• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

将 rosiglitazone FDA 安全警告传播的临床后果。

Clinical consequences of disseminating the rosiglitazone FDA safety warning.

机构信息

School of Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco, USA.

出版信息

Am J Manag Care. 2010 May 1;16(5):e111-6.

PMID:20455636
Abstract

BACKGROUND

On May 21, 2007, a safety alert was widely disseminated through the media and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) MedWatch concerning a possible increased risk of ischemic myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death in people receiving the antidiabetic drug rosiglitazone.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether notification of patients and providers about an FDA safety warning influenced the decision to discontinue rosiglitazone therapy and the resulting effect on glycemic control.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective electronic medical record (EMR) review.

METHODS

EMR documentation review of 552 primary care patients with a prescription for rosiglitazone current on May 21, 2007, was conducted to determine the percentage that had rosiglitazone discontinued as a result of written notification about the FDA alert. We ascertained whether discontinuation was initiated by the physician or patient. We compared the change in glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) values from baseline to follow-up between the group continuing on rosiglitazone and the group discontinuing therapy.

RESULTS

Of 552 patients, 344 (62%) had rosiglitazone discontinued as a result of the warning. Discontinuation was initiated by the physician in 150 cases (43.6%), by the patient in 155 cases (45.1%), and was undetermined in 39 cases (11.3%). No significant difference was found in the mean change in A1C values from baseline to follow-up between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Notifying patients and providers about FDA safety alerts does influence clinical decision making. The lay media should partner with the FDA to responsibly communicate drug safety information in evidence-based, understandable terms that quantify real risk.

摘要

背景

2007 年 5 月 21 日,媒体和美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)的 MedWatch 通过广泛传播安全警报,警告人们使用抗糖尿病药物罗格列酮可能会增加缺血性心肌梗死和心血管死亡的风险。

目的

确定 FDA 安全警告通知患者和医务人员是否会影响停止使用罗格列酮治疗的决定,以及对血糖控制的影响。

研究设计

回顾性电子病历(EMR)审查。

方法

对 552 名 2007 年 5 月 21 日正在使用罗格列酮的初级保健患者的 EMR 记录进行审查,以确定因 FDA 警告通知而停止使用罗格列酮的患者比例。我们确定了停药是由医生还是患者发起的。我们比较了继续使用罗格列酮组和停止治疗组的糖化血红蛋白(A1C)值从基线到随访的变化。

结果

在 552 名患者中,有 344 名(62%)因该警告而停止使用罗格列酮。在 150 例(43.6%)中,停药是由医生发起的,在 155 例(45.1%)中是由患者发起的,在 39 例(11.3%)中原因不明。在继续使用罗格列酮组和停止治疗组之间,从基线到随访的 A1C 值的平均变化没有显著差异。

结论

通知患者和医务人员关于 FDA 的安全警报确实会影响临床决策。大众媒体应与 FDA 合作,以负责任的方式以基于证据、易于理解的方式传达药物安全信息,并量化真实风险。

相似文献

1
Clinical consequences of disseminating the rosiglitazone FDA safety warning.将 rosiglitazone FDA 安全警告传播的临床后果。
Am J Manag Care. 2010 May 1;16(5):e111-6.
2
The thiazolidinediones rosiglitazone and pioglitazone and the risk of coronary heart disease: a retrospective cohort study using a US health insurance database.噻唑烷二酮类药物罗格列酮和吡格列酮与冠心病风险:一项使用美国医疗保险数据库的回顾性队列研究。
Clin Ther. 2009 Nov;31(11):2665-77. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.11.003.
3
Antidiabetic prescribing trends and predictors of thiazolidinedione discontinuation following the 2007 rosiglitazone safety alert.2007 年罗格列酮安全性警示后噻唑烷二酮类药物停药的抗糖尿病药物处方趋势和预测因素。
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011 Jul;93(1):49-55. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2011.02.035. Epub 2011 Mar 25.
4
Rosiglitazone, myocardial ischemic risk, and recent regulatory actions.罗格列酮、心肌缺血风险和最近的监管措施。
Ann Pharmacother. 2012 Feb;46(2):282-9. doi: 10.1345/aph.1Q400. Epub 2012 Jan 31.
5
Geographic Variation in Rosiglitazone Use Surrounding FDA Warnings in the Department of Veterans Affairs.美国退伍军人事务部内围绕 FDA 警告的罗格列酮使用的地域差异。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015 Dec;21(12):1214-34. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.12.1214.
6
FDA warning and removal of rosiglitazone from VA national formulary.美国食品药品监督管理局发出警告并将罗格列酮从退伍军人事务部国家药品目录中移除。
Am J Manag Care. 2013 Sep;19(9):748-58.
7
Responding to an FDA warning--geographic variation in the use of rosiglitazone.回应美国食品药品监督管理局的警告——罗格列酮使用的地域差异
N Engl J Med. 2010 Nov 25;363(22):2081-4. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1011042. Epub 2010 Nov 17.
8
Comparisons of rosiglitazone versus pioglitazone monotherapy introduction and associated health care utilization in Medicaid-enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.罗格列酮与吡格列酮单药治疗对参加医疗补助计划的2型糖尿病患者的起始治疗及相关医疗保健利用情况的比较
Clin Ther. 2007 Jun;29(6 Pt 1):1306-15. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.06.019.
9
Rosiglitazone and pioglitazone utilization from January 2007 through May 2008 associated with five risk-warning events.2007年1月至2008年5月期间罗格列酮和吡格列酮的使用与五项风险警示事件相关。
J Manag Care Pharm. 2008 Jul-Aug;14(6):523-31. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2008.14.6.523.
10
Comparison of cardiovascular outcomes in elderly patients with diabetes who initiated rosiglitazone vs pioglitazone therapy.起始使用罗格列酮与吡格列酮治疗的老年糖尿病患者心血管结局的比较。
Arch Intern Med. 2008 Nov 24;168(21):2368-75. doi: 10.1001/archinte.168.21.2368.

引用本文的文献

1
Unintended Effects of Communicating About Drug Safety Issues: A Critical Review of the Literature.关于药品安全问题沟通的意外后果:文献综述的批判性回顾。
Drug Saf. 2019 Oct;42(10):1125-1134. doi: 10.1007/s40264-019-00840-3.
2
Implications of Removing Rosiglitazone's Black Box Warning and Restricted Access Program on the Uptake of Thiazolidinediones and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.取消罗格列酮的黑框警告和限制获取程序对 2 型糖尿病患者使用噻唑烷二酮类药物和二肽基肽酶-4 抑制剂的影响。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2019 Jan;25(1):72-79. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2019.25.1.072.
3
Measuring the impact of medicines regulatory interventions - Systematic review and methodological considerations.
衡量药品监管干预措施的影响——系统评价及方法学考虑。
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2018 Mar;84(3):419-433. doi: 10.1111/bcp.13469. Epub 2017 Dec 20.
4
Influence of health warnings on the use of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone in an area of Spain: A time-series study.健康警示对西班牙某地区罗格列酮和吡格列酮使用情况的影响:一项时间序列研究。
SAGE Open Med. 2016 Aug 16;4:2050312116653054. doi: 10.1177/2050312116653054. eCollection 2016.
5
Disparities in Discontinuing Rosiglitazone Following the 2007 FDA Safety Alert.2007年美国食品药品监督管理局发布安全警报后罗格列酮停药情况的差异
Med Care. 2016 Apr;54(4):406-13. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000502.
6
Geographic Variation in Rosiglitazone Use Surrounding FDA Warnings in the Department of Veterans Affairs.美国退伍军人事务部内围绕 FDA 警告的罗格列酮使用的地域差异。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015 Dec;21(12):1214-34. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.12.1214.
7
Methodological approaches to evaluate the impact of FDA drug safety communications.评估美国食品药品监督管理局药物安全通讯影响的方法学途径。
Drug Saf. 2015 Jun;38(6):565-75. doi: 10.1007/s40264-015-0291-y.
8
Stimulated reporting: the impact of US food and drug administration-issued alerts on the adverse event reporting system (FAERS).激励报告:美国食品药品监督管理局发布的警报对不良事件报告系统(FAERS)的影响。
Drug Saf. 2014 Nov;37(11):971-80. doi: 10.1007/s40264-014-0225-0.
9
Chronic exposure to nicotine enhances insulin sensitivity through α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor-STAT3 pathway.慢性暴露于尼古丁通过α7 烟碱型乙酰胆碱受体-STAT3 通路增强胰岛素敏感性。
PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e51217. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051217. Epub 2012 Dec 12.
10
Prescribing of rosiglitazone and pioglitazone following safety signals: analysis of trends in dispensing patterns in the Netherlands from 1998 to 2008.rosiglitazone 和 pioglitazone 处方的安全性信号后:从 1998 年到 2008 年荷兰配药模式的趋势分析。
Drug Saf. 2012 Jun 1;35(6):471-80. doi: 10.2165/11596950-000000000-00000.