School of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China.
School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Clin Transl Sci. 2024 Apr;17(4):e13779. doi: 10.1111/cts.13779.
This study aims to assess clinical outcomes following switching from originator to generic amlodipine. This population-based, matched, cohort study included users of originator amlodipine using claims data during 2018-2020 from a health system in Tianjin, China, in which usage of generic amlodipine was promoted by a drug procurement policy, the national volume-based procurement. Non-switchers refer to those remained on originator after the policy, while pure-switchers were those who switched to and continued using generic amlodipine, and back-switchers were those switched to generic amlodipine but then back to the originator. Propensity score matching generates comparable non-switchers and pure-switchers pairs, and non-switchers and back-switchers pairs. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), defined as all-cause mortality, stroke, and myocardial infarction during follow-up (April 1, 2019 to December 30, 2020). Secondary outcomes included heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and adherence to amlodipine. The hazard ratio (HR) for each clinical outcome was assessed through Cox proportional hazard regression. In total, 5943 non-switchers, 2949 pure-switchers, and 3061 back-switchers were included (mean age: 62.9 years; 55.5% men). For the matched pairs, pure-switchers (N = 2180) presented no additional risks of clinical outcomes compared to non-switchers (N = 4360) (e.g., MACEs: 2.86 vs. 2.95 events per 100 person-years; HR = 0.97 [95%CI: 0.70-1.33]). Back-switchers (N = 1998) also presented no additional risk compared to non-switchers (N = 3996) for most outcomes except for stroke (HR = 1.55 [95%CI: 1.03-2.34]). Pure-switchers and back-switchers all had better amlodipine adherence than non-switchers. Generic substitution of amlodipine is not associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events or all-cause mortality, but improves medicine adherence.
本研究旨在评估从原研药转换为仿制药氨氯地平后的临床结局。这项基于人群的匹配队列研究纳入了 2018 年至 2020 年期间天津市某医疗系统中使用原研氨氯地平的患者,该系统的药物采购政策(国家基于采购量的采购)促进了仿制药的使用。非转换者是指政策实施后仍使用原研药的患者,而纯转换者是指转换为并继续使用仿制药氨氯地平的患者,回转换者是指转换为仿制药氨氯地平但随后又转回原研药的患者。倾向评分匹配生成可比的非转换者和纯转换者配对,以及非转换者和回转换者配对。主要结局是主要不良心血管事件(MACE),定义为随访期间(2019 年 4 月 1 日至 2020 年 12 月 30 日)的全因死亡率、卒中及心肌梗死。次要结局包括心力衰竭、心房颤动和氨氯地平的依从性。通过 Cox 比例风险回归评估每个临床结局的风险比(HR)。共纳入 5943 名非转换者、2949 名纯转换者和 3061 名回转换者(平均年龄:62.9 岁;55.5%为男性)。对于匹配对,与非转换者(N=4360)相比,纯转换者(N=2180)的临床结局无额外风险(例如,MACE:每 100 人年 2.86 与 2.95 个事件;HR=0.97[95%CI:0.70-1.33])。除卒中外(HR=1.55[95%CI:1.03-2.34]),回转换者与非转换者相比,大多数结局也无额外风险。纯转换者和回转换者的氨氯地平依从性均优于非转换者。氨氯地平的仿制药替代与心血管事件或全因死亡率的增加无关,但可提高药物依从性。