Kesselheim Aaron S, Bykov Katsiaryna, Gagne Joshua J, Wang Shirley V, Choudhry Niteesh K
From the Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Neurology. 2016 Oct 25;87(17):1796-1801. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000003259. Epub 2016 Sep 28.
With more antiepileptic drugs (AED) becoming available in generic form, we estimated the risk of seizure-related events associated with refilling generic AEDs and the effect of switching between different manufacturers of the same generic drug.
We designed a population-based case-crossover study using the Medicaid Analytic eXtract and a US commercial health insurance database. We identified 83,001 generic AED users who experienced a seizure-related hospital admission or emergency room visit between 2000 and 2013 and assessed whether they received a refill of the same AED from the same manufacturer or a different manufacturer. Patients served as their own controls and conditional logistic regression was used to compare exposure to a refill during the hazard period, defined as days 2-36 preceding the seizure-related event, to exposure during the control period, defined as days 51-85 preceding the seizure-related event.
Generic AED refilling was associated with an 8% increase in the odds of seizure-related events (odds ratio [OR] 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.11). The OR following a switch to a different manufacturer of the same AED was 1.09 (95% CI 1.03-1.15); however, after adjusting for the process of refilling, there was no association between switching and seizure-related hospital visits (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.94-1.07).
Among patients on a generic AED, refilling the same AED was associated with an elevated risk of seizure-related event; however, there was no additional risk from switching during that refill to a different manufacturer. Generic AEDs available to US patients, with Food and Drug Administration-validated bioequivalence, appear to be safe clinical choices.
随着越来越多的抗癫痫药物(AED)有了通用剂型,我们估计了重新使用通用型AED与癫痫相关事件的风险,以及在同一通用药物的不同制造商之间转换的影响。
我们利用医疗补助分析提取物和美国商业健康保险数据库设计了一项基于人群的病例交叉研究。我们确定了83001名在2000年至2013年间因癫痫相关原因入院或前往急诊室就诊的通用型AED使用者,并评估他们是否从同一制造商或不同制造商处重新获得了相同的AED。患者作为自身对照,采用条件逻辑回归比较在危险期(定义为癫痫相关事件前2至36天)重新用药的暴露情况与在对照期(定义为癫痫相关事件前51至85天)的暴露情况。
重新使用通用型AED与癫痫相关事件的几率增加8%相关(优势比[OR]1.08;95%置信区间[CI]1.06 - 1.11)。改用同一AED的不同制造商后的OR为1.09(95%CI 1.03 - 1.15);然而,在对重新用药过程进行调整后,转换与癫痫相关的医院就诊之间没有关联(OR 1.00;95%CI 0.94 - 1.07)。
在使用通用型AED的患者中,重新使用相同的AED与癫痫相关事件的风险升高有关;然而,在重新用药期间改用不同制造商并不会带来额外风险。对美国患者可用的、经美国食品药品监督管理局验证具有生物等效性的通用型AED似乎是安全的临床选择。