Risk, Responsibility, and Generic Drugs

Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
New England Journal of Medicine (Impact Factor: 55.87). 11/2012; 367(18):1679-81. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1208781
Source: PubMed

Full-text preview

Available from:
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background The official prescribing information document distributed with a prescription drug is a key source of safety information, but it may include excessive or insufficient details. Objectives To compare prescribing information approved by the US Food and Drug Administration with the UK, Canada and Australia to identify content differences in safety warnings. Methods For 20 top-selling prescription drugs, we used an automated natural language processing tool to calculate the number and severity of reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs). We fit hierarchical Poisson models and included fixed effects for other prescribing information characteristics. Separately, we analysed the appearance and content of ‘black box’ warnings. Results There was substantial variation in safety content of approved prescribing information. Canada had the highest median ADRs per drug (138 (IQR 86–234)) and the UK had the lowest (84 (IQR 51–111)). The number of ADRs reported was on average 50% higher in Canada compared with the USA (ratio of ADRs/document: 1.5, 95% CI 1.4 to 1.6, p<0.001). By contrast, there were on average 15% fewer ADRs listed in the UK compared with the USA (ratio of ADRs/document 0.85 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.93, p<0.001), and 21% fewer ADRs listed in Australia compared with the USS (ratio of ADRs/document 0.79, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.85, p<0.001). There were no variations in ADR severity. The presence and qualitative content of boxed warnings also showed substantial diversity. Conclusions International variations exist in the presentation of safety data in drug prescribing information, which may have important implications for patient safety. Better international coordination is necessary to enhance use of this information for patient decision-making.
    BMJ quality & safety 04/2013; 22(9). DOI:10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001704 · 3.99 Impact Factor

  • JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 08/2013; 310(10). DOI:10.1001/jama.2013.228349 · 35.29 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The summary of product characteristics (SPC) provides information for the safe prescription and use of a drug consistency of critical interaction warnings and quality of presentation of undesirable effects as well as concordance of critical information of representative drugs marketed in the USA, the UK and Germany. Reciprocal warnings regarding drug-drug interactions that constitute contraindications were frequently missing in the SPCs of the drugs concerned (all countries >40%). Most SPCs did not explicitly exclude adverse reactions considered not reasonably attributable to the use of the drug. Comparing SPCs of different generic brands of the same drug only 60%, 10%, 20% of the US, UK and German SPCs, respectively, provided identical contraindications.Current SPCs contain inconsistencies and misleading data that are not compatible with the purpose of SPCs to provide a basis for safe prescription and use of these drugs.Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (2014); Accepted article preview online 25 July 2014; doi:10.1038/clpt.2014.156.
    Clinical Pharmacology &#38 Therapeutics 07/2014; 96(5). DOI:10.1038/clpt.2014.156 · 7.90 Impact Factor