Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 6, 2026

The Dyspepsia Educational Tool As a Novel Aid in Dyspepsia Management
Published on: June 29, 2019
Prescription Drugs Subject to a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy: Patient Perspectives on Risk Communication
Susan Chimonas1, Carol Cosenza2, Aaron S Kesselheim3
1Center for Health Policy and Outcomes, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. chimonas@mskcc.org.
Background:
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-mandates Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) programs for certain drugs with serious side effects help ensure that the benefits of use outweigh the risks. REMS materials-including enrollment forms, fact sheets, and medication guides-inform patients and caregivers about drug risks and program requirements.
Objective:
To explore how effectively REMS materials communicate drug risk information and program requirements to patients and caregivers and to identify patients' and caregivers' preferences for risk communication.
Methods:
Interviews with patients and caregivers of patients prescribed REMS-covered drugs focused on REMS materials. Transcripts were coded manually, with answers to closed-ended questions tabulated in Excel.
Results:
The study included 43 patients and six caregivers across eight REMS-covered drugs: alemtuzumab, ambrisentan, clozapine, isotretinoin, lenalidomide, pegvaliase, pomalidomide, and sodium oxybate. Most participants were female (N = 42, 86%), white/non-Hispanic (N = 40, 82%), and college educated (N = 37, 76%). The average age was 40 years, with 27 (55%) having annual family incomes over $100,000. Most participants learned about REMS-covered drugs via printed information (N = 36, 73%), mostly REMS materials; conversations with providers about drug risks and benefits (N = 29, 59%); and websites found on their own (N = 42, 86%). Nearly all participants (N = 47, 96%) felt well-informed about drug risks and benefits, and most participants taking self-administered drugs (N = 28, 67%) reported understanding safe use "very well." However, knowledge gaps emerged around REMS-related risks and reasons for safe use measures; some participants misunderstood REMS enrollment forms as legal protections, not safety measures. Patients also widely varied in their valuations of REMS materials, with some feeling informed and empowered and others confused or intimidated. Preferences for risk communication varied; most participants (N = 36, 73%) wanted to receive information verbally from providers, with several wanting visual aids, summaries, and other resources.
Discussion:
Gaps in patients' and caregivers' understanding of REMS programs and drug risks highlight the merits of reviewing communication materials and strategies. Clear, concise, and comprehensive educational documents could promote understanding and adherence to REMS requirements.
More Related Videos
06:28E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
Published on: August 1, 2019
08:21Author Spotlight: A Pharmacodissection Approach to Uncover Mechanisms in Cardiovascular Disease Risk Populations
Published on: July 21, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Pharmacovigilance
This process, termed pharmacovigilance, aims to detect, evaluate, and minimize harmful effects related to medication use. The data collection for pharmacovigilance depends on spontaneous reporting systems, where healthcare professionals or patients voluntarily report suspected ADRs.
In some cases, there...
Dosage Regimen: Individualization
Drug Dosing: Geriatric Patients
Dosage Regimens: Designs and Approaches
Factors Affecting Drug Response: Overview