New safety signals assessed by the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee at EU level in 2014-2017

Acetazolamide-induced pulmonary oedema: A disproportionality analysis from the EudraVigilance database

To our knowledge, no prior study has analysed a possible association between acetazolamide and pulmonary oedema. The aim of this study was to use data from the EudraVigilance to detect a safety signal for acetazolamide-induced pulmonary oedema. We performed a disproportionality analysis (case-noncase method), calculating reporting odds ratios (RORs) up to 22 February 2024. Among 11 684 208 spontaneous cases of adverse reactions registered in EudraVigilance, 38 275 were pulmonary oedemas. Acetazolamide was involved in 31 cases. In more than half of those cases, the patients received a single dose of acetazolamide after undergoing cataract surgery: latency was 10-90 min. Remarkably, there were five cases of positive rechallenge and six cases resulted in death. The ROR for acetazolamide was 3.63 (95% CI 2.55-5.17). Disproportionality was also observed in VigiBase®: ROR 4.44 (95% CI 3.34-5.90). Our study confirms a signal that suggests a risk of serious pulmonary oedema associated with acetazolamide.

The Reporting of a Disproportionality Analysis for Drug Safety Signal Detection Using Individual Case Safety Reports in PharmacoVigilance (READUS-PV): Development and Statement

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Disproportionality analyses using reports of suspected adverse drug reactions are the most commonly used quantitative methods for detecting safety signals in pharmacovigilance. However, their methods and results are generally poorly reported in published articles and existing guidelines do not capture the specific features of disproportionality analyses. We here describe the development of a guideline (REporting of A Disproportionality analysis for drUg Safety signal detection using individual case safety reports in PharmacoVigilance [READUS-PV]) for reporting the results of disproportionality analyses in articles and abstracts.

METHODS

We established a group of 34 international experts from universities, the pharmaceutical industry, and regulatory agencies, with expertise in pharmacovigilance, disproportionality analyses, and assessment of safety signals. We followed a three-step process to develop the checklist: (1) an open-text survey to generate a first list of items; (2) an online Delphi method to select and rephrase the most important items; (3) a final online consensus meeting.

RESULTS

Among the panel members, 33 experts responded to round 1 and 30 to round 2 of the Delphi and 25 participated to the consensus meeting. Overall, 60 recommendations for the main body of the manuscript and 13 recommendations for the abstracts were retained by participants after the Delphi method. After merging of some items together and the online consensus meeting, the READUS-PV guidelines comprise a checklist of 32 recommendations, in 14 items, for the reporting of disproportionality analyses in the main body text and four items, comprising 12 recommendations, for abstracts.

CONCLUSIONS

The READUS-PV guidelines will support authors, editors, peer-reviewers, and users of disproportionality analyses using individual case safety report databases. Adopting these guidelines will lead to more transparent, comprehensive, and accurate reporting and interpretation of disproportionality analyses, facilitating the integration with other sources of evidence.

Pharmacovigilance Strategies to Address Resistance to Antibiotics and Inappropriate Use-A Narrative Review

The spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global challenge. Close and continuous surveillance for quick detection of AMR can be difficult, especially in remote places. This narrative review focuses on the contributions of pharmacovigilance (PV) as an auxiliary tool for identifying and monitoring the ineffectiveness, resistance, and inappropriate use of antibiotics (ABs). The terms "drug ineffective", "therapeutic failure", "drug resistance", "pathogen resistance", and "multidrug resistance" were found in PV databases and dictionaries, denoting ineffectiveness. These terms cover a range of problems that should be better investigated because they are useful in warning about possible causes of AMR. "Medication errors", especially those related to dose and indication, and "Off-label use" are highlighted in the literature, suggesting inappropriate use of ABs. Hence, the included studies show that the terms of interest related to AMR and use are not only present but frequent in PV surveillance programs. This review illustrates the feasibility of using PV as a complementary tool for antimicrobial stewardship activities, especially in scenarios where other resources are scarce.

Understanding factors influencing the implementation of medicine risk communications by healthcare professionals in clinical practice: a systematic review using the Theoretical Domains Framework

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are known to cause hospitalisation, longer hospital stays, as well as higher healthcare costs and mortality. Unrecognised ADRs are anticipated throughout the medicine lifecycle as, before the medicine reaches the market, clinical trials are conducted for a short period on a limited number of people, who might underrepresent the actual population. After the medicine reaches the market, emergent information that could affect its benefit-to-risk balance is usually shared by regulatory agencies and pharmaceutical companies through medicine risk communications. Medicines risk communications aim to prevent harm to patients by targeting their behaviour, knowledge, and attitudes, as well as those of health care professionals (HCPs). Despite their important role in translating these communications into their clinical practice, HCPs do not always adhere to the recommendations provided in risk communications. Measurement of medicine risk communications' effectiveness does not necessarily guarantee their implementation, cost-effectiveness, or transferability in real-world situations. To enhance the impact of drug regulatory interventions, implementation science has been encouraged. However, implementation science was not previously used to identify factors affecting HCPs' implementation of medicines risk communications. A recently widely used framework is the Theoretical Domain Framework (TDF). In this systematic review, the TDF was employed to categorise a range of different factors that could affect HCPs' implementation of medicine risk communications within their clinical contexts.

METHODS

The search strategy involved a set of predefined search terms and fifteen databases, such as EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science and CINAHL PLUS. Searches were conducted from April to May 2018 and updated in June 2021 using PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL PLUS. A second reviewer independently conducted the screening process of the initial search. The total number of records screened was 10,475. A study was included if it reported any factors influencing HCPs' uptake of medicine risk communications. Only studies with English or Arabic abstracts were included. Those studies that did not include pharmacovigilance-related medicine risk communications were excluded. Additionally, studies only assessing HCPs' practice or evaluating the effectiveness of risk minimisation measures were excluded. Likewise, studies related to occupational hazards, case reports, interventional studies, and studies not involving HCPs were excluded. In case the published information was insufficient to decide whether to include or exclude a study, the authors were contacted. Furthermore, the authors of seven eligible abstracts were contacted for full-text articles. The mixed method appraisal tool (MMAT) was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. All included studies were assessed by one reviewer, and a total of 16 studies were assessed by two reviewers independently. Disagreements were resolved through discussion. Using thematic analysis and concept mapping, a narrative synthesis was performed, followed by a critical reflection on the synthesis process. This review presents the results of the concept mapping, which involved matching the identified factors to the TDF.

RESULTS

A total of 28 studies were included. Eleven domains influenced HCPs' implementation of medicine risk communications. A large number of studies included factors related to the "Knowledge" domain (n = 23), followed by "Beliefs about Consequences" (n = 13), "Memory, Attention and Decision Processes" (n = 12) and "Environmental Context and Resources" domains (n = 12). Seven studies reported "social influences" and six studies included factors relating to "Goals", followed by four studies involving factors related to "Social/Professional Role and Identity". Underrepresented domains included "Emotion" (n = 2), "Beliefs about Capabilities" (n = 2), "Behavioural Regulation" (n = 1), and "Reinforcement" (n = 1). On the other hand, none of the identified factors were related to the "Skills", "Optimism", or "Intentions" domains. Except for "Beliefs about Consequences", most studies contributing to the other three most commonly reported domains ("Knowledge"; "Environmental Context and Resources"; and "Memory, Attention and Decision Processes") scored low (1 or 2 out of 5) on the MMAT quality assessment. Moreover, the same number of studies (n = 5) contributing to the "Beliefs about Consequences" domain had low (1 or 2 out of 5), and intermediate (3 out of 5) scores on the MMAT.

CONCLUSION

Medicines risk communications are important tools for disseminating information that may influence the benefit-to-risk balance of medicines. Even though HCPs are required to implement the recommendations of these communications, they do not always adhere to them. Using the TDF enabled the categorization of the range of factors that affect whether or not HCPs implement the recommendations provided in a medicine risk communication. However, most of these factors relate to four domains only ("Knowledge"; "Beliefs about Consequences"; "Memory, Attention and Decision Processes"; and "Environmental Context and Resources"). Additionally, most of the studies contributing to three of these four domains were of low quality. Future research should focus on using implementation science to identify target behaviours for actionable medicine risk communications. Regulators should use such science to develop cost-effective strategies for improving the implementation of medicines risk communication by HCPs.

Mapping Strategies to Assess and Increase the Validity of Published Disproportionality Signals: A Meta-Research Study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Disproportionality analysis is traditionally used in spontaneous reporting systems to generate working hypotheses about potential adverse drug reactions: the so-called disproportionality signals. We aim to map the methods used by researchers to assess and increase the validity of their published disproportionality signals.

METHODS

From a systematic literature search of published disproportionality analyses up until 1 January 2020, we randomly selected and analyzed 100 studies. We considered five domains: (1) rationale for the study, (2) design of disproportionality analyses, (3) case-by-case assessment, (4) use of complementary data sources, and (5) contextualization of the results within existing evidence.

RESULTS

Among the articles, multiple strategies were adopted to assess and enhance the results validity. The rationale, in 95 articles, was explicitly referred to the accrued evidence, mostly observational data (n = 46) and regulatory documents (n = 45). A statistical adjustment was performed in 34 studies, and specific strategies to correct for biases were implemented in 33 studies. A case-by-case assessment was complementarily performed in 35 studies, most often by investigating temporal plausibility (n = 26). Complementary data sources were used in 25 articles. In 78 articles, results were contextualized using accrued evidence from the literature and regulatory documents, the most important sources being observational (n = 45), other disproportionalities (n = 37), and case reports (n = 36).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-research study highlighted the heterogeneity in methods and strategies used by researchers to assess the validity of disproportionality signals. Mapping these strategies is a first step towards testing their utility in different scenarios and developing guidelines for designing future disproportionality analysis.

Lithium in Cancer Therapy: Friend or Foe?

Lithium, a trace element important for fetal health and development, is considered a metal drug with a well-established clinical regime, economical production process, and a mature storage system. Several studies have shown that lithium affects tumor development by regulating inositol monophosphate (IMPase) and glycogen synthase kinase-3 (GSK-3). Lithium can also promote proliferation and programmed cell death (PCD) in tumor cells through a number of new targets, such as the nuclear receptor NR4A1 and Hedgehog-Gli. Lithium may increase cancer treatment efficacy while reducing side effects, suggesting that it can be used as an adjunctive therapy. In this review, we summarize the effects of lithium on tumor progression and discuss the underlying mechanisms. Additionally, we discuss lithium's limitations in antitumor clinical applications, including its narrow therapeutic window and potential pro-cancer effects on the tumor immune system.

Characteristics of drug safety alerts issued by the Spanish Medicines Agency

Objectives: To describe the characteristics of safety alerts issued by the Spanish Medicines Agency (AEMPS) and the Spanish Pharmacovigilance System over a 7-year period and the regulatory actions they generated. Methods: A retrospective analysis was carried out of drug safety alerts published on the AEMPS website from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2019. Alerts that were not drug-related or were addressed to patients rather than healthcare professionals were excluded. Results: During the study period, 126 safety alerts were issued, 12 of which were excluded because they were not related to drugs or were addressed to patients and 22 others were excluded as they were duplications of previous alerts. The remaining 92 alerts reported 147 adverse drug reactions (ADRs) involving 84 drugs. The most frequent source of information triggering a safety alert was spontaneous reporting (32.6%). Four alerts (4.3%) specifically addressed health issues related to children. ADRs were considered serious in 85.9% of the alerts. The most frequent ADRs were hepatitis (seven alerts) and congenital malformations (five alerts), and the most frequent drug classes were antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents (23%). Regarding the drugs involved, 22 (26.2%) were "under additional monitoring." Regulatory actions induced changes in the Summary of Product Characteristics in 44.6% of alerts, and in eight cases (8.7%), the alert led to withdrawal from the market of medicines with an unfavorable benefit/risk ratio. Conclusion: This study provides an overview of drug safety alerts issued by the Spanish Medicines Agency over a 7-year period and highlights the contribution of spontaneous reporting of ADRs and the need to assess safety throughout the lifecycle of medicines.

Signals of Adverse Drug Reactions Communicated by Pharmacovigilance Stakeholders: A Scoping Review of the Global Literature

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Signals of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) can be supported by reports of ADRs and by interventional and non-interventional studies. The evidence base and features of ADR reports that are used to support signals remain to be comprehensively described. To this end, we have undertaken a scoping review.

METHODS

We searched the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, without language or time restrictions. We also hand searched the bibliographies of relevant studies. We included studies of any design if the results were described as signals. We assessed the levels of evidence using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) criteria and coded features of reports of ADRs using the Bradford Hill guidelines.

RESULTS

Overall, 1974 publications reported 2421 studies of signals; 1683/2421 were clinical assessments of anecdotal reports of ADRs, but only 225 (13%) of these included explicit judgments on which features of the ADR reports were supportive of a signal. These 225 studies yielded 228 signals; these were supported by features, which were: 'experimental evidence' (i.e., positive dechallenge or rechallenge, 154 instances [68%]), 'temporality' (i.e., time to onset, 130 [57%]), 'exclusion of competing causes' (49 [21%]), and others (40 [17%]). Positive dechallenge/rechallenge often co-occurred with temporality (77/228). OCEBM 4 (i.e., case series and case-control studies) was the most frequent level of evidence (2078 studies). Between 2013 and 2019, there was a three-fold increase in clinical assessments of reports of ADRs compared with a less than two-fold increase in studies supported by higher levels of evidence (i.e., OCEBM 1-3). We identified an increased rate between 2013 and 2019 in disproportionality analyses (about 15 studies per year), mostly from academia.

CONCLUSIONS

Most signals were supported by temporality and dechallenge/rechallenge, but clear reporting of judgments on causality remains infrequent. The number of studies supported only by anecdotal reports of ADRs increased from year to year. The impact of a growing number of signals of disproportionate reporting communicated without an accompanying clinical assessment should be evaluated.

Evaluation of Pharmacovigilance System in Iran

BACKGROUND

Evaluating a pharmacovigilance system helps identify its deficiencies and could facilitate measures to remedy and improve the quantity and quality of adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports and other opportunities for pharmacovigilance systems strengthening. This study aimed to evaluate the status of pharmacovigilance in Iran using the World Health Organization (WHO) pharmacovigilance indicators with the prospect of identifying the gaps and areas for improvement.

METHODS

This study was conducted in 2 parts. The first part included a secondary analysis of the national data obtained from the Iranian National Pharmacovigilance Center (PVC) using a structured data collection form based on WHO core pharmacovigilance indicators. In the second part, a 3-month prospective study was carried out to investigate 2 outcome indicators, ie, length of stay and costs of medicine-related hospitalization in all patients of 2 main referral hospitals in the southeast and north of Iran.

RESULTS

Iran has a PVC with national policy, trained staff, and a statutory budget. In 2017, the number of ADR reports was 15.0 per 100 000 population, and 262 signals were detected during the preceding 5 years. The average length of stay and costs of medicine-related hospitalization were 5 days and US$817.2 in Afzalipour hospital and 6.6 days and US$306.7 in Razi hospital, respectively. The status of pharmacovigilance in the Iranian public health programs (PHPs) is unknown, and most of the indicators could not be assessed.

CONCLUSION

A robust pharmacovigilance system is a pivotal part of the overall medicines regulatory system. The Iranian pharmacovigilance system has relatively the proper structural condition. Though the underreporting of ADRs, especially medicine-related deaths, is an important issue, and some indicators' status was unclear. The Iranian pharmacovigilance program requires a higher prioritization, particularly in the PHPs, a greater allocation of resources, and cross-sectoral cooperation to bolster and achieve the pharmacovigilance objectives.

Effectiveness and Efficacy of Vaccine on Mutated SARS-CoV-2 Virus and Post Vaccination Surveillance: A Narrative Review

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, as a result of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, since December 2019, is a major health problem and concern worldwide. The pandemic has impacted various fields, from the social to the development of health science and technology. The virus has been mutating and thus producing several new variants, rushing research in the field of molecular biology to develop rapidly to overcome the problems that occur. Vaccine clinical studies are developing promptly with the aim of obtaining vaccines that are effective in suppressing the spread of the virus; however, the development of viral mutations raises concerns about the decreasing effectiveness of the resulting vaccine, which also results in the need for more in-depth studies. There have been 330 vaccines developed, including 136 clinical developments and 194 pre-clinical developments. The SARS-CoV-2 variant continues to evolve today, and it poses a challenge in testing the effectiveness of existing vaccines. This is a narrative review describing the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, development of vaccine platforms, identification of concerning mutations and virus variants in various countries of the world, and real-world monitoring of post-vaccination effectiveness and surveillance.

Improving the data quality of spontaneous ADR reports: a practical example from Malta

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting rates and high-quality data within case summary reports are crucial to detect emerging safety concerns and implement regulatory action. In this study we aimed to improve the data quality and reporting rates of ADR reports in Malta through a series of national activities.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Between April 2018 and July 2019, we carried out the following activities: i) a review of wholesale dealers ADR reporting forms; ii) a series of educational workshops targeting physicians and pharmacists; iii) a quality system audit of the Authority's ADR management process.

RESULTS

Twelve wholesaler dealer forms were reviewed, and 155 improvements were identified. Incident reporting forms modified to capture ADRs had the most opportunities for improvement. Five workshops were organized and in total 62 physicians and 22 pharmacists attended. Although feedback from participants was positive, in our case, an increase in reporting was not observed following the workshops. The quality system audit resulted in the introduction of the 'four-eye principle' to the Authority's ADR management process.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of such activities is expected to contribute to the overall pharmacovigilance systems in Malta and our experience could benefit other entities involved in spontaneous ADR reporting.

"Drugs to avoid" to improve quality use of medicines: how is Australia faring?

BACKGROUND

Each year, the French independent bulletin Prescrire publishes a list of medicines, "Drugs to avoid", that should not be used in clinical practice as their risk-to-benefit ratio is unfavourable. This study assessed the market approval, reimbursement and use of these medicines in Australia.

METHODS

The approval status of the medicines included in 2019 Prescrire "Drugs to avoid" list was assessed by searching the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods website. Funding status was assessed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) website, the Australian public insurance system. Use levels were determined by examining governmental reports on prescribing rates including the Australian Statistics on Medicines (ASM) reports, drug use reports released by the Drug Utilisation Sub Committee (DUSC) and PBS statistics.

RESULTS

Of the 93 medicines included in the Prescrire 2019 "Drug to avoid" list included, 57 (61%) were approved in Australia in 2019 including 9 (16%) that were sold as over-the-counter medicines, 35 (38%) were listed on the PBS, 22 (24%) were registered but not listed on the PBS. Although most of these medicines were used infrequently, 16 (46%) had substantial use despite serious safety concerns. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors were used by 22% of patients receiving a treatment for diabetes in 2016. More than 50,000 patients received an anti-dementia medicine in 2014, a 19% increase since 2009. Denosumab became the 8th medicine, in terms of total sales, funded by the Australian Government in 2017-2018.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescrire's assessments provide a reliable external benchmark to assess the current use of medicines in Australia. Sixteen "drugs to avoid", judged to be more harmful than beneficial based on systematic, independent evidence reviews, are in substantial use in Australia. These results raise serious concerns about the awareness of Australian clinicians of medicine safety and efficacy. Medicines safety has become an Australian National Health Priority. Regulatory and reimbursement agencies should review the marketing and funding status of medicines which have not been shown to provide an efficacy and safety at least similar to alternative therapeutic options.

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.

Perioperative pain management in COVID-19 patients: Considerations and recommendations by the Saudi Anesthesia Society (SAS) and Saudi Society of Pain Medicine (SSPM)

The COVID-19 pandemic has swept across the world over the past few months. Many articles have been published on the safety of anesthetic medications and procedures used in COVID-19 positive patients presenting for surgery. Several other articles covered the chronic pain management aspect during the pandemic. Our review aimed to focus on perioperative pain management for COVID-19 patients. We conducted a literature search for pertinent recent articles that cover considerations and recommendations concerning perioperative pain management in COVID-19 patients. We also searched the literature for the relevant adverse effects of the commonly used medications in the treatment of COVID-19, and their potential drug-drug interactions with the common medications used in perioperative pain management. Professional societies recommend prioritizing regional anesthesia techniques, which have many benefits over other perioperative pain management options. When neuraxial and continuous peripheral nerve block catheters are not an option, patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) should be considered if applicable. Many of the medications used for the treatment of COVID-19 and its symptoms can interfere with the metabolism of medications used in perioperative pain management. We formulated an up-to-date guide for anesthesia providers to help them manage perioperative pain in COVID-19 patients presenting for surgery.

Signals of adverse drug reactions communicated by pharmacovigilance stakeholders: protocol for a scoping review of the global literature

BACKGROUND

Signals of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) form the basis of some regulatory risk-minimization actions in pharmacovigilance. Reviews of limited scope have highlighted that such signals are mostly supported by reports of ADRs or multiple types of evidence. The time that elapses between a report of a suspected ADR and the communication of a signal has not been systematically characterized. Neither has the features of reports of suspected ADRs that authors used to support putative causal relationships, although difficulties with establishing causal relationships between medicinal products and adverse events have been highlighted. The objectives of this study will be to describe the evidence underpinning signals in pharmacovigilance, the features of reports of ADRs supporting signals, and the time that it takes to communicate a signal.

METHODS

We shall retrieve records from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and PsycINFO (from inception onwards), without language/design restrictions, and apply backward citation screening. We shall hand-search the websites of 35 regulatory agencies/authorities, restricted publications from the Uppsala Monitoring Centre, and drug bulletins. Signals will be requested from the competent stakeholder, if absent from websites. We shall use VigiBase, the World Health Organization's Global Individual Case Safety Report database, to determine the dates on which ADRs were reported. We shall manage records using EndNote (v. 8.2); one reviewer will screen titles/abstracts and full texts, a second will cross-validate the findings, and a third will arbitrate disagreements. Data will be charted via the Systematic Reviews Data Repository, following the same procedures as for data retrieval. Evidence will be categorized according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence. Features of reports of ADRs will be coded. Tables will display frequencies of types of evidence and features of reports of ADRs. We shall use plots or pictograms (if appropriate) to represent the time from the first report of a suspected ADR to a signal.

DISCUSSION

We expect the findings from this review will allow a better understanding of global patterns of similarities or differences in terms of supporting evidence and timing of communications and identify relevant research questions for future systematic reviews. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: osf.io/a4xns.

Post marketing surveillance of suspected adverse drug reactions through spontaneous reporting: current status, challenges and the future

BACKGROUND

To highlight the importance of spontaneous reporting programs in post marketing surveillance of medicines. Authors also aimed at providing various dimensions of spontaneous programs, including the strengths and weakness, and providing an insight on the future prospects of pharmacovigilance systems.

METHODS

Various literature related to post marketing surveillance and spontaneous reporting programs were reviewed and the relevant ones highlighting the strengths and weaknesses are summarized. A balance of information on strengths and weaknesses is listed. The health professionals' awareness regarding existing spontaneous reporting programs is highlighted. Future prospects of pharmacovigilance are discussed.

RESULTS

Though beneficial, spontaneous reporting programs encounter several limitations and difficulties in diagnosing adverse drug reaction. Under-reporting and bias are major challenges. Online signal detection tools and innovative methods are needed to strengthen the spontaneous reporting programs. We provide the various issues to be considered while depending on spontaneous reporting programs as a method of post marketing surveillance.

CONCLUSION

To strengthen the spontaneous reporting programs as an effective post marketing surveillance method, more awareness among health professionals and innovative strategies is needed. Integrating pharmacogenetic data can be a potential aspect of future pharmacovigilance.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Monitoring adverse effects of marketed medicines through reporting by healthcare professionals and its challenges and way forward.

INTRODUCTION

This article highlights the importance of safety monitoring of medicines after they are launched in the market, mainly through reporting by healthcare professionals. We also highlight the strengths and weaknesses, and provide an insight on the future prospects of pharmacovigilance systems.

METHODS

Various literature related to the topic were reviewed and the relevant ones highlighting the strengths and weaknesses are summarized. A balance of information on strengths and weaknesses is listed. Health professionals' awareness regarding existing programs on reporting safety of medicines is highlighted.

RESULTS

Though beneficial, reporting of adverse effects by healthcare professionals who deal with patient lacks clarity in diagnosing the adverse effects. Under-reporting and bias are the major challenges. Online software is needed to strengthen reporting by healthcare professionals. We list the various issues to be considered while depending on healthcare professionals' reporting of adverse effects as a method of post marketing surveillance.

CONCLUSION

To strengthen medicine safety monitoring and reporting by healthcare professionals, more awareness among health professionals and innovative strategies are needed. Integrating the genetic data of patients can be beneficial in predicting adverse effects, therefore avoiding them and enhancing safe prescribing and dispensing by healthcare professionals.