Cookie policy: This site uses cookies (small files stored on your computer) to simplify and improve your experience of this website. Cookies are small text files stored on the device you are using to access this website. For more information please take a look at our terms and conditions. Some parts of the site may not work properly if you choose not to accept cookies.

Join

Subscribe or Register

Existing user? Login

PJ Online | PJ Letters: Prescribing

Home > PJ (current issue) > Letters | Search

Return to PJ Online Home Page

The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 268 No 7195 p568-572
27 April 2002

This page
Reprint
Photocopy

   

PDF* 80K

Letters

  Prescribing
  CPP
  Checking technicians
  CPD
  Compliance aids
  Childhood vaccination
  Packaging
  Community pharmacy
  LPS
  HRT
  Hospital Pharmacy
  The Society
  Honorary auditors
  PJ Online


Letters to the Editor

  * PDF files on PJ Online require Acrobat Reader 4 or later.

Prescribing

Evidence base must take precedence over marketing

From Mr P. D. Burrill, MRPharmS

The top 10 most costly drugs prescribed in the National Health Service in 2001 (PDF* 50K) reveals the many influences on prescribing (PJ, 20 April, p528). The prescribing of simvastatin was first stimulated by the Standing Medical Advisory Committee guidance back in 1997 but there has definitely been a resurgence since the National Service Framework for Coronary Heart Disease. Simvastatin has a strong evidence base and is licensed for secondary prevention.

Is it justifiable to substitute another statin, atorvastatin, which does not have the same evidence base nor the required licensing, simply because it is potentially cheaper? The Drug and Therapeutics Bulletin does not think so.1 Do the prescribers who have raised atorvastatin to the heights of number three in the top 10 realise that they are mostly prescribing "off-licence"? Interestingly, Pfizer has recently been reprimanded for inappropriate promotion of unlicensed medicines and off-licence indications, including atorvastatin.2

By all means, release scarce resources by substituting an evidence-based but cheaper drug for one that consumes a large proportion of your budget. A good example from the top 10 is amlodipine, described by Dr Brian Curwain as being "sold well to prescribers" (PJ, April 20, p528). Why not use felodipine, which has arguably a stronger evidence base and costs a third less? Another example from the top 10 is paroxetine, when fluoxetine is now likely to be a much more cost-effective selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.

The inclusion of doxazosin in the top 10 is of concern and prescribing continues to increase. Many prescribers seem unaware that the doxazosin arm of ALLHAT was discontinued prematurely because of worse outcomes compared with the thiazide diuretic.3 Given that thiazides, beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors, some dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, and now losartan have an evidence base in the management of hypertension, doxazosin should be required only rarely. If an alpha-blocker becomes necessary, why not use the much cheaper prazosin?

Long-acting beta2-agonists, such as salmeterol, are an important option in the management of asthma. However, their use too early can lead to underdosing with inhaled steroids. There is a dose-response curve for inhaled steroids but it is important to achieve an effective dose before considering adding in a long-acting beta2-agonist. The recently updated north of England guideline suggests this will be in the region of 1,000?g of beclometasone daily.4

Pharmacists must continue to promote evidence-based and cost-effective drugs in preference to those that are well marketed. As the Drug and Therapeutics Bulletin said nearly 10 years ago, "a drug should be prescribed because of the weight of evidence in its favour, not because of the weight of the manufacturers promotional effort behind it".5 It is possible to reduce the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on prescribers and change the top 10 mostly costly drugs to a more appropriate selection.

References

1. Statin therapy — what now? Drug Ther Bull 2001;39: 17?21.

2. Pfizer get a public dressing down over promoting unlicensed drugs. BMJ 2002; 324:753.

3. Implication of discontinuation of doxazosin arm of ALLHAT. Lancet 2000;355: 863?4.

4. Evidence-based guideline on the primary care management of asthma. Family Practice 2001;18:223?9.

5. Getting good value from drug reps. Drug Ther Bull 1983;21:13?15.

Peter Burrill
Specialist in Pharmaceutical Public Health,
North Derbyshire Public Health Network

 

Next Topic (CPP)
Send your letter to The Editor

Back to Top

Home | Journals | News | Notice-board | Search | Jobs  Classifieds | Site Map | Contact us

©The Pharmaceutical Journal

Citation: The Pharmaceutical Journal URI: 20006580

Rate this article 

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Have your say

For commenting, please login or register as a user and agree to our Community Guidelines. You will be re-directed back to this page where you will have the ability to comment.

Recommended from Pharmaceutical Press

Search an extensive range of the world’s most trusted resources

Powered by MedicinesComplete
  • Print
  • Share
  • Comment
  • Rate
  • Save
  • Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Jobs you might like

Newsletter Sign-up

Want to keep up with the latest news, comment and CPD articles in pharmacy and science? Subscribe to our free alerts.