ArticlePharmaceutical medicine2019
Liver Test Monitoring: Real-World Compliance for Drugs with Monitoring Requirements at 2-Week Intervals or More Frequently.
Article in Pharmaceutical medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMonitoring risk is often an important component of therapy. Some compounds require liver test (LT) monitoring, with the frequency detailed in the product label. Compliance with these instructions is generally unknown.
objectiveThe goal of this short study was to describe LT compliance for compounds with monitoring recommended at 2-week intervals or more frequently in three US administrative claims databases.
methodsThe sample was drawn from three US claims databases during the period 1 January 2015 through 30 June 2018. This study examined nine compounds and five types of LTs. We looked at compounds in a published list of drugs requiring LTs at 2-week intervals or more frequently. Descriptive statistics about the days between tests were reported, as were the number and proportion of tests associated with each drug that met the recommended frequency.
resultsCompliance was < 33% with four drugs (ketoconazole, succimer, pentamidine, and felbamate) and > 60% with five drugs (oxaliplatin, rifampin, tolcapone, albendazole, and azathioprine). Among drugs with more than 1000 drug eras observed (all but succimer and tolcapone), LT compliance was highest for oxaliplatin (75.3%) and lowest for pentamidine (20.6%), with little difference in overall compliance by type of test (range 41-46).
conclusionCompliance with frequent LT monitoring differed for the drugs examined. Two strata were found: compliance > 60% (oxaliplatin, rifampin, tolcapone, albendazole, and azathioprine) and compliance 20-30% (ketoconazole, succimer, pentamidine, and felbamate). No drug reached 80% compliance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31933226What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.