ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2019
Use of non-formulary high-cost medicines in an Australian public hospital.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating physicians' views on non-formulary prescribing: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Article
- The use of special approval medicines among pediatric patients in a tertiary care hospital: A reality check.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2022Article
- HTA decision-making for drugs for rare diseases: comparison of processes across countries.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Review
- The extent to which off-patent registered prescription medicines are used for off-label indications in Australia: A scoping review.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Clinicians prescribe high-cost medicines for rare diseases and nonapproved indications when conventional therapies have failed. Objective To examine the use of non-formulary high-cost medicines at an Australian public hospital. Methods Retrospective audit of individual patient use applications for nonformulary medicines costing more than $5000 AUD per year at a large tertiary referral hospital in Adelaide, South Australia over a 12-month study period from January 2015 to December 2015. Main outcome measures Total cost of non-formulary high-cost medicines, medication class, indications for use, level of supporting evidence and proposed monitoring outcomes. Results Eighty-seven individual patient use applications were examined. All except one were approved, at a total cost of $1,339,203 AUD. The most common drug classes were anti-CD20 (n = 33, 38%), combined antiretrovirals (n = 10, 11%) and TNF-alpha antagonists (n = 10, 11%). There were 56 indications for these medicines with the majority being inflammatory conditions (n = 52, 60%), followed by infections (n = 14, 16%) and malignancies (n = 14, 16%). Of the first-time individual patient use applications (n = 63), there were 25 applications (40%) that provided a case series as supporting evidence. Approximately half of new individual patient use applications (n = 32) proposed an objective monitoring outcome, but few (n = 13, 21%) contained sufficient information to allow a third party to determine efficacy of the medication. Conclusions Non-formulary high-cost medicines are being used for a broad range of indications based largely on low levels of evidence. Prospective definition of an adequate response to treatment and reporting of these outcomes is required to improve the evidence-base and to aid decision-making for subsequent treatment courses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31161497What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.