MEMORANDUM
|
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH |
DATE:
TO: Paul Seligman,
M.D., M.P.H., Acting Director
Anne
Trontell, M.D., M.P.H., Deputy Director
Office of Drug Safety
Immediate Office, HFD-400
FROM: Mark Avigan, M.D., C.M., Director
Division
of Drug Risk Evaluation, HFD-430
Gerald
DalPan, M.D., M.H.S., Director
Division
of Surveillance, Research, and Communication Support, HFD-410
Office
of Drug Safety
SUBJECT: Overview of the First Year
Evaluation of the Isotretinoin Risk Management Program
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
The
Divisions of Drug Risk Evaluation (DDRE) and Surveillance, Research, and
Communication Support (DSRCS) in the Office of Drug Safety have prepared a set
of reviews for assessing the enhanced Isotretinoin Risk Management Program
(RMP) to prevent fetal exposure to isotretinoin following the first year of its
implementation. The Isotretinoin RMP was initiated by Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc.
with a transition period in January 2002 and became mandatory on
This
group of evaluations of the first year of the Isotretinoin RMP includes (as
below) analyses of spontaneous reports of pregnancy exposures, isotretinoin
utilization during the year prior to and the year following the implementation
of the RMP, as well as analyses of the Prescription Compliance Survey (PCS) and
the Isotretinoin Patient Surveys, the two primary sources of assessing the
RMP’s tools.
Pregnancy Exposures
Despite
a modest reduction in isotretinoin prescriptions in the first year following
implementation of the RMP, we identified similar numbers of pregnancy exposures
during the Pre-RMP year and during the year following the implementation of the
RMP (127 and 120 cases for Pre-RMP and Post-RMP periods, respectively).
Pregnancies occurred throughout isotretinoin treatment for both Pre-RMP and
Post-RMP periods with slightly more pregnancies occurring during the first
month of therapy. Although, the number of women who were already pregnant prior
to initiating therapy with isotretinon decreased slightly during the Post-RMP
period relative to the Pre-RMP period, there has been no improvement in
baseline pregnancy testing, pregnancy testing during (monthly) isotretinoin
therapy, or birth control methods among patients who became pregnant during the
Pre-RMP period versus the Post-RMP period.
Despite
the implementation of the Isotretinoin RMP, the actual reason that the
pregnancies occurred often could not be delineated from the cases in the
series. Nonetheless, some common themes were identified and could account for
the pregnancy exposures. One of these entails compliance (or non-compliance)
with labeled birth control recommendations. Many pregnancy cases reported
either no contraceptive use, use of only one method of contraception, or
non-compliance with the chosen method of birth control. We also found that
labeled recommendations for baseline pregnancy testing among patients who were
pregnant prior to starting isotretinoin, were not followed. Only about 10%
reported a baseline pregnancy test during the last menstrual period (LMP) and
none started isotretinoin within two weeks of their LMP. Although the label
does not instruct to start within a specified period of time around the LMP, it
does state that the baseline pregnancy test should be conducted during the
first five days of menses immediately preceding isotretinoin therapy, and that
the prescription for isotretinoin should be dispensed within 7 days of the
“qualification date” or confirmatory pregnancy test. We also noted that a small
number of women took isotretinoin without medical supervision.
It
is important to keep in mind that since these analyses are based on data from
spontaneous reports, they are subject to reporting bias. It is possible that
there was an increase in the reporting of pregnancies in the Post-RMP year, due
to publicity around the implementation of the RMP. Additionally spontaneous
reports are variable in quality and completeness; as such, lack of information
does not necessarily indicate lack of compliance with the RMP. Furthermore,
experience of pregnancy failures may not represent general experience of
isotretinoin users.
Isotretinoin
Utilization
The number of isotretinoin prescriptions
declined roughly 23% in the year following SMART compared to the previous year,
suggesting that the SMART program may have influenced the number of
isotretinoin prescriptions dispensed. Refill prescriptions also declined from
16.0% of all isotretinoin prescriptions in the year before SMART to 2.4% in the
post-SMART year.
SMART appeared to have had
little impact on other utilization variables such as prescribing physician
specialty and patient age and gender. In
the year prior to SMART, 76% of the prescriptions dispensed were written by
dermatologists, similar to the proportion in the 12 months following SMART
(80%). Females accounted for
approximately one-half of the isotretinoin claims in both the pre- and
post-SMART eras. The majority of isotretinoin
claims were from persons aged 16-29 years who accounted for 58.5% of the
isotretinoin prescription claims in the year before SMART, and 59.5% of the
prescriptions in the year following SMART. The results of these data are
similar to the utilization data analyses reported by Hoffmann-La Roche.
Prescription
Compliance Survey
The
primary purpose of the Prescription Compliance Survey (PCS) is to measure
compliance with the isotretinoin qualification stickers using a survey of
pharmacies. In addition to compliance
with the sticker program, the PCS also attempts to measure the completeness and
accuracy of stickers from prescriptions filled at
The
results show a very high rate of sticker use with prescriptions, which
consistently exceed the primary objective of 90% complete and correct
prescriptions. Results were consistent
across gender, payer type, and age.
There were minor differences in the pharmacy strata, specifically for
prescription volume and population density.
There do not appear to be any differences in the percentage of female
patients across the survey waves, nor were there trends by age or payment type.
While
the audit also shows a high rate of compliance and completeness among the
validated prescriptions, the recruiting method appears not to be random, an
important departure from the study design.
Since the sponsor does not describe the implemented recruiting method at
all, the utility and/or applicability of these data are questionable.
The
two major limitations of the overall PCS are the low pharmacy response rate,
and the low number of prescriptions captured for analysis. Although more than 750 pharmacies were
recruited for each wave of the audit survey, there have not been 750 responses
to date. In addition, during the third
wave of the study, four pharmacy chains (Walgreens, CVS, Eckerd, and Rite Aid)
and one retailer (Wal-Mart) asked to be removed from the study. These stores represent some of the largest
pharmacy chains and pharmacy retailers in the U.S, and their removal may have
compromised the ability of the PCS to obtain the necessary number of
prescriptions for a valid analysis.
Overall,
these serious problems in the survey implementation and response rate make it
unclear if the survey is truly representative of the national picture, or if it
is even achieving the stated objective of measuring sticker compliance. In addition, the implementation of the data
validation audit appears to differ significantly from the analysis plan, making
its interpretation and usefulness questionable.
It is
important to remember that the PCS is an indirect measure of physician
compliance with the Isotretinoin Risk Management Program. The pharmacies are
middlemen, and unless the corporate, chain, or insurance reimbursement policy
dictates compliance with the RMP, pharmacies can dispense isotretinoin without
the sticker. In addition, the pharmacies
can only influence physician compliance or participation by refusing to fill
prescriptions not meeting SMART requirements.
Finally, given that this is an indirect measure of physician compliance,
without directly asking doctors to confirm their level of participation in
various sticker-associated practices, a high compliance percentage can be a
misleading indicator of physician compliance.
Isotretinoin
Patient Surveys
The
Isotretinoin Patient Surveys are questionnaires designed to evaluate pregnancy
prevention in isotretinoin treated women. The questionnaires in these surveys
have recently been modified to incorporate questions specifically designed to
measure compliance with the enhanced Isotretinoin RMP. These modified
instruments incorporate RMP-specific metrics (e.g., presence of a prescription
qualification sticker). The results of
the patient surveys should be considered with extreme caution due to possible
error from the following observations and inferences: low enrollment rate,
recall bias, social desirability bias, bias due to both unit non-response and
item non-response, and poor questionnaire design.
Absolute
participation in the patient surveys increased from 16% - 19% in the year
before SMART to 22%-26% in the first year of SMART. Although this represents an
increase, it falls short of the 60% enrollment projected by the sponsor.
Ninety-two percent of survey participants reported that they received a
prescription with an isotretinoin qualification sticker, findings consistent
with those of PCS and PCS audit.
Analyses of other components of the RMP were also conducted. In DDRE analyses of the Degge/SI cohort, 76% of survey participants reported they signed two consent forms and 81% reported the presence of a medication guide.
Analyses of both Slone and Degge/SI shows some improvement in the rate of any pregnancy testing, however only about 68% of apparently fertile and sexually active women reported two pregnancy tests prior to initiation of isotretinoin, a labeled requirement for therapy. Of menstruating, apparently fertile sexually active women, only 28% had a pregnancy test within the first 5 days of their menstrual period immediately before starting isotretinoin.
In DDRE analyses of the Degge/SI cohort, 4.2% of apparently fertile and sexually active 15-45 year-old participants reported no form of birth control. In total, 46.4% of apparently fertile and sexually active 15-45 year-old participants reported use of “appropriate” birth control consisting of two methods, at least one of which is a “primary” birth control method (e.g., oral contraception).
The
presence of a prescription qualification sticker correlated highly but
incompletely with performance of the pregnancy test. Overall 9% of Survey participants who reported
a qualification sticker was present also indicated a pregnancy test was not
done. Pregnancy testing was generally high both in the presence of a sticker
(91%) and in the absence of a sticker (90%) for apparently fertile, 15 to 45
year old survey participants.
Among
sexually active, apparently fertile 15 to 45 year old Survey participants, any
birth control was noted in 97% of enrollees with a sticker and 96% of enrollees
without a sticker.
Based
on DDRE analyses, the Degge/SI dataset contains 15 reports of pregnancy among
4277 women on their first-course of isotretinoin therapy. The observed pregnancy rate for first-course
users within the Degge/SI cohort is thus 15/4277 = 3.5/1000. Since this rate is
censored, it likely represents an underestimate of the rate realized when all
these Survey participants complete follow-up.
The reviewers have stated that this rate is virtually identical to the
rate as reported by researchers from the Slone Epidemiology Group pre-RMP Accutane
survey cohort of 2.9 per 1,000 women.
Despite this observation, the value of a comparative analysis in the
review of the patient surveys is called into question. Evaluation of the
isotretinoin RMP is most appropriately based on patients’ experience with all
isotretinoin products and should not be confined to any subset of
manufacturers, such as the innovator in this instance. Furthermore, in the analysis of pregnancy
rates, the representativeness and comparability of these two cohorts is
questionable because of differences in the survey instruments, financial
incentives for participating, response rates, and the demographic composition
of respondents and their treating physician specialties. We note from the review by Karwoski and Pitts
that pregnancies reported by survey respondents are a minority of all reported
pregnancies to FDA, and that the contribution of these reports changed from 20%
in the pre-RMP period to 27% in the post-RMP period. Lastly, the post-RMP “rate” in the attached
review does not take person-time exposure into account, nor the shortened
patient exposure in the post-RMP period compared to the pre-RMP data other than
to describe the latter factor non-quantitatively as “censoring.” Notwithstanding these reservations about the
cross-survey comparison and quantification of pregnancies, we note with concern
the reports of continued pregnancies in the post-RMP survey.
CONCLUSIONS
The
number of pregnancy exposures to isotretinoin has not decreased appreciably and
may have increased relative to the overall decrease in use of isotretinoin in
the year following the implementation of the enhanced Isotretinoin Risk
Management Program. Our review of a number of parameters comparing the Pre-RMP
to the Post-RMP pregnancy exposures suggest minimal or no improvement with the
implementation of the RMP. However, it should be emphasized that benchmarks of
success of the program based on pre-specified metrics were not defined and that
experience of pregnancy failures may not represent general experience of
isotretinoin users.
An important element of the enhanced risk management
program is the use by physicians of stickers on the prescription representing
their certification that the key elements of the program such as education,
informed consent and, in particular, pregnancy testing have been performed and
certified as negative. Data from pharmacies corroborated by patients indicate
that well over 90% of dispensed prescriptions contain the sticker.
In judging how well the use of the sticker
corresponds with pregnancy testing, we noted that among all women who reported
receiving a prescription with a sticker, 91% reported a pregnancy test. Of note
is that 9% with a sticker indicated that they had not received a
pregnancy test. For the year prior to this enhanced risk management program, among
apparently fertile, sexually active women, 74% reported having received
pregnancy testing prior to initiation of therapy. In the year subsequent to this program, 91%
reported such pregnancy testing.
Finally, during this latter
period of enhanced risk management, 70% of women used some form of birth
control although only 25% over all used contraception consistent with the label
which requires two forms of birth control of which one must be “primary” such
as the use of an oral contraceptive.
In
summary, it appears that no substantial improvement has occurred in reported
pregnancy exposures after implementation of the Isotretinoin RMP. Moreover,
analysis of patient recall surveys reveals that qualification stickers have
been issued by prescribing physicians to some patients who have not undergone
pregnancy testing. Therefore, modifications in risk management to further
reduce the likelihood of isotretinoin exposure during pregnancy should be
considered at this time.
|
REVIEW CONTENTS |
page |
||||
|
Background |
9 |
||||
|
|
Regulatory
History |
9 |
|||
|
|
Goals
of RMP |
9 |
|||
|
|
RMP
Tools |
10 |
|||
|
|
Evaluation
of the RMP |
11 |
|||
|
Pregnancy Exposures |
13 |
||||
|
|
Methods |
15 |
|||
|
|
Results |
16 |
|||
|
|
|
General
Summary Information |
16 |
||
|
|
|
Pregnancy
Testing among Patients who became pregnant |
21 |
||
|
|
|
Summary
Of Patients Who Became Pregnant Prior To Starting Isotretinoin |
22 |
||
|
|
|
Contraceptive
Use among Patients who became pregnant |
24 |
||
|
|
|
Outcome
Data |
25 |
||
|
|
Discussion |
28 |
|||
|
|
Conclusion |
29 |
|||
|
Isotretinoin Utilization |
30 |
||||
|
|
Methods |
31 |
|||
|
|
Results |
31 |
|||
|
|
Conclusions |
33 |
|||
|
Evaluation of Pharmacy
Compliance Surveys |
35 |
||||
|
|
Introduction |
36 |
|||
|
|
Methods |
37 |
|||
|
|
|
Prescription
Compliance Survey |
37 |
||
|
|
|
Prescription
Compliance Survey Audit |
39 |
||
|
|
Results |
40 |
|||
|
|
|
Prescription
Compliance Survey |
40 |
||
|
|
|
Prescription
Compliance Survey Audit |
42 |
||
|
|
Discussion |
43 |
|||
|
|
|
Prescription
Compliance Survey |
43 |
||
|
|
|
Prescription
Compliance Survey Audit |
44 |
||
|
|
Conclusions |
45 |
|||
|
Review of Isotretinoin
Patient Survey Materials and Data |
48 |
||||
|
|
Introduction |
51 |
|||
|
|
Methods |
52 |
|||
|
|
Results |
53 |
|||
|
|
|
Survey
Participation, Representativeness, and Limitation |
53 |
||
|
|
|
DAT-1
Survey (Initiation of Treatment) |
57 |
||
|
|
|
|
DAT-1
Univariate Analyses |
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
DAT-1
Bivariate Analyses |
64 |
|
|
|
|
DAT-2
Survey (During Treatment) |
67 |
||
|
|
|
|
DAT-2
Univariate Analyses |
67 |
|
|
|
|
|
DAT-1
Bivariate Analyses |
69 |
|
|
|
|
Pregnancies,
possible risk factors, and pregnancy rates within Degge/SI cohort |
71 |
||
|
|
|
Survey
Addendum (recent data) |
72 |
||
|
|
Discussion |
72 |
|||
|
Appendices |
|
||||
|
|
Appendix
1—Geographic Regions |
74 |
|||
|
|
Appendix
2—Description Of AdvancePCS |
75 |
|||
|
|
Appendix
3—Recommendations For PCS And Prescription Audit |
76 |
|||
|
|
Appendix
4—Tables And Charts |
77 |
|||
|
|
Appendix
5—Executive Summary Of The Sponsor’s Analysis Of The Smart Program |
81 |
|||
|
|
Appendix
6—Critique And Analysis Of Accutane/Isotretinoin Patient Surveys |
84 |
|||
|
|
Appendix
7—Table of Comparison of Accutane/Isotretinoin Questionaires |
94 |
|||
|
|
Appendix
8—Extrapolation Of Pregnancy Rates From Voluntary Surveys |
99 |
|||
|
|
Appendix
9—Glossary Of Abbreviations And
Definitions Of Terms |
103 |
|||
BACKGROUND
Regulatory
History
Isotretinoin
(Accutane®) was first approved in the
Because
of Isotretinoins’s potent teratogenic risks, the sponsor designed and
implemented the Accutane Pregnancy Prevention Program (PPP) in 1988. The goal
of that program was to minimize the risk of patients becoming pregnant while
taking isotretinoin and so avoid exposure during pregnancy. Continuing
pregnancies and a review of the PPP in 2000 revealing substantial
non-compliance with critical elements of the program, led the Agency and the
Dermatologic and Ophthalmic Advisory Committee to conclude that PPP had not
been sufficiently effective in minimizing pregnancy exposure during
isotretinoin treatment and that better alternatives were needed.
The
new risk management program was developed by Roche and was approved as part of
a labeling supplement on
On
|
Company |
Isotretinoin Risk
Management Program Name |
|
Genpharm,
Inc. |
System
to Prevent Isotretinoin-Related Issues of Teratogenicity (S.P.I.R.I.T.) ™ |
|
Barr
Laboratories |
Adverse
Event Learning and Education Regarding Teratogenicity (A.L.E.R.T.)™ |
|
Ranbaxy
Laboratories |
Isotretinoin Medication Program: Alerting you to
the Risks of Teratogenicity (I.M.P.A.R.T.)™ |
Risk Management
Program Goals
The
Isotretinoin Risk Management Program was developed to address the two main
goals[2]:
1) No woman should begin isotretinoin therapy if she
is pregnant, and
2) No pregnancies should occur while a woman is
taking isotretinoin.
Risk
Management Program Tools
The information below describes the tools of the enhanced
Isotretinoin Risk Management Program. The tools developed by the sponsor were
designed to prompt or guide practitioners, pharmacists, and patients in the
proper prescribing, dispensing, and use of isotretinoin to minimize the
isotretinoin exposure during pregnancy. The source of the information below is
based on Accutane® labeling, August 2003.
Evaluation of
the RMP
To
measure the effectiveness of the Isotretinoin Risk Management Program, the
sponsors were asked to use several independent outcome assessment approaches.
These include the Isotretinoin Survey, conducted by the either the Slone
Epidemiology Unit of Boston University School of Public Health or the Degge
Group, Ltd, and S.I. International; and an independent survey and audit of
pharmacies to assess the use of Isotretinoin Qualification Stickers by
prescribers.
Although
specific assessment metrics were not mandated in the RMP approval letter,
several primary and secondary assessment metrics were discussed between Roche
and FDA and are outlined in Roche’s 1
Year Report on the S.M.A.R.T Program[4]. The planned primary and secondary[5]
metrics include the following:
Isotretinoin Patient Survey
· Primary Metrics
· The primary assessment metric proposed by Roche for the Accutane Survey was that 60% of female isotretinoin patients would be enrolled in the survey one year after the implementation of RMP.
· Survey respondents would generally be representative of the reference population of isotretinoin female patients.
· Secondary Metrics
· Publication(s) of results from the Accutane Survey results will be initiated starting 6 months after labeling change.
· Percent of patients with recall of taking a pregnancy test.
· Percent of patients with recall of the Qualification Sticker affixed to their Accutane prescription.
· Percent of patients with recall of receiving a Medication Guide.
· Percent of patients with recall of using two forms of safe and effective contraception.
· Percent of patients enrolling in the Accutane Survey via the physician office, Accutane Card, and by toll-free telephone number.
Prescription Compliance Survey
· Primary Metrics
· 90% of all physicians will use the Accutane Qualification Stickers by one year after labeling change and close to 100% by two years after labeling change.
· 90% of all physicians completely and correctly complete the Accutane QS by one year after labeling change and close to 100% by two years after labeling change.
· 90% of all prescriptions are dispensed with a Medication Guide by one year after labeling change and close to 100% by two years after labeling change.
· Secondary Metrics
· Produce Newsletters that will be sent to prescribers, pharmacists, Managed Care Organizations, and Pharmacy Benefits Mangers and will be initiated starting 6 months after labeling change.
· Percent of physicians using the Accutane Qualification Sticker
· Percent of Accutane QS completed appropriately
· Percent of pharmacies dispensing Accutane Medication Guides
The
set of reviews that follow summarize ODS’s evaluation of the effectiveness of
the enhanced Isotretinoin Risk Management Program for the first year following
its implementation. The analyses presented are based upon data supplied by
Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc., contractors, and other internal and external data
resources available to the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research.
This
group of evaluations of the first year of the Isotretinoin RMP includes
analyses of spontaneous reports of pregnancy exposures, isotretinoin
utilization during the year prior to and the year following the implementation
of the RMP, as well as analyses of the Prescription Compliance Survey (PCS) and
the Isotretinoin Patient Surveys, the two primary sources of assessing the
RMP’s tools.
[1] Throughout this set of reviews the Isotretinoin RMP may be
referred to as SMART. For a more complete listing of terms used throughout this
document, see Appendix 9, pg 103.
[2] Refer to correspondence to Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc., dated October 6, 2000 (re:
NDA18-662, NDA 21-177)
[3]
Primary methods of contraception: oral
contraceptives, implantable hormones, injectable hormones, hormonal patch,
intrauterine devices, hormonal vaginal contraceptive ring, sterilization (male,
female)
[4] Hoffmann-La
Roche submission–General Correspondence:
1 Year Report on the SMART Program, June 30, 2003
[5] Numeric values vis-à-vis the Secondary Metrics for
both the Isotretinoin Patient Survey and the Prescription Compliance Survey
were not specified in the sponsor’s submission.