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.

Life-Threatening Adverse Reaction after Self-Initiated, Off-Label Use of High Dose Nicotinamide for the Treatment of Friedreich’s Ataxia

A 40-year old woman, previously known for Friedreich’s ataxia, presented with shock, profound lactic acidosis and hepatic failure after ingestion of a high dose of nicotinamide, the amide form of vitamin B3. On her own initiative, she was taking up to 4.4 g per day of nicotinamide, after having learned the results of a phase 2 study suggesting a potential benefit in Friedreich’s ataxia. The outcome was good with supportive care and withdrawal of nicotinamide.

Off-label utilization of antipsychotics

Résumé Ce travail s'inscrit dans un programme de recherche centré sur la pharmacovigilance en psychiatrie. Buts de l'étude Les nouveaux antipsychotiques atypiques sont prescrits avec beaucoup de succès, parce qu'ils présentent une sécurité dans leur emploi bien supérieure à celle des antipsychotiques classiques. Cette situation a conduit à une large prescription «off-label» (hors indication admise). Le but de ce travail a été d'étudier la pratique en matière de prescription des psychiatres hospitaliers en ce qui concerne les antipsychotiques en comparant des patients traités pour des psychoses ou d'autres indications officielles aux patients recevant un traitement antipsychotique «off-label». Méthode Dans le cadre d'un programme de pharmacovigilance - pharmacoépidemiologie, tous les médicaments prescrits à 5 jours de référence (entre 1999 et 2001) à l'hôpital psychiatrique universitaire de Lausanne (98 lits) ont été enregistrés, avec des données sur l'âge, le sexe et le diagnostic des patients. Les prescriptions de 202 patients ont été évaluées. Les patients ont été classés dans 3 groupes diagnostiques : (1) patient présentant des troubles psychotiques, (2) patient présentant des épisodes maniaques et des épisodes dépressifs avec des symptômes psychotiques, et (3) patient présentant d'autres troubles. Les groupes (1) et (2) forment une classe de patients recevant un antipsychotique pour une indication officielle, et les prescriptions dans le groupe (3) ont été considérées comme «off-label». Résultats principaux Moins de patients psychotiques ont reçu un antidépresseur (p<0.05) ou des hypnotiques non-benzodiazepine (p<0.001) comparés aux patients des deux autres groupes. Les patients présentant des troubles affectifs recevaient seulement exceptionnellement une combinaison d'un antipsychotique atypique et conventionnel, tandis qu'un nombre inférieur de patients avec des indications « off-label » ont reçu moins .souvent des antipsychotiques atypiques que ceux des deux groupes de comparaison (p<0.05). L'analyse statistique (stepwise logistic regression) a révélé que les patients présentant des troubles psychotiques avaient un risque plus élevé de recevoir un médicament antipsychotique d'une dose moyenne ou élevée, (p<0.001) en comparaison aux deux autres groupes. Conclusion Les nouveaux médicaments antipsychotiques semblent être prescrits avec moins d'hésitation principalement pour des indications admises. Les médecins prescrivent de nouveaux médicaments « off-label » seulement après avoir acquis une certaine expérience dans le domaine des indications approuvées, et ils étaient plus prudents en ce qui concerne la dose en traitant sur la base «off-label». Abstract Objective The new brands of atypical antipsychotics are very successfully prescribed because of their enhanced safety profiles and their larger pharmacological profile in comparison to the conventional antipsychotic. This has led to broad off-label utilisation. The aim of the present survey was to study the prescription practice of hospital psychiatrists with regard to antipsychotic drugs, comparing patients treated for psychoses or other registered indications to patients receiving an off-label antipsychotic treatment. Method As part of a pharmacovigilance/pharmacoepidemiology program, all drugs given on 5 reference days (1999 - 2001) in the 98-bed psychiatric hospital of the University of Lausanne, Switzerland, were recorded along with age, sex and diagnosis. The prescriptions of 202 patients were assessed. Patients were classified in 3 diagnostic groups: (1) patient with psychotic disorders, (2) patients with manic episodes and depressive episodes with psychotic symptoms, and (3) patients with other disorders. Group (1) and (2) formed the class of patients receiving an antipsychotic for a registered indication, and the prescriptions in group (3) were considered as off-label. Main results A lesser number of psychotic patients received antidepressant (p<0.05) and nonbenzodiazepine hypnotics (p<0.001) compared to the patients of the other two groups. The patients with affective disorders received only exceptionally a combination of an atypical and a conventional antipsychotic, whereas a lesser number of patients with off-label indications received less often atypical antipsychotics than those of the two comparison groups (p<0.05). Stepwise logistic regression revealed that patients with psychotic disorder were at higher risk of receiving an antipsychotic medication in medium or high dose (p<0.001), in comparison to the two other groups. Conclusions The new antipsychotic drugs seem to be prescribed with less hesitation mainly for approved indications. Physicians prescribe new drugs on off-label application only after having gained some experience in the field of the approved indications, and were more cautious with regard to dose when treating on an off-label basis.