The derivation and application of risk tolerability criteria

This research involves a study of the questions, "what is considered safe", how are safety levels defined or decided, and according to whom. Tolerable or acceptable risk questions raise various issues: about values and assumptions inherent in such levels; about decision-making frameworks at the highest level of policy making as well as on the individual level; and about the suitability and competency of decision-makers to decide and to communicate their decisions. The wide-ranging topics covering philosophical and practical concerns examined in the literature review reveal the multi-disciplined scope of this research. To support this theoretical study empirical research was undertaken at the European Space Research and Technology Centre (ESTEC) of the European Space Agency (ESA). ESTEC is a large, multi-nationality, high technology organisation which presented an ideal case study for exploring how decisions are made with respect to safety from a personal as well as organisational aspect. A qualitative methodology was employed to gather, analyse and report the findings of this research. Significant findings reveal how experts perceive risks and the prevalence of informal decision-making processes partly due to the inadequacy of formal methods for deciding risk tolerability. In the field of occupational health and safety, this research has highlighted the importance and need for criteria to decide whether a risk is great enough to warrant attention in setting standards and priorities for risk control and resources. From a wider perspective and with the recognition that risk is an inherent part of life, the establishment of tolerability risk levels can be viewed as cornerstones indicating our progress, expectations and values, of life and work, in an increasingly litigious, knowledgeable and global society.

Influence of the timing of low-dose aspirin on tolerability of prolonged-release nicotinic acid in patients at elevated cardiovascular risk

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of low-dose aspirin administered in the morning or evening on the rate of discontinuation of prolonged-release nicotinic acid (Niaspan) due to flushing in patients at elevated cardiovascular risk. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was an observational, non-interventional study in patients at elevated cardiovascular risk due to cardiovascular disease or type 2 diabetes. Patients received prolonged-release nicotinic acid and aspirin under the usual care of their physician for 15 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was the rate of treatment discontinuation for flushing. Other adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were also recorded. Lipid parameters were also measured. RESULTS: The patient population included 539 subjects (70% male); 36% had type 2 diabetes, 80% had prior cardiovascular disease, and 37% had a family history of cardiovascular disease. The rate of treatment discontinuation due to flushing did not differ (p = 0.3375) between the morning aspirin group (10.6%) and the evening aspirin group (13.8%). The overall incidence of flushing was 57%. Most flushes were of mild or moderate severity and decreases occurred over time in both frequency and intensity. ADRs unrelated to flushing occurred in 6.6% of the morning aspirin group and 7.4% of the evening aspirin group. HDL-cholesterol increased by +21.3% in the overall population, together with moderate improvements in other lipid parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Flushing was the most common ADR with prolonged-release nicotinic acid treatment, as expected. The timing of aspirin administration did not influence the rate of treatment discontinuations for flushing. Marked increases in HDL-cholesterol were observed.

Efficacy, tolerability and risk factors for virological failure of darunavir-based therapy for treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients: the Swiss HIV Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Darunavir was designed for activity against HIV resistant to other protease inhibitors (PIs). We assessed the efficacy, tolerability and risk factors for virological failure of darunavir for treatment-experienced patients seen in clinical practice. METHODS: We included all patients in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study starting darunavir after recording a viral load above 1000 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL given prior exposure to both PIs and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. We followed these patients for up to 72 weeks, assessed virological failure using different loss of virological response algorithms and evaluated risk factors for virological failure using a Bayesian method to fit discrete Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Among 130 treatment-experienced patients starting darunavir, the median age was 47 years, the median duration of HIV infection was 16 years, and 82% received mono or dual antiretroviral therapy before starting highly active antiretroviral therapy. During a median patient follow-up period of 45 weeks, 17% of patients stopped taking darunavir after a median exposure of 20 weeks. In patients followed beyond 48 weeks, the rate of virological failure at 48 weeks was at most 20%. Virological failure was more likely where patients had previously failed on both amprenavir and saquinavir and as the number of previously failed PI regimens increased. CONCLUSIONS: As a component of therapy for treatment-experienced patients, darunavir can achieve a similar efficacy and tolerability in clinical practice to that seen in clinical trials. Clinicians should consider whether a patient has failed on both amprenavir and saquinavir and the number of failed PI regimens before prescribing darunavir.

Efficacy, tolerability and risk factors for virological failure of darunavir-based therapy for treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients: the Swiss HIV Cohort Study

Darunavir was designed for activity against HIV resistant to other protease inhibitors (PIs). We assessed the efficacy, tolerability and risk factors for virological failure of darunavir for treatment-experienced patients seen in clinical practice.

Cost risk benefit analysis to support chemoprophylaxis policy for travellers to malaria endemic countries

Background: In a number of malaria endemic regions, tourists and travellers face a declining risk of travel associated malaria, in part due to successful malaria control. Many millions of visitors to these regions are recommended, via national and international policy, to use chemoprophylaxis which has a well recognized morbidity profile. To evaluate whether current malaria chemo-prophylactic policy for travellers is cost effective when adjusted for endemic transmission risk and duration of exposure. a framework, based on partial cost-benefit analysis was used Methods: Using a three component model combining a probability component, a cost component and a malaria risk component, the study estimated health costs avoided through use of chemoprophylaxis and costs of disease prevention (including adverse events and pre-travel advice for visits to five popular high and low malaria endemic regions) and malaria transmission risk using imported malaria cases and numbers of travellers to malarious countries. By calculating the minimal threshold malaria risk below which the economic costs of chemoprophylaxis are greater than the avoided health costs we were able to identify the point at which chemoprophylaxis would be economically rational. Results: The threshold incidence at which malaria chemoprophylaxis policy becomes cost effective for UK travellers is an accumulated risk of 1.13% assuming a given set of cost parameters. The period a travellers need to remain exposed to achieve this accumulated risk varied from 30 to more than 365 days, depending on the regions intensity of malaria transmission. Conclusions: The cost-benefit analysis identified that chemoprophylaxis use was not a cost-effective policy for travellers to Thailand or the Amazon region of Brazil, but was cost-effective for travel to West Africa and for those staying longer than 45 days in India and Indonesia.

Mycophenolic acid formulations in adult renal transplantation - update on efficacy and tolerability.

The description more than 30 years ago of the role of de novo purine synthesis in T and B lymphocytes clonal proliferation opened the possibility for selective immunosuppression by targeting specific enzymatic pathways. Mycophenolic acid (MPA) blocks the key enzyme inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase and the production of guanosine nucleotides required for DNA synthesis. Two MPA formulations are currently used in clinical transplantation as part of the maintenance immunosuppressive regimen. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) was the first MPA agent to be approved for the prevention of acute rejection following renal transplantation, in combination with cyclosporine and steroids. Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) is an alternative MPA formulation available in clinical transplantation. In this review, we will discuss the clinical trials that have evaluated the efficacy and safety of MPA in adult kidney transplantation for the prevention of acute rejection and their use in new combination regimens aiming at minimizing calcineurin inhibitor toxicity and chronic allograft nephropathy. We will also discuss MPA pharmacokinetics and the rationale for therapeutic drug monitoring in optimizing the balance between efficacy and safety in individual patients.

Managing hypertension in high-risk patients: lessons and promises from the STRATHE and ADVANCE trials.

Pharmacological treatment of hypertension represents a cost-effective way of preventing cardiovascular and renal complications. To benefit maximally from antihypertensive treatment, blood pressure should be brought to below 140/90 mmHg in every hypertensive patient, and even lower (< 130/80 mmHg) if diabetes or renal disease co-exists. Such targets cannot usually be reached using monotherapies. This is especially true in patients who present with a high cardiovascular risk. The co-administration of two agents acting by different mechanisms considerably increases the blood pressure control rate. Such combinations are not only efficacious, but are also well tolerated, and some fixed low-dose combinations even have a placebo-like tolerability. This is the case for the preparation containing the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor perindopril (2 mg) and the diuretic indapamide (0.625 mg), a fixed low-dose combination that has been shown in controlled trials to be more effective than monotherapies in reducing albuminuria, regressing cardiac hypertrophy and improving the stiffness of large arteries. Using this combination to initiate antihypertensive therapy has been shown in a double-blind trial (Strategies of Treatment in Hypertension: Evaluation; STRATHE) to normalize blood pressure (< 140/90 mmHg) in significantly more patients (62%) than a sequential monotherapy approach based on atenolol, losartan and amlodipine (49%) and a stepped-care strategy based on valsartan and hydrochlorothiazide (47%), with no difference between the three arm groups in terms of tolerability. An ongoing randomized trial (Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation; ADVANCE) is a study with a 2 x 2 factorial design assessing the effects of the fixed-dose perindopril-indapamide combination and of the intensive gliclazide modified release-based glucose control regimen in type 2 diabetic patients, with or without hypertension. A total of 11 140 patients were randomly selected. Within the first 6 weeks of treatment (run-in phase), the perindopril-indapamide combination lowered blood pressure from 145/81 +/- 22/11 mmHg (mean +/- SD) to 137/78 +/- 20/10 mmHg. Fixed-dose combinations are becoming more and more popular for the management of hypertension, and are even proposed by hypertension guidelines as a first-line option to treat hypertensive patients.

Oral Antibiotics for Fever in Low-Risk Neutropenic Patients With Cancer: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Multicenter Trial Comparing Single Daily Moxifloxacin With Twice Daily Ciprofloxacin Plus Amoxicillin/Clavulanic Acid Combination Therapy--EORTC Infectious Diseases Group Trial XV.

PURPOSE This double-blind, multicenter trial compared the efficacy and safety of a single daily oral dose of moxifloxacin with oral combination therapy in low-risk febrile neutropenic patients with cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Inclusion criteria were cancer, febrile neutropenia, low risk of complications as predicted by a Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) score > 20, ability to swallow, and ≤ one single intravenous dose of empiric antibiotic therapy before study drug treatment initiation. Early discharge was encouraged when a set of predefined criteria was met. Patients received either moxifloxacin (400 mg once daily) monotherapy or oral ciprofloxacin (750 mg twice daily) plus amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (1,000 mg twice daily). The trial was designed to show equivalence of the two drug regimens in terms of therapy success, defined as defervescence and improvement in clinical status during study drug treatment (< 10% difference). Results Among the 333 patients evaluated in an intention-to-treat analysis, therapy success was observed in 80% of the patients administered moxifloxacin and in 82% of the patients administered combination therapy (95% CI for the difference, -10% to 8%, consistent with equivalence). Minor differences in tolerability, safety, and reasons for failure were observed. More than 50% of the patients in the two arms were discharged on protocol therapy, with 5% readmissions among those in either arm. Survival was similar (99%) in both arms. CONCLUSION Monotherapy with once daily oral moxifloxacin is efficacious and safe in low-risk febrile neutropenic patients identified with the help of the MASCC scoring system, discharged early, and observed as outpatients.

Ageing with HIV: medication use and risk for potential drug-drug interactions.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the use of co-medication, the potential drug-drug interactions (PDDIs) and the effect on antiretroviral therapy (ART) tolerability and efficacy in HIV-infected individuals according to age, ≥ 50 years or <50 years. METHODS: All ART-treated participants were prospectively included once during a follow-up visit of the Swiss HIV Cohort Study. Information on any current medication was obtained by participant self-report and medical prescription history. The complete treatment was subsequently screened for PDDIs using a customized version of the Liverpool drug interaction database. RESULTS: Drug prescriptions were analysed for 1497 HIV-infected individuals: 477 age ≥ 50 and 1020 age <50. Older patients were more likely to receive one or more co-medications compared with younger patients (82% versus 61%; P < 0.001) and thus had more frequent PDDIs (51% versus 35%; P < 0.001). Furthermore, older patients tended to use a higher number of co-medications and certain therapeutic drug classes more often, such as cardiovascular drugs (53% versus 19%; P < 0.001), gastrointestinal medications (10% versus 6%; P = 0.004) and hormonal agents (6% versus 3%; P = 0.04). PDDIs with ART occurred mainly with cardiovascular drugs (27%), CNS agents (22%) and methadone (6%) in older patients and with CNS agents (27%), methadone (15%) and cardiovascular drugs (11%) in younger patients. The response to ART did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The risk for PDDIs with ART increased in older patients who take more drugs than their younger HIV-infected counterparts. However, medication use in older and younger patients did not differ in terms of effect on antiretroviral tolerability and response.

Application in the STRATHE trial of a score system to compare the efficacy and the tolerability of different therapeutic strategies in the management of hypertension

A score system integrating the evolution of efficacy and tolerability over time was applied to a subpopulation of the STRATHE trial, a trial performed according to a parallel group design, with a double-blind, random allocation to either a fixed-dose combination strategy (perindopril/indapamide 2 mg/0.625 mg, with the possibility to increase the dose to 3 mg/0.935 mg, and 4 mg/1.250 mg if needed, n = 118), a sequential monotherapy approach (atenolol 50 mg, followed by losartan 50 mg and amlodipine 5 mg if needed, n = 108), or a stepped-care strategy (valsartan 40 mg, followed by valsartan 80 mg and valsartan 80 mg+ hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg if needed, n = 103). The aim was to lower blood pressure below 140/90 mmHg within a 9-month period. The treatment could be adjusted after 3 and 6 months. Only patients in whom the study protocol was strictly applied were included in this analysis. At completion of the trial the total score averaged 13.1 +/- 70.5 (mean +/- SD) using the fixed-dose combination strategy, compared with -7.2 +/- 81.0 using the sequential monotherapy approach and -17.5 +/- 76.4 using the stepped-care strategy. In conclusion, the use of a score system allows the comparison of antihypertensive therapeutic strategies, taking into account at the same time efficacy and tolerability. In the STRATHE trial the best results were observed with the fixed-dose combination containing low doses of an angiotensin enzyme converting inhibitor (perindopril) and a diuretic (indapamide).

Comparing tolerability profile of second generation antipsychotics in schizophrenia and affective disorders : a meta-analysis

Les antipsychotiques de deuxième génération (ADG) sont de plus en plus employés dans le traitement de troubles psychiatriques. Selon de nombreuses observations cliniques, les effets secondaires reliés à la prise d’ADG diffèrent chez les patients atteints de schizophrénie (SCZ) et de maladies affectives (MA) éprouvent divers. Ainsi, il s’avère nécessaire d’étudier la fréquence et l'intensité des effets secondaires induits par les ADG qui pourraient différer selon le diagnostic. Pour ce faire, nous avons effectué une revue systématique de la littérature afin d’identifier l’ensemble des études rapportant les effets secondaires de cinq ADG (aripiprazole, olanzapine, quétiapine, rispéridone et ziprasidone) dans le traitement de la schizophrénie ou des maladies affectives. Les effets secondaires métaboliques et extrapyramidaux ont été recueillis séparément pour les deux groupes de patients, puis ont été combinés dans une méta-analyse. Des méta-régressions ainsi que des sous-analyses ont également été effectuées dans le but de regarder l’effet de différents modérateurs (i.e. âge, genre, et dose). Dans la présente méta-analyse, 107 études ont été inclues. Les résultats montrent que le traitement avec l’olanzapine a occasionné une plus importante prise de poids chez les patients SCZ comparativement aux patients MA. De plus, le traitement à la quétiapine a amené une hausse significative du taux de LDL et de cholestérol total dans le groupe SCZ par rapport au groupe MA. Selon nos résultats, les symptômes extrapyramidaux étaient plus fréquents dans le groupe MA, excepté pour le traitement à l'olanzapine qui a induit davantage de ces symptômes chez les patients SCZ. Également, nos résultats suggèrent que les patients SCZ seraient plus vulnérables à certains effets métaboliques induits par les ADG dû à une possible susceptibilité génétique ou à la présence de facteurs de risque associés au style de vie. D'autre part, les patients MA en comparaison aux SCZ étaient plus enclins à souffrir de troubles du mouvement induits par les ADG. Bref, les ADG semblent exacerber certains types d’effets secondaires tout dépendant de la maladie dans laquelle on les utilise.

Immune response and tolerability of varicella vaccine in children and adolescents with systemic lupus erythematosus previously exposed to varicella-zoster virus

Objectives The aim of the present paper is to evaluate the immune response and tolerability of varicella vaccine in children and adolescents with systemic lupus erythematosus previously exposed to varicella-zoster virus. Methods We performed a prospective and controlled study on a group of 54 SLE patients that were chosen at random to be or not to be vaccinated (28 were vaccinated and 26 were not). Twenty-eight healthy controls, of matching age and sex were also vaccinated. All were submitted to a questionnaire, physical evaluation and laboratory assays: lymphocyte immuno-phenotyping by flow cytometry, plasma varicella zoster virus (VZV) serology by ELISA and in vitro interferon gamma (IFN gamma) production by T-cells after stimulus with VZV antigen. They were evaluated before vaccination and at 30, 45, 180 and 360 days afterwards. Results We did not observe any differences in the frequency of adverse events in both vaccinated groups. At study entry, all individuals were seropositive for VZV antibodies. The serum VZV antibody titres similarly increased after vaccination. The frequency of flares and the SLEDAI score were also similar among the patients. Thirty days after vaccination the production of IFN gamma specific to VZV was lower in the SLE group compared to healthy, controls. In the follow-up we observed 4 cases of herpes zoster in the SLE unvaccinated group, but no zoster in the vaccinated group. Conclusion The varicella vaccine was well tolerated in SLE group, who had pre-existing immunity to varicella. The varicella vaccine immunogenicity measurement by serum antibody titres was appropriate. The incidence of HZ was lower in the vaccinated lupus group.

Ageing with HIV: medication use and risk for potential drug-drug interactions

To compare the use of co-medication, the potential drug-drug interactions (PDDIs) and the effect on antiretroviral therapy (ART) tolerability and efficacy in HIV-infected individuals according to age, ≥ 50 years or <50 years.

Safety and tolerability of slow-release oral morphine versus methadone in the treatment of opioid dependence

Opioid substitution treatment (OST) for opioid dependence may be limited by adverse events (AEs). Increasing the range of therapeutic options optimizes outcomes and facilitates patient management. An international, multi-center, two-phase study investigated the efficacy and safety of slow-release oral morphine (SROM) versus methadone in patients receiving methadone therapy for opioid dependence. In phase 1 (two way cross-over, 11 weeks each period) patients were randomized to SROM or methadone oral solution. In phase 2 (25 weeks), patients continued treatment with SROM (group A) or switched from methadone to SROM (group B). In total, 211 out of 276 completed phase 1 and 198 entered phase 2 (n = 95 group A, n = 103 group B). Treatment with both SROM and methadone was well tolerated. However, the mean QTc-interval associated with methadone was significantly longer than that under SROM. Higher treatment satisfaction, fewer cravings for heroin, and lower mental stress were reported with SROM. This study adds a significant further weight of evidence that SROM is an effective and well tolerated long-term maintenance treatment for opioid dependence with a beneficial risk profile compared to methadone regarding cardiac effects and supports its clinical utility.

Efficacy, Acceptability, and Tolerability of Antipsychotics in Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia: A Network Meta-analysis.

Importance In treatment-resistant schizophrenia, clozapine is considered the standard treatment. However, clozapine use has restrictions owing to its many adverse effects. Moreover, an increasing number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of other antipsychotics have been published. Objective To integrate all the randomized evidence from the available antipsychotics used for treatment-resistant schizophrenia by performing a network meta-analysis. Data Sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biosis, PsycINFO, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, World Health Organization International Trial Registry, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched up to June 30, 2014. Study Selection At least 2 independent reviewers selected published and unpublished single- and double-blind RCTs in treatment-resistant schizophrenia (any study-defined criterion) that compared any antipsychotic (at any dose and in any form of administration) with another antipsychotic or placebo. Data Extraction and Synthesis At least 2 independent reviewers extracted all data into standard forms and assessed the quality of all included trials with the Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool. Data were pooled using a random-effects model in a Bayesian setting. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was efficacy as measured by overall change in symptoms of schizophrenia. Secondary outcomes included change in positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia, categorical response to treatment, dropouts for any reason and for inefficacy of treatment, and important adverse events. Results Forty blinded RCTs with 5172 unique participants (71.5% men; mean [SD] age, 38.8 [3.7] years) were included in the analysis. Few significant differences were found in all outcomes. In the primary outcome (reported as standardized mean difference; 95% credible interval), olanzapine was more effective than quetiapine (-0.29; -0.56 to -0.02), haloperidol (-0. 29; -0.44 to -0.13), and sertindole (-0.46; -0.80 to -0.06); clozapine was more effective than haloperidol (-0.22; -0.38 to -0.07) and sertindole (-0.40; -0.74 to -0.04); and risperidone was more effective than sertindole (-0.32; -0.63 to -0.01). A pattern of superiority for olanzapine, clozapine, and risperidone was seen in other efficacy outcomes, but results were not consistent and effect sizes were usually small. In addition, relatively few RCTs were available for antipsychotics other than clozapine, haloperidol, olanzapine, and risperidone. The most surprising finding was that clozapine was not significantly better than most other drugs. Conclusions and Relevance Insufficient evidence exists on which antipsychotic is more efficacious for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, and blinded RCTs-in contrast to unblinded, randomized effectiveness studies-provide little evidence of the superiority of clozapine compared with other second-generation antipsychotics. Future clozapine studies with high doses and patients with extremely treatment-refractory schizophrenia might be most promising to change the current evidence.