Role of personality traits in reporting the development of adverse drug reactions: a prospective cohort study of the Estonian general population

Personality vulnerabilities and adverse event reporting in phase 1 clinical studies

BACKGROUND

Phase 1 clinical trials involve rigorous safety monitoring to identify any adverse effects of investigational treatments. There is growing evidence that healthy volunteers recruited in these studies may differ with respect to personality traits from the general population. This, in turn, may have a significant impact on the reporting of adverse events, particularly in trials investigating psychoactive treatments, including the psychedelic substances.

MAIN BODY

This analysis stems from our combined experience as investigators in phase 1 clinical trials and conveys an experiential understanding of the impact of psychological heterogeneity on study participation, reporting of adverse events and study outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Participant variability due to psychological characteristics is regularly overlooked in phase 1 clinical trials and may significantly impact on reporting of the adverse events. In our opinion, healthy volunteers who present for these studies should not only be defined by the absence of past or current medical and psychiatric illness but also characterised by their psychological attributes.

Association of post-vaccination adverse reactions after influenza vaccine with mortality and cardiopulmonary outcomes in patients with high-risk cardiovascular disease: the INVESTED trial

AIMS

Influenza vaccination is associated with reduced cardiopulmonary morbidity and mortality among patients with heart failure or recent myocardial infarction. The immune response to vaccination frequently results in mild adverse reactions (AR), which leads to vaccine hesitancy. This post hoc analysis explored the association between vaccine-related AR and morbidity and mortality in patients with high-risk cardiovascular disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The INVESTED trial randomized 5260 patients with recent heart failure hospitalization or acute myocardial infarction to high-dose trivalent or standard-dose quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. We examined the association between vaccine-related AR and adverse clinical outcomes across both treatment groups in propensity-adjusted models. Among 5210 participants with available information on post-vaccination symptoms, 1968 participants (37.8%) experienced a vaccine-related AR. Compared to those without AR, post-vaccination AR, most commonly injection site pain (60.3%), were associated with lower risk for the composite of all-cause death or cardiopulmonary hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-0.92, p < 0.001), cardiopulmonary hospitalizations (HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.76-0.95], p = 0.003), all-cause death (HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.62-0.96], p = 0.02), cardiovascular hospitalizations (HR 0.88 [95% CI 0.78-0.99], p = 0.03) and non-cardiopulmonary hospitalizations (HR 0.80 [95% CI 0.69-0.92], p = 0.003). While mild (76.4%) and moderate (20.6%) AR were most common and together associated with lower risk for the primary outcome (HR 0.81 [95% CI 0.74-0.90], p < 0.001), severe AR (2.9%) were related to increased risk (HR 1.68 [95% CI 1.17-2.42], p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Mild to moderate post-vaccination reactions after influenza vaccine were associated with reduced risk of cardiopulmonary hospitalizations and all-cause mortality in patients with high-risk cardiovascular disease, while severe reactions may indicate increased risk. Mild to moderate AR to influenza vaccination may be a marker of immune response and should not deter future vaccinations.

Associations between the Willingness to Donate Samples to Biobanks and Selected Psychological Variables

Over the past few decades, there has been a dynamic development of biobanks collecting human biological material and data. Advances in biomedical research based on biobanks, however, are highly dependent on the successful enrolment and participation of human subjects. Therefore, it is crucial to recognise those factors affecting the willingness of individuals to participate in biomedical research. There are very few studies pointing to the role of trust, preferred values and specific psychological factors. The aim of our study was the analysis of the most significant relationships between selected moral and psychological variables (i.e., preferred values, types of trust and personality) and willingness to donate biological material to biobanks. The research was carried out on a Polish representative national sample of 1100 people over 18 years of age. Statistical methods with regression models were used during the analyses. The willingness to donate samples to a biobank was associated with different types of trust and specific values. Based on regression analysis, the most important factors related to the willingness to donate material to biobanks seemed to be (1) trust towards scientists and doctors and (2) selected preferred values such as knowledge, self-development and tradition. Other values or personality traits did not seem to be as important in this context. The obtained results can be useful in building the social responsibility of biobankers and scientists, issuing more appropriate opinions by research ethics committees and planning better communication strategies between participants and biobanks.

Taking risks to feel excitement: Detailed personality profile and genetic associations

This study mapped the personality and genetics of risky excitement-seekers focusing on skydiving behavior. We compared 298 skydivers to 298 demographically matched controls across the NEO Personality Inventory-3 domains, facets, and 240 items. The most significant item-level effects were aggregated into a poly-item score of skydiving-associated personality markers (Study 1), where higher scores describe individuals who enjoy risky situations but have no self-control issues. The skydiving-associated personality marker score was associated with greater physical activity, higher rate of traumatic injuries, and better mental health in a sample of 3558 adults (Study 2). From genetic perspective, we associated skydiving behavior with 19 candidate variants that have previously been linked to excitement-seeking (Study 1). Polymorphisms in the SERT gene were the strongest predictors of skydiving, but the false discovery rate-adjusted (FDR-adjusted) p-values were non-significant. In Study 2, we predicted the skydiving-associated personality marker score and E5: Excitement-seeking from multiple risk-taking polygenic scores, using publicly available summary data from genome-wide association studies. While E5: Excitement-seeking was most strongly predicted by general risk tolerance and risky behaviors’ polygenic scores, the skydiving-associated personality marker score was most strongly associated with the adventurousness polygenic scores. Phenotypic and polygenic scores associations suggest that skydiving is a specific—perhaps more functional—form of excitement-seeking, which may nevertheless lead to physical injuries.

A Review of Drug Side Effect Identification Methods

Drug side effects have become an important indicator for evaluating the safety of drugs. There are two main factors in the frequent occurrence of drug safety problems; on the one hand, the clinical understanding of drug side effects is insufficient, leading to frequent adverse drug reactions, while on the other hand, due to the long-term period and complexity of clinical trials, side effects of approved drugs on the market cannot be reported in a timely manner. Therefore, many researchers have focused on developing methods to identify drug side effects. In this review, we summarize the methods of identifying drug side effects and common databases in this field. We classified methods of identifying side effects into four categories: biological experimental, machine learning, text mining and network methods. We point out the key points of each kind of method. In addition, we also explain the advantages and disadvantages of each method. Finally, we propose future research directions.