Available evidence and outcome of off-label use of rituximab in clinical practice

Purpose: To analyze the therapeutic indications for off-label use of rituximab, the available evidence for its use, the outcomes, and the cost. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of patients treated with rituximab for off-label indications from January 2007 to December 2009 in two tertiary hospitals. Information on patient characteristics, medical conditions, and therapeutic responses was collected from medical records. Available evidence for the efficacy of rituximab in each condition was reviewed, and the cost of treatment was calculated. Results: A total of 101 cases of off-label rituximab use were analyzed. The median age of the patients involved was 53 [interquartile range (IQR) 37.568.0] years; 55.4 % were women. The indications for prescribing rituximab were primarily hematological diseases (46 %), systemic connective tissue disorders (27 %), and kidney diseases (20 %). Available evidence supporting rituximab treatment for these indications mainly came from individual cohort studies (53.5 % of cases) and case series (25.7 %). The short-term outcome (median 3 months, IQR 24 months) was a complete response in 38 % of cases and partial response in 32.6 %. The highest short-term responses were observed for systemic lupus erythematosus and membranous glomerulonephritis, and the lowest was for neuromyelitis optica, idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, and miscellaneous indications. Some response was maintained in long-term follow-up (median 23 months IQR 1230months) in 69.2%of patients showing a short-term response. Median cost per patient was 5,187.5 (IQR 5,187.57,781.3). Conclusions: In our study, off-label rituximab was mainly used for the treatment of hematological, kidney, and systemic connective tissue disorders, and the response among our patient cohort was variable depending on the specific disease. The level of evidence supporting the use of rituximab for these indications was low and the cost was very high. We conclude that more clinical trials on the off-label use of rituximab are needed, although these may be difficult to conduct in some rare diseases. Data from observational studies may provide useful information to assist prescribing in clinical practice.

Available evidence and outcome of off-label use of rituximab in clinical practice

Purpose: To analyze the therapeutic indications for off-label use of rituximab, the available evidence for its use, the outcomes, and the cost. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of patients treated with rituximab for off-label indications from January 2007 to December 2009 in two tertiary hospitals. Information on patient characteristics, medical conditions, and therapeutic responses was collected from medical records. Available evidence for the efficacy of rituximab in each condition was reviewed, and the cost of treatment was calculated. Results: A total of 101 cases of off-label rituximab use were analyzed. The median age of the patients involved was 53 [interquartile range (IQR) 37.5-68.0] years; 55.4 % were women. The indications for prescribing rituximab were primarily hematological diseases (46 %), systemic connective tissue disorders (27 %), and kidney diseases (20 %). Available evidence supporting rituximab treatment for these indications mainly came from individual cohort studies (53.5 % of cases) and case series (25.7 %). The short-term outcome (median 3 months, IQR 2-4 months) was a complete response in 38 % of cases and partial response in 32.6 %. The highest short-term responses were observed for systemic lupus erythematosus and membranous glomerulonephritis, and the lowest was for neuromyelitis optica, idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, and miscellaneous indications. Some response was maintained in long-term follow-up (median 23 months IQR 12-30months) in 69.2%of patients showing a short-term response. Median cost per patient was 5,187.5 (IQR 5,187.5-7,781.3). Conclusions: In our study, off-label rituximab was mainly used for the treatment of hematological, kidney, and systemic connective tissue disorders, and the response among our patient cohort was variable depending on the specific disease. The level of evidence supporting the use of rituximab for these indications was low and the cost was very high. We conclude that more clinical trials on the off-label use of rituximab are needed, although these may be difficult to conduct in some rare diseases. Data from observational studies may provide useful information to assist prescribing in clinical practice.

Off-label use of misoprostol for labor induction: a nation-wide survey in Switzerland

Off-label use of drugs is frequent in obstetrical practice. No data however are available about nation-wide off-label use in obstetrics regarding frequency and patient information. The objective of our study was to assess the clinical practice of off-label use of misoprostol for labor induction.

Current state of evidence on 'off-label' therapeutic options for systemic lupus erythematosus, including biological immunosuppressive agents, in Germany, Austria and Switzerland--a consensus report

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) can be a severe and potentially life-threatening disease that often represents a therapeutic challenge because of its heterogeneous organ manifestations. Only glucocorticoids, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, azathioprine, cyclophosphamide and very recently belimumab have been approved for SLE therapy in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Dependence on glucocorticoids and resistance to the approved therapeutic agents, as well as substantial toxicity, are frequent. Therefore, treatment considerations will include 'off-label' use of medication approved for other indications. In this consensus approach, an effort has been undertaken to delineate the limits of the current evidence on therapeutic options for SLE organ disease, and to agree on common practice. This has been based on the best available evidence obtained by a rigorous literature review and the authors' own experience with available drugs derived under very similar health care conditions. Preparation of this consensus document included an initial meeting to agree upon the core agenda, a systematic literature review with subsequent formulation of a consensus and determination of the evidence level followed by collecting the level of agreement from the panel members. In addition to overarching principles, the panel have focused on the treatment of major SLE organ manifestations (lupus nephritis, arthritis, lung disease, neuropsychiatric and haematological manifestations, antiphospholipid syndrome and serositis). This consensus report is intended to support clinicians involved in the care of patients with difficult courses of SLE not responding to standard therapies by providing up-to-date information on the best available evidence.

'He was like a zombie':off-label prescription of antipsychotic drugs in dementia

This paper explores the legal position of the off-label prescription of antipsychotic medications to people with dementia who experience behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). Dementia is a challenging illness, and BPSD can be very difficult for carers to manage, with evidence that this contributes to carer strain and can result in the early institutionalisation of people with dementia. As a result, the prescription of antipsychotic and other neuroleptic medications to treat BPSD has become commonplace, in spite of these drugs being untested and unlicensed for use to treat older people with dementia. In recent years, it has become apparent through clinical trials that antipsychotic drugs increase the risk of cerebrovascular accident (stroke) and death in people with dementia. In addition, these types of medication also have other risk factors for people with dementia, including over-sedation and worsening of cognitive function. Drawing on recent questionnaire (n = 185), focus group (n = 15), and interview (n = 11) data with carers of people with dementia, this paper explores the law relating to off-label prescription, and the applicability of medical negligence law to cases where adverse events follow the use of antipsychotic medication. It is argued that the practice of off-label prescribing requires regulatory intervention in order to protect vulnerable patients. © The Author [2012]. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.

Children's views on unlicensed/off-label paediatric prescribing and paediatric clinical trials

Objectives - To explore the views and perspectives of children on the unlicensed/off-label use of medicines in children and on the participation of children in clinical trials. Methods - Focus-group discussions, involving school children, were carried out in a range of primary and secondary schools in Northern Ireland. A purposeful sample was chosen to facilitate representation of various socioeconomic groupings. Results - A total of 123 pupils, aged from 10 to 16 years, from six schools, participated in 16 focus groups. In general, pupils viewed the unlicensed/off-label use of medicines in children as unsafe and unethical and felt it is necessary to test medicines in children to improve the availability of licensed products. The majority felt that older children should be told, and that parents should be told, about the unlicensed/off-label use of medicines in children, yet they recognised some implications of this, such as potential medication non-adherence. Conclusions - This is the first study to explore the views of healthy children on unlicensed medicine use in children. Children were able to recognise potential risks associated with the unlicensed use of medicines and felt it is necessary to test and license more medicines in children. Practice implications - Health care professionals should consider the views of children in decisions that affect their health.

Perceptions and attitudes of Jordanian paediatricians towards off-label paediatric prescribing

Objective To assess current experiences and attitudes of hospital based paediatricians towards off-label medicine prescribing. Setting Paediatric hospital wards and out-patient clinics. Design A prospective, questionnaire based study. Results A 30 item questionnaire was sent to 300 hospital based paediatricians and 250 (83%) were returned completed. Over 69% of responders were familiar with the term off-label medicines. However, only 28% were knowingly prescribing off-label medicines to children. The majority of respondents (90%) expressed concerns about the safety and efficacy of off-label medicines. Only 15% had observed Adverse Drug Reactions, and 31% a treatment failure. The vast majority of respondents (83%) did not obtain informed consent or tell parents they were prescribing off label medicines to their children. Conclusions Off-label prescribing of medicines to children is a familiar concept to the majority of paediatricians in Jordan although only a smaller number are aware that it is common in their practice. Respondents showed concern about off label prescribing, although the majority do not consider it necessary to inform parents. More comprehensive research is needed in this area in Jordan and other Middle Eastern countries.

Extent and nature of unlicensed and off-label medicine use in hospitalised children in Palestine

Objective of the study To determine the extent and nature of unlicensed/off-label prescribing patterns in hospitalised children in Palestine. Setting Four paediatric wards in two public health system hospitals in Palestine [Caritas children’s hospital (Medical and neonatal intensive care units) and Rafidia general hospital (Medical and surgical units)]. Method A prospective survey of drugs administered to infants and children <18 years old was carried out over a five-week period in the four paediatric wards. Main outcome measure Drug-licensing status of all prescriptions was determined according to the Palestinian Registered Product List and the Physician’s Desk Reference. Results Overall, 917 drug prescriptions were administered to 387children. Of all drug prescriptions, 528 (57.5%) were licensed for use in children; 65 (7.1%) were unlicensed; and 324 (35.3%) were used off-label. Of all children, 49.6% received off-label prescriptions, 10.1% received unlicensed medications and 8.2% received both. Seventy-two percent of off-label drugs and 66% of unlicensed drugs were prescribed for children <2 years. Multivariate analysis showed that patients who were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit and infants aged 0–1 years were most likely to receive a greater number of off-label or unlicensed medications (OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.03–3.59 and OR 1.99; 95% CI 0.88–3.73, respectively). Conclusion The present findings confirmed the elevated prevalence of unlicensed and off-label paediatric drugs use in Palestine and strongly support the need to perform well designed clinical studies in children.