Finocchietti Marco, Crescioli Giada, Paoletti Olga, Brunori Paola, Sciancalepore Francesco, Tuccori Marco, Addis Antonio, Vannacci Alfredo, Lombardi Niccolò, Kirchmayer Ursula
Department of Epidemiology, Lazio Regional Health Service, 00147 Rome, Italy.
Section of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Department of Neurosciences, Psychology, Drug Research and Child Health, University of Florence, 50122 Florence, Italy.
J Clin Med. 2024 Jun 4;13(11):3312. doi: 10.3390/jcm13113312.
: In the context of a comparative study of efficacy and safety of drugs used in rare neuromuscular and neurodegenerative diseases (CAESAR-call AIFA_FV_2012-13-14), we assessed the use patterns of drugs indicated for myasthenia gravis (MG). : A retrospective cohort study was conducted based on administrative healthcare data. For a cohort of MG patients, prevalent and incident use of pyridostigmine (Py) and other indicated drugs in the first year after case identification was evaluated. Prevalent combined use of major therapies (azathioprine (Az), prednisone (Pr), vitamin D (Vd)) stratified by Py use was assessed, and a comparison between therapies at the time of MG identification and during the first year of follow-up was performed. : We included 2369 MG patients between 2013 and 2019. Among them, prevalent and incident Py users were 38.4% and 22.0%, respectively. In the first year of follow-up, the use of Pr was observed in 74.5% of Py prevalent users and in 82.0% of Py incident users, respectively; the use of Az was observed in 24.9% and 23.0%, respectively; and the use of Vd was observed in 53.3% and 48.2%, respectively. Among 910 Py prevalent users, 13.1% also used Az, Pr, and Vd, while 15.3% used none of these. Among 938 non-Py users, 2.7% used Az, Pr, and Vd, while 53.8% used none of these. During the first year, an increase in combined therapies was evident in incident Py users. : Our results suggest that, for some MG patients, there may be a need for treatments that combine a rapid onset of benefit with long-term and consistent disease control. These issues may be addressed by the new treatments currently being developed. To date, more studies are needed to address the heterogeneity, quality, and generalizability of the existing data and to evaluate patterns of use, efficacy, and safety of new or emerging therapies for MG.
在一项针对罕见神经肌肉和神经退行性疾病用药疗效与安全性的比较研究(CAESAR——呼叫AIFA_FV_2012 - 13 - 14)背景下,我们评估了用于重症肌无力(MG)的药物使用模式。
基于医疗管理数据进行了一项回顾性队列研究。对于一组MG患者,评估了在病例识别后第一年吡啶斯的明(Py)及其他指定药物的现患使用情况和新发病例使用情况。评估了按Py使用情况分层的主要治疗方法(硫唑嘌呤(Az)、泼尼松(Pr)、维生素D(Vd))的现患联合使用情况,并对MG识别时和随访第一年期间的治疗方法进行了比较。
我们纳入了2013年至2019年间的2369例MG患者。其中,Py现患使用者和新发病例使用者分别占38.4%和22.0%。在随访的第一年,分别在74.5%的Py现患使用者和82.0%的Py新发病例使用者中观察到Pr的使用;分别在24.9%和23.0%的患者中观察到Az的使用;分别在53.3%和48.2%的患者中观察到Vd的使用。在910例Py现患使用者中,13.1%还使用了Az、Pr和Vd,而15.3%未使用这些药物中的任何一种。在938例非Py使用者中,2.7%使用了Az、Pr和Vd,而53.8%未使用这些药物中的任何一种。在第一年,新发病例Py使用者中联合治疗的增加很明显。
我们的结果表明,对于一些MG患者,可能需要将快速起效的获益与长期持续的疾病控制相结合的治疗方法。这些问题可能通过目前正在研发的新治疗方法来解决。迄今为止,需要更多研究来解决现有数据的异质性、质量和可推广性问题,并评估MG新疗法或新兴疗法的使用模式、疗效和安全性。