Moreau Fanny, Simon Nicolas, Walther Julia, Dambrine Mathilde, Kosmalski Gaetan, Genay Stéphanie, Perez Maxime, Lecoutre Dominique, Belaiche Stéphanie, Rousselière Chloé, Tod Michel, Décaudin Bertrand, Odou Pascal
Institut de Pharmacie, CHU Lille, F-59000 Lille, France.
ULR 7365-GRITA-Groupe de Recherche sur les formes Injectables et les Technologies Associées, University of Lille, F-59000 Lille, France.
Metabolites. 2021 Mar 17;11(3):173. doi: 10.3390/metabo11030173.
The characterization of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) may require the use of several different tools, such as the thesaurus issued by our national health agency (i.e., ANSM), the metabolic pathways table from the Geneva University Hospital (GUH), and DDI-Predictor (DDI-P). We sought to (i) compare the three tools' respective abilities to detect DDIs in routine clinical practice and (ii) measure the pharmacist intervention rate (PIR) and physician acceptance rate (PAR) associated with the use of DDI-P. The three tools' respective DDI detection rates (in %) were measured. The PIRs and PARs were compared by using the area under the curve ratio given by DDI-P (R) and applying a chi-squared test. The DDI detection rates differed significantly: 40.0%, 76.5%, and 85.2% for ANSM (The National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products), GUH and DDI-P, respectively ( < 0.0001). The PIR differed significantly according to the DDI-P's R: 90.0%, 44.2% and 75.0% for R ≤ 0.5; R 0.5-2 and R > 2, respectively ( < 0.001). The overall PAR was 85.1% and did not appear to depend on the R category ( = 0.729). Our results showed that more pharmacist interventions were issued when details of the strength of the DDI were available. The three tools can be used in a complementary manner, with a view to refining medication adjustments.
药物相互作用(DDIs)的特征描述可能需要使用几种不同的工具,例如我国卫生机构(即法国国家药品安全局)发布的词库、日内瓦大学医院(GUH)的代谢途径表以及药物相互作用预测器(DDI-P)。我们旨在(i)比较这三种工具在常规临床实践中检测药物相互作用的各自能力,以及(ii)衡量与使用DDI-P相关的药剂师干预率(PIR)和医生接受率(PAR)。测量了这三种工具各自的药物相互作用检测率(以%表示)。通过使用DDI-P给出的曲线下面积比(R)并应用卡方检验来比较PIR和PAR。药物相互作用检测率存在显著差异:法国国家药品安全局(药品和健康产品安全国家局)、GUH和DDI-P的检测率分别为40.0%、76.5%和85.2%(<0.0001)。根据DDI-P的R,PIR存在显著差异:R≤0.5、R为0.5 - 2和R>2时,PIR分别为90.0%、44.2%和75.0%(<0.001)。总体PAR为85.1%,似乎不依赖于R类别(=0.729)。我们的结果表明,当有药物相互作用强度的详细信息时,会有更多的药剂师干预。这三种工具可以互补使用,以优化药物调整。