Association of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy Program With Transmucosal Fentanyl Prescribing.


Journal

JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 03 2019
Historique:
entrez: 30 3 2019
pubmed: 30 3 2019
medline: 26 11 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Transmucosal immediate-release fentanyl (TIRF) drugs are potent, rapid-acting opioids approved to treat breakthrough pain in patients with cancer who are tolerant to other around-the-clock opioid analgesics. In March 2012, a US Food and Drug Administration-approved Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) was implemented, mandating prescribers, distributors, pharmacies, and patients to enroll in the REMS to prescribe, dispense, or receive TIRF drugs. To evaluate the association of the TIRF-REMS Access Program with TIRF prescribing. Cohort study using an interrupted time series analysis of TIRF prescriptions to Medicare Part D beneficiaries nationwide from 2010 to 2014. Data were analyzed from August 2017 through July 2018. Prescribing of TIRF per 100 000 Medicare Part D beneficiaries, overall and stratified by cancer status; percentage of TIRF prescriptions for patients without cancer, overall and by brand; and percentage of TIRF prescriptions for patients without known opioid tolerance, defined as patients prescribed at least 60 morphine milligram equivalents per day, overall and by brand. There were 99 601 TIRF prescriptions written by 8619 clinicians to 10 472 patients. Most of the patients (79%) were younger than 65 years (mean [SD] age, 56 [13] years), and most (67%) did not have cancer. Implementation of TIRF-REMS was associated with a 26.7% relative level decrease in TIRF prescribing (95% CI, -33.3% to -19.4%; P < .001) but was followed by 2.0% monthly increases in prescribing (95% CI, 1.3% to 2.7%; P < .001). Sensitivity analyses that accounted for overall opioid prescribing trends were consistent with these findings. Furthermore, there were no significant changes associated with REMS implementation in the level (0.47%; 95% CI, -5.36% to 4.69%; P = .85) or trend (0.16%; 95% CI, -0.06% to 0.37%; P = .15) of the percentage of prescriptions for patients without cancer. However, a sensitivity analysis that used a broader cancer definition found implementation was associated with a 7.2% (95% CI, -13.5% to -0.48%; P = .04) level decrease in the percentage of TIRF prescriptions for patients without cancer. Lastly, the TIRF-REMS was associated with a 22.5% level decline in the percentage of TIRF prescriptions for patients without known opioid tolerance (95% CI, -36.1% to -5.95%; P = .01) followed by 1.98% monthly decreases (95% CI, -3.19% to -0.80%; P = .001). Implementation of the TIRF-REMS Access Program, a restrictive drug distribution program, was associated with a temporary reduction in the rate of TIRF prescribing to Medicare Part D beneficiaries, and with a sustained decrease in the percentage of TIRF prescriptions for patients without known opioid tolerance. Implementation may have also been associated with a temporary decrease in the percentage of TIRF prescriptions for patients without cancer.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30924899
pii: 2729477
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.1340
pmc: PMC6450314
doi:

Substances chimiques

Analgesics, Opioid 0
Fentanyl UF599785JZ

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e191340

Références

Health Care Financ Rev. 2004 Summer;25(4):119-41
pubmed: 15493448
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017 Dec;28(12):3658-3670
pubmed: 28935654
Annu Rev Public Health. 2015 Mar 18;36:559-74
pubmed: 25581144
J Clin Pharm Ther. 2002 Aug;27(4):299-309
pubmed: 12174032
Med Care. 2014 Sep;52(9):852-9
pubmed: 25119955
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Jan 1;177(1):44-50
pubmed: 27842169
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017 Jul 07;66(26):697-704
pubmed: 28683056
Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2018 Jul;67(5):1-76
pubmed: 30248015
Ann Emerg Med. 2017 Dec;70(6):799-808.e1
pubmed: 28549620
Int J Epidemiol. 2017 Feb 1;46(1):348-355
pubmed: 27283160

Auteurs

William Fleischman (W)

Department of Patient Safety & Quality, Hackensack Meridian Health, Edison, New Jersey.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Baltimore, Maryland.

Doris Auth (D)

US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland.

Nilay D Shah (ND)

Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.

Shantanu Agrawal (S)

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Baltimore, Maryland.
National Quality Forum, Washington, DC.

Joseph S Ross (JS)

Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut.
Department of Health Policy and Management, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut.
Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH