Eleven (52%) patients reached complete remission (CR), and three patients (14%) CR with partial hematological recovery (CRh), with a median duration of response of 4.5 months (range 0.5–12.5). 19 patients experienced at least 1 adverse drug reaction (ADR), mostly serious, including 3 deaths (9% of ADRs; 12.5% of patients) in febrile neutropenia. Hematological toxicities and infections (cytopenia, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, sepsis), were the most reported ADRs (84.4%). In general, neutropenic fever occurred more frequently in patients treated with decitabine (7 out of 9, 78%) compared to azacitidine (5 out of 15, 33%; p = 0.03), whereas response assessment did not differ based on used HMA (p = 0.1). These results confirm the benefit-risk profile of VEN in a real-world setting of patients with no adequate therapeutic options.

The availability of liquid oral preparations compounded by pharmacists is essential to meet paediatric needs which remain unanswered by the pharmaceutical industry. Unfortunately, compendial monographs are often not available and, in many cases, pre-formulation studies (e.g., compatibility with other excipients and solubility evaluations) are not performed in-depth, leading, in some rare cases, to the inadvertent administration of a toxic dose. In this study, the preparation of an oral liquid formulation for paediatric use, containing flecainide acetate at different strengths, was considered, taking into account the possible effects of conventionally used excipients. First, the optimal vehicle was selected based on a solubility study, evidencing some unexpected formations of precipitates. As a matter of fact, the buffers commonly used for oral solutions significantly reduced flecainide solubility, and the concomitant presence of citrate buffer and methylparaben even caused the formation of non-resuspendable crystals. Then, chemical, physical, and microbiological stability were assessed. Solutions at strengths of 10 and 20 mg/mL flecainide acetate were stable up to 8 weeks when compounded by using a 40% sucrose solution as a vehicle. Microbiological data showed that the use of methylparaben was not necessary over this time period.

Off-label use is frequently practiced in primary and revision arthroplasty, as there may be indications for the application of implants for purposes outside the one the manufacturers intended. Under certain circumstances, patients may benefit from selective application of mix & match. This can refer to primary hip arthroplasty (if evidence suggests that the combination of devices from different manufacturers has superior results) and revision hip or knee arthroplasty (when the exchange of one component only is necessary and the invasiveness of surgery can be reduced). Within the EFORT ‘Implant and Patient Safety Initiative’, evidence- and consensus-based recommendations have been developed for the safe application of off-label use and mix & match in primary as well as revision hip and knee arthroplasty. Prior to the application of a medical device for hip or knee arthroplasty off-label and within a mix & match situation, surgeons should balance the risks and benefits to the patient, obtain informed consent, and document the decision process appropriately. Nevertheless, it is crucial for surgeons to only combine implants that are compatible. Mismatch of components, where their sizes or connections do not fit, may have catastrophic effects and is a surgical mistake. Surgeons must be fully aware of the features of the components that they use in off-label indications or during mix & match applications, must be appropriately trained and must audit their results. Considering the frequent practice of off-label and mix & match as well as the potential medico-legal issues, further research is necessary to obtain more data about the appropriate indications and outcomes for those procedures. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:982-1005. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210080

Purpose: Various solutions have been put forward for prescribing and reimbursing treatments outside their registered indications within universal healthcare systems. However, most off-label oncology prescriptions are not reimbursed by health funds. This study characterized the financing sources of off-label oncology use and the predictors of the decision to forego treatment.Materials and Methods: All 708 off-label oncology requests submitted for approval in a large tertiary cancer center in Israel between 2016 and 2018 were examined for disease and patient sociodemographic characteristics, costs and financing sources, and the factors predicting actual off-label drug administration using multivariate logistic regression analysis.Results: The mean monthly cost of a planned off-label treatment was ILS54,703 (SD = ILS61,487, median = ILS39,928) (approximately US$ 15,500). The main sources of funding were private health insurance (25%) and expanded access pharma company plans (30%). Approximately one third (31%) of the requests did not have a financing source at the time of approval. Of the 708 requests, 583 (or 82%) were filled and treatment was initiated. Predictors for forgoing treatment were the impossibility of out-of-pocket payments or the lack of a financing solution (OR = 0.407; p = 0.005 and OR = 0.400; p < 0.0005).Conclusion: Although off-label recommendations are widespread and institutional approval is often granted, a large proportion of these prescriptions are not filled. In a universal healthcare system, the financing sources for off-label treatments are likely to influence access.

The word “narcotic” is often first associated with “illicit drugs”. Yet, many “narcotic” and psychotropic substances are, in fact, medicines. Controlled medicines (CM) are products that meet the legal definition of both a “narcotic” under the Swiss Narcotics Act and of a medicine under the Therapeutic Products Act. We aim to examine how similar and how different, respectively, the implementation of CM regulations is throughout French-speaking Switzerland. Based on a legal analysis of the cantonal regulations, we conducted semi-structured interviews with cantonal pharmacists and cantonal physicians. We asked them how they perceive and implement the federal legal requirements. We find that some of these requirements have fallen into disuse, notably the federal duty to notify off-label use of CM. We observe that counterfoil prescriptions in their current paper format are a veritable data graveyard in the sense that they are not actively used to monitor or supervise the market. Moreover, we detect different conditions for opioid agonist treatment authorization. Some cantons require additional physicians’ training or written commitments by the person treated. Our mapping of the CM regulation implementation can serve as a basis for cantons to review their practices.

Background: Understanding the prescription pattern of medications in a population can help reveal the potential usage scenarios, including off-label prescriptions, and the need for precision medicine implementation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the prescription pattern and off-label use of antipsychotics in the Qatari population.Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of Qatari patients who received antipsychotic prescriptions from the major healthcare providers in the country during the 2-year period between June 2018 and May 2020. The number of patients, prescriptions dispensed, and clinical indications were collected and statistical analysis using chi-square test was conducted.Results: Among the 9,349 Qatari patients prescribed with antipsychotics during the study period, the majority were female (57%; p < 0.001) and were in the age categories 20–39 and 30–39 years (both 22%; p < 0.001). Among the 35,938 antipsychotic prescriptions dispensed, second-generation antipsychotics were the most highly prescribed (59%), specifically, quetiapine (16%) and olanzapine (12%), but the first-generation antipsychotic prochlorperazine (13%) was also highly prescribed. Most of the indications of antipsychotics (69%) were for off-label use such as for controlling chronic diseases, sleeping disorders, benign paroxysmal positional vertigo and irritable bowel syndrome.Conclusion: Non-mental health and off-label prescriptions of several antipsychotics were observed. Integration of this data with pharmacogenomic and clinical outcome data will help in determining the course of action for implementing personalized and precision medicine in the country and beyond.

Background The off-label use of antipsychotic medications is common in many countries, and the extent of such use in psychiatric inpatients in China has not been sufficiently studied. The purpose of this study was to survey the incidence and examine the correlates of off-label antipsychotic use in a large, nationally–representative sample in China. Methods This study included discharged psychiatric patients between March 19 and 31, 2019 from 41 tertiary psychiatric hospitals across 29 provinces in China. Their socio-demographic and clinical data were collected and analyzed. Results After excluding patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder or bipolar disorder, 981 patients were included in the analysis. Overall, antipsychotics were prescribed to 63.2% (95%CI 60.2–66.2%) of the sample. Antipsychotics were used in a wide spectrum of psychiatric disorders, with the rate being the highest among patients with dissociative (conversion) disorders (89.9, 95%CI 83.0–94.8%), organic mental disorders (81.7, 95%CI 73.1–88.7%), dementia (79.0,95%CI 67.8–87.9%), obsessive-compulsive disorder (77.8, 95%CI 55.7–92.5%), mental disorders due to psychoactive substances (75.3,95%CI 64.7–84.2%), behavioural and emotional disorders with onset usually occurring in childhood and adolescence (71.4, 95%CI 45.5–90.1%), somatoform disorders (63.2, 95%CI 40.8%–82..2%), major depression disorder (53.7,95%CI 48.8–58.6%), anxiety disorder (38.8,95%CI 30.5–47.7%), and insomnia (25.0, 95%CI 8.5–28.9%). The top three most commonly used antipsychotics were olanzapine (29.1%), quetiapine (20.3%) and risperidone (6.8%), and their corresponding average doses were 9.04 ± 5.80 mg/day, 185.13 ± 174.72 mg/day, and 2.98 ± 1.71 mg/day, respectively. A binary logistic regression showed that younger age, having the Employee Health Insurance or Residents Health Insurance, having psychotic symptoms and requiring restraint during hospitalization were significantly associated with off-label use of antipsychotics. Conclusion Off-label use of antipsychotics is very common in psychiatric inpatients in China, mainly with moderate-dose use of single agents. However, the efficacy and safety of this practice is uncertain for many diagnoses and for the elderly. Clinicians should be cautious about this practice while waiting for more research data.

Despite the availability of a lot of effective disease-modifying drugs, multiple sclerosis (MS) (in particular the progressive forms) still represents an important unmet medical need, because of issues in terms of effectiveness, duration of response, safety, and patient compliance. An increasing body of evidence from randomized clinical trials and real-world data suggest that rituximab is a highly effective alternative in both relapsing and progressive MS, with a low discontinuation rate, related to a good benefit/risk profile, and a good compliance. To date, the use of rituximab in patients with multiple sclerosis is not in accordance with the authorized product information (off-label use). However, the use of this medicine is widespread in several countries, and in some cases, it is the most commonly used disease-modifying drug for MS subtypes. This use could be officially recognized by national regulatory authorities, according to specific procedures, to ensure equal access for patients to a safe and effective option.

Teriparatide belongs to osteo-anabolic compounds and has been used in recent years to treat patients with osteoporosis, with the benefits of increased bone density. Its osteo-anabolic action has led to the investigation of the use of teriparatide for the improvement of bone quality. Apart from the enhancement of fracture union, teriparatide has been extensively studied in the promotion of fusion rate after spinal fusion. This study summarizes the preclinical and clinical results of the off-label use of teriparatide in the spine, and specifically its intermittent administration after instrumented spinal arthrodesis along with its impact on the spinal bone quality and spinal bone mineral density.

We present the case of a 62-year-old man who sustained a traumatic distal aortic injury associated with an adjacent lumbar vertebral body fracture resulting from a 20-ft fall. Given the site of injury, an iliac artery branched endograft was deployed off-label to preserve the aortic bifurcation and cover a limited amount of healthy aorta to preserve the collaterals. The procedure was successful, with no intraoperative complications or evidence of an endoleak. The aortic bifurcation and distal iliac arteries remained widely patent by computed tomography angiography at the follow-up examination without evidence of sequelae.

Background: Unlicensed (UL) and Off-label (OL) prescription of medications is common in paediatrics and does not constitute negligent practice since there is often no approved alternative according to FDA bulary. Aim: The study aimed to determine the current frequency of UL and OL prescriptions in children from one month to 12 years of age in a Paediatric Inpatient Unit (PIU). Methods: This is an observational, prospective study, reviewing the prescriptions of all patients admitted to the PIU in a university hospital in a single week in August 2014 and a single week in January 2015. Results: We included 157 patients of median age 18 months and median length of stay 24 days. There were 1,328 prescription items (average of 8.4 items/patient) and only two patients without UL/OL use. During the winter season (August), 27% of prescriptions were classified as UL and 44.6% as OL, and during summer (January), 29.6% as UL and 45.1% as OL. We identified 188 medications, of which the most prescribed were paracetamol (11%) and dipyrone (9.5%). The most frequent OL classification was regarding drug formulation (15.8%). In the winter week, the most frequent reasons for admission were respiratory (44%), followed by other clinical causes (CC) (17.3%), while in the summer week, they were CC (26.3%), followed by surgical and gastrohepatic (23.7%). Conclusion: The OL prescription of medicines for children in Brazil is in accordance with the international literature. The higher prevalence of OL due to formulation found in this study is related to the use of formulations other than those used by the FDA.

PURPOSE: Apremilast is a phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor FDA approved for psoriatic arthritis and moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. In recent years, multiple studies have suggested other potential uses for apremilast in dermatology. A summary of these various studies will be a valuable aid to dermatologists considering apremilast for an alternative indication. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PubMed/MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were queried with the term ‘apremilast,’ with results manually screened to identify published data on off-label uses of apremilast. The article was structured by the quality of evidence available. RESULTS: Apremilast use in dermatology beyond plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis is frequently described in the literature, with a mixture of positive and negative results. Randomized controlled data is available for Behçet’s disease, hidradenitis suppurativa, nail/scalp/palmoplantar psoriasis, alopecia areata, and atopic dermatitis. CONCLUSION: The relatively safe adverse effect profile of apremilast and its broad immunomodulatory characteristics may make it a promising option in the future for patients with difficult to treat diseases in dermatology, refractory to first line therapies, but further studies will be necessary to clarify its role.

Recent randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have revolutionized acute ischemic stroke care by extending the use of intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular reperfusion therapies in time windows that have been originally considered futile or even unsafe. Both systemic and endovascular reperfusion therapies have been shown to improve outcome in patients with wake-up strokes or symptom onset beyond 4.5 h for intravenous thrombolysis and beyond 6 h for endovascular treatment; however, they require advanced neuroimaging to select stroke patients safely. Experts have proposed simpler imaging algorithms but high-quality data on safety and efficacy are currently missing. RCTs used diverse imaging and clinical inclusion criteria for patient selection during the dawn of this novel stroke treatment paradigm. After taking into consideration the dismal prognosis of nonrecanalized ischemic stroke patients and the substantial clinical benefit of reperfusion therapies in selected late presenters, we propose rescue reperfusion therapies for acute ischemic stroke patients not fulfilling all clinical and imaging inclusion criteria as an option in a subgroup of patients with clinical and radiological profiles suggesting low risk for complications, notably hemorrhagic transformation as well as local or remote parenchymal hemorrhage. Incorporating new data to treatment algorithms may seem perplexing to stroke physicians, since treatment and imaging capabilities of each stroke center may dictate diverse treatment pathways. This narrative review will summarize current data that will assist clinicians in the selection of those late presenters that will most likely benefit from acute reperfusion therapies. Different treatment algorithms are provided according to available neuroimaging and endovascular treatment capabilities.

Aims Antipsychotics are primarily labelled for the treatment of severe mental illness and have documented clinical utility in certain neurological disorders or palliative care. However, off-label use of antipsychotics is common and increasing, and prior studies on antipsychotic utilisation have not specifically assessed users in neurology, palliative care or general practice. We aimed to explore diagnoses associated with antipsychotic use, treatment patterns and characteristics of users without diagnoses relevant to antipsychotic treatment. Methods Population-based study identifiying all users of antipsychotics in Denmark (pop 5.7 mio.) 1997–2018 in the Danish National Prescription Register (DNPR). Possible indications for antipsychotic therapy were evaluated using in- and outpatient contacts from the DNPR. Users were divided hierarchically into six groups: severe mental disorders (schizophrenia, bipolar-spectrum disorders), chronic mental disorders (dementias, mental retardation, autism), other mental disorders (depression-spectrum, anxiety and personality disorders, etc.), selected neurological diseases, cancer and antipsychotic users without any of these diagnoses. This last group was characterised regarding demographics, antipsychotic use, health care utilisation and likely antipsychotic treatment initiator in 2018. Results Altogether, 630 307 antipsychotic users were identified, of whom 127 649 had filled prescriptions during 2018. Users without diagnoses relevant to antipsychotic treatment comprised of the largest group (37%), followed by schizophrenia and bipolar-spectrum disorders (34%), other mental disorders (15%), dementia, autism and mental retardation (11%), cancer (2.2%) and neurological diagnoses (2.0%). Of 37 478 incident users in 2018, 39% had no diagnosis relevant to antipsychotic treatment, 7.9% had major depression, 7.7% neurotic/stress-related disorders and 7.5% dementia. Quetiapine was most commonly used, both overall (51%) and among users without diagnoses relevant to antipsychotic treatment (58%). Of 14 474 incident users in 2018 without diagnoses relevant to antipsychotic treatment, treatment was most likely initiated by a general practitioner (65%), with only 17% seeing a psychiatrist during the following year. As many as 18% of patients with adjustment disorders and 14% of those without relevant diagnoses for antipsychotic use, remained on antipsychotic treatment 5 years after their first prescription. Conclusions Over one-third of antipsychotic users in Denmark did not have psychiatric, neurological or cancer diagnoses as possible indications for antipsychotic therapy. Many antipsychotics are initiated or prescribed in general practice, and a concerningly large subgroup without documented diagnoses relevant for antipsychotics continued to receive them. Rational prescribing, adequate side effect monitoring and further research into reasons for the observed antipsychotic use patterns and their risk–benefit ratio are needed.

Fertility preservation represents one important goal of cancer patients’ management due to the high impact on health and quality of life of survivors. The available preventive measures cannot be performed in all patients and are not feasible in all health-care facilities. Therefore, the pharmacological treatment with GnRHa has become a valuable non-invasive and well-tolerated alternative, especially in those who cannot access to cryopreservation options due to clinical and/or logistic issues. Supporting data demonstrate a significant advantage for the survivors who received GnRHa in the long-term maintenance of ovarian function and preservation of fertility. The prevention of the risk of ovarian failure with GnRHa is a typical off-label use, defined as the administration of a medicinal product not in accordance with the authorized product information. Italy has officially recognized the off-label use of GnRHa in adult women at risk of premature and permanent menopause following chemotherapy. However, fertility preservation still represents an unmet medical need in adolescents who cannot access to other treatment options.

espanolIntroduccion. Determinar las indicaciones, tasa de exito y efectos adversos del tratamiento con ceftarolina fosamil en un hospital terciario. Material y metodos. Se analizaron retrospectivamente 84 casos desde febrero de 2018 a diciembre de 2019. No se aplicaron criterios de exclusion. Resultados. Ochenta y cuatro pacientes, con una mediana de edad de 70 anos, de los cuales el 6,7% (56) eran varones, fueron tratados con ceftarolina fosamil durante una mediana de 14 dias. La mayoria de las indicaciones se realizaron fuera de ficha tecnica, incluidas 29 endocarditis (34,5%), 14 bacteriemias (16,6%), 5 infecciones de sistema nervioso central (6%) y 19 infecciones osteoarticulares (22,6%). Staphylococcus aureus fue el microorganismo aislado con mas frecuencia, incluidos 28 S. aureus sensibles a meticilina (SASM; 33,3%) y 14 S. aureus resistentes a meticilina (SARM; 16,7%), seguidos por Staphylococcus coagulasa negativo (23, 27,4%). El principal motivo de prescripcion de ceftarolina fosamil fue el fracaso del tratamiento previo (41,7% de los casos). El tratamiento fue un exito en 60/84 pacientes (71,4%) y fracaso clinica o microbiologicamente en 14 (16,7%). Ocho pacientes murieron por una causa no relacionada con la infeccion y dos tenian un proceso no infeccioso. Veintidos de treinta y cinco (62,8%) pacientes a los que se les prescribio ceftarolina debido al fracaso del tratamiento previo mejoraron, incluidas ocho endocarditis y siete bacteriemias. Cinco pacientes (5,9%) presentaron efectos adversos que incluyen neutropenia, trombocitopenia, elevacion de transaminasas y elevacion de creatinina; todos excepto uno fueron leves y todos se resolvieron despues de la interrupcion del tratamiento. Conclusiones. Ceftarolina fosamil es una cefalosporina bien tolerada, eficaz contra microorganismos grampositivos multirresistentes y muchos gramnegativos. Nuestra experiencia sugiere que es eficaz como terapia de rescate o de primera linea en otras indicaciones distintas de las aprobadas actualmente. EnglishObjective. To determine the indications, success rate and adverse effects of ceftaroline fosamil treatment in a tertiary hospital. Material and methods. In total, 84 cases from February 2018 to December 2019 were retrospectively analysed. No exclusion criteria were applied. Results. Eighty-four patients, with a median age of 70 years, of which, 6.7% (56) were male, were treated with ceftaroline fosamil for a median of 14 days. Most indications were off-label, including 29 endocarditis (34.5%), 14 bacteraemia (16.6%), 5 Central nervous system (CNS) infections (6%) and 19 osteoarticular infections (22.6%). Staphylococcus. aureus was the most frequently isolated microorganism, including 28 methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA; 33.3%) and 14 methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA; 16.7%), followed by coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (23, 27.4%). The main reason for ceftaroline fosamil prescription was the failure of previous treatment (41.7% of cases). Treatment was successful in 60/84 patients (71.4%) and failed clinically or microbiologically in 14 (16.7%). Eight patients died for a reason not related to the infection and two were found to have a non-infectious condition. Twenty-two of thirty-five (62.8%) patients prescribed ceftaroline because of failure of previous treatment improved, including eight endocarditis and seven bacteraemia. Adverse effects were reported in five patients (5.9%) including neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, transaminases elevation and creatinine elevation; all except one were mild and all resolved after discontinuation of treatment. Conclusions. Ceftaroline fosamil is a well-tolerated ceph alosporine, effective against multi- resistant gram-positive and many gram-negative microorganisms. Our experience suggests that it is effective as a rescue or first-line therapy in other indications than those currently approved.

The treatment landscape for multiple myeloma (MM) has dramatically changed over the last three decades, moving from no US Food and Drug Administration approvals and two active drug classes to over 19 drug approvals and at least eight different active classes. The advances seen in MM therapy have relied on both a structured approach to obtaining new labels and cautious off-label drug use. Although there are country and regional differences in drug approval processes, many of the basic principles behind off-label drug use in MM can be summarized into four main categories: 1) use of a therapy prior to the current approval regulations; 2) widespread use of a therapy following the release of promising clinical trial results but prior to drug approval; 3) use of a cheap therapy supported by clinical safety and efficacy data but without commercial backing; and 4) niche therapies for small well-defined patient populations where large clinical trials with sufficient power may be difficult to perform. This review takes a historical approach to discuss how off-label drug use has helped to shape the current treatment approach for MM.

Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) represents the only systemic reperfusion therapy able to reverse neurological deficit in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Despite its effectiveness in patients with or without large vessel occlusion, it can be offered only to a minority of them, because of the short therapeutic window and additional contraindications derived from stringent but arbitrary inclusion and exclusion criteria used in landmark randomized controlled clinical trials. Many absolute or relative contraindications lead to disparities between the official drug label and guidelines or expert recommendations. Based on recent advances in neuroimaging and evidence from cohort studies, off-label use of IVT is increasingly incorporated into the daily practice of many stroke centers. They relate to extension of therapeutic time windows, and expansion of indications in co-existing conditions originally listed in exclusion criteria, such as use of alternative thrombolytic agents, pre-treatment with antiplatelets, anticoagulants or low molecular weight heparins. In this narrative review, we summarize recent randomized and real-world data on the safety and efficacy of off-label use of IVT for AIS. We also make some practical recommendations to stroke physicians regarding the off-label use of thrombolytic agents in complex and uncommon presentations of AIS or other conditions mimicking acute cerebral ischemia. Finally, we provide guidance on the risks and benefits of IVT in numerous AIS subgroups, where equipoise exists and guidelines and treatment practices vary.

In clinical practice, edoxaban is sometimes prescribed for off-label use based on the hypothesis that it is as safe and effective as warfarin. However, there is limited safety information on off-label use due to lack of clinical trial. We aimed to analyze the tolerability of off-label use of edoxaban and to identify patient characteristics associated with major bleeding as adverse effects. Patients under edoxaban treatment between January 2017 and December 2017 were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study. The incidence of major bleeding with off-label use compared with on-label use was analyzed using by log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis were undertaken to detect independent variables with significant odds ratio that associated with major bleeding. After the exclusion criteria were applied, the patients were divided into two groups: off-label group (n = 30) and on-label group (n = 161). Incidence of major bleeding was found to be higher in the off-label group (13.3%) than in the on-label group (3.7%) (p

Chorea-acanthocytosis (ChAc) is a neurodegenerative disease caused by mutations in the VPS13A gene. It is characterized by several neurological symptoms and the appearance of acanthocytes. Elevated tyrosine kinase Lyn activity has been recently identified as one of the key pathophysiological mechanisms in this disease, and therefore represents a promising drug target. Methods: We evaluated an individual off-label treatment with the tyrosine kinase inhibitor dasatinib (100 mg/d, 25.8–50.4 weeks) of three ChAc patients. Alongside thorough safety monitoring, we assessed motor and non-motor scales (e.g., MDS-UPDRS, UHDRS, quality of life) as well as routine and experimental laboratory parameters (e.g., serum neurofilament, Lyn kinase activity, actin cytoskeleton in red blood cells). Results: Dasatinib appeared to be reasonably safe. The clinical parameters remained stable without significant improvement or deterioration. Regain of deep tendon reflexes was observed in one patient. Creatine kinase, serum neurofilament levels, and acanthocyte count did not reveal consistent effects. However, a reduction of initially elevated Lyn kinase activity and accumulated autophagy markers, as well as a partial restoration of the actin cytoskeleton, was found in red blood cells. Conclusions: We report on the first treatment approach with disease-modifying intention in ChAc. The experimental parameters indicate target engagement in red blood cells, while clinical effects on the central nervous system could not be proven within a rather short treatment time. Limited knowledge on the natural history of ChAc and the lack of appropriate biomarkers remain major barriers for “clinical trial readiness”. We suggest a panel of outcome parameters for future clinical trials in ChAc.

If an authorized drug is prescribed for a use that is not described in the Summary of Product Characteristics, this is defined as 'off-label use.' Methotrexate is often used off-label for dermatological indications. Off-label use is permitted if physicians can justify the treatment based on scientific evidence available to them. Our objective here was therefore to summarize the evidence for the effectiveness, efficacy, and safety of the dermatological off-label use of methotrexate in a systematic review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for studies for evidence on the effectiveness, efficacy, and safety of the off-label use of methotrexate in dermatological indications up to November 2019. We used the GRADE system to rate the quality of the evidence. The search retrieved 34,583 hits of which 3566 were selected after the title and abstract screening. After the full-text screening, 143 studies were included, which involved 3688 patients in total. We found low-quality evidence for the effectiveness, efficacy, and safety of the off-label use of methotrexate in 31 dermatological diseases. To optimize the quality of evidence to support off-label use, we need high-quality studies in which well-characterized patients are treated with standardized treatments regimens using well-validated outcomes relevant to patients and physicians.

Background/Objectives: Atopic dermatitis (AD) affects up to 20% of the pediatric population, with a growing prevalence over the past 30 years. Topical corticosteroids (TCS) are commonly used as a first-line topical therapy for AD and are prescribed in 59% of all AD visits. However, some topical corticosteroids are prescribed outside of their age range indications. This paper aims to explore the frequency with which topical corticosteroids are prescribed for AD outside of their FDA-approved age range. Methods: Data on prescribing patterns for AD were obtained from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS). We assessed the frequency of off-label use of topical corticosteroids with respect to age indications in four specific age-groups, as delineated in the data (0-1, 2-7, 8-18, and 19+ years). Results: All prescribed topical corticosteroids found in the NAMCS database have an indication for AD or other inflammatory dermatoses or pruritic dermatoses. However, some medications were prescribed outside of their FDA-approved age indications. These off-label prescription rates ranged from 52% for desoximetasone to 0% for halobetasol and alclometasone, or rates lower than could be detected by our study. Conclusions: Much like other medications for AD treatment, TCS are sometimes used off-label. The off-label use of topical corticosteroids to treat pediatric AD highlights a gap between clinical practice and regulating guidelines. Additional pediatric studies would offer a greater body of evidence to maintain or expand label indications for the use of TCS in younger patients.

This work aimed to establish whether paediatric needs in cardiovascular diseases have been met by paediatric investigation plans (PIPs) produced since the development of the European Union Paediatric Regulation in 2007. The European Medicines Agency repository was searched for patterns in the development of paediatric medicines in general. Next, positive PIPs related to cardiovascular diseases were scrutinized for outcomes and compared to specific paediatric cardiovascular needs. In total, 1866 PIPs were identified with 12% corresponding to decisions taken for cardiovascular medicines. However, despite this therapeutic area having the greatest number of overall PIPs, only 14% of established needs in paediatric cardiovascular diseases were addressed by PIPs with positive decisions. Further, 71.9% of PIPs with decisions in cardiovascular disease corresponded to full waivers, so the product would not be studied in paediatrics. Despite the progress found in overall numbers of PIPs published, cardiovascular products are still commonly used off-label in paediatrics. Particularly, there is a need to develop products to treat heart failure and hypertension, two areas with clear unmet clinical needs in paediatrics. A case study on valsartan showed that industry, regulators, health technology assessment bodies, and prescribers should work together to reduce off-label use of paediatric cardiovascular diseases (CVD).

Itolizumab, an anti-CD6 monoclonal antibody, has been recently approved for the off-label indication of cytokine release syndrome in the background of COVID-19, by the Drug Controller General of India. However, this drug has not been included in the National Clinical Management Protocol for COVID-19 yet. The limited-to-no experience of the Indian health workforce with the drug urged us to conduct a situational analysis in the pre-COVID era to analyse the degree of use of the drug and the indications for which it has been employed.

The year 2020 is facing one of the worst public health situations in decades. The world is experiencing a pandemic that has triggered significant challenges to healthcare systems in both high and low‐middle income countries (LMICs). Government policymakers and healthcare personnel are experiencing real‐life ethical dilemmas and are pressed to respond to these situations. Many possible treatments are being investigated, one of which is the use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine. These drugs are approved for use by patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis, and malaria. The demand for these products has increased, and the stocks are depleting for the patient population for whom the drugs are intended initially. Although both innovator and generic pharmaceutical manufacturers are making plans for increased production, there are challenges with global supply chains disruption and the retention of supplies for local markets. This may cause countries that rely on the importation of pharmaceuticals to be out of stock of supplies for an extended period. There are allegations of off‐label prescribing and hoarding. Pharmacists are the custodians and dispensers of medications and are faced with the task of assessing prescriptions and making decisions about the allocation of these products. This paper seeks to 1) highlight some of the ethical challenges of dispensing hydroxychloroquine by pharmacists during the COVID‐19 pandemic, 2) identify some of the responses to these issues from various regulatory authorities in the USA, and 3) recommend approaches to assist pharmacists in their decision‐making process, especially in LMICs.