This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and adverse events, either serious or mild/moderate, of all generic versus brand-name cardiovascular medicines. We searched randomized trials in MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trial Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov (last update December 1, 2014). Attempts were made to contact the investigators of all potentially eligible trials. Two investigators independently extracted and analyzed soft (including systolic blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, and others) and hard efficacy outcomes (including major cardiovascular adverse events and death), minor/moderate and serious adverse events. We included 74 randomized trials; 53 reported ≥1 efficacy outcome (overall sample 3051), 32 measured mild/moderate adverse events (n = 2407), and 51 evaluated serious adverse events (n = 2892). We included trials assessing ACE inhibitors (n = 12), anticoagulants (n = 5), antiplatelet agents (n = 17), beta-blockers (n = 11), calcium channel blockers (n = 7); diuretics (n = 13); statins (n = 6); and others (n = 3). For both soft and hard efficacy outcomes, 100 % of the trials showed non-significant differences between generic and brand-name drugs. The aggregate effect size was 0.01 (95 % CI -0.05; 0.08) for soft outcomes; -0.06 (-0.71; 0.59) for hard outcomes. All but two trials showed non-significant differences in mild/moderate adverse events, and aggregate effect size was 0.07 (-0.06; 0.20). Comparable results were observed for each drug class and in each stratified meta-analysis. Overall, 8 serious possibly drug-related adverse events were reported: 5/2074 subjects on generics; 3/2076 subjects on brand-name drugs (OR 1.69; 95 % CI 0.40-7.20). This meta-analysis strengthens the evidence for clinical equivalence between brand-name and generic cardiovascular drugs. Physicians could be reassured about prescribing generic cardiovascular drugs, and health care organization about endorsing their wider use.

Generic versus brand-name drugs used in cardiovascular diseases / Manzoli, Lamberto; Flacco Maria, Elena; Boccia, Stefania; D'Andrea, Elvira; Panic, Nikola; Marzuillo, Carolina; Siliquini, Roberta; Ricciardi, Walter; Villari, Paolo; Ioannidis John, Pa. - In: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY. - ISSN 0393-2990. - STAMPA. - (2016). [10.1007/s10654-015-0104-8]

Generic versus brand-name drugs used in cardiovascular diseases

D'ANDREA, ELVIRA;MARZUILLO, CAROLINA;VILLARI, Paolo;
2016

Abstract

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and adverse events, either serious or mild/moderate, of all generic versus brand-name cardiovascular medicines. We searched randomized trials in MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trial Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov (last update December 1, 2014). Attempts were made to contact the investigators of all potentially eligible trials. Two investigators independently extracted and analyzed soft (including systolic blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, and others) and hard efficacy outcomes (including major cardiovascular adverse events and death), minor/moderate and serious adverse events. We included 74 randomized trials; 53 reported ≥1 efficacy outcome (overall sample 3051), 32 measured mild/moderate adverse events (n = 2407), and 51 evaluated serious adverse events (n = 2892). We included trials assessing ACE inhibitors (n = 12), anticoagulants (n = 5), antiplatelet agents (n = 17), beta-blockers (n = 11), calcium channel blockers (n = 7); diuretics (n = 13); statins (n = 6); and others (n = 3). For both soft and hard efficacy outcomes, 100 % of the trials showed non-significant differences between generic and brand-name drugs. The aggregate effect size was 0.01 (95 % CI -0.05; 0.08) for soft outcomes; -0.06 (-0.71; 0.59) for hard outcomes. All but two trials showed non-significant differences in mild/moderate adverse events, and aggregate effect size was 0.07 (-0.06; 0.20). Comparable results were observed for each drug class and in each stratified meta-analysis. Overall, 8 serious possibly drug-related adverse events were reported: 5/2074 subjects on generics; 3/2076 subjects on brand-name drugs (OR 1.69; 95 % CI 0.40-7.20). This meta-analysis strengthens the evidence for clinical equivalence between brand-name and generic cardiovascular drugs. Physicians could be reassured about prescribing generic cardiovascular drugs, and health care organization about endorsing their wider use.
2016
brand-name drug; cardiovascular diseases; efficacy; generic drug; meta-analysis; safety
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Generic versus brand-name drugs used in cardiovascular diseases / Manzoli, Lamberto; Flacco Maria, Elena; Boccia, Stefania; D'Andrea, Elvira; Panic, Nikola; Marzuillo, Carolina; Siliquini, Roberta; Ricciardi, Walter; Villari, Paolo; Ioannidis John, Pa. - In: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY. - ISSN 0393-2990. - STAMPA. - (2016). [10.1007/s10654-015-0104-8]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Manzoli_Generic_2015.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 658.16 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
658.16 kB Adobe PDF
Manzoli_Generic-versus_2015.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 204.61 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
204.61 kB Adobe PDF

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/838069
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 32
  • Scopus 64
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 62
social impact