Abstract Hepatic injury has been documented in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, pharmacotherapy can frequently impact liver alterations, given the known hepatotoxic potential of drugs not effective to treat COVID-19. The objective of the present study was to evaluate reports of suspected liver reactions to drugs used for treating COVID-19, compare their use for other indications among patients with COVID-19, and assess possible interactions between them. We obtained reports on drugs used to treat COVID-19 (tocilizumab, remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, and/or lopinavir/ritonavir), registered on June 30, 2020, from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Public Dashboard. We then analyzed the risk of developing liver events with these drugs by calculating the reported odds ratios (ROR). We identified 662, 744, and 1381 reports related to tocilizumab, lopinavir/ ritonavir, and hydroxychloroquine use, respectively. The RORs (95% confidence intervals) were 6.32 (5.28-7.56), 6.12 (5.22-7.17), and 9.07 (8.00-10.29), respectively, demonstrating an increased risk of liver events among patients with COVID-19 when compared with uninfected patients. The elevated risk of reporting adverse liver events in patients with COVID-19 who receive these drugs, alone or in combination, highlights the need for careful drug selection and efforts to reduce drug combinations without notable benefits. Similar to any other condition, the use of drugs without established efficacy should be avoided.

Abstract Warfarin has been associated with bleeding and venous thromboembolism. Objective: This study aimed to estimate the association between bleeding and concomitant self-medication, and the incidence of adverse drug reactions in patients using warfarin. Setting: the public health network of Ijuí, a municipality in southern Brazil. This was an open prospective cohort, conducted for a period of 18 months with users of warfarin, treated at the public health service. The association between bleeding and self-medication was evaluated by means of the Cox Model with left truncation, using the time variable. Main outcome measurement: bleeding reported in the follow-up. Cases of thromboembolism and death were also registered. All patients treated with warfarin in the public health system of the municipality (98) were identified. Sixty-eight were interviewed and followed up, of whom 63 completed follow-up and five died during the study. Bleeding rates of 37.7 /100 patients/year, thromboembolism of 4.8/100 patients / year and deaths of 4.8 /100 patients / year were observed. The results showed that patients, who take warfarin and self-medicated present a two-fold increased bleeding, compared with those who do not self-medicate. The bleeding risk associated with self-medication ranged from 2.001 to 2.685; those values maintained their significance even when adjusted for number of interactions, CYP polymorphism, TTR and age in COX analysis. These results greatly suggest the need for providing greater assistance to patients who take anticoagulant medications with the purpose of reducing self-medication and consequently, adverse reactions.

Resumo: De acordo com a Agência de Controle de Alimentos e Medicamentos dos Estados Unidos (FDA), a prescrição do remdesivir deve ser feita com cautela em pacientes com taxa de filtração glomerular estimada (TFGe) < 30, sendo que diversos estudos relatam risco de eventos adversos renais. São limitados os dados disponíveis sobre o perfil de segurança renal do remdesivir. Assim, analisamos as reações adversas renais e urinárias atribuídas ao remdesivir e notificadas em um grande base de dados abertos de farmacovigilância. Obtivemos notificações sobre remdesivir e outros medicamentos usados para tratar a COVID-19 (tocilizumabe, hidroxicloroquina, lopinavir/ritonavir) registradas até 30 de setembro de 2020 do Sistema de Notificação de Eventos Adversos da FDA (FAERS). Analisamos as razões de chances de notificação (RORs) para notificações de eventos adversos renais e urinários referentes ao remdesivir e outros medicamentos. Encontramos 2.922 notificações sobre remdesivir registradas no FAERS para COVID-19. Entre esses casos, foram notificados 493 efeitos adversos renais e urinários (16,9%). Os eventos mais frequentes foram lesão renal aguda (338; 11,6%), comprometimento renal (86; 2,9%) e insuficiência renal (53; 1,8%). Comparado com a hidroxicloroquina, lopinavir/ritonavir ou tocilizumabe, o uso do remdesivir esteve associado com um aumento das chances de notificação de transtornos renais e urinários, independentemente do sexo e idade dos pacientes (2,53; IC95%: 2,10-3,06). A ROR permaneceu significativo quando limitamos a análise à hidroxicloroquina (4,31; IC95%: 3,25-5,71) ou ao tocilizumabe (3,92; IC95%: 2,51-6,12). Nossos resultados corroboram outros estudos e destacam a utilidade para profissionais da saúde que usam esse novo antiviral para tratar a COVID-19, sobretudo em função de sua baixa eficácia.

Abstract: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has stated that the prescription of remdesivir should be cautious for patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 30 and some studies reported risk of adverse renal events. The available information on the renal safety profile for remdesivir is limited, thus we analyzed the renal and urinary adverse reactions attributed to remdesivir reported in a large open pharmacovigilance database. We obtained reports of remdesivir and other drugs used to treat COVID-19 (tocilizumab, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir) registered by September 30 2020, from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). We analyzed the reporting odds ratios (RORs) for reports of adverse renal and urinary events for remdesivir and other drugs. We found 2,922 reports with remdesivir registered in FAERS for COVID-19. Among these, 493 renal and urinary adverse effects (16.9%) were reported. The most frequent events were acute kidney injury (338; 11.6%), renal impairment (86; 2.9%), and renal failure (53; 1.8%). Versus hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, or tocilizumab, the use of remdesivir was associated with an increased chance of reporting renal and urinary disorders regardless of gender and age of patients (2.53; 95%CI: 2.10-3.06). The ROR remained significant when we restricted the analysis to hydroxychloroquine (4.31; 95%CI: 3.25-5.71) or tocilizumab (3.92; 95%CI: 2.51-6.12). Our results reinforce this already reported signal, emphasizing that it could be extremely useful for health professionals who prescribe this new antiviral to treat COVID-19, mainly knowing its low efficacy.

Resumen: La Agencia Americana de Control de Alimentos y Medicamentos (FDA) ha destacado que la prescripción de remdesivir debe ser prudente con pacientes con tasa de filtración glomerular estimada (TGFe) < 30; además, algunos estudios informaron del riesgo de reacciones adversas renales. La información disponible sobre el perfil de seguridad renal, en el caso del remdesivir, es limitada. Por ello, analizamos las reacciones adversas renales y urinarias atribuidas al remdesivir e notificadas en una extensa base de datos abierta de farmacovigilancia. Obtuvimos las notificaciones de remdesivir y otros medicamentos usados para tratar la COVID-19 (tocilizumab, hidroxicloroquina, lopinavir/ritonavir) registrados el 30 de septiembre de 2020 por el Sistema de Notificación de Eventos Adversos de la FDA (FAERS). Analizamos las odds ratios informadas (RORs) en el caso de informes de eventos adversos renales y urinarios adversos relacionados con el remdesivir y otros medicamentos. En el FAERS, encontramos 2.922 notificaciones de remdesivir registradas como medicament sospechoso usado en COVID-19. De estos, habían 493 con efectos renales y urinarios adversos (16,9%). Los efectos adversos más frecuentes fueron lesiones renales agudas (338; 11,6%), insuficiencia renal (86; 2,9%), y fallo renal (53; 1,8%). Frente a hidroxicloroquina, lopinavir/ritonavir, o tocilizumab, el uso de remdesivir se asoció con un riesgo mayor de notificar alteraciones renales y urinarios, independientemente del género y edad de los pacientes (2,53; IC95%: 2,10-3,06). La ROR permaneció significativo al restringir el análisis a la hidroxicloroquina (4,31; IC95%: 3,25-5,71) o tocilizumab (3,92; IC95%: 2,51-6,12). Nuestros resultados corroboran datos previos, algo que podría ser extremadamente útil para los profesionales de la salud que decidan usar este nuevo antiviral para tratar la COVID-19, sobre todo conociendo su baja eficacia.

Resumo: De acordo com a Agência de Controle de Alimentos e Medicamentos dos Estados Unidos (FDA), a prescrição do remdesivir deve ser feita com cautela em pacientes com taxa de filtração glomerular estimada (TFGe) < 30, sendo que diversos estudos relatam risco de eventos adversos renais. São limitados os dados disponíveis sobre o perfil de segurança renal do remdesivir. Assim, analisamos as reações adversas renais e urinárias atribuídas ao remdesivir e notificadas em um grande base de dados abertos de farmacovigilância. Obtivemos notificações sobre remdesivir e outros medicamentos usados para tratar a COVID-19 (tocilizumabe, hidroxicloroquina, lopinavir/ritonavir) registradas até 30 de setembro de 2020 do Sistema de Notificação de Eventos Adversos da FDA (FAERS). Analisamos as razões de chances de notificação (RORs) para notificações de eventos adversos renais e urinários referentes ao remdesivir e outros medicamentos. Encontramos 2.922 notificações sobre remdesivir registradas no FAERS para COVID-19. Entre esses casos, foram notificados 493 efeitos adversos renais e urinários (16,9%). Os eventos mais frequentes foram lesão renal aguda (338; 11,6%), comprometimento renal (86; 2,9%) e insuficiência renal (53; 1,8%). Comparado com a hidroxicloroquina, lopinavir/ritonavir ou tocilizumabe, o uso do remdesivir esteve associado com um aumento das chances de notificação de transtornos renais e urinários, independentemente do sexo e idade dos pacientes (2,53; IC95%: 2,10-3,06). A ROR permaneceu significativo quando limitamos a análise à hidroxicloroquina (4,31; IC95%: 3,25-5,71) ou ao tocilizumabe (3,92; IC95%: 2,51-6,12). Nossos resultados corroboram outros estudos e destacam a utilidade para profissionais da saúde que usam esse novo antiviral para tratar a COVID-19, sobretudo em função de sua baixa eficácia.

Abstract: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has stated that the prescription of remdesivir should be cautious for patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 30 and some studies reported risk of adverse renal events. The available information on the renal safety profile for remdesivir is limited, thus we analyzed the renal and urinary adverse reactions attributed to remdesivir reported in a large open pharmacovigilance database. We obtained reports of remdesivir and other drugs used to treat COVID-19 (tocilizumab, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir) registered by September 30 2020, from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). We analyzed the reporting odds ratios (RORs) for reports of adverse renal and urinary events for remdesivir and other drugs. We found 2,922 reports with remdesivir registered in FAERS for COVID-19. Among these, 493 renal and urinary adverse effects (16.9%) were reported. The most frequent events were acute kidney injury (338; 11.6%), renal impairment (86; 2.9%), and renal failure (53; 1.8%). Versus hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, or tocilizumab, the use of remdesivir was associated with an increased chance of reporting renal and urinary disorders regardless of gender and age of patients (2.53; 95%CI: 2.10-3.06). The ROR remained significant when we restricted the analysis to hydroxychloroquine (4.31; 95%CI: 3.25-5.71) or tocilizumab (3.92; 95%CI: 2.51-6.12). Our results reinforce this already reported signal, emphasizing that it could be extremely useful for health professionals who prescribe this new antiviral to treat COVID-19, mainly knowing its low efficacy.

Resumen: La Agencia Americana de Control de Alimentos y Medicamentos (FDA) ha destacado que la prescripción de remdesivir debe ser prudente con pacientes con tasa de filtración glomerular estimada (TGFe) < 30; además, algunos estudios informaron del riesgo de reacciones adversas renales. La información disponible sobre el perfil de seguridad renal, en el caso del remdesivir, es limitada. Por ello, analizamos las reacciones adversas renales y urinarias atribuidas al remdesivir e notificadas en una extensa base de datos abierta de farmacovigilancia. Obtuvimos las notificaciones de remdesivir y otros medicamentos usados para tratar la COVID-19 (tocilizumab, hidroxicloroquina, lopinavir/ritonavir) registrados el 30 de septiembre de 2020 por el Sistema de Notificación de Eventos Adversos de la FDA (FAERS). Analizamos las odds ratios informadas (RORs) en el caso de informes de eventos adversos renales y urinarios adversos relacionados con el remdesivir y otros medicamentos. En el FAERS, encontramos 2.922 notificaciones de remdesivir registradas como medicament sospechoso usado en COVID-19. De estos, habían 493 con efectos renales y urinarios adversos (16,9%). Los efectos adversos más frecuentes fueron lesiones renales agudas (338; 11,6%), insuficiencia renal (86; 2,9%), y fallo renal (53; 1,8%). Frente a hidroxicloroquina, lopinavir/ritonavir, o tocilizumab, el uso de remdesivir se asoció con un riesgo mayor de notificar alteraciones renales y urinarios, independientemente del género y edad de los pacientes (2,53; IC95%: 2,10-3,06). La ROR permaneció significativo al restringir el análisis a la hidroxicloroquina (4,31; IC95%: 3,25-5,71) o tocilizumab (3,92; IC95%: 2,51-6,12). Nuestros resultados corroboran datos previos, algo que podría ser extremadamente útil para los profesionales de la salud que decidan usar este nuevo antiviral para tratar la COVID-19, sobre todo conociendo su baja eficacia.

Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and validate a stepwise tool to aid primary health care professionals in the process of deprescribing potentially inappropriate medication in older persons. Methods: We carried out a systematic review to identify previously published tools. A composite proposal of algorithm was made by following the steps from clinical experience to deprescribe medications. A 2-round electronic Delphi method was conducted to establish consensus. Eighteen experts from different countries (Colombia, Spain and Argentina) accepted to be part of the panel representing geriatricians, internists, endocrinologist, general practitioners, pharmacologists, clinical pharmacists, family physicians and nurses. Panel members were asked to mark a Likert Scale from 1 to 9 points (1= strongly disagree, 9= strongly agree). The content validity ratio, item-level content validity, and Fleiss’ Kappa statistics was measured to establish reliability. The same voting method was used for round 2. Results: A 7-question algorithm was proposed. Each question was part of a domain and conduct into a decision. In round 1, a consensus was not reached but statements were grouped and organized. In round 2, the tool met consensus. The inter-rater reliability was between substantial and almost perfect for questions with Kappa=0.77 (95% CI 0.60-0.93), for domains with Kappa= 0.73 (95%CI 0.60-0.86) and for decisions with Kappa= 0.97 (95%CI 0.90-1.00). Conclusions: This is a novel tool that captures and supports healthcare professionals in clinical decision-making for deprescribing potentially inappropriate medication. This includes patient's and caregiver's preferences about medication. This tool will help to standardize care and provide guidance on the prescribing/deprescribing process of older persons’ medications. Also, it provides a holistic way to reduce polypharmacy and inappropriate medications in clinical practice.

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of daptomycin therapy and adherence to treatment recommendations, a retrospective cohort study was conducted with patients that received daptomycin during the period of the study. The adherence and nonadherence to clinical guidelines were assessed through organism identification, dose and time of treatment, management of bacteremia, and vancomycin treatment failure. A multiple logistic regression model analyzed the association between independent variables and clinical success (dependent variable), considering 5% of statistical significance. The study presented 52 patients who received daptomycin for the treatment of bacteremia (21.1%) or infections (osteomyelitis [63.5%], synovial fluid [15.4%]). Most patients (86.5%) received daptomycin as the second line of treatment, and 51.9% achieved clinical success. The patients had a better chance of clinical success when they followed the guideline indications (OR = 16.86; 95% CI = 1.45-195.88) and the medication was prescribed by a specialist in infectious diseases (OR = 4.84; 95% CI = 1.11-21.09). The study demonstrated lower clinical success than that described in the literature because of patients who were not eligible according to the clinical guidelines. Adherence to recommendations and appropriate prescription of reserve antibiotics is important in limiting early resistance, and avoiding clinical failure and unnecessary expenditure.

O objetivo deste trabalho foi analisar o nível de evidências sobre a eficácia, a efetividade e a segurança dos medicamentos para tosse registrados no Brasil. A base de dados da Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária foi empregada para identificar os medicamentos. Os ensaios clínicos, as revisões sistemáticas, as metanálises e os estudos de segurança foram pesquisados no Medline, the Cochrane Library e SIETES (Sistema de Informações Essenciais em Terapêutica e Saúde, base de dados em espanhol). A maioria dos medicamentos (62,5%) eram comercializados como associação em dose fixa com dois ou mais fármacos. Ensaios clínicos randomizados foram encontrados apenas para três fármacos: bromexina, dextrometorfano e guaifenesina; para associações a dose fixa não foram encontrados ensaios clínicos. Revisões sistemáticas publicadas pela Cochrane não encontraram evidências favoráveis ou contrárias à efetividade dos medicamentos para tosse. Essa eficácia não é clara, especialmente a das associações a dose fixa. As evidências sobre a eficácia dos medicamentos para tosse isentos de prescrição disponíveis no mercado brasileiro são fracas, devido à falta de pesquisas de boa qualidade. A farmacovigilância de medicamentos para tosse isentos de prescrição deve ser incentivada.

The objective of this study was to analyze the level of evidence regarding the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of over-the-counter (OTC) cough medications registered in Brazil. The National Health Surveillance Agency database was used to identify the drugs. Clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and studies on safety were searched on the Medline baseline, the Cochrane Library and SIETES (System of Essential Information in Therapeutics and Health; database in Spanish). Most drugs (62.5%) were sold as a fixed-dose combination of two or more drugs. Randomized clinical trials were found for only three drugs: bromhexine, dextromethorphan and guaifenesin. No clinical trials were found for fixed-dose combinations. Systematic reviews on Cochrane did not report any evidence in favor of or against the effectiveness of cough drugs. Efficacy is also unclear, especially regarding fixed-dose combinations. The evidence for the efficacy of OTC cough medications available in Brazil is poor due to the lack of quality studies. Pharmacovigilance of OTC cough medications should be encouraged.

Objectives. The primary was to assess the frequency of therapeutic non-compliance due to ADRs in a cohort of patients with recently diagnosed systemic hypertension. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the blood pressure control during the follow-up in the whole cohort and in patients who received non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Methods. A cohort of 73 recently diagnosed ambulatory hypertensive patients was followed-up for 6 months. Validated questionnaires for identification of therapeutic scheme changes and ADRs were applied monthly, during each medical visit. Results. Family physicians selected monotherapy in 79% of patients. The frequency of therapeutic non-compliance was 44%; non-compliance secondary to ADR was 7%. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure at the beginning of the study were 140 ± 15/90 ± 15 mm Hg for the whole cohort. At the end of the study the figures were 130 ± 11/85 ± 6 (p < 0.001). Patients receiving non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) had higher blood pressure levels than the groups of patients not receiving such kind of drugs (134 ± 10 vs. 128 ± 8 mm Hg, p = 0.025 and 88 ± 7 vs. 83 ± 5 mm Hg, p = 0.05). Conclusions. The drugs used in the present study as monotherapy are considered acceptable choices for hypertension treatment. The frequency of therapeutic non-compliance was within the limits reported in the literature and the frequency of therapeutic non-compliance secondary to ADRs in this cohort was lower than that reported in the literature. Higher blood pressure was found in the group of patients receiving NSAIDs.

Objetivos. El objetivo primario fue evaluar la frecuencia de falta de cumplimiento terapéutico debido a la presencia de reacciones adversas a medicamentos (RAMs) con el uso de antihipertensivos; los objetivos secundarios fueron evaluar el control de la presión arterial durante el seguimiento y en aquellos pacientes que recibieron fármacos antiinflamatorios no esteroideos. Métodos. Se integró una cohorte de 73 pacientes hipertensos de reciente diagnóstico, a los que se les vigiló durante seis meses. En cada visita médica mensual se les aplicaron cuestionarios validados, para identificar cambios en el esquema terapéutico y RAMs. Resultados. Los médicos familiares emplearon monoterapia en 79% de los pacientes. La falta de cumplimiento terapéutico se presentó en 44%; el incumplimiento terapéutico secundario a RAMs se observó en 7% de los casos. En todos los pacientes la presión arterial sistólica y diastólica al inicio del estudio fue 140 ± 15/90 ± 15 mm Hg y al final del estudio las cifras fueron 130 ± 11 / 85 ± 6 (p < 0.001). Los pacientes que recibieron fármacos antiinflamatorios no esteroideos (AINEs) tuvieron cifras de presión arterial más elevadas que pacientes que no recibieron este tipo de fármacos (134 ± 10 vs. 128 ± 8, p = 0.025 y 88 ±7 vs. 83 ± 5 mm Hg, p - 0.05). Conclusiones. Los fármacos empleados en este estudio como monoterapia son fármacos aceptados para el tratamiento de la hipertensión. La frecuencia de falta de cumplimiento terapéutico se ubicó dentro de los límites descritos en la literatura y la falta de cumplimiento terapéutico secundario a RAMs fue menor que lo informado en la literatura. Se observaron cifras de presión arterial elevadas en pacientes que recibieron AINEs.