Risk Evaluation And Mitigation Strategy Program Research Articles

Brief of over 300 reproductive health researchers as Amici Curiae in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine.

On January 30, 2024, over 300 researchers filed an amicus brief in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a United States (US) Supreme Court case that could have severely impacted access to mifepristone, one of the two drugs commonly used in medication abortion. The researchers summarize the legal challenges to the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) original approval of mifepristone in 2000 and its 2016 and 2021 decisions modifying mifepristone's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Program and label, the responses from the FDA and drug manufacturer to the challenges, and the potential implications of the Court's decision on access to mifepristone in the US. The researchers detail how the FDA relied on a robust scientific record analyzing tens of thousands of patient experiences that conclusively demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of the changes to the mifepristone REMS Program and label and urge the Supreme Court to rely on the clear scientific record and preserve access to mifepristone without reimposing restrictions. What follows is a reprint of this brief.

Removing the FDA’s Boxed Hepatotoxicity Warning and Liver Function Testing Requirement for Ambrisentan

Endothelin receptor antagonists are first-line therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). The first 2 agents approved in the class, bosentan and ambrisentan, initially carried boxed warnings for hepatotoxicity and required monthly liver function tests (LFTs) as part of a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS); however, in 2011, as further safety data emerged on ambrisentan, the boxed hepatotoxicity warning and LFT requirements were removed. To analyze changes in the use of and LFT monitoring for ambrisentan and bosentan after changes to the ambrisentan labeling and REMS. This serial cross-sectional study used data from 3 longitudinal health care insurance claims databases-Medicaid, Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart, and Merative Marketscan-to perform an interrupted time series analysis of prescription fills and LFTs for patients taking ambrisentan and bosentan. Participants were patients filling prescriptions for ambrisentan and bosentan from July 1, 2007, to December 31, 2018. Data analysis was performed from April 2021 to August 2023. Removal of the boxed warning for hepatotoxicity and the REMS LFT monitoring requirements on ambrisentan in March 2011. The primary outcomes were use of ambrisentan (ie, individuals with at least 1 dispensing per 1 000 000 individuals enrolled in the 3 datasets) vs bosentan and LFT monitoring (ie, proportion of initiators with at least 1 ordered test) before initiation and before the first refill. A total of 10 261 patients received a prescription for ambrisentan during the study period (7442 women [72.5%]; mean [SD] age, 52.6 [17.6] years), and 11 159 patients received a prescription for bosentan (7931 women [71.1%]; mean [SD] age, 47.7 [23.7] years). Removal of the ambrisentan boxed hepatotoxicity warning and LFT monitoring requirement was associated with an immediate increase in the use of ambrisentan (1.50 patients per million enrollees; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.92 patients per million enrollees) but no significant change in the use of bosentan. There were reductions in recorded LFTs before drug initiation (13.1% absolute decrease; 95% CI, -18.2% to -8.0%) and before the first refill (26.4% absolute decrease; 95% CI, -34.4% to -18.5%) of ambrisentan but not bosentan. In this serial cross-sectional study of ambrisentan, labeling changes and removal of the REMS-related LFT requirement were associated with shifts in prescribing and testing behavior for ambrisentan but not bosentan. Further clinician education may be needed to maximize the benefits of REMS programs and labeling warnings designed to ensure the safe administration of high-risk medications.

A Real-World Evidence Review of Post-Marketing Safety and Compliance with Pegcetacoplan in Patients with Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria (PNH) in the US

Introduction: Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) is a rare, acquired hematologic condition characterized by complement-mediated, life-threatening hemolysis and thrombosis which are associated with significant impacts on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Pegcetacoplan is the first targeted complement component 3 (C3) therapy approved for adults with PNH (US) and adults with PNH plus anemia despite receiving a complement component 5 inhibitor (C5i) for ≥3 months (EU). In clinical trials including patients with PNH who were C5i-experienced or -naive, pegcetacoplan significantly improved levels of hemoglobin (Hb) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and reduced transfusion burden. Pegcetacoplan had a favorable safety profile in parent studies and an ongoing long-term, rollover, open-label extension study (NCT03531255). Compliance with pegcetacoplan treatment was high across all clinical studies. In the US real-world OPERA and Adelphi PNH Disease Specific Programme™ (DSP) patient-reported outcomes (PRO) studies, improvements in levels of Hb and LDH, along with self-reported fatigue and cognitive outcomes, were observed. Pegcetacoplan treatment also led to reductions in the frequency and severity of PNH symptoms (including shortness of breath and fatigue) and improvements in social, physical, and emotional HRQoL domains in the US real-world Voice of the Patient PRO study. Further, both patient and physician satisfaction with pegcetacoplan treatment was high in the Adelphi PNH DSP study. However, to date, compliance and safety with pegcetacoplan treatment in the real-world setting have not been described. The objective of this real-world evidence review study was to evaluate compliance and safety with pegcetacoplan treatment in patients with PNH in the US post-marketing setting. Methods: Post-marketing data from the US, including the number of patients who received pegcetacoplan and reported safety events, were collected and analyzed from the pegcetacoplan Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) program which controls the distribution of pegcetacoplan and the pharmacovigilance safety database through May 13, 2023. Treatment compliance was calculated as the proportion of days a patient had the drug in possession, divided by the total number of days of follow-up, using central pharmacy prescription refill data. Thrombosis (a leading cause of death in patients with PNH prior to the availability of complement inhibitors) and meningococcal infections (a potential risk with complement inhibitors) were safety events of interest. To reduce the risk of serious meningococcal infections, clinical trial protocols and pegcetacoplan labeling required vaccination against Streptococcus pneumoniae; N meningitidis types A, C, W, Y, and B; and Haemophilus influenzae type B before starting treatment with pegcetacoplan. If pegcetacoplan treatment must be initiated before vaccination, the US label mandates prophylactic antibiotic use. In this study, the rates of thrombosis and meningococcal infection per 100 patient-years were estimated based on the total number of thrombosis and meningococcal infection events reported in the REMS program. Results: As of May 13, 2023, the cumulative pegcetacoplan exposure was 273.10 patient-years in the US post-marketing setting. Based on prescription refill data, compliance with pegcetacoplan treatment was ~98%. There were 2 confirmed thrombotic events reported and the incidence of thrombotic events was 0.73 events/100 patient-years in 273.10 patient-years. Similar to clinical trials, no meningococcal infections were reported in the US post-marketing setting. Conclusions: The high compliance rate and favorable safety profile of pegcetacoplan in the US post-marketing setting were consistent with clinical trial observations. These data, coupled with the effectiveness on hematologic parameters and improvements in symptoms and HRQoL reported in pegcetacoplan real-world PRO studies, support a positive benefit:risk profile for pegcetacoplan in the real-world setting.

Provision of ambrisentan from a health-system specialty pharmacy affiliated with a pulmonary hypertension Center of Comprehensive Care.

This descriptive report describes the process used to obtain access to providing ambrisentan from a health-system specialty pharmacy (HSSP) affiliated with a pulmonary hypertension Center of Comprehensive Care, develop a pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) care team at the HSSP, and characterize medication adherence and access metrics. PAH is a rare disease treated with several specialty medications requiring intensive monitoring. Historically, specialty medications used to treat PAH have been provided by only select specialty pharmacies due to restricted drug distribution channels. It is recommended that patients with PAH receive their care at centers with expertise in the diagnosis and management of this disorder, but the HSSPs at these expert centers are unable to provide specialty PAH medications. The current care model for PAH leads to patients receiving their medical and pharmaceutical care from separate entities. This descriptive report describes a multidisciplinary team's approach to gaining access to providing ambrisentan and developing a disease state care team within an established HSSP. After implementing this service, specialty pharmacy metrics were assessed, including proportion of days covered (PDC), time to first fill, patient contact rate, Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program compliance, time to prior authorization (PA) approval, rate of optimal adherence (PDC of >80%), and PA renewal rate, to demonstrate a proof-of-concept HSSP model for PAH. In this model, the HSSP was able to demonstrate high-quality specialty pharmacy metrics with regard to medication adherence, medication access, and REMS program compliance. The development of a PAH care team to provide ambrisentan at an existing HSSP was associated with high adherence rates, efficient and reliable medication access, and REMS program compliance.

The Importance of Gender-Neutral Terminology in Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy Programs: A Call to Action.

The use of risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) programs is frequently required for prescriptions with potentially teratogenic effects, especially in the field of dermatology. Among these REMS programs, the most well-known example is isotretinoin, an oral retinoid that uses the iPLEDGE system. iPLEDGE has strict regulations and a lengthy approval process, and until recently, patients were grouped into 3 categories: male, female, or female of reproductive potential. This strict grouping has posed problems in the medical community, especially for gender-diverse individuals where their perceived gender conflates with their assigned grouping causing patient-specific distress. The distinction between gender-a multifactorial perception of identity-and biological sex is addressed under new iPLEDGE guidelines. Dermatologists now register patients under one of 2 categories: patients who can become pregnant and those who cannot become pregnant. This change simultaneously improves the accessibility to isotretinoin among gender-diverse individuals, while limiting prescription barriers. Despite initial success being limited due to lengthy system conversions, a registration process based on reproductive potential ultimately enhances iPLEDGE's goal to prevent potential birth defects. We propose that other REMS programs follow the standard set by the iPLEDGE system, including those for the medications thalidomide, acitretin, and mycophenolate mofetil, all of which currently have a similar taxonomy to that of the old iPLEDGE system. Implementing the standardization of gender-neutral terminology can maximize enrollment and minimize distress. Current and ongoing refinement of iPLEDGE and other REMS is needed to build protocols solely around the prevention of birth defects without regard to sex or gender.

Patients prefer free drug disposal options delivered by pharmacists at the point of care: Results of a decision tree analysis of a national factorial vignette panel survey.

Unused opioid medication in the home increases risk of medication diversion, misuse, and unintended harm. The United States Federal Food and Drug Administration is currently considering the implementation of a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) program that would require US pharmacists to provide drug disposal products with opioid prescriptions. Still, little is known about consumer preference for drug disposal method. The objective of this study was to identify product and program characteristics associated with consumer preference for at-home drug disposal products. A 2x2x3x3 full-factorial design was employed to text-based vignettes representing opioid analgesic disposal scenarios. Each vignette varied on four characteristics: product cost (free vs paid), ease of use (a mail back envelope, bringing medication to a takeback site, and an at-home drug deactivation pouch), potential environmental impact (incineration), and point of access (pharmacy, community organization, and prescriber). Of the 36 possible vignettes, 12 were removed as they represented a non-realistic combination of vignette characteristics. The remaining 24 were administered to a panel of patients with controlled-substance use in the past six-months. Decision tree modeling and general linear mixed (GLM) models were used sequentially to identify product characteristics associated with patient drug preferences RESULTS: A total of 1,006 participants completed all vignette drug disposal scenarios. Regression tree analysis found that the most important predictor of use was cost followed by ease of access and product design. GLM showed that takeback programs offered at a pharmacy were the most preferred disposal option followed by at-home products (mailed envelope or deactivation system) dispensed with the prescription. Programs that provide disposal resources directly to the patient at no cost with their prescription are likely to optimize willingness to dispose. Findings support the FDA's plan for a REMS program requiring pharmacies to distribute mail-back envelopes to patients when dispensed opioids.

Medication Management of Early Pregnancy Loss: The Impact of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy [A289

INTRODUCTION: Early pregnancy loss (EPL) occurs in 1 million U.S. patients annually. Mifepristone pretreatment for medication management increases efficacy but requires compliance with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program. This study examined how REMS influences mifepristone use for EPL among obstetrician–gynecologists (ob-gyns) in Massachusetts. METHODS: This mixed methods study included in-depth qualitative interviews focused on EPL management analyzed under a thematic analysis framework using multiple coders and a consensus method. Qualitative data informed development of a survey fielded among all ob-gyns in Massachusetts identified through the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. The Partners IRB deemed this study exempt. RESULTS: Nearly all interviewees (17 of 19, 89%) listed the REMS as a barrier to mifepristone use. Barriers included belief that the REMS indicated mifepristone was not available to general ob-gyns, lack of pharmacy dispensing, and concerns about signing the required prescriber agreement. The REMS sometimes gave hospital or pharmacy leadership the impression that mifepristone is dangerous, prolonging protocol development and implementation. A total of 197 physicians responded to a subsequent survey. Of those, 37% did not offer mifepristone for EPL, and 40% were not or only somewhat familiar with mifepristone's REMS program. Among those who reported on barriers to mifepristone use (n=57), the most common was uncertainty with how to comply with the REMS (53%); 73% reported that removing these regulations would help them use mifepristone for EPL. CONCLUSION: The FDA REMS program for mifepristone impedes evidence-based medication management of EPL. Removing the REMS would improve access to this best practice.

Telemedicine management of systemic therapy with isotretinoin of patients with moderate-to-severe acne during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal prospective feasibility study

Telemedicine management of systemic therapy with isotretinoin of patients with moderate-to-severe acne during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal prospective feasibility study

Patient and Caregiver Experiences With and Perceptions of Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy Programs With Elements to Assure Safe Use

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Amendments Act of 2007 authorized the FDA to impose safety requirements on drugs with important risks, such as prescriber certification or routine laboratory testing, to ensure that the benefits of use outweighed the risks. However, little is known about patient and caregiver experiences with these Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) programs with Elements to Assure Safe Use (ETASU). To understand patient and caregiver experiences with and perceptions of REMS programs with ETASU. This qualitative study included semistructured qualitative phone interviews conducted between 2016 and 2017, with initial analysis performed in 2017 and reanalysis performed in 2021. Adult patients prescribed natalizumab or sodium oxybate, adult patients or caregivers of adult patients prescribed vigabatrin, and adult female patients of reproductive age prescribed riociguat were included. Assessment of knowledge, decision-making, medication access, and perceptions of medical privacy. Among 63 participants, 46 (73%) were female. Twenty-five participants (40%) had taken natalizumab, 10 (16%) riociguat, 15 (24%) sodium oxybate, and 10 (16%) vigabatrin. One participant had taken both natalizumab and vigabatrin; 4 (6%) were caregivers of patients using vigabatrin. Most participants expressed knowledge of REMS program requirements, but many lacked the insight that these requirements were part of an FDA-mandated special safety program and expressed difficulty understanding program education materials. REMS requirements made some participants more likely to initiate treatment. However, many reported burdens accessing medication, including the need to travel to certified prescribers or pharmacies. Manufacturer access to personal health information was also controversial, although some participants expressed an altruistic desire to assist others. This qualitative study found that REMS programs with ETASU reassured patients and their caregivers about drug safety and helped support medication initiation. However, steps are needed to improve the quality of REMS educational materials, promote efficient medication access, and protect patient privacy.

APA Joins in Negotiations Over New Problematic Clozapine REMS

APA Joins in Negotiations Over New Problematic Clozapine REMS

Off-Label Use of Ketamine: A Challenging Drug Treatment Delivery Model With an Inherently Unfavorable Risk-Benefit Profile.

Off-Label Use of Ketamine: A Challenging Drug Treatment Delivery Model With an Inherently Unfavorable Risk-Benefit Profile.

Pragmatic applications of implementation science frameworks to regulatory science: an assessment of FDA Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) (2014\u20132018)

BackgroundA Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) is a drug safety program for certain medications with serious safety concerns required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of manufacturers to implement to help ensure the benefits of the medication outweigh its risks. FDA is encouraging “the research community to develop novel methods for assessing REMS,” conveying the unmet need for a standardized evaluation method of these regulatory-mandated healthcare programs. The objective of this research is to evaluate FDA REMS assessment plans using established implementation science frameworks and identify opportunities for strengthening REMS evaluation.MethodsA content analysis was conducted of publicly available assessment plans for all REMS programs (N = 23) approved 1/1/2014–12/31/2018 for new drug applications (NDAs) and biologics license applications (BLAs) requiring FDA-mandated Elements to Assure Safe Use (ETASU). Blinded reviewers critically appraised REMS assessment measures (n = 674) using three established implementation science frameworks: RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance); PRECEDE-PROCEED (Predisposing, Reinforcing, and Enabling Constructs in Educational/Environmental Diagnosis and Evaluation – Policy, Regulatory, and Organizational Constructs in Educational and Environmental Development); and CFIR (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research). Framework constructs were mapped to REMS Assessment categories as defined by FDA Guidance for Industry to evaluate congruence.ResultsREMS assessment measures demonstrated strong congruence (> 90% mapping rate) with the evaluative constructs of RE-AIM, PRECEDE-PROCEED, and CFIR. Application of the frameworks revealed that REMS assessment measures heavily emphasize implementation and operations, focus less on health outcomes, and do not evaluate program context and design assumptions.ConclusionsImplementation science frameworks have utility for evaluating FDA-mandated drug safety programs including the selection of primary measures to determine whether REMS goals are being met and of secondary measures to evaluate contextual factors affecting REMS effectiveness in varying organizational settings.

Increase your Confidence in Opioid Prescribing: Marketing Messages in Continuing Medical Education Activities on ER/LA Opioids

Overprescription of opioids has fueled an epidemic of addiction and overdose deaths. The FDA required manufacturers of extended-release/long-acting (ER/LA) opioids to fund continuing medical education (CME) on opioids as part of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS). We sought to determine whether industry-funded REMS on long-acting opioids were consistent with the FDA's goal to reduce serious, adverse outcomes resulting from inappropriate prescribing, misuse, and abuse. In 2018, we analyzed all internet-based REMS CME activities funded by the REMS Program Companies (RPC), a consortium of ER/LA opioid manufacturers. We utilized systematic narrative thematic analysis, an inductive approach that allows for mapping of concepts and meanings across a body of data by identifying, recording, analyzing, and refining key narrative points, called "themes". Authors viewed all REMS activities multiple times. Ten themes were identified, all of which were at least somewhat incongruent with federal guidelines and their goals: 1. Chronic pain is a common, under-treated problem. 2.Chronic pain is a chronic disease.3.Opioids are an appropriate treatment for chronic pain. 4.LAs are more appropriate than immediate-release (IR) opioids for chronic pain. 5.Tolerance is normal, expected, and beneficial. 6. Opioid rotation" can maximize analgesia and minimize adverse effects.7. There is no population for whom opioids are absolutely contraindicated or inappropriate. 8. Screening and monitoring tools are effective for preventing opioid-related problems. 9. Opioid related adverse effects, such as respiratory depression and addiction, are due only to misuse and abuse. Addiction, overdose, and death are due to street drugs such as heroin and fentanyl, not prescription opioids.Themes and statements repeated in these activities were inconsistent with current medical knowledge, evidence-based federal guidelines, and FDA goals. We evaluated only online, not live, CME. We also did not evaluate individual conflicts of interest of faculty. Industry-funded REMS-compliant CME on opioids contain messages that misrepresent scientific evidence and may foster overprescribing of opioids.

Optimization of REMS Program Compliance in a Large Academic Health System.

Ensuring compliance with all applicable Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) programs within a health system is challenging. These FDA-mandated programs are numerous, unique, and ever-changing. Actions require several stakeholders and moving parts. In addition, the effectiveness and impact of these programs has been challenged and is not always clear, which hampers buy-in and therefore compliance. F&MCW is a health network in southeastern Wisconsin that includes five hospitals and almost 40 clinics. Since 2014, several system-wide approaches to medication use, including formulary alignment and REMS program optimization, have taken place with an over-arching goal of providing efficient, safe, and consistent care for the patients and populations served. This manuscript describes the steps that took place over the past six years or so related to REMS program optimization. It also offers practical tips for other health systems based on lessons learned through this one institution's experiences.

Medication abortion: Advocating for mifepristone dispensing by pharmacists

Medication abortion consisting of an oral regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol has been available in the United States since 2000 when mifepristone was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for this indication [1]. Special access and use restrictions have been imposed by the FDA since initial approval, and in 2008 mifepristone was transitioned into a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program. REMS programs are designed to ensure that benefits outweigh the risks for medications with serious safety concerns, and often strictly regulate access [2].

A Multi-modal Approach to Evaluate the Impact of Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Programs

Since 2007, the US Food and Drug Administration has had the authority to require risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) programs for certain medications with serious safety concerns to help ensure the benefits of the medication outweigh its risks. Such programs can include requirements for patient monitoring, restrictions on dispensing or administration, and physician and pharmacy training and certification. However, there has been only scattered evidence on the impact of REMS programs on informed decision making, medication access, or patient outcomes. The objective of this article was to describe a study that researchers at Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School will conduct in partnership with the Food and Drug Administration's Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology to investigate systematically how REMS programs have operated in practice. Investigations include health insurance claims-based analyses to understand patterns of drug use, adherence to safety requirements, and patient outcomes under REMS programs; surveys and interviews to understand physician and patient experiences with REMS; and REMS program material-based and interview-based analyses to understand the effectiveness of risk communication in REMS programs. These research activities will evaluate the performance of REMS programs, provide information on the benefits and burdens to patients and healthcare providers, and generate recommendations for actionable steps to improve REMS programs overall.

Med Check: Rapid Blood Test for Concussion; REMS for Some Fentanyl Products; Phase 3 for Troriluzole for OCD; Remote Neuromodulation Device for Adolescent Migraine

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Med CheckFull AccessMed Check: Rapid Blood Test for Concussion; REMS for Some Fentanyl Products; Phase 3 for Troriluzole for OCD; Remote Neuromodulation Device for Adolescent MigraineTerri D’ArrigoTerri D’ArrigoSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:10 Feb 2021https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.pn.2021.2.1FDA Approves Rapid Blood Test for ConcussionsIn January the FDA approved Abbott’s i-STAT Alinity handheld device for detecting mild traumatic brain injury (TBI), the company announced. Test results are available within 15 minutes using plasma that is placed into a test cartridge. The test was developed in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Defense.The test measures glial fibrillary acidic protein and ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase L1 in blood plasma—two biomarkers that indicate brain injury when they are elevated. According to a statement by the company, the device provides test results with 95.8% sensitivity and greater than 99% negative predictive value. A negative test can rule out the need for a CT scan, and having a blood test available could reduce the number of unnecessary CT scans, according to the company.FDA Toughens REMS for Some Fentanyl ProductsIn December the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) took steps to strengthen the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program for transmucosal immediate-release fentanyl (TIRF).“To use the TIRF medicines safely, these patients must be opioid tolerant based on concurrent regular use of another opioid medication,” the FDA wrote in a statement. “Despite the decline in the use of TIRF medicines in recent years, data have suggested that prescribing of TIRF medicines still occurs in patients who are not opioid tolerant. With this in mind, the FDA finalized modifications to the REMS program to address the persistence of these concerning prescribing practices.”The TIRF REMS program now requires the following:Prescribers must document a patient’s opioid tolerance with each prescription of a TIRF medicine for outpatient use.Outpatient pharmacies dispensing TIRF medicines must document and verify a patient’s opioid tolerance before dispensing.Inpatient pharmacies must develop internal policies and procedures to verify opioid tolerance in patients who require TIRF medicines while hospitalized.A new patient registry will monitor for accidental exposure, misuse, abuse, addiction, and overdose.Phase 3 Trial Enrollment Begins for Troriluzole for OCDBiohaven has begun enrollment for a phase 3 trial to assess the efficacy and safety of 280 mg troriluzole once per day in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), the company announced in January. The trial will include two double-blind, placebo-controlled studies with approximately 600 patients in each. Troriluzole normalizes synaptic levels of glutamate, a key neurotransmitter implicated in OCD.Biohaven is pressing forward with the phase 3 trial even though troriluzole did not meet its primary endpoint in a previous trial, wherein scores on the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale for patients who took troriluzole were not statistically significantly better than those who took placebo after 12 weeks. In the previous trial, scores in patients who took troriluzole dropped an average of 5.9 points from baseline, compared with 4.9 points in those who took placebo. However, after eight weeks, there was a 1.5-point gap in scores between the troriluzole group and the placebo group.Remote Neuromodulation Device Shows Promise For Adolescent MigraineA study in Headache suggests that Nerivio, a wearable device approved for treating migraine in adults, may also be helpful in treating the condition in adolescents, manufacturer Theranica announced in December. The device, which is worn with an arm band and controlled through an app on the patient’s smartphone, uses remote electrical neuromodulation to activate the body’s natural ability to modulate pain.Researchers evaluated 45 patients aged 12 to 17 with a history of episodic and chronic migraines who completed at least one treatment with Nerivio. Over the course of the 12-week study, the device treated 159 migraine headaches, 49% of which were moderate and 33% of which were severe at baseline. Two hours after treatment, 71% of participants reported pain relief and 35% reported being free of pain, results that were sustained for 24 hours in 90% of cases. At two hours, 69% of patients experienced improved functional ability, which was defined as the ability to do schoolwork and perform “usual activities.” There were no device-related serious adverse events. ■“Remote Electrical Neuromodulation for Acute Treatment of Migraine in Adolescents” is posted here. ISSUES NewArchived

Changes in Erythropoiesis Stimulating Agent Use Under a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Program.

Risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) programs are intended to improve safe use of US Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs. However, controversy exists over whether they consistently accomplish this goal. We aimedto assess how initiation of the erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) darbepoetin alfa and epoetin alfa changed following implementation and enforcement (following a 1-year post-implementation grace period) of a prominent REMS program warning physicians against use in cancer patients with hemoglobin above 10g/dL. Using claims data from a large US commercial insurance company, we conducted interrupted time-series analyses of darbepoetin alfa and epoetin alfa initiation among adult cancer patients in the 12 months before REMS program implementation, after REMS program implementation, and after REMS program enforcement. We also evaluated differences in inappropriate initiation (hemoglobin tests all above 10g/dL in the prior month) between the periods. In total, we identified 3456 darbepoetin alfa initiators and 2632 epoetin alfa initiators. Over the study period, the monthly number of initiators per 100,000 patients with cancer fell from 119 to 32 for darbepoetin alfa and from 82 to 34 for epoetin alfa. However, non-significant post-REMS program implementation level and slope changes per 100,000 adult patients with cancer were observed for darbepoetin alfa (level0.03 [95% confidence interval (CI) -14.98 to 15.05]; slope 1.94 [95% CI -0.22 to 4.10]) and epoetin alfa (level -4.10 [95% CI -16.85 to 8.65]; slope -0.52 [95% CI -2.35 to 1.32]). Non-significant post-REMS program enforcement level and slope changes were also seen for both drugs (darbepoetin alfa level 1.58 [95% CI -0.58 to 3.74,slope -0.28 [95% CI -15.29 to 14.73]; epoetin alfa level 1.58 (95% CI -0.26 to 3.42],slope 5.74 [95% CI -7.01 to 18.49]). Finally, non-significant changes in inappropriate darbepoetin alfa (60% vs. 53% vs. 57%, p = 0.68) and epoetin alfa (53% vs. 53% vs. 46%, p = 0.41) initiation were observed between the three study periods. REMS program implementation and enforcement were not associated with significant changes in ESA initiation, adding to concerns over the degree to which certain REMS programs enhance patient safety.

REMS Patents Should Not be Listed in Orange Book

This submission to the FDA explains why patents covering REMS (Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies, applying to risky drugs) programs should not be listed in the Orange Book (which lists drugs and any relevant patents). First, it explains that these patents are not similar to categories listable in the Orange Book. Second, it demonstrates how the listing of REMS patents in the Orange Book harms competition. Third, it shows how these patents undermine the relevant statute. Fourth, it offers a proposal to implement the recommendation.

Clozapine and hematologic adverse reactions: Impact of the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy program.

IntroductionIn October 2015, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) instituted an update to the mandatory Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program for clozapine to improve safety monitoring of hematologic events. However, the impact of the clozapine REMS program on reporting of hematologic adverse events has not been quantified.MethodsWe assessed adverse event reports for agranulocytosis, granulocytopenia, leukopenia, and neutropenia from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) for a 1-year time period before (October 2014 to September 2015, pre-REMS) and after (October 2015 to September 2016, post-REMS) the implementation of the clozapine REMS program. The AERSMine platform was used to capture historical effect estimates (October 2004 to September 2014). Reporting odds ratios (ROR), proportional reporting ratios (PRR), and corresponding Taylor series 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for hematologic events with clozapine compared with all other medications using OpenEpi.ResultsReporting rates for agranulocytosis, granulocytopenia, leukopenia, and neutropenia with clozapine all increased from the pre-REMS to post-REMS time frames, ranging from a 2-fold increase with leukopenia to a 40-fold increase with neutropenia; the composite measure of all hematologic reports had a 12-fold increase. During the post-REMS time frame, the ROR increased by 1691% (111.4, 95% CI 100.6-123.4) compared with the pre-REMS time frame (7.1, 95% CI 5.2-9.6), and the PRR increased by 1280% (83.1, 95% CI 76.8-90.0 vs 6.9, 95% CI 5.1-9.4) for the composite outcome.DiscussionWe observed significant increases in reports of hematologic adverse events with clozapine after the introduction of the clozapine REMS program. Future research should explore the impact of the less stringent exclusionary and discontinuation criteria on utilization (eg, expanded access) and clinical outcomes (eg, treatment effectiveness and adverse events).