Summary:Purpose: Compulsory generic substitution of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) may lead to adverse effects in epilepsy patients because of seizure recurrence or increased toxicity. The study objectives were (a) to quantify and compare the switchback rates from generic to brand-name AEDs versus nonAEDs, and (b) to assess clinical implications of switching from branded Lamictal to generic lamotrigine (LTG) and whether signals exist suggesting outcome worsening.Methods: By using a public-payer pharmacy-claims database from Ontario, Canada, switchback rates from generic to branded AEDs [Lamictal, Frisium (clobazam; CLB), and Depakene (VPA; divalproex)] were calculated and compared with non-AED long-term therapies, antihyperlipidemics and antidepressants, in January 2002 through March 2006. We then assessed pharmacy utilization and AED dosage among LTG patients switching back to branded Lamictal compared with those staying on generic formulation. Results:The 1,354 patients (403 monotherapy, 951 polytherapy) were prescribed generic LTG, of whom 12.9% switched back to Lamictal (11.7% monotherapy, 13.4% polytherapy). Switchback rates of other AEDs were ∼20% for CLB and VPA. The switchback rates for AEDs were substantially higher than for non-AEDs (1.5-2.9%). Significant increases in LTG doses were observed after generic substitution for those who did not switch back (6.2%; p < 0.0001). The average number of codispensed AEDs and non-AED drugs significantly increased (p < 0.0001) after LTG generic entry, especially in the generic group.Conclusions: These results reflect poor acceptance of switching AEDs to generic compounds. They may also indicate increased toxicity and/or loss of seizure control associated with generic AED use.

Both health-care resource use and costs were reduced after initiation of PPI therapy. Additional reductions from the pre-PPI period were further observed by compliance with PPI therapy.

No abstract

Based on the average cumulative doses, the EPO:DARB dose ratio was 236:1 (Units EPO: mcg DARB) with 52% greater drug cost in the DARB group. Despite the variable administration frequency observed between the two agents, the number of hematology/oncology outpatient visits was not different.

Based on this analysis of claims data from more than 30 US healthcare plans, extended dosing (> or = q2w) of EPO and DARB was common in elderly pCKD patients treated with erythropoietic agents, with significantly higher weekly drug costs observed in the DARB group compared with the EPO group. The number of outpatient nephrologist visits was not significantly different between EPO and DARB patients. This study was the first to evaluate the dosing patterns of EPO and DARB in elderly pCKD patients in a large managed care population.