ARE BRAND-NAME AND GENERIC WARFARIN INTERCHANGEABLE? A SURVEY OF ONTARIO PATIENTS AND PHYSICIANS
Main Article Content
Keywords
Warfarin, generic, bioequivalence, interchangeability, perceptions
Abstract
Background
The issue of therapeutic equivalence has been a source of controversy in Canada since the approval of generic warfarin products in 2000.
Objectives
We surveyed Ontario patients and physicians on perceptions of generic warfarin and brand substitution.
Methods
Self-administered questionnaires employed 7.0-point Likert scales of agreement. Patient participants were drawn from a thromboembolism clinic in Hamilton, Ontario. Physician participants were from a random sample of 375 Ontario family physicians, internists, cardiologists and hematologists.
Results
Eighty-one patients responded: 52% female, mean age 63.4 years and 63% brand-name warfarin users. Overall, 33% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they would feel comfortable taking generic warfarin. However, seventeen percent agreed or strongly agreed that generic warfarin was neither as safe nor as effective as brand-name warfarin, with this view more common amongst patients taking brand-name than those taking generic warfarin. One hundred and ten (29.3%) physicians returned the survey -29% females, mean age 45.3 years, 22% family physicians. Forty-four percent agreed or strongly agreed that they would rather prescribe brand-name than generic warfarin for patients starting warfarin therapy, while 40.7% agreed or strongly agreed that they would not feel comfortable switching from brand-name to generic warfarin. However, only 19.4% of physicians who had switched patients from brand-name to generic warfarin actually reported difficulties in managing the switch.
Conclusion
While most patients and physicians appear to have accepted the principle of therapeutic equivalence of generic and brand-name warfarin, a sizable minority has concerns that could influence prescribing and compliance.
References
2. Atrial Fibrillation Investigators. Risk factors for stroke and efficacy of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation: analysis of pooled data from five randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154:1449-1457.
3. Segal JB, McNamara RL, Miller MR. Prevention of thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation: a meta analysis of trials of anticoagulants and antiplatelet drugs. J Gen Intern Med 2000; 15:56-97.
4. Ezekowitz MD, Levine JA. Preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. JAMA 1999; 281:1830-1835.
5. Hirsh J, Dalen J, Anderson DR et al. Oral anticoagulants: mechanism of action, clinical effectiveness, and optimal therapeutic range. Chest 2001; 119(Suppl 1):8S-21S.
6. DQTC Drug Reviews (2001, June). Drug Program Branch Bulletin. Retrieved August 7, 2002 from http://www.gov.on.ca/health/english/program/drug s/odbf/bulletin/bul_0601.pdf
7. Midha KK, Nagai T. Bioavailability, bioequivalence and pharmacokinetic studies: F.I.P. Bio international '96: Internal conference of F.I.P. "Bio-International '96", Tokyo, Japan, April 22-24, 1996. Tokyo: Business Center for Academic Studies, 1996.
8. Palylyk-Colwell E, Jamali F, Dryden W et al.Bioequivalence and interchangeability of narrow therapeutic range drugs. J Pharm Pharm Sci 1998; 1(1):2-7.
9. Chow S, Liu J. Design and analysis of bioavailability and bioequivalence studies. 2nd ed. New York: M. Dekker, 2000.
10. Friesen MH, Walker SE. Are the current bioequivalence standards sufficient for the acceptance of narrow therapeutic index drugs? Utilization of a computer simulated warfarin bioequivalence model. J Pharm Pharm Sci 1999; 2(1):15-22.
11. Yacobi A, Masson E, Moros D. Who needs individual bioequivalence studies for narrow therapeutic index drugs? A case for warfarin. J Clin Pharmacol. 2000 Aug;40(8):826-35.
12. The United States Pharmacopeia 23 / The National Formulary 18. Taunton: Rand McNally, 2003.
13. Wittkowsky AK. Generic warfarin: implications for patient care. Pharmacotherapy 1997;17:640-643.
14. Apotex Canada. Prescribing information - Apo- warfarin. Retrieved March 8, 2003 from http://www.apotex.ca/En/Products/PrescribingInfo/WARFARIN-PR.pdf .
15. The Alberta Health Drug Benefit List Update. Interchangeability of warfarin sodium preparations. 2003 Retrieved June 7, 2003 from http://www.ab.bluecross.ca/dbl/pdfs/dblreportdec00update.pdf.
16. Lawrence J. (1998, January 12). State by state - DuPont-Merck battles to limit NTI substitution. Drug Store News. Retrieved March 3, 2003, from http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3374/i s_n1_v20/ai_20801949.
17. Barlas S. (1998, March 2). FDA chastises DuPont- Merck on Coumadin campaign. Drug Store News. Retrieved March 4, 2003 from http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3374/i s_4_20/ai_56202109.
18. Snyder K. Brands losing physician, pharmacist loyalty. Drug Topics 1995; Suppl:26S-28S.
19. Banahan BF, Kolassa EM. A physician survey on generic drugs and substitution of critical dose medications. Arch Intern Med 1997;157(18):2080-2088.
20. Vasquez EM, Min DI. Transplant pharmacists' opinions of generic product selection of critical- dose drugs. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 1999;56(7):615-621.
21. Kendall KW, Ng S, Schoner B. Consumer response to generic/chemically equivalent drugs. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 1991;10:182-201.
22. Lamert ZV, Doering PL, Golstein E, McCormack WC. Predispositions toward generic drug substitution. J Consumer Res 1980; 14:23.
23. Bearden W, Mason JB, Smith E. Perceived risk and elderly perceptions on generic drug prescribing. Gerontologist 1979; 19:191-195.
24. Anonymous. Consumer drug purchases are based on perceptions of quality, survey on generic finds. Am J Hosp Pharm 1988; 45:1245
25. Carroll NV, Wolfgang AP, Kotzan JA, Perri M. Consumer attitudes and actions towards generic drugs. J Pharm Mark Manage 1988; 2(4):87-89.
26. Tootelian DH, Gaedeke RM, Schlacter J. Branded versus generic prescription drugs: perceptions of risk, efficacy, safety and value. J Health Care
Mark 1988; 8(3):26-29.
27. Carroll NV, Jang R. Consumer awareness of generic drugs. Contemporary Pharmacy Practice 1981; 4(3):155-159.
28. Wagner JL, Dent LA. Epistaxis associated with elevation of INR in a patient switched to generic warfarin. Pharmacother 2000; 20(2):240-243.
29. Hope KA, Havrda DE. Subtherapeutic INR values association with a switch to generic warfarin. Ann Pharmacother 2001; 35:183-187.
30. McCallum D, Peterson J. Computer-Based Readability Indexes.In:ACM, editor. Proceedings of the ACM '82 conference. New York: ACM Press, 1982. p.44-48.
31. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.1996.
32. Stafford RS, Singer DE. Recent national patterns of warfarin use in atrial fibrillation. Circulation 1998; 97:1231-1233.
33. Chamberlain MA, Sageser NA, Ruiz D. Comparison of anticoagulation clinic patient outcomes with outcomes from traditional care in a family medicine clinic. J Am Board Fam Pract 2001;14:16-21.
34. Samsa GP, Matchar DB, Goldstein LB, et al.Quality of anticoagulation management among patients with atrial fibrillation: results of a review of medical records from 2 communities. Arch Intern Med 2000;160:967-973.
35. Chiquette E, Amato MG, Bussey HI. Comparison of an anticoagulation clinic with usual medical care, anticoagulation control, patient outcomes, and health care costs. Arch Intern Med 1998;158:1641-1647.
36. Pereira JA, Holbrook AM, Dolovich L et al. Are brand-name and generic warfarin interchangeable? Can J Clin Pharmacol. 2004;75(2):27.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.