The contribution of direct patient reported ADRs to drug safety signals in the Netherlands from 2010 to 2015

Development of a core outcome set for cardiovascular diabetology: a methodological framework

Background

Cardiovascular diabetology is an emergent field focusing on all aspects of diabetes/cardiovascular interrelationship and metabolic syndrome. High-quality evidence needs to be provided to determine the efficacy and safety of interventions in cardiovascular diabetology. The heterogeneity of outcomes among trials limits the comparison of results, and some outcomes are not always meaningful to end-users. The cardiovascular diabetology core outcome set (COS) study aims to develop a COS of interventions for cardiovascular diabetology. In this paper, we introduce the methodological framework for developing the COS.

Methods

The COS development will include the following steps: (a) establish the COS groups of stakeholders, including international steering committee, Delphi survey group, and consensus meeting group; (b) systematic reviews of outcomes used in trials of cardiovascular diabetology; (c) semistructured interview of stakeholders for outcomes of cardiovascular diabetology; (d) generate a list of candidate outcomes and determine the original outcome pool; (e) Delphi survey with stakeholders of cardiovascular diabetology to select potential core outcomes; and (f) review and endorse the cardiovascular diabetology COS by expert consensus meeting.

Conclusions

This current study reports the methodological framework to develop a COS in cardiovascular diabetology and will provide evidence for the future development of COS in cardiovascular diabetology.

Factors that influence patient and public adverse drug reaction reporting: a systematic review using the theoretical domains framework

BACKGROUND

Only 5-10% of all adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are reported. Mechanisms to support patient and public reporting offer numerous advantages to health care systems including increasing reporting rate. Theory-informed insights into the factors implicated in patient and public underreporting are likely to offer valuable opportunity for the development of effective reporting-interventions and optimization of existing systems.

AIM

To collate, summarize and synthesize the reported behavioral determinants using the theoretical domains framework (TDF), that influence patient and public reporting of ADRs.

METHOD

Cochrane, CINAHL, Web of science, EMBASE and PubMed were systematically searched on October 25th, 2021. Studies assessing the factors influencing public or patients reporting of ADRs were included. Full-text screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were performed independently by two authors. Extracted factors were mapped to TDF.

RESULTS

26 studies were included conducted in 14 countries across five continents. Knowledge, social/professional role and identity, beliefs about consequences, and environmental context and resources, appeared to be the most significant TDF domains that influenced patient and public behaviors regarding ADR reporting.

CONCLUSION

Studies included in this review were deemed of low risk of bias and allowed for identification of key behavioural determinants, which may be mapped to evidence-based behavioral change strategies that facilitate intervention development to enhance rates of ADR reporting. Aligning strategies should focus on education, training and further involvement from regulatory bodies and government support to establish mechanisms, which facilitate feedback and follow-ups on submitted reports.

Sample Bias in Web-Based Patient-Generated Health Data of Dutch Patients With Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor: Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Increasingly, social media is being recognized as a potential resource for patient-generated health data, for example, for pharmacovigilance. Although the representativeness of the web-based patient population is often noted as a concern, studies in this field are limited.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the sample bias of patient-centered social media in Dutch patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST).

METHODS

A population-based survey was conducted in the Netherlands among 328 patients with GIST diagnosed 2-13 years ago to investigate their digital communication use with fellow patients. A logistic regression analysis was used to analyze clinical and demographic differences between forum users and nonusers.

RESULTS

Overall, 17.9% (59/328) of survey respondents reported having contact with fellow patients via social media. Moreover, 78% (46/59) of forum users made use of GIST patient forums. We found no statistically significant differences for age, sex, socioeconomic status, and time since diagnosis between forum users (n=46) and nonusers (n=273). Patient forum users did differ significantly in (self-reported) treatment phase from nonusers (P=.001). Of the 46 forum users, only 2 (4%) were cured and not being monitored; 3 (7%) were on adjuvant, curative treatment; 19 (41%) were being monitored after adjuvant treatment; and 22 (48%) were on palliative treatment. In contrast, of the 273 patients who did not use disease-specific forums to communicate with fellow patients, 56 (20.5%) were cured and not being monitored, 31 (11.3%) were on curative treatment, 139 (50.9%) were being monitored after treatment, and 42 (15.3%) were on palliative treatment. The odds of being on a patient forum were 2.8 times as high for a patient who is being monitored compared with a patient that is considered cured. The odds of being on a patient forum were 1.9 times as high for patients who were on curative (adjuvant) treatment and 10 times as high for patients who were in the palliative phase compared with patients who were considered cured. Forum users also reported a lower level of social functioning (84.8 out of 100) than nonusers (93.8 out of 100; P=.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Forum users showed no particular bias on the most important demographic variables of age, sex, socioeconomic status, and time since diagnosis. This may reflect the narrowing digital divide. Overrepresentation and underrepresentation of patients with GIST in different treatment phases on social media should be taken into account when sourcing patient forums for patient-generated health data. A further investigation of the sample bias in other web-based patient populations is warranted.

Development of a multivariate prediction model to identify individual case safety reports which require clinical review

BACKGROUND

The number of Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) in pharmacovigilance databases are rapidly increasing world-wide. The majority of ICSRs at the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb is reviewed manually to identify potential signal triggering reports (PSTR) or ICSRs which need further clinical assessment for other reasons.

OBJECTIVES

To develop a prediction model to identify ICSRs that require clinical review, including PSTRs. Secondly, to identify the most important features of these reports.

METHODS

All ICSRs (n = 30 424) received by Lareb between October 1, 2017 and February 26, 2021 were included. ICSRs originating from marketing authorisation holders and ICSRs reported on vaccines were excluded. The outcome was defined as PSTR (yes/no), where PSTR 'yes' was defined as an ICSR discussed at a signal detection meeting. Nineteen features were included, concerning structured information on: patients, adverse drug reactions (ADR) or drugs. Data were divided into a training (70%) and test set (30%) using a stratified split to maintain the PSTR/no PSTR ratio. Logistic regression, elastic net logistic regression and eXtreme Gradient Boosting models were trained and tuned on a training set. Random down-sampling of negative controls was applied on the training set to adjust for the imbalanced dataset. Final models were evaluated on the test set. Model performances were assessed using the area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence interval of a receiver operating characteristic (ROC), and specificity and precision were assessed at a threshold for perfect sensitivity (100%, to not miss any PSTRs). Feature importance plots were inspected and a selection of features was used to re-train and test model performances with fewer features.

RESULTS

1439 (4.7%) of reports were PSTR. All three models performed equally with a highest AUC of 0.75 (0.73-0.77). Despite moderate model performances, specificity (5%) and precision (5%) were low. Most important features were: 'absence of ADR in the Summary of product characteristics', 'ADR reported as serious', 'ADR labelled as an important medical event', 'ADR reported by physician' and 'positive rechallenge'. Model performances were similar when using only nine of the most important features.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a prediction model with moderate performances to identify PSTRs with nine commonly available features. Optimisation of the model using more ICSR information (e.g., free text fields) to increase model precision is required before implementation.

Post-Marketing Safety Profile of Vortioxetine Using a Cluster Analysis and a Disproportionality Analysis of Global Adverse Event Reports

Introduction

Vortioxetine, a multimodal serotonergic drug, is widely used as treatment for major depressive disorder. Although on the market since late 2013, the data of the relative safety of vortioxetine, especially compared to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, are still scarce.

Objective

The aim of this study was to explore the adverse event reporting pattern of vortioxetine through a cluster analysis. Furthermore, to compare the adverse event reporting pattern for vortioxetine with that of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

Methods

Individual case safety reports for vortioxetine in VigiBase up to 1 November, 2019 were subjected to consensus clustering, to identify and describe natural groupings of reports based on their reported adverse events. A vigiPoint exploratory analysis compared vortioxetine to the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in terms of relative frequencies for a wide range of covariates, including patient sex and age, reported drugs and adverse events, and reporting country. Important differences were identified using odds ratios with adaptive statistical shrinkage.

Results

Thirty-six clusters containing at least five reports were identified and analysed. The two largest clusters included 48% of the vortioxetine reports and appeared to represent gastrointestinal adverse events and hypersensitivity adverse events. Other distinct clusters were related to, respectively, fatigue, aggression/suicidality, convulsion, medication errors, arthralgia/myalgia, increased weight, paraesthesia and anticholinergic effects. Some of these clusters are not labelled for vortioxetine, such as arthralgia/myalgia and paraesthesia, but are known adverse events for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. A vigiPoint analysis revealed a higher proportion of reports from consumers and non-health professionals for vortioxetine as well as higher relative reporting rates of gastrointestinal symptoms, pruritus and mood-related symptoms, consistent with the cluster analysis.

Conclusions

A pattern of co-reported adverse events that is consistent with labelled adverse events for vortioxetine and the safety profile for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in general was revealed. Clusters of unlabelled adverse events were identified that reflect clinical entities that might represent signals of previously unknown adverse events. More extensive analyses of spontaneous reports may help to further understand the reporting pattern of adverse events.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40264-021-01139-y.

The Importance of Direct Patient Reporting of Adverse Drug Reactions in the Safety Monitoring Process

All medicinal products authorized in the European Union are subjects of constant drug-safety monitoring processes. It is organized in a pharmacovigilance system that is designed to protect human health and life by the detection, analysis and prevention of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and other drug-related problems. The main role of the aforementioned system is to collect and analyze adverse drug reaction reports. Legislation introduced several years ago allowed patients, their legal representatives and caregivers to report adverse drug reactions, which caused them to be an additional source of safety data. This paper presents the analysis of EudraVigilance data related to adverse drug reactions provided by patients, their representatives, as well as those obtained from healthcare professionals related to medicines which belong to M01A anti-inflammatory and antirheumatic products, a non-steroid group. The objective of the study was to identify the changes in the number and structure of adverse reaction reporting after the introduction of pharmacovigilance (PV) obligations in EU. A review of scientific literature was also conducted to assess the differences in adverse reactions reported by patients or their representatives and by healthcare professionals. We also identified other factors which, according to literature review, influenced the number of adverse reaction reports provided by patients. Analysis of data collected from the EudraVigilance showed that from 2011 to 2013 the number of reports made by patients and their caregivers increased by approx. 24 percentage points, and then, from 2014, it constituted around 30% of the total of reported reactions every year, so patient reporting is an important part of pharmacovigilance system and a source of drugs’ safety information throughout their use in healthcare practice. Additionally, there was no interrelationship between the seriousness of reported adverse reactions and the overall number of patient reports when compared to reports form healthcare professionals.

Signals from the Dutch national spontaneous reporting system: Characteristics and regulatory actions

PURPOSE

The aim of the study is to characterise safety signals based on the Dutch spontaneous reporting system (SRS) and to investigate the association between signal characteristics and Product Information (PI) update stratified by approval type: centrally authorised products (CAPs) versus nationally and decentralised authorised products (NAPs).

METHODS

This study evaluates the full cohort of signals disseminated from the Dutch SRS in the period from 2008 to 2017. Each retrieved signal was characterised on a number of aspects. The signal management process from signal generation to a potential PI update was analysed in four steps: (1) signal characterisation; (2) proposed actions by the Dutch national competent authority (NCA) for the signals; (3) presence of PI update (yes/no) and association with signal characteristics; (4) timing from the moment the signal was issued to PI update. For step 1-3 we stratified products in CAPs and NAPs.

RESULTS

Of all signals, 88.7% led to a proposed regulatory action by the NCA. Signals from the Dutch SRS for CAPs versus NAPs more often concerned biologicals, important medical events, class effects and shorter periods since marketing authorization. We detected PI updates for 26.2% of CAP signals and 61.3% of NAP signals.

CONCLUSIONS

The Dutch SRSs remains an important source of signals. There are some notable differences in the characteristics of signals for CAPs versus NAPs. Signals for NAPs more frequently led to PI updates.

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting by Patients in 12 European Countries

Patients who report suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) help minimize drug safety risks and bolster the pharmacovigilance system. The aim of this study was to examine the contribution of patients to pharmacovigilance and compare the tools used to promote patient reporting in European countries that implemented this reporting type in 2012-2013. A web-based questionnaire was sent to the national competent authorities (NCAs) of the European countries. The received answers were systematized and compared using statistical analysis. The performed statistical analysis demonstrated that changes in the number of received ADR reports increased significantly in each country during the analyzed period. These changes were significantly different in Ireland and Finland from those in the other reviewed countries. The common source of information on direct patient reporting was the country's NCA website. Other sources used were social media pages, leaflets, and posters. This is the first study on patient reporting schemes implemented after the significant reform of the European regulatory system for pharmacovigilance. However, some countries did not actively promote their patient reporting schemes. Our findings indicate that countries with minimal experience in pharmacovigilance systems that include direct patient reporting should organize comprehensive campaigns on ADR reporting.

Patients' contribution to drug safety in Catalonia: the interest of personal feelings on adverse drug reactions

PURPOSE

There are few studies on the personal view retrieved by patients in the spontaneous reports' free-text section of suspected adverse drug reactions.

METHODS

We analysed the suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) spontaneous reports sent to the Catalan Centre of Pharmacovigilance between 2013 and 2017. The information provided in the free-text section was classified as (1) temporal sequence, (2) description of symptoms, (3) description of psychological impact, (4) withdrawal effects, (5) alternative causes, and (6) rechallenge. The concordance level between the perceived severity by the reporter and the pharmacovigilance team was assessed by the Kappa index (ƙ). Usual descriptive statistics were used to describe variables.

RESULTS

Nationally, 190 spontaneous reports described 383 ADRs, which 28.6% were unknown or poorly known in the literature, and 52.1% were serious. The most frequent ADRs were gastrointestinal (19.3%) and neurological (19.1%), and among the most common 213 suspected medicines, there were those used for nervous system conditions (18.8%). The agreement on the perception of ADRs' severity between citizens and centre's technicians was 'good' (K = 0.62 (0.51-0.72)). An analysis of the free-text section of reports showed that one-quarter of the reports provided useful additional data, like the psychobiosocial impact, which could explain the discrepancy between patients and health professionals in the classification of the severity of some ADRs.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' report free-text section provides relevant information, mainly about symptoms description, psychobiosocial impact and feelings. Therefore, it is a section to be enhanced and analysed. These findings should encourage the strengthening of citizens reporting.

Potential for Detection of Safety Signals for Over-the-Counter Medicines Using National ADR Spontaneous Reporting Data: The Example of OTC NSAID-Associated Gastrointestinal Bleeding

One post-marketing surveillance challenge for many regulatory authorities is access to information regarding the safety of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines. National spontaneous adverse drug reaction (ADR) report data represent a rich potential data source for the detection of safety signals associated with OTC medicines, yet little is known regarding the possibility of detecting safety signals for OTC medicines within these datasets. The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential for detecting safety signals for OTC medicines in National ADR spontaneous reporting data, using OTC non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and gastrointestinal bleeding as an example. Data from the Australian Adverse Drug Reactions System (ADRS) dataset (1971-2008) and the Canadian Vigilance Adverse Reaction Online Database (VAROD) (1965-2013) were used to explore the feasibility of using spontaneous reporting data, exploring the association between gastrointestinal bleeding and the use of OTC NSAIDs. Safety signals were examined using disproportionality analyses and reporting odds ratios calculated. After adjusting for age, gender, medications known to increase the risk of bleeding, and medications used for the management of conditions associated with an increased risk of bleeding, a two-fold increase in the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding with OTC NSAID was observed within each dataset. This study demonstrates that spontaneous ADR reporting data can be used in pharmacovigilance to monitor the safety of OTC medicines.

Intensive monitoring of adverse drug events associated with the use of new glucose-lowering drugs: results from an inception cohort study in Portugal

AIMS

To determine the frequency and the time-course profile of adverse drug events associated with new glucose-lowering drugs in daily practice and to explore factors potentially associated to these events.

METHODS

An inception cohort study was implemented. Adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus initiating a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist or a sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor were eligible for inclusion. Data were collected through baseline and follow-up telephone questionnaires, administered at 2 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank were computed to compare the time to adverse drug event onset. Cox models were used to explore potential factors associated with adverse drug events.

RESULTS

A total of 1328 participants were recruited to the study. In all, 1118 adverse drug events were reported (of which 36% were not listed in the summary of product characteristics) by 41% of participants. The median latency time of adverse drug events reported in ≥1% of participants ranged from 0 to 2 days. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor subgroups were associated with an increased likelihood of adverse drug event reporting when compared with the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor subgroup. A total of 328 glucose-lowering drugs were withdrawn, more than half as a result of an adverse drug event.

CONCLUSIONS

More than two-fifths of participants reported an adverse drug event; dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors led to the highest proportion of unlabelled adverse drug events. Adverse drug event latency time data show that counselling and adverse drug event management should be proactively addressed from treatment initiation. There should be greater focus on prevalent new users of glucose-lowering drugs, who were more complex participants in this study in terms of type 2 diabetes disease, as they were more likely to report an adverse drug event than the incident new users.

"ADR PvPI" Android mobile app: Report adverse drug reaction at any time anywhere in India

BACKGROUND:

To improve the public health and promote instant adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting, a need to develop an ADR Pharmacovigilance Programme of India (PvPI) mobile app was identified by the National Coordination CentrePvPI (NCCPvPI) to serve the Pan India ADR reporting. The objective of this study was to develop an indigenous Googlebased Android mobile application known as “ADR PvPI” and to analyze the ADRrelated data reported through this mobile application on pilot basis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

The ADR PvPI mobile application was indigenously developed by NCCPvPI officials within 6 months. The study of spontaneous ADR reporting was carried out between September 2017 and September 2018. This article provides an overview of the salient features of ADR PvPI mobile application, guides on how to fillin ADRs, reporting trends of ADR, types of ADR as per System Organ Class and pharmacological classes of drugs.

RESULTS:

Till date, >5500 users have downloaded the app with an average rating of 4.26. In that tenure, 262 reports have been received through ADR PvPI mobile app. During the year 2017, 3.55% of reports were received through ADR PvPI mobile app and the percentage of reports received by 2018 was 96.45%.

CONCLUSION:

The frequency of ADR reporting has significantly increased over the past 1 year and should be promoted further through awareness and training programs.

Intensive Monitoring Studies for Assessing Medicines: A Systematic Review

Introduction: Intensive monitoring (IM) is one of the methods of post-marketing active surveillance based upon event monitoring, which has received interest in the current medicines regulatory landscape. For a specific period of time, IM involves primary data collection and is actively focused on gathering longitudinal information, mainly safety, since the first day of drug use. Objectives: To describe IM systems and studies' data published over 11-years period (2006-2016). Specifically, we reviewed study population/event surveillance, methodological approaches, limitations, and its applications in the real-world evidence generation data. Methods: We completed a systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify studies published from 2006 to 2016, that used IM methodology. We extracted data using a standardized form and results were analyzed descriptively. The methodological quality of selected studies was assessed using the modified Downs and Black checklist. Results: From 1,400 screened citations, we identified 86 papers, corresponding to 69 different studies. Seventy percent of reviewed studies corresponded to established IM systems, of which, more than half were prescription event monitoring (PEM) and modified-PEM. Among non-established IM systems, vaccines were the most common studied drugs (n = 14). The median cohort size ranged from 488 (hospitals) to 10,479 (PEM) patients. Patients and caregivers were the event data source in 39.1% of studies. The mean overall quality score was similar between established and non-established IM. Conclusions: Over the study period, IM studies were implemented in 26 countries with different maturity levels of post-marketing surveillance systems. We identified two major limitations: only 20% of studies were conducted at hospital-level, which is a matter of concern, insofar as healthcare systems are facing a lack of access to new medicines at ambulatory care level. Additionally, IM access to data of drug exposure cohorts, either at identification or at follow-up stages, could somehow constitute a barrier, given the complexity of managerial, linkable, and privacy data issues.

Knowledge, awareness, perception and reporting of experienced adverse drug reactions among outpatients in Nigeria

Background Higher incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) remain a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Most targeted ADR reporting activities are mainly professional-centered with less attention to patients' knowledge, perception and selfreporting of experienced ADRs. Objectives To comprehensively evaluate patients' knowledge, awareness, perception and reporting of experienced ADRs. Setting Three public healthcare facilities in Ibadan, southwestern Nigeria. Method A questionnaire-guided cross-sectional interview of 1190 consented ambulatory adult patients consecutively recruited from various clinics of the selected hospitals between February and June 2018. The 32-item pretested questionnaire comprised open- and closed-ended questions, as well as open-ended questions with relevant prompts. Data were summarised using descriptive statistics, while Chi square was used to investigate association between relevant categorical variables at p < 0.05. Main outcome measure Knowledge, awareness, perception and reporting of experienced ADRs among patients. Results Response rate was 99.1%. Mean age was 40.6 ± 14.9 years. Forty-nine (4.1%) patients were aware of pharmacovigilance. A total of 964 (81.0%) correctly understood what can be regarded as serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs), 444 (37.3%) had previously experienced ADRs, while 77 (6.5%) experienced reactions with current medication(s). Of this, 64 (83.1%) made a report largely to physician (52; 81.3%). Summarily, reported reactions were more with antimalarials (214; 49.1%), with itching (168; 78.5%) constituting the most frequently occurring reaction. Use of text message (276; 27.2%) and filling of ADR report form (248; 24.4%) were topmost on the list of suggested methods for ADR reporting. There was a significant association between patient's age and awareness of pharmacovigilance (p = 0.015), while educational qualification (p = 0.001) significantly influenced tendency to make a report of experienced ADRs. Conclusion Approximately four percent of patients were aware of pharmacovigilance, while more than three-quarters correctly understood the concept of serious adverse drug reactions. A little above one-quarter had previously experienced one form of reaction or the other, with majority reporting such reactions to physician. Continuous education of stakeholders in pharmacovigilance activities is advocated, while patient's active involvement in spontaneous reporting of ADRs should be carefully considered.

Fifteen years of patient reporting -what have we learned and where are we heading to?

INTRODUCTION

In April 2003, the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb successfully implemented patient reporting to their spontaneous reporting system. The number of reports by patients rapidly grew, prompting the need to evaluate the value of the patient reporting scheme and to compare experiences with other countries. The aim of this article is to summarize our 15-year experience of working with direct patient reporting in pharmacovigilance and to discuss necessary steps in order to optimize the use of patient reports in the future.

AREAS COVERED

This article is based on Lareb studies on patient reporting from 2004 onwards and covers the evolution of the Dutch patient reporting system, the value of patient participation in pharmacovigilance, the impact of patient reporting on the spontaneous reporting system and future steps to strengthen patient reporting.

EXPERT OPINION

After 15 years of experience with patient reporting we conclude that patients can add value to pharmacovigilance. We recognize that there is a big leap between allowing patients to report and actual patient involvement in pharmacovigilance. It is our belief that increased patient involvement in pharmacovigilance is a way to improve pharmacovigilance, enhancing the general public's trust in medicines.

Collaboration between patient and pharmacovigilance organizations to gain insight into adults' experiences with drug use and ADRs for the treatment of ADHD

BACKGROUND

Patient organizations have good access to patients, which can be of interest in gaining knowledge about patients' experiences with drugs. The aim of this study is to investigate if a collaboration between a pharmacovigilance center and an ADHD patient organization can give more insight in patients' experiences with drug use and ADRs for the treatment of AD(H)D.

METHODS

Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb and ADHD patient organization Impuls & Woortblind created a web-based questionnaire asking about patients' experiences with drug use and ADRs. Patients were approached to participate by e-mail and an open web-link. They were also asked to report ADRs through the official reporting form of Lareb.

RESULTS

A total of 1160 patients completed the questionnaire, of which 75.2% of the respondents experienced ADRs and 60.7% discontinued treatment because of an ADR. More than 70% experienced positive effects of their drugs. Additionally, 5.0% of the respondents reported their ADRs to Lareb.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaboration with patient organizations provide useful insight into patients' experiences with drug use and ADRs taking into account establishing clear 'rules of engagement'. An active approach to collaborate with patient organizations is a way forward to gain more information about drug use and ADRs in a selective cohort.

Harmonization of Pharmacovigilance Regulation in Brazil: Opportunities to Improve Risk Communication

Brazilian pharmacovigilance regulations involve 3 spheres: health services, Marketing Authorization Holders (MAHs), and sanitary agency. Drug tolerability began to be effectively assessed in Brazil after the founding of the National Agency of Sanitary Surveillance, which developed the Sentinel Network Project. The objective of the Sentinel Network Project is to increase the adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting rate by health care professionals in the hospital setting. Pharmacovigilance practices became mandatory for MAHs, and patient tolerability issues were considered in drug policy in Brazil only as recently as 2000. However, despite recent events, the regulatory advancements in pharmacovigilance in Brazil are only equivalent to international practices (ie, those of the European Union). The pharmacovigilance system in the European Union integrates the national authorities, the European Commission, and the European Medicines Agency, which is responsible for the scientific evaluation, supervision, and safety monitoring of medicines for human and veterinary use in the European Union. Furthermore, ADR patient reporting is included in the new EU pharmacovigilance regulations. Numerous possible ways are available to improve the Brazilian pharmacovigilance system, mainly through regulations of biosimilar, nanotechnology, and veterinary medicines or by training health care professionals and patients to report nonserious cases and quality deviations. It is necessary to encourage and develop strategies for decentralizing pharmacovigilance actions in the whole country, as is common practice in several EU countries. Motivating and considering ADR reports by patients and improving feedback and audit practices in health care services and MAHs are also necessary measures. With the inclusion of Brazil as a member of the International Conference of Harmonization, significant changes in pharmacovigilance regulation are expected; these updates, which will consider international standards, will improve signal detection and risk communication.

The Role of European Patient Organizations in Pharmacovigilance

INTRODUCTION

Patient organizations have a privileged position to be active agents for promoting pharmacovigilance and patient engagement, encouraging direct patient reporting and improving the awareness of pharmacovigilance.

AIM

The objective of this study was to understand the role of European patient organizations as stakeholders to optimize patient involvement in pharmacovigilance.

METHODS

A descriptive correlational study was conducted to investigate the opinions and attitudes of patient organizations regarding general patient involvement in pharmacovigilance, and their initiatives to support drug safety through a web-based questionnaire during the months of March and April 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 1898 patient organizations were invited to participate in the survey, including 89 pan-European organizations. In total, 337 questionnaires (17.76%) were collected from 31 countries, including 297 complete answers (88.31%). A large number of organizations stated that they would like to increase the awareness of patients regarding specific adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to their medicines (43.19%, n  = 130); however, 38.54% (n  = 116) declared they do not have any pharmacovigilance goals. Barriers to supporting pharmacovigilance activities include low budget to promote pharmacovigilance among members (45.45%, n  = 135), lack of resources to participate in pharmacovigilance activities (43.77%, n  = 130), or lack of support from the National Competent Authorities (33.33%, n  = 99). Organizations inform patients to report ADRs (40.40%; n  = 120), information regarding new ADRs related to their medicines (40.07%; n  = 119), or when a new drug is marketed (30.98%; n  = 92); however, more than one-third indicated that they never had any involvement in pharmacovigilance (34.68%; n  = 103).

CONCLUSION

Bringing pharmacovigilance stakeholders and patient organizations together could create a more optimal reporting culture. Patient organizations appear to have an important role in encouraging patients to talk with their doctors/pharmacists about ADRs experienced, or to help him/her report the ADRs to the pharmacovigilance systems. Lack of resources, budget, and support from NCAs are seen as the main barriers to being involved in pharmacovigilance awareness.

Safety Concerns Reported by Patients Identified in a Collaborative Signal Detection Workshop using VigiBase: Results and Reflections from Lareb and Uppsala Monitoring Centre

Introduction

Patient reporting in pharmacovigilance is important and contributes to signal detection. However, descriptions of methodologies for using patient reports in signal detection are scarce, and published experiences of how patient reports are used in pharmacovigilance are limited to a few individual countries.

Objective

Our objective was to explore the contribution of patient reports to global signal detection in VigiBase.

Methods

Data were retrieved from VigiBase in September 2016. Drug–event-combination series were restricted to those with >50% patient reports, defined as reporter type “Consumer/non-health professional” per E2B reporting standard. vigiRank was applied to patient reports to prioritize combinations for assessment. Product information for healthcare professionals (HCPs) as well as patient information leaflets (PILs) were used as reference for information on adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Staff from the Uppsala Monitoring Centre and the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb categorized the combinations. Potential signals proceeded to a more in-depth clinical review to determine whether the safety concern should be communicated as a “signal.”

Results

Of the 212 combinations assessed, 20 (9%) resulted in eight signals communicated within the World Health Organization (WHO) programme for international drug monitoring. Review of PILs revealed insufficient ADR descriptions for patients and examples of poor consistency with product information for HCPs. Patient narratives provided details regarding the experience and impact of ADRs and evidence that patients make causality and personal risk assessments.

Conclusions

Safety concerns described in patient reports can be identified in a global database including previously unknown ADRs as well as new aspects of known ADRs. Patient reports provide unique information valuable in signal assessment and should be included in signal detection. Novel approaches to highlighting patient reports in statistical signal detection can further improve the contribution of patient reports to pharmacovigilance.

Does patient reporting lead to earlier detection of drug safety signals? A retrospective comparison of time to reporting between patients and healthcare professionals in a global database

AIMS

To explore if there is a difference between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) in time to reporting drug-adverse drug reaction (ADR) associations that led to drug safety signals.

METHODS

This was a retrospective comparison of time to reporting selected drug-ADR associations which led to drug safety signals between patients and HCPs. ADR reports were selected from the World Health Organization Global database of individual case safety reports, VigiBase. Reports were selected based on drug-ADR associations of actual drug safety signals. Primary outcome was the difference in time to reporting between patients and HCPs. The date of the first report for each individual signal was used as time zero. The difference in time between the date of the reports and time zero was calculated. Statistical differences in timing were analysed on the corresponding survival curves using a Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

In total, 2822 reports were included, of which 52.7% were patient reports, with a median of 25% for all included signals. For all signals, median time to signal detection was 10.4 years. Overall, HCPs reported earlier than patients: median 7.0 vs. 8.3 years (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients contributed a large proportion of reports on drug-ADR pairs that eventually became signals. HCPs reported 1.3 year earlier than patients. These findings strengthen the evidence on the value of patient reporting in signal detection and highlight an opportunity to encourage patients to report suspected ADRs even earlier in the future.

Cancer cells growing on perfused 3D collagen model produced higher reactive oxygen species level and were more resistant to cisplatin compared to the 2D model

INTRODUCTION

Three-dimensional (3D) collagen scaffold models, due to their ability to mimic the tissue and organ structure in vivo, have received increasing interest in drug discovery and toxicity evaluation.

METHODS

In this study, we developed a perfused 3D model and studied cellular response to cytotoxic drugs in comparison with traditional 2D cell cultures as evaluated by cancer drug cisplatin.

RESULTS

Cancer cells grown in perfused 3D environments showed increased levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) production compared to the 2D culture. As determined by growth analysis, cells in the 3D culture, after forming a spheroid, were more resistant to the cancer drug cisplatin compared to that of the 2D cell culture. In addition, 3D culturing cells showed elevated level of ROS, indicating a physiological change or the formation of a microenvironment that resembles tumor cells in vivo.

CONCLUSIONS

These data revealed that cellular response to drugs for cells growing in 3D environments are dramatically different from that of 2D cultured cells. Thus, the perfused 3D collagen scaffold model we report here might be a potentially very useful tool for drug analysis.

Dedicated mobile application for drug adverse reaction reporting by patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (Vigip-SEP study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADR) by patients represents an interesting challenge in the field of pharmacovigilance, but the reporting system is not adequately implemented in France. In 2015, only 20 MS patients in France reported ADR due to first-line disease-modifying drugs (DMD), while more than 3000 patients were initiated on DMD. The aim of this study is to validate a proof-of-concept as to whether the use of a mobile application (App) increases ADR reporting among patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RR-MS) receiving DMD.

METHODS/DESIGN

We designed a multi-centric, open cluster-randomized controlled trial, called the Vigip-SEP study (NCT03029897), using the App My eReport France® to report ADR to the appropriate authorities in E2B language, in accordance with European regulations. RR-MS patients who were initiated on, or switched, first-line DMD will be included. In the experimental arm, a neurologist will introduce the patient to the App to report ADR to the appropriate French authorities. In the control arm, the patient will be informed of the existence of the App but will not be introduced to its use and will then report ADR according to the usual reporting procedures. Primary assessment criteria are defined as the average number of ADR per patient and per center. We assume that the App will increase patient reporting by 10-fold. Therefore, we will require 24 centers (12 per arm: 6 MS academic expert centers, 3 general hospitals, 3 private practice neurologists), allowing for an expected enrollment of 180 patients (alpha risk 5%, power 90% and standard deviation 4%).

DISCUSSION

Increasing patient reporting of ADR in a real-life setting is extremely important for therapeutic management of RR-MS, particularly for monitoring newly approved DMD to gain better knowledge of their safety profiles. To increase patient involvement, teaching patients to use tools, such as mobile applications, should be encouraged, and these tools should be tested rigorously.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , ID: NCT03029897 . Registered on 20 January 2017.

A prediction model-based algorithm for computer-assisted database screening of adverse drug reactions in the Netherlands

Purpose

The statistical screening of pharmacovigilance databases containing spontaneously reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is mainly based on disproportionality analysis. The aim of this study was to improve the efficiency of full database screening using a prediction model‐based approach.

Methods

A logistic regression‐based prediction model containing 5 candidate predictors was developed and internally validated using the Summary of Product Characteristics as the gold standard for the outcome. All drug‐ADR associations, with the exception of those related to vaccines, with a minimum of 3 reports formed the training data for the model. Performance was based on the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results were compared with the current method of database screening based on the number of previously analyzed associations.

Results

A total of 25 026 unique drug‐ADR associations formed the training data for the model. The final model contained all 5 candidate predictors (number of reports, disproportionality, reports from healthcare professionals, reports from marketing authorization holders, Naranjo score). The AUC for the full model was 0.740 (95% CI; 0.734–0.747). The internal validity was good based on the calibration curve and bootstrapping analysis (AUC after bootstrapping = 0.739). Compared with the old method, the AUC increased from 0.649 to 0.740, and the proportion of potential signals increased by approximately 50% (from 12.3% to 19.4%).

Conclusions

A prediction model‐based approach can be a useful tool to create priority‐based listings for signal detection in databases consisting of spontaneous ADRs.