-
Systematic review of drug administration costs and implications for biopharmaceutical manufacturing.Applied Health Economics and Health... Oct 2013The acquisition costs of biologic drugs are often considered to be relatively high compared with those of nonbiologics. However, the total costs of delivering these... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The acquisition costs of biologic drugs are often considered to be relatively high compared with those of nonbiologics. However, the total costs of delivering these drugs also depend on the cost of administration. Ignoring drug administration costs may distort resource allocation decisions because these affect cost effectiveness.
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this systematic review were to develop a framework of drug administration costs that considers both the costs of physical administration and the associated proximal costs; and, as a case example, to use this framework to evaluate administration costs for biologics within the UK National Health Service (NHS).
METHODS
We reviewed literature that reported estimates of administration costs for biologics within the UK NHS to identify how these costs were quantified and to examine how differences in dosage forms and regimens influenced administration costs. The literature reviewed were identified by searching the Centre for Review and Dissemination Databases (DARE, NHS EED and HTA); EMBASE (The Excerpta Medica Database); MEDLINE (using the OVID interface); Econlit (EBSCO); Tufts Medical Center Cost Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry; and Google Scholar.
RESULTS
We identified 4,344 potentially relevant studies, of which 43 studies were selected for this systematic review. We extracted estimates of the administration costs of biologics from these studies. We found evidence of variation in the way that administration costs were measured, and that this affected the magnitude of costs reported, which could then influence cost effectiveness.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings suggested that manufacturers of biologic medicines should pay attention to formulation issues and their impact on administration costs, because these affect the total costs of healthcare delivery and cost effectiveness.
Topics: Biological Products; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drug Administration Routes; Drug Costs; Humans; State Medicine
PubMed: 23846573
DOI: 10.1007/s40258-013-0045-x -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Mar 2014Fungal infections are reported to cause 23% of foot diseases and 50% of nail conditions in people seen by dermatologists, but are less common in the general population,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Fungal infections are reported to cause 23% of foot diseases and 50% of nail conditions in people seen by dermatologists, but are less common in the general population, affecting 3% to 12% of people.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of oral treatments for fungal toenail infections in adults? What are the effects of topical treatments for fungal toenail infections in adults? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to October 2013 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 13 studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: amorolfine, butenafine, ciclopirox, fluconazole, itraconazole, terbinafine, tioconazole, and topical ketoconazole.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Antifungal Agents; Humans; Mycoses; Nails
PubMed: 24625577
DOI: No ID Found -
Neurocritical Care Feb 2014Central nervous system infections requiring treatment with intraventricular (IVT) vancomycin are becoming increasingly common with advent of intracranial devices and... (Review)
Review
Central nervous system infections requiring treatment with intraventricular (IVT) vancomycin are becoming increasingly common with advent of intracranial devices and increasing prevalence of multi-drug resistant and nosocomial organisms. Administering vancomycin via IVT route bypasses the blood-brain barrier to allow localized and controlled delivery directly to the desired site of action, achieving high concentrations for more reliable bactericidal action. This article systematically reviews current literature on IVT vancomycin in adults, compiles current knowledge, and integrates available evidence to serve as a practical reference.Medline (1946-July 2012), Embase (1974-July 2012), and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-July 2012) were searched using terms vancomycin, intraventricular, shunt infection, cerebrospinal fluid, and intraventriculitis. Seventeen articles were included in this review. Indications for IVT vancomycin included meningitis unresponsive to intravenous antibiotics, ventriculitis, and intracranial device infections. No serious adverse effects following IVT vancomycin have been reported. Dosages reported in literature ranged from 0.075-50 mg/day, with the most evidence for dosages of 5 to 20 mg/day. Duration of therapy most commonly ranged from 7 to 21 days. Therapeutic drug monitoring was reported in 11 studies, with CSF vancomycin levels varying widely from 1.1 to 812.6 mg/L, without clear relationships between CSF levels and efficacy or toxicity. Using IVT vancomycin to treat meningitis, ventriculitis, and CNS device-associated infections appears safe and effective based on current evidence. Optimal regimens are still unclear, and dosing of IVT vancomycin requires intricate consideration of patient specific factors and their impact on CNS pathophysiology. Higher-quality clinical trials are necessary to characterize the disposition of vancomycin within CNS, and to determine models for various pathophysiological conditions to facilitate better understanding of effects on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Cerebral Ventriculitis; Humans; Injections, Intraventricular; Meningoencephalitis; Vancomycin
PubMed: 23090839
DOI: 10.1007/s12028-012-9784-z -
ESC Heart Failure Apr 2023There is considerable variability in the effect of intravenous iron on hard cardiovascular (CV)-related outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) in randomized... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
There is considerable variability in the effect of intravenous iron on hard cardiovascular (CV)-related outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We use a meta-analytic approach to analyse data from existing RCTs to derive a more robust estimate of the effect size of intravenous iron infusion on CV-related outcomes in patients with HF.
METHOD AND RESULTS
PubMed/Medline was searched using the following terms: ('intravenous' and 'iron' and 'heart failure') from inception till 6 November 2022 for RCTs comparing intravenous iron infusion with placebo or standard of care in patients with HF and iron deficiency. Outcomes were the composite of CV mortality and first hospitalization for HF; all-cause mortality; CV mortality; first hospitalization for HF; and total hospitalizations for HF. Random effects risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Ten RCTs with a total of 3438 patients were included. Intravenous iron resulted in a significant reduction in the composite of CV mortality and first hospitalization for HF [RR 0.0.85; 95% CI (0.77, 0.95)], first hospitalization for HF [RR 0.82; 95% CI (0.67, 0.99)], and total hospitalizations for HF [RR 0.74; 95% CI (0.60, 0.91)] but no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality [RR 0.95; 95% CI. (0.83, 1.09)] or CV mortality [OR 0.89; 95% CI (0.75, 1.05)].
CONCLUSIONS
Intravenous iron infusion in patients with HF reduces the composite risk of first hospitalization for HF and CV mortality as well as the risks of first and recurrent hospitalizations for HF, with no effect on all-cause mortality or CV mortality alone.
Topics: Humans; Heart Failure; Infusions, Intravenous; Iron Deficiencies; Administration, Intravenous
PubMed: 36734033
DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.14310 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Aug 2015A woman has premenstrual syndrome (PMS) if she complains of recurrent psychological and/or physical symptoms occurring during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
A woman has premenstrual syndrome (PMS) if she complains of recurrent psychological and/or physical symptoms occurring during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle, and often resolving by the end of menstruation. Symptom severity can vary between women. Premenstrual symptoms occur in 95% of women of reproductive age. Severe, debilitating symptoms occur in about 5% of those women. There is no consensus on how symptom severity should be assessed for PMS, which has led to the use of a wide variety of symptom scores and scales, thus making it difficult to synthesise data on treatment efficacy. The cyclical nature of the condition also makes it difficult to conduct RCTs.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic overview, aiming to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of continuous hormonal treatments in women with premenstrual syndrome? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to April 2014 (Clinical Evidence overviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this overview).
RESULTS
At this update, searching of electronic databases retrieved 132 studies. After deduplication and removal of conference abstracts, 132 records were screened for inclusion in the overview. Appraisal of titles and abstracts led to the exclusion of 102 studies and the further review of 30 full publications. Of the 30 full articles evaluated, one systematic review and three RCTs were added to this overview. We performed a GRADE evaluation for three PICO combinations.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic overview, we categorised the efficacy for three interventions based on information relating to the effectiveness and safety of continuous combined oral contraceptives, continuous transdermal estradiol, and continuous subcutaneous estradiol implants.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Contraceptives, Oral, Combined; Drug Implants; Estradiol; Female; Humans; Infusions, Subcutaneous; Premenstrual Syndrome
PubMed: 26303988
DOI: No ID Found -
European Journal of Clinical... May 2021Ketamine has rapid-onset antidepressant effects in patients with treatment-resistant depression. Common side effects include dissociation (a sense of detachment from...
PURPOSE
Ketamine has rapid-onset antidepressant effects in patients with treatment-resistant depression. Common side effects include dissociation (a sense of detachment from reality) and increases in systolic and diastolic blood pressure. The objective of this structured review was to examine the effect of ketamine formulation and route of administration on its pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability, to identify formulation characteristics and routes of administration that might minimise side effects.
METHODS
This was a structured review of published ketamine pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability data for any ketamine formulation. The ratio of ketamine:norketamine was calculated from reported C values, as a measure of first pass metabolism. The effect of formulation and route of administration on safety was evaluated by measuring mean changes in systolic blood pressure and tolerability by changes in dissociation ratings. Data were correlated using Spearman's method.
RESULTS
A total of 41 treatment arms were identified from 21 publications, and included formulation development studies in healthy volunteers, and studies in clinical populations (patients undergoing anaesthesia, or being treated for pain or depression). Ketamine:norketamine ratios were strongly positively correlated with change in dissociation ratings (r = 0.89) and change in blood pressure (r = 0.96), and strongly negatively correlated with ketamine T (r = - 0.87; p < 0.00001 for all). Ketamine T strongly positively correlated with a change in dissociation ratings (r = - 0.96) and change in blood pressure (r = - 0.99; p < 0.00001 for all).
CONCLUSION
Ketamine formulations that maximize first pass metabolism and delay T will be better tolerated and safer than formulations which lack those characteristics.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Dissociative Disorders; Drug Administration Routes; Drug Delivery Systems; Humans; Hypertension; Ketamine; Metabolic Clearance Rate
PubMed: 33210159
DOI: 10.1007/s00228-020-03047-z -
Pediatrics Oct 2020Current International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation recommendations on epinephrine administration during neonatal resuscitation were derived in 2010 from indirect...
CONTEXT
Current International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation recommendations on epinephrine administration during neonatal resuscitation were derived in 2010 from indirect evidence in animal or pediatric studies.
OBJECTIVE
Systematic review of human infant and relevant animal studies comparing other doses, routes, and intervals of epinephrine administration in neonatal resuscitation with (currently recommended) administration of 0.01 to 0.03 mg/kg doses given intravenously (IV) every 3 to 5 minutes.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and trial registry databases.
STUDY SELECTION
Predefined criteria were used for selection.
DATA EXTRACTION
Risk of bias was assessed by using published tools appropriate for the study type. Certainty of evidence was assessed by using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.
RESULTS
Only 2 of 4 eligible cohort studies among 593 unique retrieved records yielded data allowing comparisons. There were no differences between IV and endotracheal epinephrine for the primary outcome of death at hospital discharge (risk ratio = 1.03 [95% confidence interval 0.62 to 1.71]) or for failure to achieve return of spontaneous circulation, time to return of spontaneous circulation (1 study; 50 infants), or proportion receiving additional epinephrine (2 studies; 97 infants). There were no differences in outcomes between 2 endotracheal doses (1 study). No human infant studies were found in which authors addressed IV dose or dosing interval.
LIMITATIONS
The search yielded sparse human evidence of very low certainty (downgraded for serious risk of bias and imprecision).
CONCLUSIONS
Administration of epinephrine by endotracheal versus IV routes resulted in similar survival and other outcomes. However, in animal studies, researchers continue to suggest benefit of IV administration using currently recommended doses.
Topics: Animals; Bronchodilator Agents; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Epinephrine; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infusions, Intravenous; Resuscitation
PubMed: 32907923
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2020-0586 -
The Patient Aug 2016Subcutaneous injections allow for self-administration, but consideration of patients' perspectives on treatment choice is important to ensure adherence. Previous... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Subcutaneous injections allow for self-administration, but consideration of patients' perspectives on treatment choice is important to ensure adherence. Previous systematic reviews have been limited in their scope for assessing preferences in relation to other routes of administration.
OBJECTIVE
Our objective was to examine patients' perspectives on subcutaneously administered self-injectable medications when compared with other routes or methods of administration for the same medicines.
METHODS
Nine electronic databases were searched for publications since 2000 using terms pertaining to methods of administration, choice behavior, and adverse effects. Eligibility for inclusion was determined through reference to specific criteria by two independent reviewers. Results were described narratively.
RESULTS
Of the 1726 papers screened, 85 met the inclusion criteria. Studies were focused mainly on methods of insulin administration for diabetes but also included treatments for pediatric growth disorders, multiple sclerosis, HIV, and migraine. Pen devices and autoinjectors were favored over administration with needle and syringe, particularly with respect to ergonomics, convenience, and portability. Inhalation appeared to be more acceptable than subcutaneous injection (in the case of insulin), but how subcutaneous infusion, intramuscular injection, and needle-free injection devices compare with subcutaneous injections in terms of patient preference is less certain.
CONCLUSIONS
The review identified a number of studies showing the importance of the methods and routes of drug delivery on patient choice. However, studies were prone to bias, and further robust evidence based on methodologically sound approaches is required to demonstrate how patient choice might translate to improved adherence.
Topics: Choice Behavior; Drug Administration Routes; Humans; Injections, Subcutaneous; Patient Preference; Perception; Self Administration
PubMed: 26792584
DOI: 10.1007/s40271-015-0160-x -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Aug 2011Fungal infections are reported to cause 23% of foot diseases and 50% of nail conditions in people seen by dermatologists, but are less common in the general population,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Fungal infections are reported to cause 23% of foot diseases and 50% of nail conditions in people seen by dermatologists, but are less common in the general population, affecting 3% to 5% of people.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of oral treatments for fungal toenail infections? What are the effects of topical treatments for fungal toenail infections? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to March 2011 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 12 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: amorolfine, butenafine, ciclopirox, fluconazole, griseofulvin, itraconazole, ketoconazole, mechanical debridement, terbinafine, and tioconazole.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Debridement; Humans; Itraconazole; Nails; Onychomycosis
PubMed: 21846413
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2021Misoprostol given orally is a commonly used labour induction method. Our Cochrane Review is restricted to studies with low-dose misoprostol (initially ≤ 50 µg), as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Misoprostol given orally is a commonly used labour induction method. Our Cochrane Review is restricted to studies with low-dose misoprostol (initially ≤ 50 µg), as higher doses pose unacceptably high risks of uterine hyperstimulation.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of low-dose oral misoprostol for labour induction in women with a viable fetus in the third trimester of pregnancy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (14 February 2021) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials comparing low-dose oral misoprostol (initial dose ≤ 50 µg) versus placebo, vaginal dinoprostone, vaginal misoprostol, oxytocin, or mechanical methods; or comparing oral misoprostol protocols (one- to two-hourly versus four- to six-hourly; 20 µg to 25 µg versus 50 µg; or 20 µg hourly titrated versus 25 µg two-hourly static).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Using Covidence, two review authors independently screened reports, extracted trial data, and performed quality assessments. Our primary outcomes were vaginal birth within 24 hours, caesarean section, and hyperstimulation with foetal heart changes.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 61 trials involving 20,026 women. GRADE assessments ranged from moderate- to very low-certainty evidence, with downgrading decisions based on imprecision, inconsistency, and study limitations. Oral misoprostol versus placebo/no treatment (four trials; 594 women) Oral misoprostol may make little to no difference in the rate of caesarean section (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.11; 4 trials; 594 women; moderate-certainty evidence), while its effect on uterine hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes is uncertain (RR 5.15, 95% CI 0.25 to 105.31; 3 trials; 495 women; very low-certainty evidence). Vaginal births within 24 hours was not reported. In all trials, oxytocin could be commenced after 12 to 24 hours and all women had pre-labour ruptured membranes. Oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone (13 trials; 9676 women) Oral misoprostol probably results in fewer caesarean sections (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.90; 13 trials, 9676 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis indicated that 10 µg to 25 µg (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.87; 9 trials; 8652 women) may differ from 50 µg (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.34; 4 trials; 1024 women) for caesarean section. Oral misoprostol may decrease vaginal births within 24 hours (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.00; 10 trials; 8983 women; low-certainty evidence) and hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.59; 11 trials; 9084 women; low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol versus vaginal misoprostol (33 trials; 6110 women) Oral use may result in fewer vaginal births within 24 hours (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95; 16 trials, 3451 women; low-certainty evidence), and less hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.92, 25 trials, 4857 women, low-certainty evidence), with subgroup analysis suggesting that 10 µg to 25 µg orally (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.57; 6 trials, 957 women) may be superior to 50 µg orally (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.11; 19 trials; 3900 women). Oral misoprostol probably does not increase caesarean sections overall (average RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.16; 32 trials; 5914 women; low-certainty evidence) but likely results in fewer caesareans for foetal distress (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.99; 24 trials, 4775 women). Oral misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin (6 trials; 737 women, 200 with ruptured membranes) Misoprostol may make little or no difference to vaginal births within 24 hours (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.33; 3 trials; 466 women; low-certainty evidence), but probably results in fewer caesarean sections (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.90; 6 trials; 737 women; moderate-certainty evidence). The effect on hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes is uncertain (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.26; 3 trials, 331 women; very low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol versus mechanical methods (6 trials; 2993 women) Six trials compared oral misoprostol to transcervical Foley catheter. Misoprostol may increase vaginal birth within 24 hours (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.79; 4 trials; 1044 women; low-certainty evidence), and probably reduces the risk of caesarean section (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95; 6 trials; 2993 women; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.21; 4 trials; 2828 women; low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol one- to two-hourly versus four- to six-hourly (1 trial; 64 women) The evidence on hourly titration was very uncertain due to the low numbers reported. Oral misoprostol 20 µg hourly titrated versus 25 µg two-hourly static (2 trials; 296 women) The difference in regimen may have little or no effect on the rate of vaginal births in 24 hours (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.16; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is of very low certainty for all other reported outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low-dose oral misoprostol is probably associated with fewer caesarean sections (and therefore more vaginal births) than vaginal dinoprostone, and lower rates of hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes. However, time to birth may be increased, as seen by a reduced number of vaginal births within 24 hours. Compared to transcervical Foley catheter, low-dose oral misoprostol is associated with fewer caesarean sections, but equivalent rates of hyperstimulation. Low-dose misoprostol given orally rather than vaginally is probably associated with similar rates of vaginal birth, although rates may be lower within the first 24 hours. However, there is likely less hyperstimulation with foetal heart changes, and fewer caesarean sections performed due to foetal distress. The best available evidence suggests that low-dose oral misoprostol probably has many benefits over other methods for labour induction. This review supports the use of low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour, and demonstrates the lower risks of hyperstimulation than when misoprostol is given vaginally. More trials are needed to establish the optimum oral misoprostol regimen, but these findings suggest that a starting dose of 25 µg may offer a good balance of efficacy and safety.
Topics: Administration, Intravaginal; Administration, Oral; Apgar Score; Cesarean Section; Dinoprostone; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Heart Rate, Fetal; Humans; Intensive Care, Neonatal; Labor, Induced; Misoprostol; Oxytocics; Oxytocin; Parturition; Placebos; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors; Uterus
PubMed: 34155622
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014484