Search

Ketamine is a versatile anesthetic that has been widely used off-label to treat a variety of indications. Esketamine, a derivative of ketamine, is FDA-approved to treat treatment-resistant depression. This report compares statewide prescription ketamine and esketamine trends. Using PDMP data from 2017–2023, prescription and prescriber characteristics, and patient demographics were compared between esketamine and ketamine prescriptions. During this time, ketamine prescriptions, patients, and providers rose 55.8%, 30.6%, and 2.8% since 2017. Esketamine prescriptions increased 1289.4% since 2019. In 2023, ketamine prescriptions were primarily in powder form (98.7%) and paid for out-of-pocket (83.9%), whereas esketamine prescriptions were primarily paid for by insurance (80.2%). The proportion of ketamine prescribed in RI but dispensed out-of-state have increased 22% since 2022 (18% of total dispensations). As more people seek treatment for mental health disorders, ketamine and esketamine prescriptions continue to rise. Understanding ketamine and esketamine use can help mitigate associated adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abrocitinib, an oral small-molecule Janus Kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor, is primarily approved for treating moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in adults and adolescents aged 12 and older. This review examines the emerging off-label uses of Abrocitinib. We identified 37 papers reporting on the use of Abrocitinib in various conditions other than AD. The most commonly reported uses were for vitiligo, prurigo nodularis, and hand eczema, with 12 cases each. There were also 10 cases of lichen sclerosus and chronic pruritus of unknown origin and 5 cases each of pityriasis rubra pilaris alopecia areata. Additionally, erythematotelangiectatic rosacea and steroid-induced rosacea were reported in four cases each. Other conditions treated with Abrocitinib were noted, but these mostly had only one or two reported cases. Interestingly, out of the 103 patients reviewed, all studies reported favorable clinical outcomes and satisfactory results, with the exception of one isolated case where Abrocitinib was used to treat erythematotelangiectatic rosacea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Global antipsychotic usage, including off-label prescriptions, has increased in recent decades. However, trends in China, particularly for children and adolescents, remain unclear. This study explored these trends from 2016 to 2021 and identified factors associated with off-label prescriptions. Methods: In this retrospective study, we analyzed on-label and off-label prescriptions based on drug information approved by the China National Medical Products Administration. To identify factors associated with off-label prescriptions, we conducted multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: Our study included 48,258 antipsychotic prescriptions, 52.4% (25,295) of which were prescriptions for males. Of these, 61.7% (29,813) were off-label. Over time, the number of antipsychotics and the percentage of off-label prescriptions for children and adolescents overall increased from 2016 to 2021. The use of atypical antipsychotics increased, whereas that of typical antipsychotics decreased. For off-label usage, all of the factors in our study were associated with off-label usage, including age, sex, year, region, department, reimbursement, antipsychotic type, drug expense, number of polypharmacy and diagnoses. Additionally, tiapride (15.8%) and aripiprazole (18.6%) were the most common typical and atypical antipsychotics, respectively. For pediatric diseases, common diagnoses included mood or affective disorders (31.7%) and behavioral and emotional disorders, with onset usually occurring in childhood and adolescence (29.1%). Furthermore, a depressive state was the most common diagnosis for which antipsychotic polypharmacy was used for treatment. Conclusion: In this retrospective study, off-label antipsychotic prescriptions were common, with trends generally increasing among children and adolescents from 2016 to 2021. However, there is a lack of evidence supporting off-label usage, thus emphasizing the need for studies on the efficacy and safety of these treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Paediatric patients are especially prone to experiencing adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and the surgical environment gathers many conditions for such reactions to occur. Additionally, little information exists in the literature on ADRs in the paediatric surgical population. We aimed to quantify the ADR frequency in this population, and to investigate the characteristics and risk factors associated with ADR development. Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in a cohort of 311 paediatric patients, aged 1–16 years, admitted for surgery at a tertiary referral hospital in Spain (2019–2021). Incidence rates were used to assess ADR frequency. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated to evaluate the influence of potential risk factors on ADR development. Results: Distinct ADRs (103) were detected in 80 patients (25.7%). The most frequent being hypotension (N = 32; 35%), nausea (N = 16; 15.5%), and emergence delirium (N = 16; 15.5%). Most ADRs occurred because of drug-drug interactions. The combination of sevoflurane and fentanyl was responsible for most of these events (N = 32; 31.1%). The variable most robustly associated to ADR development, was the number of off-label drugs prescribed per patient (OR = 2.99; 95% CI 1.73 to 5.16), followed by the number of drugs prescribed per patient (OR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.41), and older age (OR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.49). The severity of ADRs was assessed according to the criteria of Venulet and the Spanish Pharmacovigilance System. According to both methods, only four ADRs (3.9%) were considered serious. Conclusions: ADRs have a high incidence rate in the paediatric surgical population. The off-label use of drugs is a key risk factor for ADRs development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have improved outcomes in a variety of adult cancers and are prescribed with increasing frequency across oncology. However, patterns of off‐label use of ICI in pediatrics remain unclear. Methods: This is a single‐institution, retrospective cohort study evaluating off‐label ICI use in pediatric and young adult patients with cancer treated at our institution from 2014 to 2022. Response was based on clinician assessment derived from clinical records. Immune‐related adverse events (iRAEs) were classified according to CTCAE v5.0. Results: We identified 50 unique patients treated with off‐label ICI (28 with solid tumors, 20 with central nervous system (CNS) tumors, 2 with hematologic malignancies). At time of ICI initiation, only five patients (10%) had localized disease, and all but one patient was treated in the relapsed/refractory setting. All patients were treated with the FDA‐approved weight‐based dosing recommendations. Overall, there was disease control in 21 patients (42%), with best response including one complete response (melanoma), two partial responses (high‐grade glioma, CNS nongerminomatous germ cell tumor), and 18 patients with stable disease. Forty‐four patients (88%) eventually experienced disease progression. Among 22 patients (44%) experiencing iRAEs, 10 (20%) had a grade ≥3 irAE, 12 (24%) required corticosteroids, and 14 (28%) required ICI discontinuation. irAE occurrence was associated with significantly improved progression‐free survival (HR 0.35; 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.68; p = 0.002) and overall survival (HR 0.33; 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.66; p = 0.002). Conclusions: At our institution, ICI was most commonly prescribed in the relapsed/refractory setting to patients with metastatic disease. The treatment was generally well‐tolerated in the pediatric population. The overall response rate was low, and the majority of patients eventually experienced disease progression. A few patients, however, had durable treatment responses. Further studies are needed to identify which pediatric patients are most likely to benefit from ICI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To assess the extent of off‐label drug use and the occurrence of suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) among paediatric patients in Italian hospitals. Methods: We conducted a 2‐year prospective cohort study across 22 Italian hospital wards from September 2020 to September 2022. As part of the surveillance project, we performed a 6‐month retrieval of all reported ADRs and evaluated all drug prescriptions for their possible off‐label use. Following an educational project on pharmacovigilance addressed to healthcare professionals in participating wards, the same data collection was performed. Results: Among the 892 patients included in the study, 64% were admitted to paediatric wards and 36% to neonatal wards. Fifty per cent of all drugs prescribed were used off‐label and mainly concerned the administration of a different dose from the one authorized. In neonatal wards, off‐label prescriptions occurred slightly more often, with antibacterials being the most frequently used off‐label drugs. A total of 35 reports of suspected ADRs were collected, five before the educational project and 30 afterwards. Based on product licence, 10 of the total 35 reports concerned at least one off‐label drug use. Conclusions: The off‐label use of drugs in treating paediatric patients was extensive in Italian hospitals. Regulatory interventions are needed to promote the use of drugs based on the latest available literature and improve ADR reporting on children. Paediatric indications and dosages of the drugs most commonly used in children should be supported by appropriate ad hoc studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With a global increased use of psychotropics in pediatrics, their off-label use is a concern due to uncertainty and risk. Data on psychotropics use in the Greek pediatric population do not exist to date. We analyzed retrospective data from the nationwide pharmacy claim database, to estimate the prevalence of psychotropics in pediatrics focusing on off-label use (March 2016-October 2019). In total 63,782 pediatric subjects had at least one identified psychotropic prescription. The prevalence of psychotropics use was 5.1-14.6/1,000 pediatric inhabitants. When excluding 42,508 subjects who received only short-time hydroxyzine, the prevalence was 3.1-6.5/1,000 pediatric inhabitants; adolescents and boys had higher exposures. An in-depth analysis of 21,274 subjects accounting for 222,307 psychotropic dispensations, showed antiepileptics as the most frequent psychotropics, consistently with the finding on epilepsy being the most frequent diagnosis; diazepam was the single drug with the highest exposure in almost all ages. 14% of subjects have received at least one medicine with no pediatric information in the labelling, corresponding to 5.5% of dispensed psychotropics. 7.6% of all dispensed psychotropics were used in a non-authorized age range with quetiapine being the most frequent psychotropic as off-label age range; antipsychotics and antidepressants were first as off-label for non-authorized indication. Data from Greece show that a relevant number of patients are prescribed psychotropics, with 1 in 7 being under off-label use. Due to the limitations inherent to pharmacy claims databases, further research using clinical data for a longer follow-up period could confirm and identify trends in psychotropics use in Greece. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are few data on yellow fever (YF) and hepatitis A (HA) off-label vaccination. Given the rising trend of travel to endemic countries, there is a growing necessity to broaden vaccination coverage among the pediatric population. For this reason, we aim to assess the adverse effects associated with off-label vaccination, with the ultimate purpose of expanding the vaccine spectrum. We analyzed ambispectively ninety-four children under 12 months of age who received YF or HA off-label vaccines. The YF vaccine was administered to children aged 6–9 months and those allergic to eggs (with a prior negative prick test and no history of anaphylaxis), while the HA vaccine was given to children aged 6–12 months. Overall, 71 (75%) were vaccinated against YF, and 57 (60%) against HA; 34 against both. All of them fulfilled off-label vaccination criteria. No immediate adverse effects (AEs) were reported. Mild common AEs (diarrhea, fever, or malaise) were experienced by 10.8% of patients within 10 days after vaccination. The rate of AEs associated with off-label vaccination for HA and YF is low, suggesting that the vaccines could be considered safe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The objective of this article is to present a decision aid in the form of a flowchart, designed to assist psychiatrists in navigating the challenges of off-label medication use. This tool is believed to be the only one currently available that combines guidance from medical indemnity insurers, RANZCP guidelines, CATG frameworks, and relevant legislation to provide a practical guide for everyday psychiatric practice. Conclusions: There are clinical, legal, ethical, and financial considerations to take into account each time an off-label prescription is ordered. There is no legal barrier to prevent psychiatrists from prescribing off-label in Australia and New Zealand. The medication should be utilised if it is in the best interests of the patient. However, practitioners must be able to defend the rationale for their off-label medication use with evidence of sound quality. Off-label use medication use can lead to improved patient outcomes and quality of life. On the other hand, poor practice in off-label prescribing can result in adverse events, patient harm, legal implications, and damage to professional reputation. By evaluating available evidence, considering patient characteristics, obtaining informed consent, and documenting the rationale for off-label use, clinical decision-making can be enhanced whilst mitigating the risks associated with off-label prescribing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Unlicensed and off-label (UL/OL) prescriptions have been associated with an increased risk of drug-related problems. Data of their prevalence at hospital discharge remain insufficient. We aimed to describe the prevalence of UL/OL drugs in outpatient prescriptions at discharge in children. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study using the routinely collected health data of children at discharge from 2014 to 2016. The primary reference source for determining licensed labelling was the summaries of product characteristics (SPCs) in a French industry-independent formulary named Thériaque. We described the characteristics of UL/OL prescriptions at discharge and looked for predictors of UL/OL prescriptions. Results: We included 2536 prescriptions of 479 children. Licensed, OL, and UL prescriptions accounted for 58.6% (95% CI: 56.7–60.5), 39.2% (95% CI: 37.3–41.1), and 2.3% (95% CI: 1.7–2.9), respectively. A total of 323 (74%) children received at least one UL/OL drug. Among the licensed drugs, bronchodilators (8.8%) and analgesics (8.6%), and among the OL drugs, antibiotics (2.8%), were the most prescribed. The younger age of the children and higher number of drugs they received increased the probability of UL/OL prescriptions (unadjusted p-value of ≤0.05). Conclusion: The prevalence of UL/OL prescriptions is about 40% at discharge from a pediatric university hospital in France. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objective: The safety and efficacy of on-label use of pipeline embolization devices (PEDs) are well established; however, there is much controversy over their off-label use. This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of the off-label use of PEDs for treating intracranial aneurysms. Methods: This single-center study retrospectively included patients with digital subtraction angiography, computed tomographic angiography, or magnetic resonance angiography confirmed intracranial aneurysms treated with PEDs who were admitted to our institution between 1 January 2018 and 1 July 2022. Patients were divided into on- and off-label groups according to the Food and Drug Administration criteria published in 2021. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance disparities in baseline information between the two groups. Safety outcomes included postoperative mortality and complication rates, whereas effectiveness outcomes included aneurysm occlusion rate (O'Kelly-Marotta grading system C + D grades), retreatment rate within 12 months, and postoperative functional score [modified Rankin scale (mRS) score]. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Scientific Research and Clinical Trial of the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University (Ethics number: KY 2018-098-02). All patients provided informed consent. Results: A total of 242 patients with 261 aneurysms (160 on-label and 101 offlabel aneurysms) were included in this study. PSM yielded 81 pairs of patients matched for baseline information. Postoperative hemorrhagic, ischemic, and procedure-related complication rates did not reach statistical significance. In addition, no statistically significant differences in the aneurysm occlusion rate, retreatment rate within 12 months, postoperative functional score (mRS score), or mRS score deterioration rate were observed between the two groups. A higher incidence of in-stent stenosis was observed in the offlabel (4.9% vs. 21%, p = 0.002) group than in the on-label group; however, all patients were asymptomatic. Conclusion: Compared with on-label use, off-label use of PEDs for treating intracranial aneurysms did not increase the risk of complications, and the occlusion rates were comparable. Therefore, decisions regarding clinical management should not rely solely on on- or off-label indications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The large-scale utilization of immunoglobulins in patients with inborn errors of immunity (IEIs) since 1952 prompted the discovery of their key role at high doses as immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory therapy, in the treatment of IEI-related immune dysregulation disorders, according to labelled and off-label indications. Recent years have been dominated by a progressive imbalance between the gradual but constant increase in the use of immunoglobulins and their availability, exacerbated by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Objectives: To provide pragmatic indications for a need-based application of high-dose immunoglobulins in the pediatric context. Sources: A literature search was performed using PubMed, from inception until 1st August 2023, including the following keywords: anti-inflammatory; children; high dose gammaglobulin; high dose immunoglobulin; immune dysregulation; immunomodulation; immunomodulatory; inflammation; intravenous gammaglobulin; intravenous immunoglobulin; off-label; pediatric; subcutaneous gammaglobulin; subcutaneous immunoglobulin. All article types were considered. Implications: In the light of the current imbalance between gammaglobulins' demand and availability, this review advocates the urgency of a more conscious utilization of this medical product, giving indications about benefits, risks, cost-effectiveness, and administration routes of high-dose immunoglobulins in children with hematologic, neurologic, and inflammatory immune dysregulation disorders, prompting further research towards a responsible employment of gammaglobulins and improving the therapeutical decisional process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become an indispensable part of clinical practice; however, off-label use of these agents is unknown. We aimed to define the patterns of off-label use of ICIs in a nationwide sample of patients. Methods: The online database (Reçetem) was retrospectively searched for off-label use cases related to ICIs approved during a 6-month period. Adult patients with metastatic solid tumors were included. Ethics approval was obtained. Reasons for off-label use were recorded in eight categories and cases were assessed for adherence to current guidelines. Statistical analysis was performed with GNU PSPP version 1.5.3. Results: Five hundred seventy-seven reasons for use were recorded for 538 cases related to 527 patients (67.5% male). Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (35.9%) was the most common cancer type. Nivolumab (49%), pembrolizumab (25.5%), and atezolizumab (25%) were commonly used. The top reason for off-label use was lack of approval for the cancer type (37.1%), followed by use beyond the approved treatment line (21%). Nivolumab was more frequently used than atezolizumab and/or pembrolizumab in patients with malignant melanoma, kidney cancer, head and neck cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma (Chi-square goodness-of-fit test, p < 0.001). The guideline adherence rate was 60.5%. Conclusion: Off-label use of ICIs was primarily related to (NSCLC), and most patients were treatment-naïve in contrast to the acceptance that off-label use results from exhausted treatment options. Lack of approval is a significant reason for the off-label use of ICIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Psychotropics are increasingly used in pediatrics, often as off-label medicines. The guarantees of safety and efficacy are not always granted in clinical practice compared to adult authorised indications. A retrospective observational study was done to estimate the prevalence of psychotropic use in pediatric subjects of Catalonia (Spain). Anonymised data on dispensation of psychotropics to pediatric patients, demography and other related data were obtained by the local healthcare management for the period 2008-2017. Estimation of off-label use was done through description of drug dispensations with no authorised use related to age range. The prevalence of psychotropics was 40.8-64.2 per 1,000 pediatric inhabitants. Hydroxyzine-only represented two-thirds of dispensations, and when removed, the prevalence dropped to 26.4-32.2 per 1,000 pediatric inhabitants. Adolescents and boys were more likely to receive a psychotropic. Psychostimulants had the highest exposure rate, mainly due to methylphenidate. Off-label use was observed in 12% of subjects, corresponding to 4.6% of all dispensed psychotropics with boys being more exposed. The proportion of off-label use vs. labelled use was higher in younger populations. Aripiprazole had the highest off-label frequency. Our data support the frequent reality of off-label use in pediatrics, despite the potential underestimation related to the selected off-label definition. There is an urgent need to systematically ascertain effectiveness and any potential adverse events in the offlabel pediatric setting, and to generate valuable information for risk-benefit assessment in these populations where extrapolation from adults is not reliable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Off-label drug use is a global problem for which many countries and regions have issued legal provisions or reached an expert consensus. Off- label use is sometimes a necessity, especially since antibacterial drugs have become one of the most widely used drugs in pediatric settings and the issue of causing antimicrobial resistance has increasingly become unavoidable. It also poses additional risks, such as adverse drug reactions. Methods: Our study analyzed the antimicrobial prescriptions of pediatric inpatients in a large Chinese hospital in the first half of 2021. This retrospective investigation included 6,829 prescriptions, including 2,294 off-label prescriptions. We performed descriptive analyses of prescription antimicrobial agents among pediatric populations and reported the percentages and frequencies. Results: It was found that off-label use of antibiotics was present in many children (n = 1,665, 48.9%) and was most common in newborns (n = 328, 82.8%). Among the commonly used antibiotics in pediatric patients, cephalosporins (n = 2,778, 40.7%) accounted for a relatively low proportion of offlabel use (n = 360, 15.7%), while macrolides (n = 628, 27.4%) and penicillins (n = 610, 26.6%) accounted for a higher proportion. The off-label type mainly referred to the appropriate population (46.5%) and dosage (dose, 10.0%; frequency of administration, 48.3%). Discussion: Off-label use was due to imperfect labels, improper medications, or medication errors. Only a few consensuses could apply to pediatric patients. More clinical trials are required to update the consensus, and drug labels must be continuously improved. The prescription behavior of doctors is also needed to be regulated. Rational use of drugs, especially antimicrobials, is the responsibility of all people, including the states, medical institutions, and individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Early access programs (EAPs) generally refer to patient access to medicines/indications before marketing authorization, possibly extended to price and reimbursement approval. These programs include compassionate use, which is usually covered by pharmaceutical companies, and EAPs reimbursed by third-party payers. This paper aims at comparing EAPs in four European countries (France, Italy, Spain, UK) and providing empirical evidence on EAPs in Italy. The comparative analysis was conducted through a literature review (including scientific and grey literature), complemented by 30-min semi-structured interviews with local experts. The Italian empirical analysis employed data available on the National Medicines Agency website. Although EAPs are very different across countries, they exhibit some common features: (i) eligibility criteria refer to the absence of valid therapeutic alternatives and a presumed favourable risk–benefit profile; (ii) payers do not allocate a pre-determined budget to these programs; (iii) total spending on EAPs is unknown. The French EAPs seem to be the most structured, financed through social insurance, covering pre-marketing, post-marketing and pre-reimbursement phases and providing for data collection. Italy's approach to EAPs has been varied, with several programs covered by different payers, including the cohort-based 648 List (for both early access and off-label use), the nominal-based 5% Fund, and Compassionate Use. Most applications to EAPs are from the Antineoplastic and immunomodulating drug class (ATC L). Some 62% of indications in the 648 List are either not under clinical development or have never been approved (pure off-label use). For those subsequently approved, most approved indications coincide with those covered through EAPs. Only the 5% Fund provides data on economic impact (€ 81.2 million in 2021; average cost per patient € 61.5K). Diverse EAPs are a possible source of inequalities in access to medicines across Europe. A harmonization of these programs, though difficult to achieve, could be modelled on the French EAPs and provide key advantages, not least of which a common effort to collect real-world data in parallel with clinical trials and clear separation between EAPs and off-label use programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: Since first approved by the FDA, on-label and off-label usage of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP2) for spinal fusion surgeries has become widespread. While many studies have investigated the safety and efficacy of its use, as well as its economic impact, few have looked at the current trends in its on- and off-label use. The goal of this study is to evaluate the current trends of on- and off-label rhBMP2 use for spinal fusion surgery. (2) Methods: A deidentified survey was created and electronically distributed to members of two international spine societies. Surgeons were asked to report their demographic information, surgical experience, and current usage of rhBMP2. They were then presented with five spinal fusion procedures and asked to report if they use rhBMP2 for these indications in their current practice. Responses were stratified between rhBMP2 users vs. non-users and on-label vs. off-label use. Data were analyzed using chi-square with Fisher's exact test for categorical data. (3) Results: A total of 146 respondents completed the survey with a response rate of 20.5%. There was no difference in overall rhBMP2 usage based on specialty, experience, or number of cases per year. Fellowship-trained surgeons and those who practice in the United States were more likely to use rhBMP2. Surgeons who were trained in the Southeast and Midwest regions reported the highest usage rates. rhBMP2 use was more common among fellowship-trained and US surgeons for ALIFs; non-US surgeons for multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusions; and fellowship-trained and orthopedic spine surgeons for lateral lumbar interbody fusions. Non-US surgeons were more likely to use rhBMP2 for off-label indications compared to surgeons from the US. (4) Conclusions: While various demographics of surgeons report different rates of rhBMP2 use, off-label use remains relatively commonplace amongst practicing spine surgeons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Antiseizure medications (ASMs) remain the mainstay of epilepsy treatment. These ASMs have mainly been tested in trials in adults with epilepsy, which subsequently led to market authorization (MA). For treatment of – especially young – children with epilepsy, several ASMs do not have a MA and guidelines are lacking, subsequently leading to "off‐label" use of ASMs. Even though "off‐label" ASM prescriptions for children could lead to more adverse events, it can be clinically appropriate and rational if the benefits outweigh the risks. This could be the case if "on‐label" ASM, in mono‐ or polytherapy, fails to achieve adequate seizure control. Methods: The Medical Therapies Task Force of the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Commission for Pediatrics performed a survey to study the current treatment practices in six classic, early life epilepsy scenarios. Our aim was not only to study first‐ and second‐line treatment preferences but also to illustrate the use of "off‐label" drugs in childhood epilepsies. Results: Our results reveal that several ASMs (e.g. topiramate, oxcarbazepine, benzodiazepines) are prescribed "off‐label" in distinct scenarios of young children with epilepsy. In addition, recent scientific guidelines were not always adopted by several survey respondents, suggesting a potential knowledge gap. Significance: We report the relatively common use of "off‐label" prescriptions that underlines the need for targeted and appropriately designed clinical trials, including younger patients, which will also result in the ability to generate evidence‐based guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Farmacie Pro Praxi is the property of SOLEN sro and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

With advances in drug development and our understanding of the pathophysiology of skin disease, biologic medications have emerged as powerful management tools for dermatologists. While biologics have most often been used in the management of psoriasis, they are being used off-label for the management of a variety of other immune-mediated skin diseases with overlapping molecular targets. This narrative review focuses on the novel and off-label use of biologic medications for the management of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), pyoderma gangrenosum (PG), lichen planus (LP), and seborrheic dermatitis (SD). Review of the literature revealed that IL-17, IL-23, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors were being used across a variety of immune-mediated skin pathologies with variable efficacy, among other targeted biologics. While biologics were generally safe in the treatment of primary immune-mediated skin disorders, paradoxical disease eruptions were noted with biologic use and were theorized to occur owing to immune dysregulation and cytokine imbalance. While numerous case reports show promise for the use of biologics in immune-mediated skin pathologies, the variable efficacy and safety reported warrants more thorough investigations of the role of these targeted medications in comprehensive disease management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Off-label drug prescribing in psychiatry is increasing. Many psychotropic drugs are approved for psychopathologic syndromes rather than based on international standard diagnostic classification systems which might facilitate the clinical decision for off-label prescriptions. The objective of this study was to analyze the prevalence and category of off-label use of psychotropic drugs. The study was conducted in 10 psychiatric hospitals in Germany over a period of 2 years. Prescription data of all patients were retrospectively analyzed after identification of antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood-stabilizers, which were classified as off-label according to the German prescribing information and diagnostic classification according to ICD-10. In total, 53,909 patient cases (46% female) with a mean age of 46.8 (SD: 18) years were included in the study. 30.2% of the cases received at least one off-label prescription of a psychotropic drug during hospital stay. Off-label prevalence rates differed markedly between different diagnostic groups (ICD-10 F0/G3: 47%, F1: 33%, F2: 25%, F3: 21%, F4: 27%, F6: 46%, F7: 84%). The most often off-label prescribed drugs were quetiapine and mirtazapine for organic mental disorders (F0/G3), valproate and quetiapine in patients with disorders due to psychoactive substance use (F1), valproate in patients with psychotic disorders (F2), and risperidone and olanzapine in patients with affective disorders (F3). The prevalence rate of psychotropic off-label prescriptions is high if restricted to product description and ICD-10 diagnosis. Therefore, current psychiatric guidelines should drug-specifically issue this problem by defining psychiatric off-label indications based on a clear benefit–risk assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The lack of medicines containing drug information leaflets considering the treatment of pediatric patients is a problem frequently observed in hospitals, especially in the pediatric and neonatal intensive care unit (ICU) sectors. It is known that, for a treatment to be considered safe and effective, a series of clinical studies are necessary; however, a low number of these studies involving children are reported, mainly due to ethical issues that make conducting them difficult. Thus, few drugs prove to be suitable for treating these patients, making it necessary to resort to using off-label and unlicensed drugs. Drugs are classified as off-label when their use differs from their approved specifications, in turn, unlicensed products are classified in this way due to not having approval for marketing in the country or do not have proof of safety and efficacy. Preparation of organized study protocols, reporting information to parents and the child in a clear and objective way, bringing researchers and parents closer to establish a relationship of trust and conducting research at moments when the family is available are important strategies to facilitate conducting clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Our aim was to describe the clinical outcome and safety of the sequential treatment with off-label dalbavancin in patients with spondylodiscitis that is caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Methods: We retrospectively included all patients >18 years of age with spondylodiscitis that is caused by MRSA that was treated with dalbavancin from January 2018–January 2021, recording the instances of clinical cure/failure, adverse events, and the need to be re-hospitalized after the initiation of dalbavancin. In 2/15 patients, we performed therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for dalbavancin. Results: We included 15 patients, 53.3% of them were females, with a median age of 67.9 years (57.4–78.5); 100% patients reported back pain, while a fever was present only in 2/15 cases. The spondylodiscitis was localized in 86.6% cases at the lumbar level. A median of a 2-week in-hospital intravenous vancomycin was followed by dalbavancin with a median duration of 12 weeks (12–16). All patients reported a clinical cure, except for a woman who is still on a suppressive treatment. No patient needed to be re-hospitalized, access to emergency department, or experienced adverse events. The TDM for dalbavancin showed that more than 90% of the determinations were above the pharmacodynamic target against staphylococci. Conclusions: The results from our unique, even if it was small, cohort demonstrated that dalbavancin can be a safe/effective option as a sequential treatment in patients with serious infections requiring prolonged antibiotic therapy, such as spondylodiscitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Given increasing community-based and off-label use of ketamine for psychiatric indications, we examined current informed consent processes from a convenience sample of outpatient ketamine clinics to identify areas of congruence with current evidence and opportunities for growth.Methods: Using a rubric developed from existing practice guidelines, we conducted an exploratory analysis of informed consent documents (IC-Docs) from 23 American clinics offering ketamine as a psychiatric treatment. Domains assessed included clinical content, procedures, and syntax.Results: Participating clinics (23/288) varied widely in their constitution, training, and services provided. We found that IC-Docs addressed a majority of consent elements, though did so variably on an item-level. Areas for improvement included communication around long-term adverse effects, treatment alternatives, medical/psychiatric evaluation prior to treatment, medical/psychological support during treatment, adjunctive psychological interventions, and subjective/dissociative-type effects. All forms were limited by poor readability.Limitations: Our study was limited by convenience sampling along with possible underestimation of verbal consent processes.Conclusions: As ketamine continues to emerge as a psychiatric intervention, both patients and providers will benefit from a deliberate consent process informed by scientific, ethical, and pragmatic factors toward the goal of shared decision-making regarding treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: The incidence of thromboembolic events is relatively low in the general population, but it increases in hospitalized children and those who underwent thrombogenic procedures. Although the evidence regarding direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in children with venous thromboembolism (VTE) is growing, DOACs were excluded from existing guidelines due to the lack of reliable data at that moment. Therefore, current evidence on VTE management in children needs to be critically reviewed. (2) Methods: We have conducted a literature search in the Scopus, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases using prespecified keywords to retrieve studies published between 2010 and 2022. (3) Results: Clinical trials highlighted that rivaroxaban and dabigatran had predictable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles in children, similar to those observed in adults. Dabigatran and rivaroxaban had a similar safety profile to standard therapy but improved thrombotic burden and resolution during follow-up. Most studies involving apixaban and edoxaban are ongoing, and results are awaited. (4) Conclusions: Dabigatran and rivaroxaban could be valid therapeutic options for VTE management in children. In the case of apixaban and edoxaban, results from ongoing clinical studies are required before using them in pediatric VTE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, off-label and unlicensed drug use has extensively developed in the paediatric population. For a long time, clinical trials in the paediatric population were considered complicated to perform because of ethical problems, causing frequent off-label use. Off-label drug use remains an important public health issue, especially for children with rare conditions or with diseases not responsive to conventional treatments. The present paper is a narrative review of the literature of off-label drug use in children. The aim of our study is to summarize the main works dealing with the off-label use of biological drugs in paediatrics. Further studies analyzing their efficacy, safety, and cost–benefit ratios are needed to extend the use of biological therapies to the paediatric population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The acquisition of proper and relevant pediatric clinical data is essential to ensure tolerable and effective pediatric drug therapies. In the field of pharmacological treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders, the lack of sufficient high quality scientific evidence for pediatric age results in the frequent need to prescribe off-label drugs. With the aim of improving knowledge about safety profile of off-label drug prescription in children and adolescent with neurological and/or psychiatric disorders, we realized a multidisciplinary pharmacovigilance study. Materials and methods: An observational retrospective study was conducted to assess the safety of off-label pharmacological therapies in patients aged 0–18 years, admitted to the Neuropsychiatry Unit of the Institute for Maternal and Child Health - IRCCS "Burlo Garofolo" between January 2016 and December 2018. Prescription patterns and adverse drug reactions were evaluated by a multidisciplinary team. Results: Overall, 230 patients were enrolled, 48% boys (N = 111), 52% girls (N = 119), average age of 10 years, and a total of 534 prescriptions was analyzed. 54.5% (N = 125) of patients had epilepsy, 37.5% (N = 86) suffered from psychiatric disorders, 8% (N = 19) had other neurological disorders. The prevalence of off-label prescriptions was 32% and 50% of the study population received at least one off-label drug. A total of 106 ADRs was detected: 57% of ADRs were due to drug-drug interactions, 30% were due to off-label prescriptions, 10% were due to overdose and 3% were due to improper use. No significant association between emerged ADRs and off label prescriptions was found (Fisher's exact two-tailed test, p = 1.000). There was significant association between increasing number of administrated drugs and risk of ADRs (OR 1.99; IC95% 1.58–2.5; p = 0.000). Psychiatric disorders were associated with at least three times higher risk to be treated with an off-label drug (OR 3.30; IC95% 2.26–4.83; p = 0.000). Conclusions: This study shows that off-label prescribing in neuropsychiatric disorders does not pose a greater risk of ADRs than on-label prescribing and highlights unmet clinical needs in pediatric neuropsychopharmacology. The multidisciplinary approach can provide important contributions to improve therapeutic path of these already complex pathologies by careful monitoring of therapeutic appropriateness and drug interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ruxolitinib is a Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor that is FDA-approved for the treatment of myelofibrosis, polycythemia vera, and acute graft-versus-host disease. Its use in treating various dermatologic diseases has been a topic of growing interest due to its favorable safety profile and targeted inhibition of several cytokines that perpetuate inflammatory skin conditions. The PubMed/MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for literature on off-label uses of ruxolitinib in dermatology and ongoing trials studying its safety and efficacy. There is randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence for the successful use of ruxolitinib in treating alopecia, atopic dermatitis, and psoriasis, with ongoing RCTs for its use in vitiligo. Smaller studies have confirmed the success of ruxolitinib in treating conditions such as dermatomyositis and hypereosinophilic syndrome, among others. No serious adverse effects were reported with the use of ruxolitinib in dermatology, but further research is needed to determine its efficacy, delivery route, and optimal dosing for treating dermatologic conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Many efforts have been made to stimulate clinical trials (CTs) in pediatrics but most of the drugs are still authorized only in adults and used off-label in the pediatric population. Aim: To assess how widespread is the off-label prescription in Italy and to identify areas of unmet medical need by applying a model for the systematic collection and analysis of data. Methods: A study was performed using 2015 data from the Italian Medicines Utilization Monitoring Centre Health Database (OsMed). A study sample of 3,726,583 pediatric patients, was considered. Cardiovascular drugs were selected for this study. Assessment of the off-label use, the analysis of the pharmacovigilance signals, a bibliographic research and the analysis of ongoing CTs were carried out. Results: In 2015, 8,544 pediatric patients received treatment with a cardiovascular drug. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) followed by beta blockers agents are the most prescribed molecules. Eight molecules were selected and an in-depth analysis conducted. The PhV network showed only one record of adverse reaction as off-label in 2015. The results show several therapeutic areas of use in pediatrics. Conclusion: Off-label in pediatrics is largely widespread in Europe and US and our results show it is also present in Italy. Molecules selected are used off-label for therapeutic areas such as oncologic, hematological and rare diseases. Results of pharmacovigilance suggests underreporting. The analysis carried out in this study could be an open track for a systematic monitoring activity and of interest for prescribers, pediatricians and other healthcare professionals during the clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The lack of appropriate medicines for children has a significant impact on health care practices in various countries around the world, including Thailand. The unavailability of pediatric medicines in hospital formularies causes issues regarding off-label use and extemporaneous preparation, resulting in safety and quality risks relating to the use of medicines among children. This research aimed to identify missing pediatric formulations based on the experience of healthcare professionals in a teaching hospital in northern Thailand. A cross-sectional survey was conducted to collect data on missing pediatric formulations, the reasons for their inaccessibility, their off-label uses, their reactions to the situation, and suggestions to improve access to these identified medications. The survey was distributed to all physicians, nurses, and pharmacists involved in prescribing, preparing, dispensing, and administering pediatric medicines. A total of 218 subjects responded to the survey. Omeprazole, sildenafil, and spironolactone suspension were most often identified as missing formulations for children by physicians and pharmacists. They are unavailable on the Thai market or in any hospital formulary. For nurses, sodium bicarbonate, potassium chloride, and chloral hydrate were the most problematic formulations in terms of preparation, acceptability, and administration. These medicines were difficult to swallow because of their taste or texture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anakinra (Kineret®) is an interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra) FDA approved for use in rheumatoid arthritis and in neonatal-onset multisystem inflammatory disease (NOMID). It has been used off-label for a variety of dermatologic conditions. A review of the available studies and cases of these off-label uses would be valuable to the dermatologist considering alternative treatments for these oftentimes poorly studied conditions. The PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched with the term 'anakinra.' Results were manually screened to identify published data on off-label uses of anakinra in dermatologic conditions and systemic conditions with prominent dermatologic manifestations. Anakinra appears to show efficacy for numerous dermatologic conditions, with the strongest evidence for hidradenitis suppurativa, Bechet's disease, Muckle-Wells syndrome, and SAPHO syndrome. Case reports and case series data are available for numerous other dermatologic conditions. Anakinra is a potential option for patients with certain difficult-to-treat dermatologic diseases, given its relatively benign adverse effect profile and its effectiveness in a wide array of conditions. Overall, anakinra appears to be a promising option in the treatment of numerous dermatologic inflammatory conditions refractory to first line therapies, but further and higher-quality data is needed to clarify its therapeutic role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Governmental regulations of drug registration and licensing are not always followed by healthcare providers. OBJECTIVE: To explore the global research growth and patterns on systemic use of off-label and unlicensed drugs to gain knowledge about the magnitude of the problem and the main research themes encountered in this field. METHODS: SciVerse Scopus was searched for papers on off-label and unlicensed drug use from 1990 until December 31, 2020, without any language limitations. A bibliometric methodology was adopted to present the following indicators: top-cited documents, the most productive countries, top active journals, international research collaboration, the most frequent author keywords, and research themes. RESULTS: The search query returned 1320 papers with an h-index of 66, published in 721 different journals. The Hospital Pharmacy journal ranked first (n = 43, 3.3%). In total, 5777 authors (median = 3) from 85 different countries contributed to the retrieved papers. The USA (n = 381, 28.9%) ranked first, followed distantly by Germany and Italy. The percentage of documents with international authors for active countries was from 8.8% for China to 42.3% for the Netherlands. The most frequent author keyword next to off-label was children/pediatrics. The keyword unlicensed was less frequently encountered than that for off-label. Major research themes in the retrieved papers focused on off-label drug use in hospitalized children/pediatrics, biological drugs such as rituximab and rFVIIa, psychiatric disorders, regulations, and questionnaire-based knowledge/attitude studies among community pharmacists and physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Research activity on off-label drug use has witnessed a general increase in the past two decades. The major research theme was off-label drug use in hospitalized children/pediatrics/neonates. The USA and certain European countries made a major contribution to this field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Botulinum toxin is a neurotoxic protein produced by Clostridium botulinum, the bacterium responsible for botulism. Botulinum toxin was first used for therapeutic indications in the 1970s for the treatment of strabismus. With greater understanding of its underlying physiology and safety profile, the use of botulinum toxin has now expanded to a range of cosmetic and medical indications. We performed a systematic review of current literature on the applications of botulinum toxin on off‐label esthetic uses. Electronic databases were searched for original published studies including randomized trials, observational or cohort studies, as well as relevant case reports. To add to the body of evidence, our review summarizes and synthesizes key study characteristics, results, and level of evidence for each use case. Although the body of evidence remains weak, there is increasing support for the use of botulinum toxin in emerging off‐label esthetic uses of botulinum toxin in dermatology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and study aims: Lumen-apposing stents (LAMS) are approved to treat peripancreatic collections and for gallbladder and bile duct drainage. Over the last years, LAMS have also been used for off-label indications including gastrojejunostomy, gastro-gastrostomy and drainage of postsurgical collections. We aimed to analyze indications, technical/clinical success rates and complications of all LAMS placed over the last 2 years. Patients and methods: Data from 61 consecutive LAMS (Hot Axios, Boston Scientific) in 57 patients were analyzed. Technical success was defined as successful deployment of the LAMS in the desired position. Clinical success was defined as follows: for pancreatic collections: resolution without the need for non-endoscopic interventions; for choledochoduodenostomy: ≥ 50% drop in baseline serum bilirubin within 2 weeks AND patient can receive chemotherapy if indicated; for gastrojejunostomy: resolution of gastric outlet obstruction and successful re-initiation of oral intake; for gastro-gastrostomy: successful endoscopic access to the excluded stomach; for gallbladder or postsurgical collection drainage: resolution of sepsis. Results: Indications were drainage of peripancreatic collections in 24 cases (39.3%), choledochoduodenostomy in 13 (21.3%), gastrojejunostomy in 6 (9.8%), gastro-gastrostomy in 13 (21.3%), gallbladder drainage in 1 (1.6%) and postsurgical collection drainage in 4 (6.6%). Overall technical and clinical success rates were high (57/61; 93.4% and 54/61; 88.5%, respectively). Clinical success rate for non-approved indications was 95.6% (22/23 cases). Complications occurred in 13 patients (21.3%, 4 serious). Conclusions: LAMS are increasingly used in interventional endoscopy. In our cohort, more than one third of LAMS are placed for off-label indications, with a high success rate and acceptable complication rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of combination pharmacotherapy is to allow PH patients to live independently if possible, with an acceptable or good quality of life.9,29 Postponing the listing for lung transplantation19 in patients at higher risk can be safely achieved by combination PAH therapy in treatment-responsive patients who do improve in the EPPVDN risk class and scores.29 Ongoing pediatric randomized controlled PAH trials and published observational studies There are currently no large, randomized prospective study data sets on childhood PAH combination therapy available. Nevertheless, the mainstay of therapy worldwide for two of the most common forms of PH in childhood, that is, PH associated with bronchopulmonary dysplasia in preterm infants (BPD-PH)27 and PH associated with congenital heart disease,31 is the oral phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE5) inhibitor sildenafil, either as monotherapy or in combination with an endothelin receptor antagonist (ERA). Keywords: children; macitentan; off-label; pulmonary hypertension; riociguat; selexipag EN children macitentan off-label pulmonary hypertension riociguat selexipag 1 7 7 07/27/21 20210801 NES 210801 Key points Pulmonary Hypertension is currently an incurable condition in adults and children. The decision on the specific therapy for PH with the possibility of combining drugs of all substance classes-including "off-label pediatric formulations"-should be made by a PH expert with sufficient experience in the treatment of children with pulmonary hypertension-and especially with vasoactive drugs (Table 1). [Extracted from the article]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tofacitinib citrate is an oral Janus kinase 1/3 inhibitor approved for rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis, and active psoriatic arthritis. Tofacitinib is being increasingly used off-label for dermatological conditions, with varying efficacy across recent studies. A review of these studies will be a helpful resource for dermatologists considering the use of tofacitinib for conditions refractory to first-line therapies. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, Clinicaltrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were all searched for articles and trials mentioning the term 'tofacitinib', then manually reviewed to identify published data on off-label uses of tofacitinib. The article was structured according to the quality of the evidence available. Tofacitinib appears to show strong efficacy for numerous dermatologic conditions. Randomized controlled trial data is available for atopic dermatitis, alopecia areata, and plaque psoriasis. Case report and case series data is available for numerous other dermatologic conditions. While tofacitinib has a wide array of immunoregulatory properties, making it a possible candidate for treating many dermatologic conditions refractory to other treatments, further testing is needed to better characterize its efficacy and utility moving forward, as well as its safety and adverse effect profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The guidelines for borderline personality disorder (BPD) treatment suggest non-pharmacological treatment as the first option, but second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are among the overprescribed medications. This study aimed to explore Italian psychiatrists' attitudes toward off-label use of SGAs in BPD. A randomly selected sample of Italian psychiatrists completed a questionnaire regarding off-label prescription of SGAs. Most respondents reported the off-label use of SGAs. Among the reasons supporting the prescription of SGAs, the presence of strong published data was the most determining factor (51.5%). The SGA olanzapine is considered the most appropriate, followed by quetiapine and aripiprazole. Although off-label prescription of SGAs represents a common clinical practice in accordance with a worldwide trend, the use of long-acting injection formulations was considered inappropriate by 69% of psychiatrists in our sample. Our results reiterate the discrepancy between everyday clinical practice and international recommendations, and show how relevant the literature is in off-label drug prescription. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Española de Quimioterapia is the property of Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

To retrospectively analyze the off‐label prescriptions at a plastic surgery hospital in China and conduct a literature review. The prescriptions in outpatient department from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018 were collected and compared with the related drug instructions in indications, dosage, frequency and route of administration to identify the off‐label prescriptions. According to related literatures, guidelines, and MICROMEDEX, the rationality of off‐label drug uses was evaluated. A total of 39 836 prescriptions were screened and 3395 (8.52%) off‐label prescriptions were identified. It involved 23 items off‐label medication uses. 20 items were off‐label used in indication and three items were in indication and administration route. These off‐label prescriptions involved 19 medicines and 12 indications and the dermatology related drug usage accounted for the largest proportion (91.3%). Additionally, five items (21.7%) were Chinese patent medicine related. Of the 23 items, seven (30.4%) have been recommended by guidelines and two (8.7%) by Thomson Grading System of Micromedex. All of them have been proved by literature evidence of level 1 to 4, in which 19 (82.6%) by Level 1 evidence, 21 (91.3%) by Level 1 to 2 evidence and 2 (8.7%) only by level 3 to 4 evidence. This can provide a theoretical basis to clinicians in prescribing. Our next work is to perfect some details about evidence assessment to improve the reliability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor eye injections have become the most accepted and effective treatment for some of the leading causes of blindness. Aflibercept (Eylea; Bayer) is the most expensive item on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, (PBS) with ranibizumab (Lucentis; Roche/Novartis) ranked eighth. In 2011 the pharmaceutical cost for these treatments was A$237 million – now the figure is A$665 million and climbing. Bevacizumab (Avastin; Roche) is part of the original molecular lineage for a group of biologic agents, which were originally designed for cancer therapy. It is now administered worldwide on an off-label basis and in very large numbers for retinal vascular disease. It has a proven efficacy and safety profile. Bevacizumab is thirty times cheaper than the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)-approved alternatives and its use could reduce PBS costs by hundreds of millions of dollars. Should the TGA be the sole arbiter in the approval of drugs, or should alternative bodies have some say in the approval of off-label usage under such compelling circumstances? Legislation for this approach has been approved in France, the UK, and Italy. Only by eliminating the legal risk to authorising bodies and physicians, and the financial disincentive to the patient associated with off-label use, will drugs such as bevacizumab be more widely adopted. What is known about the topic? Bevacizumab is known to be a far cheaper off-label alternative for the treatment of retinal vascular diseases such as age related macular disease, diabetic maculopathy and venous occlusive disease. Cost, litigation pressures and supply issues continue to limit its use in Australia. What does this paper add? This paper discusses the approaches taken by other health jurisdictions and authorities around the world, enabling easier access to this drug and thus making massive cost savings to their respective health budgets. What are the implications for practitioners? Potentially enormous cost savings could be achieved by enabling easier access to bevacizumab. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 is continuing as a big challenge for the globe and several types of research are continued to find safe and effective treatment and preventive options. Although there is a lack of conclusive evidence of their benefit, there is worldwide controversy to use anti-malarial drugs, hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, for the treatment of COVID-19. FDA issued an emergency use authorization to the use of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. On the contrary to the FDA, the European Medicines Agency has warned against the widespread use of these drugs to treat COVID-19. Finally, the WHO declared that clinical trials on these drugs are halted after the devastating findings of the study published in the medical journal called The Lancet. Against this fact, there are several rumors about the irresponsible use of these drugs in Africa for the treatment of COVID-19. This work aimed to review the off-label use of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 in African countries against WHO recommendation. Data on the use of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 in African countries were searched from credible sources including Scopus, PubMed, Hindawi, Google Scholar, and from local and international media. The study showed that many African countries have already approved at the national level to use these drugs to treat COVID-19 by opposing WHO warnings. In addition to this, falsified and substandard chloroquine products started to emerge in some African countries. The health sectors of the African government should critically compare the risks and benefits before using these drugs. The WHO and African drug regulatory organizations should intervene to stop the off-label use practice of these drugs against the licensed purpose and distribution of falsified and substandard products in the continent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Quetiapine is frequently prescribed off‐label in the community but little is known about the initiation and use of quetiapine in general (non‐psychiatry) hospital settings. Aim: This study examined the extent of off‐label quetiapine prescribing and rates of initiation of quetiapine in a general inpatient population of an Australian inner city teaching hospital, as well as the frequency of communication with community prescribers following discharge. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted of all patients admitted under all non‐psychiatric teams and prescribed quetiapine within a tertiary teaching hospital between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2016. All quetiapine prescribing information was extracted from an electronic medication management system (EMMS) and medical records were reviewed for a random sample of 100 patients prescribed quetiapine. Results: EMMS data indicated that 793 people were prescribed quetiapine over the study period. Quetiapine was most frequently prescribed once daily, with a median daily dose of 100 mg (interquartile range 37.5–200 mg). Eighty‐seven of the 100 medical records reviewed had corresponding discharge summaries, and potentially off‐label quetiapine prescribing was found in 48 people (55%); the most frequent off‐label indication was for agitation or delirium. Of the 33 people who had quetiapine initiated in hospital, 26 prescriptions (79%) were for off‐label indications. Of the 11 prescriptions (33%) continued at discharge, only three (27%) discharge summaries contained instructions to community prescribers regarding quetiapine. Conclusion: Off‐label prescribing of quetiapine was common in this sample of inpatients, and senior hospital staff should remain cautious of quetiapine prescribing for indications where the evidence of harms and benefits remains unclear. Communication with community prescribers could also be improved to reduce the risk of conversion from intended short‐term off‐label use to longer‐term use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]