Skip to main content

Critical Extrapolation of Guidelines and Study Results: Risk-Benefit Assessment for Patients with Reduced Life Expectancy and a New Classification of Drugs According to Their Fitness for the Aged

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Drug Therapy for the Elderly
  • 1884 Accesses

Abstract

It is hard to understand that the largest group of drug consumers—elderly patients—is underrepresented in clinical trials. To avoid unclear results from patients with multimorbidity, elderly patients aged 65 or more years are almost routinely excluded from clinical trials. They obscure effect detection by events from concomitant diseases not addressed by the drug intervention, thereby diluting the “true” events under question. Only very recently, few exceptions from this rule have surfaced, with a study on arterial hypertension in the very elderly and several studies on new anticoagulants in the treatment of atrial fibrillation as signs of hope. In addition, regulatory authorities increasingly demand studies on pharmacokinetics in the elderly, although such studies are generally small and not powered to detect endpoint effects or assess safety in the elderly. Still, in the typical case of a newly developed drug, its clinical development was mainly restricted to younger adults, but it will be used predominantly in the group of elderly patients in whom it had never or only insufficiently been tested. This points to a large evidence gap in this context; as evidence-based medicine (EBM, defined by Sackett; Sackett et al. 2007) critically depends on evidence and guidelines almost automatically claim evidence as their major source of reasoning, we witness the critical absence of genuinely EBM-based guidelines for the elderly (Wehling 2011). For example, in the 2007 European guideline on arterial hypertension (Mancia et al. 2007), less than one page is devoted to treatment of the elderly although arterial hypertension represents one of the few therapeutic areas for which data in the elderly are emerging (see section “Positive Assessment of Drugs for the Elderly”). In the reappraisal of the guideline in 2009 (Mancia et al. 2009), also one page seemed sufficient for this. In the U.S. JNC 7 guideline (Chobanian et al. 2003), hypertension in the elderly is presented on less than two pages. But, there is hope: Recently the first consensus statement on the treatment of hypertension in the elderly (Aronow et al. 2011) extensively and comprehensively described all major aspects of hypertension treatment in the elderly on 81 pages.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aronow WS, Fleg JL, Pepine CJ et al (2011) ACCF/AHA 2011 expert consensus document on hypertension in the elderly: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus documents developed in collaboration with the American Academy of Neurology, American Geriatrics Society, American Society for Preventive Cardiology, American Society of Hypertension, American Society of Nephrology, Association of Black Cardiologists, and European Society of Hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol 57:2037–2114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beckett NS, Peters R, Fletcher AE et al (2008) Treatment of hypertension in patients 80 years of age or older. N Engl J Med 358:1887–1898

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beers MH (1997) Explicit criteria for determining potentially inappropriate medication use by the elderly. Arch Intern Med 157:1531–1536

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010) National vital statistics reports. 58(21), 28 Jun 2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR et al (2003) Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension 42:1206–1252

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Döser S, März W, Reinecke MF et al (2004) Recommendations on statin therapy in the elderly, data and consensus. Internist 45:1053–1062, in German

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Field TS, Mazor KM, Briesacher B, Debellis KR, Gurwitz JH (2007) Adverse drug events resulting from patient errors in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 55:271–276

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman DW, Kelly JP, Rosenberg L, Anderson TE, Mitchell AA (2002) Recent patterns of medication use in the ambulatory adult population of the United States: the Slone survey. JAMA 287:337–344

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kvan E, Pettersen KI, Landmark K, Reikvam A, INPHARM Study Investigators (2006) Treatment with statins after acute myocardial infarction in patients > or = 80 years: underuse despite general acceptance of drug therapy for secondary prevention. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 15:261–267

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN (1998) Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA 279:1200–1205

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mancia G, De Backer G, Dominiczak A et al (2007) 2007 ESH-ESC practice guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: ESH-ESC task force on the management of arterial hypertension. J Hypertens 25:1751–1762

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mancia G, Laurent S, Agabiti-Rosei E et al (2009) Reappraisal of European guidelines on hypertension management: a European Society of Hypertension Task Force document. J Hypertens 27:2121–2158

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pugh MJ, Hanlon JT, Zeber JE, Bierman A, Cornell J, Berlowitz DR (2006) Assessing potentially inappropriate prescribing in the elderly Veterans Affairs population using the HEDIS 2006 quality measure. J Manag Care Pharm 12:537–545

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS (2007) Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t, 1996. Clin Orthop Relat Res 455:3–5

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd J, Blauw GJ, Murphy MB et al (2002) Pravastatin in elderly individuals at risk of vascular disease (PROSPER): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 360:1623–1630

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Steinman MA, Landefeld CS, Rosenthal GE, Berthental D, Sen S, Kaboli PJ (2006) Polypharmacy and prescribing quality in older people. J Am Geriatr Soc 54:1516–1523

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Akker M, Buntinx F, Metsemakers JF, Roos S, Knottnerus JA (1998) Multimorbidity in general practice: prevalence, incidence, and determinants of co-occurring chronic and recurrent diseases. J Clin Epidemiol 51:367–375

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wehling M (2008) Drug therapy in the aged: too much and too little. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 133:2289–2291, in German

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wehling M (2009) Multimorbidity and polypharmacy: how to reduce the harmful drug load and yet add needed drugs in the elderly? Proposal of a new drug classification: fit for the aged. J Am Geriatr Soc 57:560–561

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wehling M (2011) Guideline-driven polypharmacy in elderly, multimorbid patients is basically flawed: there are almost no guidelines for these patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 59:376–377

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhan C, Sangl J, Bierman AS et al (2001) Potentially inappropriate medication use in the community-dwelling elderly: findings from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. JAMA 286:2823–2829

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Wehling .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Wien

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wehling, M. (2013). Critical Extrapolation of Guidelines and Study Results: Risk-Benefit Assessment for Patients with Reduced Life Expectancy and a New Classification of Drugs According to Their Fitness for the Aged. In: Wehling, M. (eds) Drug Therapy for the Elderly. Springer, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-0912-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-0912-0_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Vienna

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-7091-0911-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-7091-0912-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics