Unlicensed Drug Prescriptions Research Articles

Off-label and unlicensed drug use in a Spanish Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

ObjetiveTo describe off-label and unlicensed drugs in clinical practice in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). MethodThe design of the study was a descriptive and retrospective three months research in a NICU of a Spanish University Hospital. All prescriptions were classified as approved, off-label and unlicensed drug used, according to the information available on the Summary of Product Characteristics. Off-label drugs prescriptions were divided into four groups (dose, frecuency, age and indication of use) depending on the reason of disconformity. ResultsForty-one neonates were included (46.3% premature patients) and a total of 273 drug prescriptions were evaluated. Of them, 53.1% (145) were classified as an approved drug prescriptions, 41.4% (113) were off-label use and 5.5% (15) were unlicensed drugs. 90.2% of the patients (37/41) received at least one off label prescription, with a median of 3 (range 1-7). Age was the foremost reason for off-label use (42.5%), followed by dose (31.0%), frecuency (16.8%) and dose-frecuency off-label drug use (8.8%). The last place was reserved for off-label drug use by indication (0.9%). Group J (corresponding with antiinfectives for systemic use) was the most frecuently prescribed, with ampicillin (18.6%) and gentamicin (16.8%) as the drugs most commonly use as off-label prescriptions. Finally, caffeine citrate was the unlicensed drug most frecuently prescribed. ConclusionsOff-label and unlicensed drug use prescriptions in our NICU clinical practice are highly frecuent as other authors have previously published in other countries where they were studied. Although there are few studies in newborn patients, both off-label and unlicensed drug prescriptions are commonly recomended in Paediatrics Guidelines.

Extent, reasons and consequences of off-labeled and unlicensed drug prescription in hospitalized children: a narrative review.

Off-label and unlicensed prescriptions pose a severe safety concern among the pediatric population. We aimed to summarize the up-to-date evidence on the extent, reasons, and consequences of off-label and unlicensed drugs in hospitalized pediatric patients. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Google Scholar between 1990 and 2020 in which the last search was conducted on 12 February 2021. We included studies with the following inclusion criteria: (1) observational studies in design; (2) target population was hospitalized pediatric patients whether admitted in the intensive care unit or in the general ward; (3) study reporting the prevalence of off-label, unlicensed prescriptions or both; and (4) published in English. A total of 47 studies were eligible for inclusion. The proportion of off-label and unlicensed prescriptions ranged from 7.4% to 99.5% and 0.1% to 74.4%, respectively. The most frequent category of off-label prescriptions was prescription outside the age range, with the most commonly reported reason for off-label prescriptions being the lack of information specifically for pediatrics on the drug information leaflets. The consequences of off-label and unlicensed prescriptions ranged from minor and bearable skin reactions to debilitating renal failure, risking deaths. Off-label and unlicensed prescriptions are extensive and require progressively meditative interventions. However, the pediatric population is currently a "therapeutic orphan". Unless adequate pediatric clinical trials and licensed drugs become available, off-label and unlicensed drug prescription should not entirely be banned but rather promoted in an organized manner.

Comparative assessment of off-label and unlicensed drug prescription in neonatal intensive care: FDA versus Brazilian guidelines

IntroductionRegulatory agencies are responsible for defining the use of off-label (OL) and unlicensed (UL) drug prescription in neonatal intensive care. However, these regulatory criteria may differ between agencies in different countries. The aim of this study was to establish the frequency of OL and UL drug prescription in a sample of patients in a neonatal intensive care unit applying the criteria of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the United States and the Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA) of Brazil, analysing the differences observed in the results based on the applied criteria. MethodsProspective cohort study in neonates admitted for more than 24h to the NICU of a teaching maternity hospital between August 2017 and July 2018. We obtained information concerning the drugs included in the analysis of OL and UL prescriptions from the DrugDex-Micromedex® and official information on pharmaceutical products in Brazil. We used the kappa correlation coefficient to assess the agreement between the FDA and ANVISA criteria. We defined disagreement as a kappa value of less than 0.200. ResultsWe evaluated 220 neonates admitted to the NICU and 17,421 items prescribed during the study period. We did not find a difference in the proportion of neonates in which at least 1 drug was prescribed under OL conditions applying the FDA versus the ANVISA criteria (96.4% vs. 98.6%). We found differences between the FDA and ANVISA in the OL classification based on the authorized age of use and indications for prescription, mainly in systemic antimicrobials and cardiovascular drugs. When we compared the prescribing information provided by the FDA and the ANVISA, we found that the criteria of the ANVISA were less specific. ConclusionOff-label and unlicensed drug prescription are frequent in neonatal intensive care applying the criteria of either agency, although the FDA has established more detailed criteria in terms of the ages and indications for which prescription is authorized.

Comparative Assessment of Off-label and Unlicensed Drug Prescriptions in Children: FDA Versus ANSM Guidelines

PurposeThe main objectives of this study were to assess the incidence of off-label (OL) and/or unlicensed (UL) prescriptions in a sample of pediatric Lebanese patients by using US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the French Medical Regulatory Authority (ANSM) regulations. The goal was to analyze the divergences between regulations and to identify those drugs most commonly involved in OL-UL utilization. MethodsThis study was a retrospective analysis (500 pediatric files) conducted in a Lebanese University hospital in 3 pediatric wards (chronic diseases, acute diseases, and the pediatric intensive care unit). FindingsThe frequency of OL-UL drug use was significantly different between pediatric wards (P < 0.001), with the highest incidence occurring in the intensive care unit. The most frequent OL-UL prescriptions occurred with cancer (oncology) admissions. Age was significantly related to OL-UL frequency (highest incidence in children aged between 0 and 1 year). The number of drugs prescribed per patient ranged between 1 and 20 (mean [SD], 4.13 [2.6]). The incidence of OL-UL prescriptions was significantly higher in patients treated with a greater number of medicines (P < 0.001). Overall, 58.9% of drug prescriptions were authorized according to ANSM and 50.7% according to FDA regulations; 11.1% (ANSM) and 15.8% (FDA) were UL, and 30.2% (ANSM) and 33.5% (FDA), respectively, were OL use (where OL for the indication were the most common). The highest percentage of OL-UL prescriptions was seen with the following groups: blood and blood-forming organs, genitourinary system, and sex hormones. Divergence between FDA and ANSM was mainly observed for OL medicines. UL prescriptions assessed according to both regulations showed similar results. ImplicationsThis study highlights the need for prescribers to continuously examine updates to official regulations to avoid using an OL-UL drug whenever possible. It also calls for better harmonization between worldwide official guidelines concerning drugs used in children to reduce risk factors for adverse drug reactions.

소아청소년정신과에서의 허가 초과 및 비승인 약물 처방

The purpose of licensing system is to ensure that the medicines are examined for safety, efficacy and quality. Nevertheless, off-label or unlicensed drug usages in pediatric practice is widespread in Korea and worldwide. Psychotropics are one of the most commonly used off-label or unlicensed drugs. The most valid approach to face this dilemma will be to have more evidences from pediatric pharmacological studies. Clinicians, in addition, need to monitor closely their off-label or unlicensed drug prescriptions to minimize the trial and error in practice. Researchers should publish their experiences and provide guidelines. Pharmaceutical companies, regulatory authorities, and consumer organizations should endeavor altogether for the children's right to get safe and efficacious drugs as adults do. Here, the definition as well as the current status of off-label and unlicensed drug prescriptions will be introduced. Critical issues regarding the off label drugs are discussed. In addition, I will describe the present condition as to the off-label and unlicensed drugs in child and adolescent psychiatry and the authorization process of off-label drug prescription in Korea. Lastly, direction we should like to take in this field will be mentioned.

Unlicensed and off-label use of medicines at a neonatology clinic in Italy

Many drugs used for children are not licensed or are used off-label. An increased risk of medication errors and unexpected adverse drug reactions (ADR) associated with off-label and unlicensed drug prescription has been reported. This risk increases in the newborn, who are more likely to be predisposed to an ADR due to their physiological immaturity. The objective of this study was to describe the use of unlicensed or off-label drugs in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). All drugs prescribed to newborn admitted to the Neonatology Unit of Bari University Hospital, from July 1st to August 31st in 2004 were recorded. All the drugs prescribed were analysed with regard to their license status, then the licensed drugs were compared to the indications, dose, route of administration, duration of treatment, contraindications and warnings specified in the summary of product characteristics of the marketing authorization. Data were collected on 176 prescriptions for 61 different drugs given to 34 newborns. Drugs were licensed in 88% and unlicensed in 12% of cases. About the licensed drugs, in 37.5% medicines were used following the terms of the marketing authorization, in 22.7% of cases medicines were used in an off-label manner as they contained no information for paediatric use in the marketing authorization and in 27.8% of cases medicines were licensed for paediatric use, but they were used off-label with regard to age, dose, route of administration and duration of treatment. Despite European and American initiatives aiming to promote greater awareness and research in the paediatric population, these data demonstrate that there is still a high percentage of unlicensed or off-label drugs use in neonatology, underlining the need to stimulate scientific data collection by means of experimental studies or outcome research.

Off label and unlicensed drugs use in paediatric cardiology

The use of drugs in an off label or unlicensed manner to treat children is a widespread phenomenon in Europe and the United States. The incidence of unlicensed and off label prescribing in paediatric cardiology practice has not been studied to date. This study was designed to assess the extent and nature of off label and unlicensed drug use in paediatric cardiology inpatients. In a prospective study, drug prescriptions in a paediatric cardiology ward were reviewed during a 2-year period. Data were collected and analyzed by special software created for this purpose. The children (n = 544) studied varied in age from 4 h to 18 years. One or more off label and unlicensed prescriptions were given to 414 (76%) patients. Of the 2,130 prescriptions given during the 2-year period, more than one-half were unlicensed (11%) or off label (47%). While children aged 2-11 years received most of the unlicensed drug prescriptions (17%), neonates, who did not receive unlicensed drugs, led (64%) in the use of off label drugs. CONCLUSIONS. This study showed that the problem of off label and unlicensed drug use also exists in paediatric cardiology. The findings imply that the phenomenon of off label and unlicensed use of drugs in children can be correlated with the deficiency of paediatric drug formulations on the global market and insufficient data from clinical studies which must be performed to confirm the efficacy and safety of drugs in the paediatric population. Therefore, efforts to improve paediatric labelling are important and need the full support of all involved.

Unlicensed and off-label drug use in children: implications for safety.

A significant number of children receive either an unlicensed or an off-label drug during their stay in hospital. Studies throughout Europe have shown that at least one-third of children in hospital and up to 90% of neonates in a neonatal intensive care unit receive such drug prescriptions. The medicines that are most frequently used off-label include analgesics, antibiotics and bronchodilators. The purpose of licensing a drug is to ensure safety, efficacy and quality. If a drug is used in a different manner, one would expect a greater risk of toxicity. Only three studies have commented on the risk of toxicity in relation to unlicensed or off-label drug use. Only one of these three studies prospectively tried to evaluate the risk associated with off-label and unlicensed drug prescription. This study suggested that the percentage of unlicensed and off-label drug use was significantly associated with the risk of an adverse drug reaction. Two studies looking at adverse drug reactions suggest that there is a greater risk of a severe adverse drug reaction occurring in association with the off-label or unlicensed use of drugs. One study found that five out of eight severe adverse drug reactions were associated with the off-label use of a medicine. The other study found that 14 of 19 drug prescriptions associated with 17 severe adverse drug reactions were either unlicensed or off-label. The risk of prescribing off-label and unlicensed drugs in children is not clear from the limited data available.