This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (9)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letters  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Cardiovascular System  • Quality of Care  • Evidence-Based Medicine  • Review  • Cardiovascular Disease/ Myocardial Infarction  • Drug Therapy  • Drug Therapy, Other  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Aaron S. Kesselheim, MD, JD, MPH; Alexander S. Misono, BA; Joy L. Lee, BA; Margaret R. Stedman, MPH; M. Alan Brookhart, PhD; Niteesh K. Choudhry, MD, PhD; William H. Shrank, MD, MSHS

JAMA. 2008;300(21):2514-2526.

Context  Use of generic drugs, which are bioequivalent to brand-name drugs, can help contain prescription drug spending. However, there is concern among patients and physicians that brand-name drugs may be clinically superior to generic drugs.

Objectives  To summarize clinical evidence comparing generic and brand-name drugs used in cardiovascular disease and to assess the perspectives of editorialists on this issue.

Data Sources  Systematic searches of peer-reviewed publications in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts from January 1984 to August 2008.

Study Selection  Studies compared generic and brand-name cardiovascular drugs using clinical efficacy and safety end points. We separately identified editorials addressing generic substitution.

Data Extraction  We extracted variables related to the study design, setting, participants, clinical end points, and funding. Methodological quality of the trials was assessed by Jadad and Newcastle-Ottawa scores, and a meta-analysis was performed to determine an aggregate effect size. For editorials, we categorized authors' positions on generic substitution as negative, positive, or neutral.

Results  We identified 47 articles covering 9 subclasses of cardiovascular medications, of which 38 (81%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Clinical equivalence was noted in 7 of 7 RCTs (100%) of β-blockers, 10 of 11 RCTs (91%) of diuretics, 5 of 7 RCTs (71%) of calcium channel blockers, 3 of 3 RCTs (100%) of antiplatelet agents, 2 of 2 RCTs (100%) of statins, 1 of 1 RCT (100%) of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and 1 of 1 RCT (100%) of -blockers. Among narrow therapeutic index drugs, clinical equivalence was reported in 1 of 1 RCT (100%) of class 1 antiarrhythmic agents and 5 of 5 RCTs (100%) of warfarin. Aggregate effect size (n = 837) was –0.03 (95% confidence interval, –0.15 to 0.08), indicating no evidence of superiority of brand-name to generic drugs. Among 43 editorials, 23 (53%) expressed a negative view of generic drug substitution.

Conclusions  Whereas evidence does not support the notion that brand-name drugs used in cardiovascular disease are superior to generic drugs, a substantial number of editorials counsel against the interchangeability of generic drugs.

Author Affiliations: Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED LETTERS

Equivalence of Generic and Brand-Name Drugs for Cardiovascular Disease
Barry L. Carter
JAMA. 2009;301(16):1654.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Equivalence of Generic and Brand-Name Drugs for Cardiovascular Disease
Michael James Zema
JAMA. 2009;301(16):1654-1655.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Equivalence of Generic and Brand-Name Drugs for Cardiovascular Disease
James A. Reiffel
JAMA. 2009;301(16):1655.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Use and cost of branded and generic drugs in patients with coronary heart disease--results from a prospective survey of 1008 patients in two London hospitals
Corp et al.
QJM 2009;0:hcp127v1-hcp127.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Comparing Generic and Innovator Drugs: A Review of 12 Years of Bioequivalence Data from the United States Food and Drug Administration
Davit et al.
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2009;43:1583-1597.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Removing Costs From The Health Care Supply Chain: Lessons From Mass Retail
Agwunobi and London
Health Aff (Millwood) 2009;28:1336-1342.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

'Marginal Medicine': Targeting Comparative Effectiveness Research To Reduce Waste
Hoffman and Pearson
Health Aff (Millwood) 2009;28:w710-w718.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Equivalence of Generic and Brand-Name Drugs for Cardiovascular Disease
Carter
JAMA 2009;301:1654-1654.
FULL TEXT  

Equivalence of Generic and Brand-Name Drugs for Cardiovascular Disease
Reiffel
JAMA 2009;301:1655-1655.
FULL TEXT  

Equivalence of Generic and Brand-Name Drugs for Cardiovascular Disease
Zema
JAMA 2009;301:1654-1655.
FULL TEXT  

All you need to read in the other general journals
BMJ 2008;337:a2947-a2947.
FULL TEXT