Search

Background: Physiological changes in pregnancy may affect drug safety and efficacy, sometimes requiring dose adjustments. Pregnancy-adjusted doses, however, are missing for most medications. Increasingly, pharmacokinetic models can be used for antenatal dose finding. Given the novelty of this technique and questions regarding dose credibility, the acceptability of model-informed antenatal doses should be explored. Objective: We aimed to assess the willingness-to-use and preferred features for model-informed antenatal doses among healthcare practitioners (HCPs) and pregnant women in European countries. Methods: A cross-sectional, web-based study drawing on two open surveys was performed between 8 September and 30 November 2022. Each survey comprised statements drawn from prior focus groups, associated with Likert- scales. Themes included respondents' information needs, search behaviours along with their willingness-to-use and preferred features for model-informed antenatal doses. The surveys were disseminated through professional societies, pregnancy websites and social media. A descriptive analysis was performed. Results: In total, 608 HCPs from different specialties and 794 pregnant women across 15 countries participated, with 81% of respondents across both groups in the Netherlands or Belgium. Among pregnant women, 31% were medical professionals and 85% used medication during pregnancy. Eighty-three percent of HCPs found current antenatal pharmacotherapy suboptimal and 97% believed that model-informed antenatal doses would enhance the quality of antenatal care. Most HCPs (93%) and pregnant women (75%) would be willing to follow model-informed antenatal doses. Most HCPs desired access to the evidence (88%), including from pharmacokinetic modelling (62%). Most pregnant women (96%) wanted to understand antenatal dosing rationales and to be involved in dosing decisions (97%). Conclusion: Thewillingness-to-usemodel-informed antenatal doses is high among HCPs and pregnant women provided that certain information needs are met. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite growing knowledge of pregnancy-induced changes in physiology that may alter maternal and fetal pharmacokinetics, evidence-based antenatal doses are lacking for most drugs. Pharmacokinetic modeling and expanding clinical data in pregnancy may support antenatal doses. We aimed to develop and pilot a comprehensive and user-driven Framework for Dose Selection in Pregnancy to support the clinical implementation of a best-evidence antenatal dose for sertraline. After initial development and evaluation by experts, the framework prototype was piloted to formulate an antenatal dosing strategy for sertraline in depression and anxiety disorders. Next, the framework was reviewed and assessed for usability by a multidisciplinary working committee of end-users comprising healthcare practitioners, experts from other disciplines including pharmacometrics, reproductive toxicology and medical ethics, alongside pregnant women and a partner. The resulting framework encompasses the following: rationale for drug selection, a comprehensive analysis of pharmacokinetic and dose-related efficacy and safety data, and implementation aspects including feasibility and desirability of the recommended antenatal dose based on a structured maternal and fetal benefit-risk assessment. An antenatal dose recommendation for sertraline, as a case study, was formulated using this approach and endorsed for clinical use by the working committee. Future applications of the framework for other drugs can further demonstrate its suitability for developing best evidence, acceptable and clinically feasible antenatal doses., (© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) utilizes mathematical models to predict optimal medication doses for a specific patient or patient population. However, the factors influencing the implementation of MIPD have not been fully elucidated, hindering its widespread use in clinical practice. A systematic review was conducted in PubMed from inception to December 2022, aiming to identify barriers and facilitators for the implementation of MIPD into patient care. Articles with a focus on implementation of MIPD were eligible for this review. After screening titles and abstracts, full articles investigating the clinical implementation of MIPD were included for data extraction. Of 790 records identified, 15 publications were included. A total of 72 barriers and facilitators across seven categories were extracted through a hybrid thematic analysis. Barriers comprised limited data for model validation, unclear regulatory pathways for model endorsement and additional drug level measurements required for certain types of MIPD. Facilitators encompassed the development of user-friendly MIPD tools continuously updated based on user feedback and data. Collaborative efforts among diverse stakeholders for model validation and implementation, along with education of end-users, may promote the utilization of MIPD in patient care. Despite ongoing challenges, this systematic review revealed various strategies to facilitate the clinical implementation of MIPD., (© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Most individuals use medication during pregnancy. However, decision making on antenatal pharmacotherapy presents considerable ethical and scientific challenges. Amid a sociocultural paradigm prioritising the elimination of fetal risks, available evidence and guidance are limited, and current decision making on antenatal drugs mostly proceeds in an ad-hoc and, often, biased manner. This approach might undermine the health of both mother and child. The need for a systematic approach towards antenatal drug decisions is becoming even more pressing with the growing knowledge of pregnancy-induced changes in drug disposition and effects. With this new complexity, pregnancy-specific doses might be necessary, potentially altering the balance between maternal and fetal benefits and risks. In this Viewpoint, we argue that ethical principles and a pregnant individual's values must be integrated alongside existing evidence when making decisions on antenatal drug use and dosing. We use the example of sertraline to outline practical strategies for achieving this goal. This approach is urgently needed to foster better-informed and balanced decisions on antenatal pharmacotherapy., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests SNdW receives compensation for consultancy work for Khondrion. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Crown Copyright © 2024 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Plasmodium vivax malaria remains a global health challenge, with approximately 6.9 million estimated cases in 2022. The parasite has a dormant liver stage, the hypnozoite, which reactivates to cause repeated relapses over weeks, months, or years. These relapses erode patient health, contribute to the burden of malaria, and promote transmission. Radical cure to prevent relapses requires administration of an 8-aminoquinoline, either primaquine or tafenoquine. However, malaria treatment guidelines updated by the World Health Organization (WHO) in October 2023 restrict primaquine use for women breastfeeding children < 6 months of age, or women breastfeeding older children if their child is G6PD deficient or if the child's G6PD status is unknown. Primaquine restrictions assume that 8-aminoquinoline exposures in breast milk would be sufficient to cause haemolysis in the nursing infant should they be G6PD deficient. WHO recommendations for tafenoquine are awaited. Notably, the WHO recommends that infants are breastfed for the first 2 years of life, and exclusively until 6 months old. Repeated pregnancies, followed by extended breastfeeding leaves women in P. vivax endemic regions potentially vulnerable to relapses for many years. This puts women's health at risk, increases the malaria burden, and perpetuates transmission, hindering malaria control and elimination. The benefits of lifting restrictions on primaquine administration to breastfeeding women are significant, avoiding the adverse consequences of repeated episodes of acute malaria, such as severe anaemia. Recent data challenge the restriction of primaquine in breastfeeding women. Clinical pharmacokinetic data in breastfeeding infants ≥ 28 days old show that the exposure to primaquine is very low and less than 1% of the maternal exposure, indicating negligible risk to infants, irrespective of their G6PD status. Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modelling complements the clinical data, predicting minimal primaquine exposure to infants and neonates via breast milk from early post-partum. This article summarizes the clinical and modelling evidence for a favourable benefit:risk evaluation of P. vivax radical cure with primaquine for breastfeeding women without the need for infant G6PD testing, supporting a change in policy. This adjustment to current treatment guidelines would support health equity in regard to effective interventions to protect women and their children, enhance malaria control strategies, and advance P. vivax elimination., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Most women use medication during pregnancy. Pregnancy-induced changes in physiology may require antenatal dose alterations. Yet, evidence-based doses in pregnancy are missing. Given historically limited data, pharmacokinetic models may inform pregnancy-adjusted doses. However, implementing model-informed doses in clinical practice requires support from relevant stakeholders., Purpose: To explore the perceived barriers and facilitators for model-informed antenatal doses among healthcare practitioners (HCPs) and pregnant women., Methods: Online focus groups and interviews were held among healthcare practitioners (HCPs) and pregnant women from eight countries across Europe, Africa and Asia. Purposive sampling was used to identify pregnant women plus HCPs across various specialties prescribing or providing advice on medication to pregnant women. Perceived barriers and facilitators for implementing model-informed doses in pregnancy were identified and categorised using a hybrid thematic analysis., Results: Fifty HCPs and 11 pregnant women participated in 12 focus groups and 16 interviews between January 2022 and March 2023. HCPs worked in the Netherlands (n = 32), the UK (n = 7), South Africa (n = 5), Uganda (n = 4), Kenya, Cameroon, India and Vietnam (n = 1 each). All pregnant women resided in the Netherlands. Barriers and facilitators identified by HCPs spanned 14 categories across four domains whereas pregnant women described barriers and facilitators spanning nine categories within the same domains. Most participants found current antenatal dosing information inadequate and regarded model-informed doses in pregnancy as a valuable and for some, much-needed addition to antenatal care. Although willingness-to-follow model-informed antenatal doses was high across both groups, several barriers for implementation were identified. HCPs underlined the need for transparent model validation and endorsement of the methodology by recognised institutions. Foetal safety was deemed a critical knowledge gap by both groups. HCPs' information needs and preferred features for model-informed doses in pregnancy varied. Several pregnant women expressed a desire to access information and partake in decisions on antenatal dosing., Conclusions: Given the perceived limitations of current pharmacotherapy for pregnant women and foetuses, model-informed dosing in pregnancy was seen as a promising means to enhance antenatal care by pregnant women and healthcare practitioners., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Most women use medication during pregnancy. The disposition of drugs may be altered due to changes in pregnant women's bodies. This may call for pregnancy-adjusted doses for certain medications. However, in the face of scarce evidence, such doses are generally lacking, potentially contributing to an increased risk of treatment failure or toxicity in pregnant women and their unborn children. By integrating physiological and/or population data, pharmacokinetic models can be used to determine appropriate medication dosages among pregnant women and their unborn children, as well as other patient groups for which evidence-based doses may be lacking such as children, elderly or obese patients. In order to translate model predictions into clinically usable doses, a number of conditions must be met, including careful model validation, an assessment of evidence from pharmacokinetic modelling alongside available clinical studies by multidisciplinary experts, as well as transparent communication towards end-users on the considerations for determining appropriate medication doses.

Background: Pediatric drug calculators (PDCs) intended for clinical use qualify as medical devices under the Medical Device Directive and the Medical Device Regulation. The extent to which they comply with European standards on quality and safety is unknown., Objective: This study determines the number of PDCs available as mobile apps for use in the Netherlands that bear a CE mark, and explore the factors influencing the CE marking of such devices among app developers., Methods: A scoping review of Google Play Store and Apple App Store was conducted to identify PDCs available for download in the Netherlands. CE accreditation of the sampled apps was determined by consulting the app landing pages on app stores, by screening the United Kingdom Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency's online registry of medical devices, and by surveying app developers. The barriers to CE accreditation were also explored through a survey of app developers., Results: Of 632 screened apps, 74 were eligible, including 60 pediatric drug dosage calculators and 14 infusion rate calculators. One app was CE marked. Of the 20 (34%) respondents to the survey, 8 considered their apps not to be medical devices based on their intent of use or functionality. Three developers had not aimed to make their app available for use in Europe. Other barriers that may explain the limited CE accreditation of sampled PDC apps included poor awareness of European regulations among developers and a lack of restrictions when placing PDCs in app stores., Conclusions: The compliance of PDCs with European standards on medical devices is poor. This puts clinicians and their patients at risk of medical errors resulting from the largely unrestricted use of these apps., (©Charlotte Koldeweij, Jonathan Clarke, Joppe Nijman, Calandra Feather, Saskia N de Wildt, Nicholas Appelbaum. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 13.12.2021.)

For-profit biotechnological and pharmaceutical companies have played an essential role in the research and development (R&D) of innovative medical products and drugs for many decades and embody a trillion-dollar industry. The past decades have been marked by an increase in growth of social non-profit biotechnology companies and organizations led by entrepreneurs committed to solve (global) health issues. In this review, we define the concept of social bioentrepreneurship and consider the potential impact of such ventures on global health. We analyse the current status of non-profit biotechnology and clarify the strategy, motivation, funding, and marketing techniques of these enterprises. We find that these non-profit ventures mainly focus on neglected and rare diseases by using different but also similar funding, marketing, and business strategy approaches to for-profit biotechnology enterprises. We also identify good leadership, multidisciplinary teams, and public awareness as key components to achieve long-term survival and higher success rates. Challenges faced by bioentrepreneurs include the lack of a clearly defined regulatory environment or governmental incentives to support their endeavors. Overall, with this qualitative data review and market analysis we draw a promising picture of social non-profit bioentrepreneurship and underscore its current and future impact on global health issues., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Sadeghi, Koldeweij, Trujillo-de Santiago, Tannazi, Hosseinnia, Loosbroek, Manbachi, Taverne, Bogers and Alvarez.)

Background: Hypertension is the largest single contributor to the global burden of disease, affecting an estimated 1.39 billion people worldwide. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) can aid in the effective management of this common condition, however, inconsistencies exist between CPGs, and the extent of this is unknown. Understanding the differences in CPG recommendations across income settings may provide an important means of understanding some of the global variations in clinical outcomes related to hypertension., Aims: This study aims to analyse the variation between hypertension CPGs globally. It aims to assess the variation in three areas: diagnostic threshold and staging, treatment and target blood pressure (BP) recommendations in hypertension., Methods: A search was conducted on the MEDLINE repository to identify national and international hypertension CPGs from 2010 to May 2020. An additional country-specific grey-literature search was conducted for all countries and territories of the world as identified by the World Bank. Data describing the diagnosis, staging, treatment and target blood pressure were extracted from CPGs, and variations between CPGs for these domains were analysed., Results: Forty-eight CPGs from across all World Bank income settings were selected for analysis. Ninety-six per cent of guidelines defined hypertension as a clinic-based BP of ≥140/90 mmHg, and 87% of guidelines recommended a target BP of < 140/90 mmHg. In the pharmacological treatment of hypertension, eight different first-step, 17 different second-step and six different third-step drug recommendations were observed. Low-income countries preferentially recommended diuretics (63%) in the first-step treatment, whilst high-income countries offered more choice between antihypertensive classes. Forty-four per cent of guidelines, of which 71% were from higher-income contexts recommended initiating treatment with dual-drug therapy at BP 160/100 mmHg or higher., Conclusion: This study found that CPGs remained largely consistent in the definition, staging and target BP recommendations for hypertension. Extensive variation was observed in treatment recommendations, particularly for second-line therapy. Variation existed between income settings; low-income countries prescribed cheaper drugs, offered less clinician choice in medications and initiated dual therapy at later stages than higher-income countries. Future research exploring the underlying drivers of this variation may improve outcomes for hypertensive patients across clinical contexts.