Quality of serious adverse events reporting to academic sponsors of clinical trials: far from optimal

A Comparison of Signals of Designated Medical Events and Non-designated Medical Events: Results from a Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) maintains a list of designated medical events (DMEs), events that are inherently serious and are prioritized for signal detection, irrespective of statistical criteria. We have analysed the results of our previously published scoping review to determine whether DME signals differ from those of other adverse events in terms of time to communication and characteristics of supporting reports of suspected adverse drug reactions.

METHODS

For all signals, we obtained the launch year of medicinal products from textbooks or regulatory agencies, extracted the year of the first report in VigiBase and calculated the interval between the first report and communication (time to communication, TTC). We further retrieved the average completeness (via vigiGrade) of the reports in each case series in the years before the communication. We categorised as DME signals those concerning an event in the EMA's list. We described the two groups of signals using medians and interquartile ranges (IQR) and compared them using the Brunner-Munzel test, calculating 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) and P values.

RESULTS

Of 4520 signals, 919 concerned DMEs and 3601 concerned non-DMEs. Signals of DMEs were supported by a median of 15 reports (IQR 6-38 reports) with a completeness score of 0.52 (IQR 0.43-0.62) and signals of non-DMEs by 20 reports (IQR 6-84 reports) with a completeness score of 0.46 (IQR 0.38-0.56). The probability that a random DME signal was supported by fewer reports than non-DME signals was 0.56 (95% CI 0.54-0.58, P < 0.001) and that of one having lower average completeness was 0.39 (95% CI 0.36-0.41, P < 0.001). The median TTCs of DME and non-DME signals did not differ (10 years), but the TTC was as low as 2 years when signals (irrespective of classification) were supported by reports whose average completeness was > 0.80.

CONCLUSIONS

Signals of designated medical events were supported by fewer reports and higher completeness scores than signals of other adverse events. Although statistically significant, the differences in effect sizes between the two groups were small. This suggests that listing certain adverse events as DMEs is not having the expected effect of encouraging a focus on reports of the types of suspected adverse reactions that deserve special attention. Further enhancing the completeness of the reports of suspected adverse drug reactions supporting signals of designated medical events might shorten their time to communication and reduce the number of reports required to support them.

Completeness of pharmaceutical industry insulin adverse event reports from Africa and the Middle East

BACKGROUND

Growing numbers of patients with diabetes mellitus in Africa and the Middle East on antidiabetic therapies necessitate an understanding of adverse event reporting in these regions. We assessed pharmaceutical industry insulin individual case safety report (ICSR) completeness and completeness-associated variables.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The observational cross-sectional study, set in an insulin-manufacturing company's safety database, assessed vigiGrade® completeness scores of African and Middle Eastern post-marketing ICSRs during January to December 2018, and the effects of case variables on completeness. Low vigiGrade® scores indicated poorly documented ICSRs.

RESULTS

We analyzed 4854 ICSRs; 59.8% from the Middle East. The mean vigiGrade® score was 0.58. Middle Eastern ICSRs had higher mean scores than African ICSRs (0.65 vs. 0.46, p<0.001). Scores peaked at 0.32, 0.70, and 1.00, for Middle Eastern ICSRs compared to 0.35 and 0.50 for African ICSRs. Middle Eastern serious (0.77 vs. 0.47; p<0.001) and solicited (0.70 vs. 0.48; p<0.001) ICSRs had higher mean scores than African ICSRs. Mean scores were highest for Middle Eastern physicians (0.89) and other healthcare professionals (0.82) whereas, in Africa, scores were highest for consumer- (0.47) and pharmacist-reported ICSRs (0.47) (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Middle Eastern pharmaceutical industry insulin ICSRs were documented with greater detail than African ICSRs. Event seriousness, report source, and reporter type significantly impacted ICSR completeness.

Regulating clinical trials in a resource-limited setting during the Ebola public health emergency in Sierra Leone

Clinical trials during public health emergencies of novel medical products such as therapeutics and vaccines in resource-limited settings are daunting due to the limited capacity for regulatory assessment. Regulating clinical trials during the Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone required expedited evaluation to identify medical products that could be promptly introduced to combat the epidemic in the absence of approved treatment or prevention. This article explored the decisions taken by the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone through its Expert Committee on Medicine Safety and Clinical Trials regarding clinical trials oversight during the Ebola epidemic and the lessons learned. This independent expert committee assessed and provided scientific opinions to the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone to inform approval of all clinical trials within 10–15 working days. We also requested for assisted review from the African Vaccine Regulatory Forum and support from the US Food and Drug Administration through a unilateral recognition and reliance memorandum of understanding. In addition, the Agency-ensured structures and systems were in place for reporting and reviewing adverse events and serious adverse events, management of biological samples, submission and review of progress reports, and good clinical practice inspections. Unfortunately, the Ebola epidemic revealed many weaknesses in the country’s clinical trials regulatory structure and processes. Government and partners should further offer more resources to build the clinical trial structures and systems so that the Agency will be better poised to handle future public health emergencies.

Intensive Safety Monitoring of Rituximab (Biosimilar Novex® and the Innovator) in Pediatric Patients With Complex Diseases

Although rituximab is widely used off-label for complex pediatric diseases, safety reports are limited. We aimed to report evidence of its use in clinical practice, to describe the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADR) to rituximab biosimilar Novex^® and innovator, and to identify risk factors for the development of ADR in a real-life follow-up cohort of pediatric patients with complex diseases. We conducted a prospective, longitudinal, observational, single-centre study in patients that received rituximab for any complex disease, and as part of an intensive pharmacovigilance program. Demographic, pharmacological, clinical, and drug-related data were collected for all patients. ADR-free survival, including infusion-related reactions (IRR) and delayed ADR (dADR), was estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Risk factors were evaluated by multivariable Cox regression models. In total, 77 patients (<19 y.o.) received 187 infusions of rituximab Novex^® (n = 155) or innovator rituximab (n = 32) for neurologic (Neu), immune-hematologic-rheumatic (IHR), oncologic (O) diseases, and hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) or solid-organ transplantation (SOT). We recorded 29 IRR and 58 dADR that occurred in 27 (35.1%) and 29 (37.7%) patients, respectively. The respiratory tract was the most affected during IRR (29.6%) and hypogammaglobulinemia (37.9 %) was the most frequent dADR. First versus subsequent infusions (HR 5.4, CI95% 2.4-12.1, p<0.05), sex (boys vs. girls, HR 0.3, CI95% 0.1-0.8, and p<0.05), and diagnosis (Neu-IHR diseases vs. O-HSCT-SOT, HR 2.3, CI95% 1.02-5.4, and p < 0.05) were significantly associated with the development of IRR. For dADR, risk factors were diagnosis (Neu-IHR diseases vs. O-HSCT-SOT, HR 0.4, CI95% 0.2-0.9, and p < 0.05) and cumulative body surface area-normalized dosage (HR 1.0003, CI95% 1.0001-1.0006, and p < 0.05). The present is the largest real-world safety assessment of rituximab in Latin-American children with complex diseases supporting its use based on the overall acceptable safety. Identification of risk factors may contribute to optimization of off-label rituximab treatment in pediatrics.

Serious Adverse Events Reporting in Phase III Randomized Clinical Trials of Colorectal Cancer Treatments: A Systematic Analysis

Objective: The occurrence, development, and prognosis of serious adverse events (SAEs) associated with anticancer drugs in clinical trials have important guiding significance for real-world clinical applications. However, to date, there have been no studies investigating SAEs reporting in randomized clinical trials of colorectal cancer treatments. This article systematically reviewed the SAEs reporting of phase III randomized clinical trials of colorectal cancer treatments and analyzed the influencing factors. Methods: We reviewed all articles about phase III randomized clinical trials of colorectal cancer treatments published in the PubMed, Embase, Medline, and New England Journal of Medicine databases from January 1, 1993, to December 31, 2018, and searched the registration information of clinical trials via the internet sites such as "clinicaltrials.gov". We analyzed the correlation between the reported proportion (RP) of SAEs in the literature and nine elements, including the clinical trial sponsor and the publication time. Chi-square tests and binary logistic regression were used to identify the factors associated with improved SAEs reports. This study was registered on PROSPERO. Results: Of 1560 articles identified, 160 were eligible, with an RP of SAEs of 25.5% (41/160). In forty-one publications reporting SAEs, only 14.6% (6/41) described the pattern of SAEs in detail. In clinical trials sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, the RP of SAEs was significantly higher than that in those sponsored by investigators (57.6 versus 20.7%, p < 0.001). From 1993 to 2018, the RP of SAEs gradually increased (none (0/6) before 2000, 17.1% (12/70) from 2000 to 2009, and 34.5% (29/84) after 2009). The average RP of SAEs published in the New England Journal of Medicine (N Engl J Med), the Lancet, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), the Lancet Oncology (Lancet Oncol), and the Journal of Clinical Oncology (J Clin Oncol) was significantly higher than that published in other journals (31.9 versus 16.7%, p = 0.030). In the clinical trials referenced by clinical guidelines, the RP of SAEs was higher than that in non-referenced clinical trials (32.0 versus 15.9%, p = 0.023). Binary logistic regression analysis showed that pharmaceutical company sponsorship, new drug research, and sample size greater than 1000 were positive influencing factors for SAEs reporting. Conclusion: Although the RP of SAEs increased over time, SAEs reporting in clinical trials needs to be further improved. The performance, outcomes and prognosis of SAEs should be reported in detail to guide clinical practice in the real world.

Overview of clinical trials vigilance units in French institutional sponsors - A study from the REVISE working group

PURPOSE

To follow the European Directive 2001/20/EC, institutional sponsors created or reinforced their vigilance units. Since 2007, the working group "REflexion sur la VIgilance et la Sécurité des Essais" (REVISE) rallies French institutional vigilance units (IVUs) to share their experience. The group decided to elaborate a collective work to provide a real-life descriptive picture of French IVUs activities and resources over the 2011-2016 period.

METHOD

A questionnaire was sent to the 60 IVUs of the group. It included questions on staff and activities, such as the number of received and analyzed serious adverse events (SAEs). All results and proposals were discussed and consensus was achieved in general meeting.

RESULTS/CONCLUSION

The results highlight the commitment of IVU staffs at many steps of CTs, but also the frailty of some units, leading to 6 proposals intended to institutional sponsors and competent authorities for ensuring (1) IVU visibility to all actors; (2) sustainable IVU staff; (3) IVU resources adapted to sponsor's ambitions; (4) valorization of IVUs in publications; (5) recognition of IVU's value in clinical research quality; (6) involvement of IVUs in regulatory changes and their procedures of implementation.

Retrospective analyzes of adverse events during biologic agents in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis from a single center in Turkey

OBJECTIVES

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis is the most common rheumatic disease in childhood. Biologic agents have changed the course of juvenile idiopathic arthritis. However, there are concerns regarding the occurrence of serious adverse events in patients receiving biologic agents. The aim of this study was to evaluate adverse events in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis receiving biologic agents.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study includes juvenile idiopathic arthritis patients receiving biologic agents. Demographic features and adverse events during biologic agents were collected from medical files. Adverse events that either resulted in death, were life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization, or resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity were considered as serious adverse events.

RESULTS

In total, 162 juvenile idiopathic arthritis patients (55.6% female) receiving biologic agents were enrolled: 101 (62.3%) patients treated with etanercept, 27 (16.7) with tocilizumab, 14 (8.6%) with adalimumab, 15 (9.2%) with anti-interleukin 1 agents (13 canakinumab, 2 anakinra), and 5 (3.1%) with infliximab. 75.9% of the patients received concomitantly disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, and 20.4% received disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs plus corticosteroid. The mean age at initiation of the biologic agent was 10.5 ±4.3 years. The mean age at the study enrolment was 12.1 ±4.5 years. The mean follow-up duration was 19.7 ±2.1 months. The most frequent adverse event was upper respiratory tract infections (54.3%) followed by urinary tract infections (21%). Anaphylaxis occurred in 3 patients (1.9%): 2 with tocilizumab and one with infliximab. Macrophage activation syndrome occurred in 1 patient (0.6%) receiving tocilizumab. Lung tuberculosis developed in 2 patients (1.2%) receiving canakinumab. The frequency of serious adverse events in total was 6.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

While the most frequent adverse events during biologic agents was upper respiratory tract infections, the frequency of serious adverse events was 6.7%; therefore, juvenile idiopathic arthritis patients receiving biologic agents should be carefully evaluated for these adverse events in clinical practice.

The benefit–risk balance for biological agents in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Objective

To assess the net benefit of biological agents (BA) used in JIA.

Methods

We systematically searched databases up to March 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCT) performed in JIA disease. Separate random-effects meta-analyses were conducted for efficacy (ACR paediatric score 30%, ACRpedi30) and serious adverse events for safety. In order to standardize the baseline risk, we performed a meta-analysis of baseline risk in the control group (for both efficacy and safety meta-analysis). The net benefit was determined as the risk difference of efficacy subtracted by the risk difference of safety.

Results

We included 19 trials: 11 parallel RCTs (754 patients) and 8 withdrawal RCTs (704 patients). The net benefit ranged from 2.4% (adalimumab) to 17.6% (etanercept), and from 2.4% (etanercept) to 36.7%, (abatacept) in parallel and withdrawal trials assessing non-systemic JIA, respectively. In the systemic JIA category, the net benefit ranged from 22.8% (rilonacept) to 70.3% (canakinumab), and from 32.3% (canakinumab) to 58.2% (tocilizumab) in parallel and withdrawal trials, respectively.

Conclusion

The results suggest that a greater number of patients experienced therapeutic success without serious adverse events in the systemic onset JIA category compared with the BAs for non-systemic JIA categories. Baseline risk, design of trial and JIA categories impact the measure of net benefit of BAs in JIA patients.

Innovative Digital Tools and Surveillance Systems for the Timely Detection of Adverse Events at the Point of Care: A Proof-of-Concept Study

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Regulatory authorities often receive poorly structured safety reports requiring considerable effort to investigate potential adverse events post hoc. Automated question-and-answer systems may help to improve the overall quality of safety information transmitted to pharmacovigilance agencies. This paper explores the use of the VACC-Tool (ViVI Automated Case Classification Tool) 2.0, a mobile application enabling physicians to classify clinical cases according to 14 pre-defined case definitions for neuroinflammatory adverse events (NIAE) and in full compliance with data standards issued by the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium.

METHODS

The validation of the VACC-Tool 2.0 (beta-version) was conducted in the context of a unique quality management program for children with suspected NIAE in collaboration with the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin, Germany. The VACC-Tool was used for instant case classification and for longitudinal follow-up throughout the course of hospitalization. Results were compared to International Classification of Diseases , Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes assigned in the emergency department (ED).

RESULTS

From 07/2013 to 10/2014, a total of 34,368 patients were seen in the ED, and 5243 patients were hospitalized; 243 of these were admitted for suspected NIAE (mean age: 8.5 years), thus participating in the quality management program. Using the VACC-Tool in the ED, 209 cases were classified successfully, 69 % of which had been missed or miscoded in the ED reports. Longitudinal follow-up with the VACC-Tool identified additional NIAE.

CONCLUSION

Mobile applications are taking data standards to the point of care, enabling clinicians to ascertain potential adverse events in the ED setting and during inpatient follow-up. Compliance with Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) data standards facilitates data interoperability according to regulatory requirements.

Mobile health: the power of wearables, sensors, and apps to transform clinical trials

Mobile technology has become a ubiquitous part of everyday life, and the practical utility of mobile devices for improving human health is only now being realized. Wireless medical sensors, or mobile biosensors, are one such technology that is allowing the accumulation of real-time biometric data that may hold valuable clues for treating even some of the most devastating human diseases. From wearable gadgets to sophisticated implantable medical devices, the information retrieved from mobile technology has the potential to revolutionize how clinical research is conducted and how disease therapies are delivered in the coming years. Encompassing the fields of science and engineering, analytics, health care, business, and government, this report explores the promise that wearable biosensors, along with integrated mobile apps, hold for improving the quality of patient care and clinical outcomes. The discussion focuses on groundbreaking device innovation, data optimization and validation, commercial platform integration, clinical implementation and regulation, and the broad societal implications of using mobile health technologies.