Pharmacy Benefits Management Services, Center for Medication Safety, Department of Veterans Affairs, Hines, Illinois.
Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Department of Veterans Affairs, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Oct 1;3(10):e2014645. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.14645.
Using real-world data, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) initiated a surveillance evaluation of edaravone after its approval for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) in 2017. The use and safety of edaravone for patients with ALS in the VA health care system remain to be assessed.
To describe a pharmacovigilance surveillance initiative with edaravone to monitor patient characteristics, utilization (edaravone cycles and riluzole use), and safety and to evaluate safety/effectiveness.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This propensity score-matched cohort study used data on 369 patients with documented definite or probable ALS in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) with at least 1 prescription for edaravone between August 1, 2017, and September 30, 2019. The analysis compared edaravone (alone or with riluzole) with riluzole only. For chronic users (≥6 months of drug), a time-to-event model evaluated ALS-related outcomes, with censoring at outcome, death, or end of evaluation. Patients with Parkinson disease, dementia, schizophrenia, or significant respiratory insufficiency per diagnosis codes within 2 years before prescription initiation were excluded. In overall matched cohorts, 223 patients treated with edaravone were 1:3 propensity score matched based on predefined confounders. For the chronic user subgroup analysis, 96 patients receiving edaravone and 424 patients receiving riluzole only were included.
Edaravone (alone or with riluzole) vs riluzole only.
Patient characteristics, ALS drug use, and mortality. Acute outcomes (within 6 months of index) included proportion and mean time to event for death, discontinuation, or all-cause hospitalization, and outcomes for chronic users (receiving >6 months of treatment) included hazard ratios of outcomes related to disease-state progression.
Of 369 patients who received edaravone, most were older (mean [SD] age, 64.6 [11.3] years), male (346 [93.8%]), and White (261 [70.7%]). As of September 2019, 59.9% of edaravone patients had discontinued treatment; of those, 49.5% (108 of 218) received only 1 to 3 treatment cycles. Approximately 30% (110 patients) died. In a matched evaluation, significantly more acute all-cause hospitalization events occurred with edaravone (35.4% vs 22.0% for riluzole only); 72.6% of the edaravone cohort received edaravone with riluzole. Among chronic users, edaravone patients (70.8% edaravone with riluzole) had an increased hazard ratio of ALS-associated hospitalization (2.51; 95% CI, 1.18-8.16). The death rate was lower with edaravone but the difference was not statistically significant.
Early edaravone discontinuation was common in the VA. Although outcomes favored use of riluzole only in the matched analysis, results should be interpreted with caution, as unmeasured bias in observational data is likely.
美国退伍军人事务部(VA)在 2017 年批准依达拉奉用于肌萎缩侧索硬化症(ALS)后,利用真实世界的数据启动了一项依达拉奉监测评估。VA 医疗体系中依达拉奉用于 ALS 患者的使用情况和安全性仍有待评估。
描述一项使用依达拉奉的药物警戒监测计划,以监测患者特征、使用情况(依达拉奉周期和利鲁唑的使用)和安全性,并评估安全性/有效性。
设计、设置和参与者:这项倾向评分匹配队列研究使用了退伍军人健康管理局(VHA)中记录有明确或可能的 ALS 的 369 名患者的数据,这些患者在 2017 年 8 月 1 日至 2019 年 9 月 30 日期间至少有 1 次依达拉奉处方。分析比较了依达拉奉(单独使用或与利鲁唑联合使用)与利鲁唑单独使用。对于慢性使用者(≥6 个月的药物),时间事件模型评估了与 ALS 相关的结局,结局、死亡或评估结束时进行了删失。在处方开始前 2 年内,排除了因诊断代码而患有帕金森病、痴呆、精神分裂症或严重呼吸功能不全的患者。在总体匹配队列中,223 名接受依达拉奉治疗的患者根据预先确定的混杂因素进行了 1:3 的倾向评分匹配。在慢性使用者亚组分析中,纳入了 96 名接受依达拉奉和 424 名仅接受利鲁唑的患者。
依达拉奉(单独使用或与利鲁唑联合使用)与利鲁唑单独使用。
患者特征、ALS 药物使用和死亡率。急性结局(索引后 6 个月内)包括死亡、停药或全因住院的比例和平均时间到事件,慢性使用者(接受>6 个月的治疗)的结局包括与疾病进展相关的结局的风险比。
在接受依达拉奉治疗的 369 名患者中,大多数患者年龄较大(平均[标准差]年龄,64.6[11.3]岁)、男性(346[93.8%])和白人(261[70.7%])。截至 2019 年 9 月,59.9%的依达拉奉患者已停止治疗;其中,49.5%(108 名/218 名)仅接受了 1 至 3 个治疗周期。约 30%(110 名)死亡。在匹配评估中,依达拉奉的急性全因住院事件明显更多(依达拉奉为 35.4%,利鲁唑单独使用为 22.0%);依达拉奉组中约 72.6%的患者接受了依达拉奉与利鲁唑联合治疗。在慢性使用者中,依达拉奉患者(70.8%依达拉奉与利鲁唑)ALS 相关住院的风险比增加(2.51;95%CI,1.18-8.16)。依达拉奉的死亡率较低,但差异无统计学意义。
VA 中依达拉奉的早期停药很常见。尽管匹配分析中仅使用利鲁唑的结局较好,但结果应谨慎解释,因为观察性数据中存在未测量的偏倚是很可能的。