AIM OF THE STUDY: To establish the relationship between CYP2C19 genotype, clopidogrel responsiveness and 1-year MACE.
MATERIALS & METHODS: Aspirin/clopidogrel responses were assessed with Multiplate Analyzer and CYP2C19*2 allele by SpartanRx.
RESULTS: A total of 42.0% carried ≥1 CYP2C19*2 allele. Prevalences of aspirin and clopidogrel high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR; local cutoffs: 300 AU*min for aspirin and 600 AU*min for clopidogrel) were 11.5% and 19.8% respectively. In multivariate ana-lysis, clopidogrel HPR was found to be an independent predictor for 1-year MACE (adj HR: 3.48, p = 0.022 ).
CONCLUSION: Having clopidogrel HPR could be a potentially modifiable risk factor guided by phenotyping.
METHODS: This is a nationwide retrospective audit on the documentation of Dabigatran Prescribing and Dispensing Checklist for a period of two years from January 2013 till December 2014. Data from these Dabigatran Checklists (indication, dose, duration, renal function and adverse drug reactions encountered) were extracted by the pharmacist at MOH healthcare facilities.
RESULTS: A total of 52 out of 56 (92.9%) of MOH facilities complied to usage of checklist at their centres involving a total of 582 patients of which 569 (97.7%) patients were initiated on dabigatran for the approved indications. The recommended dose of dabigatran was used correctly in 501 (99.6%) of patients. Reason for switching to DOACs use was only documented in 76.7% (131/171) of patients. The most common reason for switching from warfarin was poor INR control (n=39), history of bleeding/overwarfarinisation (n=22) and unable to attend regular INR clinic (n=21). There were 75 cases of adverse events reported. The most common adverse event reported were abdominal discomfort (n=10) followed by gum bleeding (n=9) and dizziness (n=5).
CONCLUSIONS: Compliance to the dabigatran check list was high with 70% of patients prescribed the appropriate dosing.
SUMMARY: A 29-year-old woman undergoing contrast-enhanced computed tomography developed lesions over her trunk starting 6 hours after imaging. Although initially diagnosed as an allergy to the radiocontrast agent, the condition progressively worsened into toxic epidermal necrolysis-drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms overlap syndrome, despite adequate hydration and treatment. Investigation of the patient's medications revealed that she had been switched from brand-name to generic levetiracetam a week before the onset of symptoms. Levetiracetam was immediately discontinued, with the patient recovering after 2 weeks of intensive care. Adverse drug reaction analysis identified excipients in generic levetiracetam as the likely cause of the severe reaction.
CONCLUSION: This is the first reported case of severe cutaneous drug allergy after a brand-to-generic switch for levetiracetam. Brand-to-generic switches of medications can potentially cause severe allergic reactions due to differences in excipients.
METHODS: A prospective multicentre cohort study was conducted on paediatric general medical wards in five European and non-European hospitals. ADRs were identified by intensive chart review. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate risk factors associated with ADRs. For the risk factor analysis, prescribed drugs were divided into high-risk and low-risk drug groups. Analgesics, anti-epileptics, antibacterials and antimycotics for systemic use, corticosteroids for systemic use and immunosuppressant agents were considered as high-risk groups whereas the remaining drug classes were defined as low-risk drug groups.
RESULTS: A total of 1,253 paediatric patients were identified [Australia (n = 145), Germany (n = 372), Hong Kong (n = 138), Malaysia (n = 291), UK (n = 307)]. A total of 328 ADRs were observed in 16.7% of patients (186/1,115). Use of five or more low-risk drugs per patient or three or more high-risk drugs was a strong predictor for ADRs (OR 4.7, 95% CI 2.4-9.3; OR 6.5, 95% CI 2.7-16.0 respectively; p < 0.001). Older children were more likely to experience ADRs; gender was not significantly associated.
CONCLUSION: To reduce the risk of ADRs in children, clinicians and pharmacists should aim to minimise polypharmacy and be aware of higher ADR risks associated with some drug groups.
Methods: This study analyzed all suspected ADEs related to favipiravir reported from 2015. The reports were analyzed based on age, gender, and seriousness of ADEs at the System Organ Classification (SOC) level and the individual Preferred Term (PT) level.
Results: This study is based on 194 ADEs reported from 93 patients. Most frequent ADEs suspected to be caused by the favipiravir included increased hepatic enzymes, nausea and vomiting, tachycardia, and diarrhea. Severe and fatal ADEs occurred more frequently in men and those over the age of 64 years. Blood and lymphatic disorders, cardiac disorders, hepatobiliary disorders, injury poisoning, and procedural complications were more common manifestations of severe ADEs.
Conclusion: This study revealed that favipiravir appears to be a relatively safe drug. An undiscovered anti-inflammatory activity of favipiravir may explain the improvement in critically ill patients and reduce inflammatory markers. Currently, the data is based on very few patients. A more detailed assessment of the uncommon ADEs needs to be analyzed when more information will be available.