Background

Many consumers use natural health products (NHPs) concurrently with prescription medications. As NHP-related harms are under-reported through passive surveillance, the safety of concurrent NHP-drug use remains unknown. To conduct active surveillance in participating community pharmacies to identify adverse events related to concurrent NHP-prescription drug use.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Participating pharmacists asked individuals collecting prescription medications about (i) concurrent NHP/drug use in the previous three months and (ii) experiences of adverse events. If an adverse event was identified and if the patient provided written consent, a research pharmacist conducted a guided telephone interview to gather additional information after obtaining additional verbal consent and documenting so within the interview form. Over a total of 112 pharmacy weeks, 2615 patients were screened, of which 1037 (39.7%; 95% CI: 37.8% to 41.5%) reported concurrent NHP and prescription medication use. A total of 77 patients reported a possible AE (2.94%; 95% CI: 2.4% to 3.7%), which represents 7.4% of those using NHPs and prescription medications concurrently (95%CI: 6.0% to 9.2%). Of 15 patients available for an interview, 4 (26.7%: 95% CI: 4.3% to 49.0%) reported an AE that was determined to be “probably” due to NHP use.

Conclusions/Significance

Active surveillance markedly improves identification and reporting of adverse events associated with concurrent NHP-drug use. Although not without challenges, active surveillance is feasible and can generate adverse event data of sufficient quality to allow for meaningful adjudication to assess potential harms.

Background

Smokers need effective support to maximise the chances of successful quit attempts. Current smoking cessation medications, such as nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline, have been shown to be effective in clinical trials but are underused by smokers attempting to quit due to adverse effects, contraindications, low acceptability and/or high cost. Cytisine is a low-cost, plant-based alkaloid that has been sold as a smoking cessation aid in Eastern Europe for 50 years. A systematic review of trial evidence suggests that cytisine has a positive impact on both short- and long-term abstinence rates compared to placebo. However, the quality of the evidence is poor and insufficient for licensing purposes in many Western countries. A large, well-conducted placebo-controlled trial (n = 740) of cytisine for smoking cessation has recently been published and confirms the findings of earlier studies, with 12-month continuous abstinence rates of 8.4% in the cytisine group compared to 2.4% in the placebo group (Relative risk = 3.4, 95% confidence intervals 1.7-7.1). No research has yet been undertaken to determine the effectiveness of cytisine relative to that of NRT.

Methods/design

A single-blind, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial has been designed to determine whether cytisine is at least as effective as NRT in assisting smokers to remain abstinent for at least one month. Participants (n = 1,310) will be recruited through the national telephone-based Quitline service in New Zealand and randomised to receive a standard 25-day course of cytisine tablets (Tabex®) or usual care (eight weeks of NRT patch and/or gum or lozenge). Participants in both study arms will also receive a behavioural support programme comprising an average of three follow-up telephone calls delivered over an eight-week period by Quitline. The primary outcome is continuous abstinence from smoking at one month, defined as not smoking more than five cigarettes since quit date. Outcome data will also be collected at one week, two months and six months post-quit date.

Discussion

Cytisine appears to be effective compared with placebo, and given its (current) relative low cost may be an acceptable smoking cessation treatment for smokers, particularly those in low- and middle-income countries. Cytisine's 'natural' product status may also increase its acceptability and use among certain groups of smokers, such as indigenous people, smokers in countries where the use of natural medicines is widespread (e.g. China, India), and in those people who do not want to use NRT or anti-depressants to help them quit smoking. However it is important to ascertain the effectiveness of cytisine compared with that of existing cessation treatments.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12610000590066)

Herbal products are readily available over the counter in health food stores and are often perceived to be without risk. The current Canadian adverse event reporting system suffers from severe underreporting, resulting in a scarcity of safety data on herbal products. Twelve health food store personnel in the Greater Toronto Area were interviewed about their responses to herbal product–related adverse reactions. They generally fostered customer loyalty by offering generous return policies, which included collecting contact information to be sent to the manufacturers with the returned product. Thus, despite the public's lack of knowledge about the formal reporting system, adverse reaction information was directed to manufacturers whenever it resulted in a product return. The relationship between health food stores, industry and Health Canada provides a new opportunity to facilitate adverse event reporting. Additional information could be collected during the return process, and educational initiatives could be implemented to augment current post-market surveillance procedures for herbal products.

Background

Natural health products (NHPs), such as herbal medicines and vitamins, are widely available over-the-counter and are often purchased by consumers without advice from a healthcare provider. This study examined how consumers respond when they believe they have experienced NHP-related adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in order to determine how to improve current safety monitoring strategies.

Methods

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with twelve consumers who had experienced a self-identified NHP-related ADR. Key emergent themes were identified and coded using content analysis techniques.

Results

Consumers were generally not comfortable enough with their conventional health care providers to discuss their NHP-related ADRs. Consumers reported being more comfortable discussing NHP-related ADRs with personnel from health food stores, friends or family with whom they had developed trusted relationships. No one reported their suspected ADR to Health Canada and most did not know this was possible.

Conclusion

Consumers generally did not report their suspected NHP-related ADRs to healthcare providers or to Health Canada. Passive reporting systems for collecting information on NHP-related ADRs cannot be effective if consumers who experience NHP-related ADRs do not report their experiences. Healthcare providers, health food store personnel, manufacturers and other stakeholders also need to take responsibility for reporting ADRs in order to improve current pharmacovigilance of NHPs.