Analysis and reporting of adverse events in randomised controlled trials: a review

Effectiveness, Adherence and Safety of Home High Flow Nasal Cannula in Chronic Respiratory Disease and Respiratory Insufficiency: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

The effectiveness of home high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) for the treatment of chronic respiratory failure in patients with chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) has not been summarized. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness, adherence, and safety of HFNC in the long-term treatment of patients with chronic respiratory diseases and respiratory failure.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted. PubMed, Web of science, and SCOPUS were search up to August 2023. Long-term HFNC studies (≥4 weeks) reporting dyspnea; exacerbations, hospitalizations; peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2), comfort; patient experience, health-related quality of life or partial pressure of carbon dioxide (paCO2) were included.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles (701 patients) based on 10 studies were selected: randomized control trials (n=3), randomized crossover trials (n=2), crossover (n=3) and retrospective (n=2) studies. COPD (n=6), bronchiectasis (n=2), COPD/bronchiectasis (n=1) and ILD (n=1) were the underlined CRDs. HFNC reduced exacerbations when compared to usual care/home respiratory therapies (n=6). Quality of life outcomes were also in favor of HFNC in patients with COPD and bronchiectasis (n=6). HFNC had significant effects on hospitalizations, paCO2, and lung function. Adherence ranged from 5.2 to 8.6h/day (n=5). Three studies reported no events, 3 non-serious events and 2 no differences compared with other home respiratory therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

HFNC seems more effective than usual care or other home respiratory therapies in reducing exacerbations and improving quality of life in patients with COPD and bronchiectasis, while presenting good adherence and being safe. Its apparently superior effectiveness needs to be better studied in future real-world pragmatic trials.

Development and Evaluation of a Framework for Identifying and Addressing Spin for Harms in Systematic Reviews of Interventions

"Spin" refers to misleading reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation of findings in primary and secondary research (such as in systematic reviews). The study of spin primarily focuses on beneficial outcomes. The objectives of this research were threefold: first, to develop a framework for identifying spin associated with harms in systematic reviews of interventions; second, to apply the framework to a set of reviews, thereby pinpointing instances where spin may be present; and finally, to revise the spin examples, offering guidance on how spin can be rectified.

The authors developed their framework through an iterative process that engaged an international group of researchers specializing in spin and reporting bias. The framework comprises 12 specific types of spin for harms, grouped by 7 categories across the 3 domains (reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation). The authors subsequently gathered instances of spin from a random sample of 100 systematic reviews of interventions. Of the 58 reviews that assessed harm and the 42 that did not, they found that 28 (48%) and 6 (14%), respectively, had at least 1 of the 12 types of spin for harms. Inappropriate extrapolation of the results and conclusions for harms to populations, interventions, outcomes, or settings not assessed in a review was the most common category of spin in 17 of 100 reviews.

The authors revised the examples to remove spin, taking into consideration the context (for example, medical discipline, source population), findings for harms, and methodological limitations of the original reviews. They provide guidance for authors, peer reviewers, and editors in recognizing and rectifying or (preferably) avoiding spin, ultimately enhancing the clarity and accuracy of harms reporting in systematic review publications.

Serenoa repens for the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Due to Benign Prostatic Enlargement: An Updated Cochrane Review

PURPOSE

To assess the effects of Serenoa repens in the treatment of men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) consistent with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases up to September 2022 with no language or publication status restrictions. We included parallel-group randomized controlled trials of participants with BPH who were treated with Serenoa repens or placebo/no treatment. We used standard Cochrane methods, including a GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence (CoE).

RESULTS

We included 27 studies involving a total of 4,656 participants. Serenoa repens results in little to no difference in urologic symptoms at short-term follow-up (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS]: mean difference [MD] -0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.74 to -0.07; I²=68%; 9 studies, 1,681 participants; high CoE). Serenoa repens results in little to no difference in the quality of life at short-term follow-up (high CoE). Serenoa repens probably results in little to no difference in adverse events (moderate CoE). Different phytotherapeutic agents that include Serenoa repens may result in little to no difference in urologic symptoms compared to placebo at short-term follow-up (IPSS: MD -2.41, 95% CI -4.54 to -0.29; I²=67%; 4 studies, 460 participants; low CoE). We are very uncertain about the effects of these agents on quality of life (very low CoE). These agents may result in little to no difference in the occurrence of adverse events (low CoE).

CONCLUSIONS

Serenoa repens alone provides little to no benefits for men with LUTS due to benign prostatic enlargement. There is more uncertainty about the role of Serenoa repens in combination with other phytotherapeutic agents.

Clinical care standards for the management of low back pain: a scoping review

The objective of this study is to compare and contrast the quality statements and quality indicators across clinical care standards for low back pain. Searches were performed in Medline, guideline databases, and Google searches to identify clinical care standards for the management of low back pain targeting a multidisciplinary audience. Two independent reviewers reviewed the search results and extracted relevant information from the clinical care standards. We compared the quality statements and indicators of the clinical care standards to identify the consistent messages and the discrepancies between them. Three national clinical care standards from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom were included. They provided from 6 to 8 quality statements and from 12 to 18 quality indicators. The three standards provide consistent recommendations in the quality statements related to imaging, and patient education/advice and self-management. In addition, the Canadian and Australian standards also provide consistent recommendations regarding comprehensive assessment, psychological support, and review and patient referral. However, the three clinical care standards differ in the statements related to psychological assessment, opioid analgesics, non-opioid analgesics, and non-pharmacological therapies. The three national clinical care standards provide consistent recommendations on imaging and patient education/advice, self-management of the condition, and two standards (Canadian and Australian) agree on recommendations regarding comprehensive assessment, psychological support, and review and patient referral. The standards differ in the quality statements related to psychological assessment, opioid prescription, non-opioid analgesics, and non-pharmacological therapies.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials assessing safety and efficacy of human extracellular vesicle-based therapy

Nowadays, it has become clear that extracellular vesicles (EVs) are not a cellular waste disposal vesicle but are an essential part of an intercellular communication system. Besides the use of EVs in biomarker studies and diagnostics, the potential of EV-therapeutics has been seen by many. They provide unique properties for disease therapy, including strong immune-modulatory actions, the possibility of engineering, low immunogenicity, and the capability of crossing biological barriers. Proof-of-concept of EV-therapeutics for various pathologies has been achieved in preclinical studies. However, clinical trials with EVs have only been emerging slowly. Here, we aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state-of-the-art concerning clinical studies using EVs in human therapy. By approaching the current knowledge in a systematic manner, we were able to include 21 reports for meta-analysis of safety and evaluation of efficacy outcomes. Overall, we have shown that EV-based therapy is safe with a low incidence of serious adverse events (SAE; 0.7% (95%-CI: 0.1-5.2%), and adverse events (AE; 4.4% (95%-CI: 0.7-22.2%). Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference in SAE when comparing autologous versus allogeneic administration, as well as engineered versus non-engineered EV products. A significantly higher number of AE was seen in autologous versus allogeneic administration. However, the clinical relevance remains questionable. Evaluation of the clinical outcomes of immunostimulatory, immunosuppressive or regenerative EV-therapies indicated improvement in the majority of treated patients. Despite these promising results, data need to be approached with caution due to a high heterogeneity in the EVs manufacturing methods, study design, and reporting of (S)AE. Overall, we conclude that EV-based therapy is safe and presents a promising opportunity in therapy. More efforts are needed in the standardization and harmonization of reporting of EV isolation and characterization data as well as in the reporting of (S)AE to allow inter-study comparison.

A proposal for using benefit-risk methods to improve the prominence of adverse event results when reporting trials

Adverse events suffer from poor reporting within randomised controlled trials, despite them being crucial to the evaluation of a treatment. A recent update to the CONSORT harms checklist aims to improve reporting by providing structure and consistency to the information presented. We propose an extension wherein harms would be reported in conjunction with effectiveness outcome(s) rather than in silo to provide a more complete picture of the evidence acquired within a trial. Benefit-risk methods are designed to simultaneously consider both benefits and risks, and therefore, we believe these methods could be implemented to improve the prominence of adverse events when reporting trials. The aim of this article is to use case studies to demonstrate the practical utility of benefit-risk methods to present adverse events results alongside effectiveness results. Two randomised controlled trials have been selected as case studies, the Option-DM trial and the SANAD II trial. Using a previous review, a shortlist of 17 benefit-risk methods which could potentially be used for reporting RCTs was created. From this shortlist, three benefit-risk methods are applied across the two case studies. We selected these methods for their usefulness to achieve the aim of this paper and which are commonly used in the literature. The methods selected were the Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) Framework, net clinical benefit (NCB), and the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) 3 × 3 table. Results using the benefit-risk method added further context and detail to the clinical summaries made from the trials. In the case of the SANAD II trial, the clinicians concluded that despite the primary outcome being improved by the treatment, the increase in adverse events negated the improvement and the treatment was therefore not recommended. The benefit-risk methods applied to this case study outlined the data that this decision was based on in a clear and transparent way. Using benefit-risk methods to report the results of trials can increase the prominence of adverse event results by presenting them alongside the primary efficacy/effectiveness outcomes. This ensures that all the factors which would be used to determine whether a treatment would be recommended are transparent to the reader.

Adverse Events Reported in Trials Assessing Manual Therapy to the Extremities: A Systematic Review

Objective: This review aimed to describe the quality and comprehensiveness of adverse event (AE) reporting in clinical trials incorporating manual therapy (MT) as an intervention for extremity conditions using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)-Harms extension as the benchmark. The secondary aim was to determine whether the quality of AE reporting improved after the availability of the CONSORT reporting checklist. Design: Systematic review. Methods: A literature search was conducted using multiple databases to identify trials where MT was used to treat extremity conditions. Studies that reported AEs were identified and evaluated using the CONSORT-Harms extension. The frequency of trials reporting study AEs before and after the publication of the updated 2010 CONSORT statement was calculated, along with the categorization of how study AEs were reported. Results: Of the 55,539 studies initially identified, 220 trials met all inclusion criteria. Eighty trials (36.4%) reported AE occurrence. None of the studies that reported AEs adhered to all 10 criteria proposed by the 2010 CONSORT-Harms extension. The most commonly reported criterion was number four, which clarified how AE-related information was collected (30% of trials). The least reported criterion was number six, which describes the participant withdrawals for each arm due to AEs and the experience with the allocated treatment (1.3% of trials). The nomenclature used to describe AEs varied substantially. Fifty-nine of 76 trials (33.3%) were published after the updated CONSORT Harms-checklist was available, compared to 21 of 44 trials (46.7%) published before it was available. Conclusion: Reporting of AEs in trials investigating MT for extremity conditions is poor. Every included trial lacked adherence to all 10 criteria proposed by the CONSORT-Harms Extension. The quality and comprehensiveness of AE reporting did not improve after the most recent CONSORT update recommending AE reporting. Clinicians must obtain informed consent before performing any intervention, including MT, which requires disclosing potential risks, which could be better known with improved tracking, analyzing, and reporting of AEs. The authors recommend improved adherence to best practices for adequately tracking and reporting AEs in future MT trials.

Dose optimization for cancer treatments with considerations for late-onset toxicities

Given that novel anticancer therapies have different toxicity profiles and mechanisms of action, it is important to reconsider the current approaches for dose selection. In an effort to move away from considering the maximum tolerated dose as the optimal dose, the Food and Drug Administration Project Optimus points to the need of incorporating long-term toxicity evaluation, given that many of these novel agents lead to late-onset or cumulative toxicities and there are no guidelines on how to handle them. Numerous methods have been proposed to handle late-onset toxicities in dose-finding clinical trials. A summary and comparison of these methods are provided. Moreover, using PI3K inhibitors as a case study, we show how late-onset toxicity can be integrated into the dose-optimization strategy using current available approaches. We illustrate a re-design of this trial to compare the approach to those that only consider early toxicity outcomes and disregard late-onset toxicities. We also provide proposals going forward for dose optimization in early development of novel anticancer agents with considerations for late-onset toxicities.

Effectiveness of mind-body exercises in chronic respiratory diseases: an overview of systematic reviews with meta-analyses

PURPOSE

To gather evidence on the effectiveness and safety of qigong, tai chi, and yoga to modulate symptoms associated with chronic respiratory diseases.

METHODS

A search of systematic reviews was conducted in CINHAL, Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus, and the Cochrane Library from inception to November 2022. Systematic reviews with meta-analyses investigating physical and psychological measures were eligible. The methodological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR-2), the spin of information in abstracts, and the overlap of primary studies were explored.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven systematic reviews involving 37 000 participants, 146 studies, and 150 meta-analyses were included. Reviews investigated asthma (n = 4) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (n = 23). Most reviews discussed their findings without considering the risk of bias of primary studies. The overlap ranged between slight (5%) and very high (35%). Yoga was better than control interventions to improve symptoms related with asthma. In adults with COPD, qigong improved dyspnoea, exercise endurance, lung function, and quality of life, while tai chi and yoga increased exercise endurance.

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of yoga on symptoms associated with asthma varied depending on the lung function parameter and the control group. Qigong, tai chi, and yoga could be effective to improve COPD-related symptoms, especially exercise endurance.

Comparative Risk of Gout Flares When Initiating or Escalating Various Urate-Lowering Therapy: A Systematic Review With Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

We systematically examined comparative gout flare risk after initiation or escalation of different urate-lowering therapies (ULTs), comparative flare risk with and without concomitant flare prophylaxis, adverse event rates associated with flare prophylaxis, and optimal duration of flare prophylaxis.

METHODS

We searched the Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases and clinical trial registries from inception to November 2021 for trials investigating adults with gout initiating or escalating ULT. We performed random effects network meta-analyses and calculated risk ratios (RRs) between treatments. Bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.

RESULTS

We identified 3,775 records, of which 29 publications (27 trials) were included. When compared to placebo plus prophylaxis, the RR of flares ranged from 1.08 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-1.33) for febuxostat 40 mg plus prophylaxis to RR 2.65 [95% CI 1.58-4.45] for febuxostat 80 mg plus lesinurad 400 mg plus prophylaxis. Compared to ULT alone, the RR of flares was lower for ULT plus rilonacept 160 mg (RR 0.35 [95% CI 0.25-0.50]), ULT plus rilonacept 80 mg (RR 0.43 [95% CI 0.31-0.60]) and ULT plus colchicine (RR 0.50 [95% CI 0.35-0.72]). There was limited evidence for other flare prophylaxis and on prophylaxis harms and optimal duration. Primarily because of missing outcome data and bias in the selection of reported results, 71.4% and 63.4% of studies were assessed as high risk of bias for flares and adverse events, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The RR of flares when introducing ULT varies depending on ULT drug and dosing strategies. There were limited data on ULT escalation. Flare prophylaxis with colchicine and rilonacept reduces flare incidence. More research is required on the harms and optimal duration of prophylaxis.

Quality of reporting and concordance between sources of adverse events in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis: a cross-sectional study of RCTs from a Cochrane systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Incomplete reporting of safety outcomes in quality and availability of safety reporting in published articles of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were described in different medical areas. The number of RCTs assessing systemic treatments for psoriasis has increased considerably. Complete and precise reporting of safety is mandatory for the efficacy/harms balance evaluation. We aimed to assess the quality and availability of safety reporting in published RCTs assessing systemic treatments for psoriasis, as well as the concordance of data between published trials and ClinicalTrials.gov (CT).

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We included all RCTs in adults initiated after September 2009, assessing systemic psoriasis treatments compared with placebo or with an active comparator. All trials were selected in duplicate by 2 independent authors from the latest search of the dedicated Cochrane review. We described quality of safety reporting for all published RCTs, using a modified Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials harms scale by using descriptive analysis, and a composite score of 3 key items of safety report. For each RCT, data on adverse events (AEs)/serious AEs (SAEs) were extracted from the publication and CT: total number of AEs/SAEs, patients with AEs/SAEs, SAEs by system organ class classification and deaths. These data were compared between sources for each RCT.

RESULTS

In total, 128 trials were included in the analysis of reporting quality, and 76 in the analysis of data concordance between sources. The median number of reported Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials harms items per article was 9 out of 18 (IQR 7-10), and mean number was 8.39 (SD = 3.02). Items in the methods section were the least frequently reported. The proportion of RCTs reporting the number of SAEs and death were significantly higher on CT than in the published article ((100% (76/76) vs 88.2%, McNemar test, P < .0016). At least 1 discrepancy between sources for SAE safety data was found in 30/76 (39.5%) RCTs.

CONCLUSION

Shortcomings and gaps in the quality of safety reporting in publications of RCTs of systemic psoriasis treatments have been identified. A lack of data in published articles and discrepancies between published articles and CT data complete this finding.

Efficacy of computer-assisted robotic based clinical training program for spinal oncology education on pedicle screw placement

Pedicle screw placement (PSP) is the fundamental surgical technique that requires high accuracy for novice orthopedists studying spinal oncology education. Therefore, we set forth to establish a computer-assisted robotic navigation training program for novice spinal oncology education. Novice orthopedists were involved in this study to evaluate the feasibility and safety of the computer-assisted robotic navigation (CARN) training program. In this research, trainees were randomly taught by the CARN training program and the traditional training program. We prospectively collected the clinical data of patients with spinal tumors from 1st May 2021 to 1st March 2022. The ability of PSP was evaluated by cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis, learning curve, and accuracy of pedicle screws. The patients included in both groups had similar baseline characteristics. In the CUSUM analysis of the learning curve for accurate PSP, the turning point in the CARN group was lower than that in the traditional group (70th vs. 92nd pedicle screw). The LC-CUSUM test indicated competency for PSP at the 121st pedicle screw in the CARN group and the 138th pedicle screw in the traditional group. The accuracy of PSP was also significantly higher in the CARN group than in the traditional group (88.17% and 79.55%, P = 0.03 < 0.05). Furthermore, no major complications occurred in either group. We first described CARN in spinal oncology education and indicated the CARN training program as a novel, efficient and safe training program for surgeons.

The prevalence of hepatic and thyroid toxicity associated with imatinib treatment of chronic myeloid leukaemia: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Imatinib, a potent inhibitor of targeted protein tyrosine kinases, treats chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML). Data on imatinib-associated changes in hepatic and thyroid functions are limited and conflicting.

AIM

To report the prevalence of hepatic and thyroid toxicity associated with the use of imatinib in CML patients.

METHOD

Articles for the systematic review were selected from electronic databases (PubMed, CINALH, Web of Science). Readily accessible peer-reviewed full articles in English published 1st January 2000 to 18th July 2023 were included. The search terms included combinations of: imatinib, CML, liver toxicity, hepatic toxicity, thyroid toxicity. Screening of titles, abstracts, full text articles was conducted independently by two reviewers. Inclusions and exclusions were recorded following PRISMA guidelines. Detailed reasons for exclusion were recorded. Included articles were critically appraised.

RESULTS

Ten thousand one hundred and twenty-three CML patients were reported in the 82 included studies corresponding to 21 case reports, 2 case series, 39 clinical trials and 20 observational studies were selected. Excluding case studies/reports, 1268 (12.6%; n = 1268/10046) hepatotoxicity adverse events were reported, of which 64.7% were rated as mild grade I & II adverse events, 363 (28.6%) as severe, grade III and IV adverse events; some led to treatment discontinuation, liver transplantation and fatal consequences. Twenty (35.1%) studies reported discontinuation of imatinib treatment due to the severity of hepatic toxicity. Fourteen (8.4%, n = 14/167) thyroid dysfunction adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

High frequency of mild and severe hepatotoxicity, associated with imatinib in CML patients, was reported in the published literature. Low numbers of mild and manageable thyroid toxicity events were reported.

Nocebo effects in systemic therapies for adult plaque psoriasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

The nocebo effect is defined as adverse outcomes secondary to negative patient expectations rather than the pharmacologic activity of an intervention. Nocebo effects can reduce treatment adherence and/or persistence. Therefore, nocebo effects in psoriasis need to be defined.

Methods

A Cochrane systematic review was updated with a search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials for phase II - IV RCTs comparing systemic therapy versus placebo for patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Estimates were pooled using a random effects model, and heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic. The primary outcome was the pooled proportion of any adverse event (AE) and corresponding risk difference (RD) in patients randomized to placebo versus systemic therapy.

Results

A total of 103 unique trials were identified enrolling 43,189 patients. The overall pooled AE rate in patients randomized to systemic therapy was 57.1% [95% CI: 54.7-59.5%] compared to 49.8% [95% CI: 47.1-52.4%] for placebo [RD 6.7% (95% CI: 4.6-8.9%), p < 0.00001, I2 = 75%]. Both biologic and non-biologic systemic therapy groups had a higher proportion of infectious AEs compared to placebo. No statistically significant RD in serious AEs or AEs leading to discontinuation was identified between systemic therapy and placebo groups.

Discussion

Half of patients exposed to inert placebo in clinical trials of systemic psoriasis therapies experienced AEs, which may be explained by nocebo effects. These findings have important implications when counseling patients and designing future studies.

An Overview of Regression Models for Adverse Events Analysis

Over the last few years, several review articles described the adverse events analysis as sub-optimal in clinical trials. Indeed, the context surrounding adverse events analyses often imply an overwhelming number of events, a lack of power to find associations, but also a lack of specific training regarding those complex data. In randomized controlled trials or in observational studies, comparing the occurrence of adverse events according to a covariable of interest (e.g., treatment) is a recurrent question in the analysis of drug safety data, and adjusting other important factors is often relevant. This article is an overview of the existing regression models that may be considered to compare adverse events and to discuss model choice regarding the characteristics of the adverse events of interest. Many dimensions may be relevant to compare the adverse events between patients, (e.g., timing, recurrence, and severity). Recent efforts have been made to cover all of them. For chronic treatments, the occurrence of intercurrent events during the patient follow-up usually needs the modeling approach to be adapted (at least with regard to their interpretation). Moreover, analysis based on regression models should not be limited to the estimation of relative effects. Indeed, absolute risks stemming from the model should be presented systematically to help the interpretation, to validate the model, and to encourage comparison of studies.

[Special issue PRO] Considering endpoints for comparative tolerability of cancer treatments using patient report given the estimand framework

Regulatory agencies are advancing the use of systematic approaches to collect patient experience data, including patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in cancer clinical trials to inform regulatory decision-making. Due in part to clinician under-reporting of symptomatic adverse events, there is a growing recognition that evaluation of cancer treatment tolerability should include the patient experience, both in terms of the overall side effect impact and symptomatic adverse events. Methodologies around implementation, analysis, and interpretation of "patient" reported tolerability are under development, and current approaches are largely descriptive. There is robust guidance for use of PROs as efficacy endpoints to compare cancer treatments, but it is unclear to what extent this can be relied-upon to develop tolerability endpoints. An important consideration when developing endpoints to compare tolerability between treatments is the linkage of trial design, objectives, and statistical analysis. Despite interest in and frequent collection of PRO data in oncology trials, heterogeneity in analyses and unclear PRO objectives mean that design, objectives, and analysis may not be aligned, posing substantial challenges for the interpretation of results. The recent ICH E9 (R1) estimand framework represents an opportunity to help address these challenges. Efforts to apply the estimand framework in the context of PROs have primarily focused on efficacy outcomes. In this paper, we discuss considerations for comparing the patient-reported tolerability of different treatments in an oncology trial context.

Does Osteopathic Heart-Focused Palpation Modify Heart Rate Variability in Stressed Participants with Musculoskeletal Pain? A Randomised Controlled Pilot Study

Heart rate variability (HRV) describes fluctuations in time intervals between heartbeats and reflects autonomic activity. HRV is reduced in stressed patients with musculoskeletal pain and improved after osteopathic manipulative treatment and mind-body interventions. Heart-focused palpation (HFP) combines manual and mind-body approaches to facilitate relaxation. This randomised controlled pilot study investigated the feasibility and sample size for a future randomised controlled trial and the effect of a single treatment with HFP or sham HFP (SHAM) on short-term HRV. A total of Thirty-three adults (47.7 ± 13.5 years old) with stress and musculoskeletal pain completed the trial with acceptable rates of recruitment (8.25 subjects per site/month), retention (100%), adherence (100%), and adverse events (0%). HFP (n = 18), but not SHAM (n = 15), significantly increased the root mean square of successive RR interval differences (p = 0.036), standard deviation of the NN intervals (p = 0.009), and ratio of the low-frequency to high-frequency power band (p = 0.026). HFP and SHAM significantly decreased the heart rate (p < 0.001, p = 0.009) but not the stress index and ratio of the Poincaré plot standard deviation along and perpendicular to the line of identity (p > 0.05). A power analysis calculated 72 participants. Taken together, the study was feasible and HFP improved HRV in stressed subjects with musculoskeletal pain, suggesting a parasympathetic effect.

Achieving white blood cell equity: are the safety profiles of biosimilar and reference pegfilgrastims comparable?

Biosimilars can provide choices for patients and may provide cost savings; however, their uptake has been slow in the USA, in part due to limited knowledge. To provide additional confidence in US pegfilgrastim biosimilars, this narrative review compared the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims, currently approved or filed for approval in the USA, with the EU- and US-approved reference pegfilgrastims. Headache and bone pain were common to biosimilars and reference products and occurred at a similar incidence. Clinical trial data on the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims and reference products have demonstrated similarity and comparability, with no unexpected safety outcomes. Overall, the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims and reference pegfilgrastims demonstrated a high degree of similarity and comparability.

The Effect of Different Types of Exercise on Sleep Quality and Architecture in Parkinson Disease: A Single-Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial Protocol

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this trial is to (1) determine the best exercise modality to improve sleep quality and sleep architecture in people with Parkinson disease (PD); (2) investigate whether exercise-induced improvements in sleep mediate enhancements in motor and cognitive function as well as other non-motor symptoms of PD; and (3) explore if changes in systemic inflammation after exercise mediate improvements in sleep.

METHODS

This is a multi-site, superiority, single-blinded randomized controlled trial. One hundred fifty persons with PD and sleep problems will be recruited and randomly allocated into 4 intervention arms. Participants will be allocated into 12 weeks of either cardiovascular training, resistance training, multimodal training, or a waiting list control intervention. Assessments will be conducted at baseline, immediately after each intervention, and 8 weeks after each intervention by blinded assessors. Objective sleep quality and sleep architecture will be measured with polysomnography and electroencephalography. Motor and cognitive function will be assessed with the Unified PD Rating Scale and the Scale for Outcomes in PD-Cognition, respectively. Subjective sleep quality, fatigue, psychosocial functioning, and quality of life will be assessed with questionnaires. The concentration of inflammatory biomarkers in blood serum will be assessed with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays.

IMPACT

This study will investigate the effect of different types of exercise on sleep quality and architecture in PD, exploring interactions between changes in sleep quality and architecture with motor and cognitive function and other non-motor symptoms of the disease as well as mechanistic interactions between systemic inflammation and sleep. The results will provide important practical information to guide physical therapists and other rehabilitation professionals in the selection of exercise and the design of more personalized exercise-based treatments aimed at optimizing sleep, motor, and cognitive function in people with PD.

A Phone Pal to overcome social isolation in patients with psychosis-Findings from a feasibility trial

People with psychosis often experience social isolation due to stigma. Several volunteering programmes that exist in the community to support patients expect in-person meetings, requiring greater availability and commitment. This study investigated the acceptability and feasibility of remote volunteering over a smartphone for people with psychosis over 12 weeks, exploring its potential impact on both patients and volunteers. A total of 36 participants took part in the study. In the first phase, six participants were recruited in less than three weeks in London. All established contact with their match, and there were no study withdrawals. In the second phase, 30 additional participants were recruited in four weeks, across the United Kingdom. Most patients and volunteers reported that they primarily used audio calls to make contact, followed by text messages, WhatsApp messages and video calls. There were improvements in patients' scores of quality of life, self-esteem, social contacts and symptoms, and in volunteers' ratings of quality of life, physical activity, self-esteem, social comparison, and social distance towards people with mental illness. This study demonstrates that it is feasible, acceptable and safe to remotely connect volunteers and people with psychosis who are afar. Trial registration: ISRCTN17586238 (registration date: 28/09/2018).

A Novel Method for Deriving Adverse Event Prevalence in Randomized Controlled Trials: Potential for Improved Understanding of Benefit-Risk Ratio and Application to Drug Labels

INTRODUCTION

Adverse event (AE) data in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) allow quantification of a drug's safety risk relative to placebo and comparison across medications. The standard US label for Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs typically lists AEs by MedDRA Preferred Term that occur at ≥ 2% in drug and with greater incidence than in placebo. We suggest that the drug label can be more informative for both patients and physicians if it includes, in addition to AE incidence (percent of subjects who reported the AE out of the total subjects in treatment), the absolute prevalence (percent of subject-days spent with an AE out of the total subject-days spent in treatment) and expected duration (days required for AE incidence to be reduced by half). We also propose a new method to analyze AEs in RCTs using drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence to improve safety signal detection.

METHODS

AE data from six RCTs in schizophrenia were analyzed (five RCTs of the dopamine D2 receptor-based antipsychotic lurasidone and one RCT of the novel trace amine-associated receptor 1 [TAAR1] agonist ulotaront). We determined incidence, absolute prevalence, and expected duration of AEs for lurasidone and ulotaront vs respective placebo. We also calculated areas under the curve of drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence and mean percent contribution of each AE to this difference.

RESULTS

A number of AEs with the same incidence had different absolute prevalence and expected duration. When accounting for these two parameters, AEs that did not appear in the 2% incidence tables of the drug label turned out to contribute substantially to drug tolerability. The percent contribution of a drug-related AE to the overall side effect burden increased the drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence, whereas the percent contribution of a placebo-related AE decreased such difference, revealing a continuum of risk between drug and placebo. AE prevalence curves for drug were generally greater than those for placebo. Ulotaront exhibited a small drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence curves due to a relatively low incidence and short duration of AEs in the ulotaront treatment arm as well as the emergence of disease-related AEs in the placebo arm.

CONCLUSION

Reporting AE absolute prevalence and expected duration for each RCT and incorporating them in the drug label is possible, is clinically relevant, and allows standardized comparison of medications. Our new metric, the drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence, facilitates signal detection in RCTs. We piloted this metric in RCTs of several neuropsychiatric indications and drugs, offering a new way to compare AE burden and tolerability among treatments using existing clinical trial information.

Incidence of Rapidly Progressive Osteoarthritis Following Intra-articular Hip Corticosteroid Injection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The American Academy of Orthopedic Surgery recommends intra-articular corticosteroid injections (CSIs) for managing hip osteoarthritis (OA) based on short-term, prospective studies. Recent retrospective studies have raised concerns that CSIs may lead to rapidly progressive OA (RPOA). We sought to systematically review the literature of CSIs for hip OA to estimate the incidence of RPOA.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify original research of hip OA patients receiving CSIs. Overall, 27 articles involving 5831 patients published from 1988 to 2022 were included. Study design, patient characteristics, CSI details, follow-up, and cases of RPOA were recorded. Studies were classified by their ability to detect RPOA based on follow-up. Random effects meta-analysis was used to calculate the incidence of RPOA for studies able to detect RPOA.

Results

The meta-analytic estimate of RPOA incidence was 6% (95% confidence interval, 3%-9%) based on 10 articles classified as able to detect RPOA. RPOA definitions varied from progression of OA within 6 months to the presence of destructive changes. These studies were subject to bias from excluding patients with missing post-CSI radiographs. The remaining 17 articles were classified as unable to detect RPOA, including all of the studies cited in the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgery recommendation.

Conclusions

The incidence of RPOA after CSIs remains unknown due to variation in definitions and follow-up. While RPOA following CSIs may be 6%, many cases are not severe, and this may reflect selection bias. Further research is needed to understand whether clinically significant RPOA is incident enough to limit CSI use.

Harms were detected but not reported in six clinical trials of gabapentin

OBJECTIVES

We sought to assess and report harms that were observed but not disclosed previously in clinical trials of gabapentin.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We reanalyzed individual participant data from six randomized parallel trials of gabapentin for neuropathic pain, and we conducted meta-analyses. Between 1996 and 2003, adult participants were assigned to gabapentin (600 mg-3,600 mg per day) or placebo for 7-14 weeks. We calculated the proportion of participants with: one or more adverse events (AEs), one or more serious AEs, discontinued, discontinued because AEs. We also estimated effects on AEs at three levels of aggregation using COSTART, a hierarchical system for classifying AEs: body system, midlevel system, preferred term.

RESULTS

We found evidence of important harms that were neither included in published trial reports nor included in systematic reviews. Aggregating related harms led to greater confidence that gabapentin might harm the nervous system and possibly the digestive, metabolic and nutritional, respiratory, sensory, and urogenital body systems. Nervous system harms were more common than previous reports suggest.

CONCLUSION

Clinical trials identified harms that were not reported publicly, and journal articles overstated uncertainty about harms. Relying on journal articles to evaluate gabapentin's harms could contribute to incomplete and misleading conclusions in systematic reviews and guidelines. To prevent bias arising from the selective nonreporting of results, journal articles should describe how to access data for all harms observed in clinical trials (e.g., by sharing individual participant data).

Stakeholder endorsement advancing the implementation of a patient-reported domain for harms in rheumatology clinical trials: Outcome of the OMERACT Safety Working Group

OBJECTIVES

To develop an understanding of the concept of safety/harms experienced by patients involved in clinical trials for their rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) and to seek input from the OMERACT community before moving forward to developing or selecting an outcome measurement instrument.

METHODS

OMERACT 2023 presented and discussed interview results from 34 patients indicating that up to 171 items might be important for patients' harm-reporting.

RESULTS

Domain was defined in detail and supported by qualitative work. Participants in the Special-Interest-Group endorsed (96 %) that enough qualitative data are available to start Delphi survey(s).

CONCLUSION

We present a definition of safety/harms that represents the patient voice (i.e., patients' perception of safety) evaluating the symptomatic treatment-related adverse events for people with RMDs enrolled in clinical trials.

Real-world outcomes of concomitant antidepressant and statin use in primary care patients with depression: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Antidepressants are licensed for use in depressive disorders, but non-response and poor adherence to treatment affect a considerable number of patients. Pre-clinical and clinical evidence suggest that statins can augment the effects of antidepressants. However, the acceptability and tolerability of combining statins with antidepressants are unclear, and their add-on efficacy has only been shown in small, short-term clinical trials. Observational data can provide complementary information about treatment effects on larger samples over longer follow-ups. In this study, we therefore assessed the real-world acceptability, tolerability, and efficacy of concomitant antidepressant and statin treatment in depression.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study investigating QResearch primary care research database, which comprises the anonymised electronic healthcare records of 35 + million patients over 1574 English general practices. Patients aged 18-100 years, registered between January 1998 and August 2020, diagnosed with a new episode of depression, and commencing an antidepressant were included. Using a between-subject design, we identified two study groups: antidepressant + statin versus antidepressant-only prescriptions. Outcomes of interest included the following: antidepressant treatment discontinuations due to any cause (acceptability) and due to any adverse event (tolerability) and effects on depressive symptoms (efficacy) measured as response, remission, and change in depression score on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. All outcomes were assessed at 2, 6, and 12 months using multivariable regression analyses, adjusted for relevant confounders, to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) or mean differences (aMDs) with 99% confidence intervals (99% CIs).

RESULTS

Compared to antidepressant-only (N 626,335), antidepressant + statin (N 46,482) was associated with higher antidepressant treatment acceptability (aOR2months 0.88, 99% CI 0.85 to 0.91; aOR6months 0.81, 99% CI 0.79 to 0.84; aOR12months 0.78, 99% CI 0.75 to 0.81) and tolerability (aOR2months 0.92, 99% CI 0.87 to 0.98; aOR6months 0.94, 99% CI 0.89 to 0.99, though not long term aOR12 months 1.02, 99% CI 0.97 to 1.06). Efficacy did not differ between groups (range aOR2-12 months 1.00 and 1.02 for response and remission, range aOR2-12 months - 0.01 and - 0.02 for change in depression score).

CONCLUSIONS

On real-world data, there is a positive correlation between antidepressant treatment adherence and statin use, partly explained by fewer dropouts due to adverse events. The main limitation of our study is its observational design, which restricts the potential to make causal inferences.

Sertraline versus escitalopram in South Asians with moderate to severe major depressive disorder: (SOUTH-DEP) a double-blind, parallel, randomized controlled trial

Objective

The study design included the double-blind, parallel, randomized controlled trial. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of sertraline and escitalopram in participants with moderate to severe major depressive disorder (MDD).

Methods

The study was conducted in South Asian participants. A total of 744 participants with moderate to severe MDD were randomly assigned to receive either sertraline or escitalopram for 8 weeks. Drug dosages and titration schedules were based on the recommendations of the prescribing information for each product and according to the judgment of the clinicians involved in the study. The primary outcome measures were changes from baseline on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the clinical global impression (CGI) scale as well as the frequency of adverse events in both groups. Baseline MADRS scores in the escitalopram and sertraline groups were 28.2±0.47 (mean±SD) and 29.70±0.46 (mean±SD) respectively, and was no variability in the baseline assessments. Changes in MADRS as well as CGI scales at the end of the study were significant only for the sertraline group whereas they remained statistically nonsignificant for the escitalopram group. Results: The results of the study showed that sertraline was more efficacious than escitalopram in reducing depression rating scales such as MADRS and CGI, and that participants subjectively felt better regarding their symptoms in the sertraline group. Sertraline displays enhanced safety or tolerability than other groups of antidepressants, which frequently cause high levels of drowsiness, dizziness, blurred vision, and other undesirable effects. Adverse events were seen in both groups, but delayed ejaculation was the most frequent adverse event seen in both groups. However, a greater number of participants reported having nausea and insomnia in the sertraline group compared to the escitalopram group.

Conclusion

Our study clearly highlights that there is a statistically significant difference in efficacy between sertraline and escitalopram at the doses used in our study. Sertraline was able to significantly lower the depression rating scales like MADRS and CGI in participants with moderate to severe MDD. Participants subjectively felt better regarding their symptoms in the sertraline group. The most frequent adverse event in both groups was delayed ejaculation. From an efficacy standpoint, sertraline was more efficacious than escitalopram. The study indicates that the prevalence of depressive disorders in South Asia is comparable to the global estimate, and Bangladesh and India has higher proportions of people with depressive disorders in South Asia. Additionally, females and older adults (75-79 years) have the highest burden of depressive disorders across all countries in the region. This study's limitation included the absence of a placebo arm. An additional limitation of the current study was the lack of an evaluation of inter-rater reliability and the research sample could not have been uniform in terms of the kind of depressive disorders and bipolarity.

Harms Reporting in Systematic Reviews of the Microvascular Free Flap in Head and Neck Reconstruction

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate harms reporting in systematic reviews (SRs) of microvascular free flap (MFF) in head and neck reconstruction.

DATA SOURCES

This cross-sectional analysis included searches from the following major databases from 2012 to June 1, 2022: MEDLINE (Pubmed and Ovid), Embase, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

REVIEW METHODS

In a masked duplicate manner, screening was performed using Rayyan, and data were extracted using a pilot-tested Google form. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) was used to appraise the methodological quality of reviews and the corrected covered area was calculated to detect primary study overlap across all reviews. Reviews were then grouped in pairs of 2, called dyads, and the corrected covered area was calculated again for each individual dyad. Dyads with high overlap (≥50%) were further investigated for the accuracy of harms reporting.

RESULTS

Our initial search yielded 268 records, with 50 SRs meeting the inclusion criteria. A total of 46 (92%) of the included reviews demonstrated 50% or more adherence to the items assessed in our harms checklist. Our corrected covered area tool revealed 0.6% primary study overlap across all reviews, and 1 dyad with high overlap (≥50%). No statistically significant relationship was observed between the completeness of harms reporting and reviews listing harms as a primary outcome, reviews reporting adherence to Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, or a review's AMSTAR rating.

CONCLUSION

This study identifies how harms reporting in SRs of MFF reconstruction of the head and neck can be improved and provides suggestions with the potential to mitigate the paucity in current literature.

Quality of reporting of adverse events in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs: systematic review

Objective

To assess the quality of reporting of adverse events in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs based on the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) harms extension and according to clinical trial design, and to examine reporting of serious adverse events in drug trials published on PubMed versus clinical trial summaries on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Design

Systematic review.

Data sources

PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov registries were searched from 1 December 2019 to 17 February 2022.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies

Randomised clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of drugs used to treat covid-19 disease in participants of all ages with suspected, probable, or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Clinical trials were screened on title, abstract, and text by two authors independently. Only articles published in French and English were selected. The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) was used to assess risk of bias.

Results

The search strategy identified 1962 randomised clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of drugs used to treat covid-19, published in the PubMed database; 1906 articles were excluded after screening and 56 clinical trials were included in the review. Among the 56 clinical trials, no study had a high score for quality of reporting of adverse events, 60.7% had a moderate score, 33.9% had a low score, and 5.4% had a very low score. All clinical trials with a very low score for quality of reporting of adverse events were randomised open label trials. For reporting of serious adverse events, journal articles published on PubMed under-reported 51% of serious adverse events compared with clinical trial summaries published on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Conclusions

In one in three published clinical trials on covid-19 drugs, the quality of reporting of adverse events was low or very low. Differences were found in the number of serious adverse events reported in journal articles versus clinical trial summaries. During the covid-19 pandemic, risk assessment of drugs in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs did not comply with good practice recommendations for publication of results.

Systematic review registration

European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCePP) EUPAS45959.

Potential implicit bias in attribution of adverse events in randomized controlled trials in cystic fibrosis

INTRODUCTION

Although work to date in cystic fibrosis (CF) has elucidated frequencies and characteristics of adverse events, the accuracy of attribution of relatedness to study drug by investigators has not been assessed. We aimed to determine whether there was an association of attribution by group allocation in CF clinical trials.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis from 4 CF trials of all persons who experienced an AE. Our primary outcome was the odds of an AE related to active study drug and predictor of interest was the treatment allocation. We constructed a multivariable generalized estimating equation model allowing for repeated measures.

RESULTS

A total of 785 subjects (47.5% female, mean age 12 years) had 11,974 AEs, of which 430 were serious. AE attribution was greater with receipt of active study drug as compared to placebo but did not reach statistical significance (OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.98-1.82). Significantly associated factors included female sex (OR 0.58, 95% 0.39-0.87), age (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.06-1.46) and baseline lung function (per 10%, OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.05-1.28).

CONCLUSION

In our large study, there was a non-significant but greater odds of AE attribution (a key element of clinical trial reporting) to active study drug based on assigned treatment to study drug or control which suggests that there is a trend in physicians to attribute blinded safety data to the active drug. Interestingly, females were less likely to have AE attribution to study drug and warrants further work in development and validation of monitoring guidelines and processes.

Natural Language Processing to Automatically Extract the Presence and Severity of Esophagitis in Notes of Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy

PURPOSE

Radiotherapy (RT) toxicities can impair survival and quality of life, yet remain understudied. Real-world evidence holds potential to improve our understanding of toxicities, but toxicity information is often only in clinical notes. We developed natural language processing (NLP) models to identify the presence and severity of esophagitis from notes of patients treated with thoracic RT.

METHODS

Our corpus consisted of a gold-labeled data set of 1,524 clinical notes from 124 patients with lung cancer treated with RT, manually annotated for Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0 esophagitis grade, and a silver-labeled data set of 2,420 notes from 1,832 patients from whom toxicity grades had been collected as structured data during clinical care. We fine-tuned statistical and pretrained Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers-based models for three esophagitis classification tasks: task 1, no esophagitis versus grade 1-3; task 2, grade ≤1 versus >1; and task 3, no esophagitis versus grade 1 versus grade 2-3. Transferability was tested on 345 notes from patients with esophageal cancer undergoing RT.

RESULTS

Fine-tuning of PubMedBERT yielded the best performance. The best macro-F1 was 0.92, 0.82, and 0.74 for tasks 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Selecting the most informative note sections during fine-tuning improved macro-F1 by ≥2% for all tasks. Silver-labeled data improved the macro-F1 by ≥3% across all tasks. For the esophageal cancer notes, the best macro-F1 was 0.73, 0.74, and 0.65 for tasks 1, 2, and 3, respectively, without additional fine-tuning.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first effort to automatically extract esophagitis toxicity severity according to CTCAE guidelines from clinical notes. This provides proof of concept for NLP-based automated detailed toxicity monitoring in expanded domains.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Injection Site Reactions in Randomized-Controlled Trials of Biologic Injections

BACKGROUND

Biologic agents are emerging as an important treatment option for immune-mediated diseases. Injection site reactions following subcutaneous injection of biologic agents is not well described in the literature.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize injection site reaction data in phase 3 trials of all biologic agents.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were systematically searched on February 8, 2022. Proportional meta-analysis was conducted to summarize injection site reaction prevalence for each biologic.

RESULTS

There were 158 articles included in the review. The most common types of injection site reactions were erythema (42.8%), unspecified reaction (23.3%), pain (12.4%), and pruritus (5.7%). No patients discontinued their treatment due to injection site reactions in 39 of the 48 studies that reported on discontinuation data. There were 16 biologics included in meta-analysis across 80 eligible studies. The biologics with the highest point prevalence of patients reporting injection site reactions were Canakinumab (15.5%; 294 patients), Dupilumab (11.4%; 1888 patients), Etanercept (11.4%; 4363 patients), and Ixekizumab (11.2%; 2205 patients). The biologics with the lowest point prevalence of injection site reactions were Risankizumab (0.8%; 707 patients), Brodalumab (1.3%; 1365 patients), Guselkumab (1.3%; 1852 patients), Secukinumab (1.9%; 1277 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of injection site reaction in response to biologics ranges from 0.08 to 15.5%. Canakinumab, Dupilumab, Etanercept, and Ixekizumab had the highest prevalence of injection site reactions. Risankizumab, Brodalumab, Guselkumab, and Secukinumab had the lowest prevalence of injection site reactions. Recommendations are made regarding the improvement of adverse event reporting to better understand the epidemiology of injection site reactions.

Serenoa repens for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic enlargement

BACKGROUND

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a non-malignant enlargement of the prostate, which can lead to obstructive and irritative lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The pharmacologic use of plants and herbs (phytotherapy) for the treatment of LUTS associated with BPH is common. The extract of the berry of the American saw palmetto or dwarf palm plant, Serenoa repens (SR), which is also known by its botanical name of Sabal serrulatum, is one of several phytotherapeutic agents available for the treatment of BPH.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of Serenoa repens in the treatment of men with LUTS consistent with BPH.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of multiple databases (the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and LILACS), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings published up to 16 September 2022, with no restrictions on language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials of participants with BPH who were treated with Serenoa repens or placebo/no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion at each stage and undertook data extraction and risk of bias assessment and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence. We considered review outcomes measured up to 12 months after randomization as short term, and beyond 12 months as long term. Our main outcomes included urologic symptom scores, quality of life, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

For this update, we narrowed the review question to only comparisons with placebo. We included 27 studies (of which 9 were new) involving a total of 4656 participants, 19 studies comparing Serenoa repens with placebo, and 8 studies comparing Serenoa repens in combination with other phytotherapeutic agents versus placebo. Most studies included men aged > 50 (mean age range 52 to 68) with moderate urologic symptoms (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS] range 8 to 19). Ten studies were funded by the pharmaceutical industry; two studies were funded by government agencies; and the remaining studies did not specify funding sources. Serenoa repens versus placebo or no intervention Results for this comparison are based on predefined sensitivity analyses limited to studies at low risk of bias. Serenoa repens results in little to no difference in urologic symptoms at short-term follow-up (3 to 6 months; IPSS score range 0 to 35, higher scores indicate worse symptoms; mean difference (MD) -0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.74 to -0.07; I2 = 68%; 9 studies, 1681 participants; high-certainty evidence). Serenoa repens results in little to no difference in the quality of life at short-term follow-up (3 to 6 months; IPSS quality of life domain range 0 to 6, higher scores indicate worse quality of life; MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.00; I2 = 39%; 5 studies, 1001 participants; high-certainty evidence). Serenoa repens probably results in little to no difference in adverse events (1 to 17 months; risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.31; I2 = 18%; 12 studies, 2399 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on 164 cases per 1000 men in the placebo group, this corresponds to 2 more (38 fewer to 51 more) per 1000 men in the Serenoa repens group. Serenoa repens results in little to no difference in urologic symptoms at long-term follow-up (12 to 17 months, IPSS score, MD 0.07, 95% CI -0.75 to 0.88; I2 = 34%; 3 studies, 898 participants; high-certainty evidence). Serenoa repens results in little to no difference in quality of life at long-term follow-up (12 to 17 months, IPSS quality of life, MD -0.11, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.19; I2 = 65%; 3 studies, 882 participants; high-certainty evidence). There were no data on long-term adverse events for this comparison. Serenoa repens in combination with other phytotherapy versus placebo or no intervention Different phytotherapeutic agents that include Serenoa repens may result in little to no difference in urologic symptoms compared to placebo at short-term follow-up (12 to 24 weeks, IPSS score, MD -2.41, 95% CI -4.54 to -0.29; I2 = 67%; 4 studies, 460 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about the effects of these agents on quality of life (very low-certainty evidence). These agents may result in little to no difference in the occurrence of adverse events; however, the CIs included substantial benefits and harms (12 to 48 weeks, RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.41; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 481 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on 132 cases per 1000 men in the placebo group, this corresponds to 12 fewer (55 fewer to 54 more) per 1000 men in the combined phytotherapeutic agents with Serenoa repens group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Serenoa repens alone provides little to no benefits for men with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic enlargement. There is more uncertainty about the role of Serenoa repens in combination with other phytotherapeutic agents.

CONSORT Harms 2022 statement, explanation, and elaboration: updated guideline for the reporting of harms in randomized trials

Randomized controlled trials remain the reference standard for healthcare research on effects of interventions, and the need to report both benefits and harms is essential. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (the main CONSORT) statement includes one item on reporting harms (i.e., all important harms or unintended effects in each group). In 2004, the CONSORT group developed the CONSORT Harms extension; however, it has not been consistently applied and needs to be updated. Here, we describe CONSORT Harms 2022, which replaces the CONSORT Harms 2004 checklist, and shows how CONSORT Harms 2022 items could be incorporated into the main CONSORT checklist. Thirteen items from the main CONSORT were modified to improve harms reporting. Three new items were added. In this article, we describe CONSORT Harms 2022 and how it was integrated into the main CONSORT checklist and elaborate on each item relevant to complete reporting of harms in randomized controlled trials. Until future work from the CONSORT group produces an updated checklist, authors, journal reviewers, and editors of randomized controlled trials should use the integrated checklist presented in this paper.

Antidepressants for pain management in adults with chronic pain: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is common in adults, and often has a detrimental impact upon physical ability, well-being, and quality of life. Previous reviews have shown that certain antidepressants may be effective in reducing pain with some benefit in improving patients' global impression of change for certain chronic pain conditions. However, there has not been a network meta-analysis (NMA) examining all antidepressants across all chronic pain conditions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of antidepressants for adults with chronic pain (except headache).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, AMED and PsycINFO databases, and clinical trials registries, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of antidepressants for chronic pain conditions in January 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs that examined antidepressants for chronic pain against any comparator. If the comparator was placebo, another medication, another antidepressant, or the same antidepressant at different doses, then we required the study to be double-blind. We included RCTs with active comparators that were unable to be double-blinded (e.g. psychotherapy) but rated them as high risk of bias. We excluded RCTs where the follow-up was less than two weeks and those with fewer than 10 participants in each arm.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors separately screened, data extracted, and judged risk of bias. We synthesised the data using Bayesian NMA and pairwise meta-analyses for each outcome and ranked the antidepressants in terms of their effectiveness using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). We primarily used Confidence in Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) and Risk of Bias due to Missing Evidence in Network meta-analysis (ROB-MEN) to assess the certainty of the evidence. Where it was not possible to use CINeMA and ROB-MEN due to the complexity of the networks, we used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Our primary outcomes were substantial (50%) pain relief, pain intensity, mood, and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were moderate pain relief (30%), physical function, sleep, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), serious adverse events, and withdrawal.

MAIN RESULTS

This review and NMA included 176 studies with a total of 28,664 participants. The majority of studies were placebo-controlled (83), and parallel-armed (141). The most common pain conditions examined were fibromyalgia (59 studies); neuropathic pain (49 studies) and musculoskeletal pain (40 studies). The average length of RCTs was 10 weeks. Seven studies provided no useable data and were omitted from the NMA. The majority of studies measured short-term outcomes only and excluded people with low mood and other mental health conditions. Across efficacy outcomes, duloxetine was consistently the highest-ranked antidepressant with moderate- to high-certainty evidence. In duloxetine studies, standard dose was equally efficacious as high dose for the majority of outcomes. Milnacipran was often ranked as the next most efficacious antidepressant, although the certainty of evidence was lower than that of duloxetine. There was insufficient evidence to draw robust conclusions for the efficacy and safety of any other antidepressant for chronic pain.  Primary efficacy outcomes Duloxetine standard dose (60 mg) showed a small to moderate effect for substantial pain relief (odds ratio (OR) 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.69 to 2.17; 16 studies, 4490 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and continuous pain intensity (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.31, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.24; 18 studies, 4959 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For pain intensity, milnacipran standard dose (100 mg) also showed a small effect (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.06; 4 studies, 1866 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mirtazapine (30 mg) had a moderate effect on mood (SMD -0.5, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.22; 1 study, 406 participants; low-certainty evidence), while duloxetine showed a small effect (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.22 to -0.1; 26 studies, 7952 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); however it is important to note that most studies excluded participants with mental health conditions, and so average anxiety and depression scores tended to be in the 'normal' or 'subclinical' ranges at baseline already. Secondary efficacy outcomes Across all secondary efficacy outcomes (moderate pain relief, physical function, sleep, quality of life, and PGIC), duloxetine and milnacipran were the highest-ranked antidepressants with moderate-certainty evidence, although effects were small. For both duloxetine and milnacipran, standard doses were as efficacious as high doses. Safety There was very low-certainty evidence for all safety outcomes (adverse events, serious adverse events, and withdrawal) across all antidepressants. We cannot draw any reliable conclusions from the NMAs for these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review and NMAs show that despite studies investigating 25 different antidepressants, the only antidepressant we are certain about for the treatment of chronic pain is duloxetine. Duloxetine was moderately efficacious across all outcomes at standard dose. There is also promising evidence for milnacipran, although further high-quality research is needed to be confident in these conclusions. Evidence for all other antidepressants was low certainty. As RCTs excluded people with low mood, we were unable to establish the effects of antidepressants for people with chronic pain and depression. There is currently no reliable evidence for the long-term efficacy of any antidepressant, and no reliable evidence for the safety of antidepressants for chronic pain at any time point.

Reporting of adverse events associated with spinal manipulation in randomised clinical trials: an updated systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To describe if there has been a change in the reporting of adverse events associated with spinal manipulation in randomised clinical trials (RCTs) since 2016.

DESIGN

A systematic literature review.

DATA SOURCES

Databases were searched from March 2016 to May 2022: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, CINAHL, ICL, PEDro and Cochrane Library. The following search terms and their derivatives were adapted for each platform: spinal manipulation; chiropractic; osteopathy; physiotherapy; naprapathy; medical manipulation and clinical trial.

METHODS

Domains of interest (pertaining to adverse events) included: completeness and location of reporting; nomenclature and description; spinal location and practitioner delivering manipulation; methodological quality of the studies and details of the publishing journal. Frequencies and proportions of studies reporting on each of these domains were calculated. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were fitted to examine the effect of potential predictors on the likelihood of studies reporting on adverse events.

RESULTS

There were 5399 records identified by the electronic searches, of which 154 (2.9%) were included in the analysis. Of these, 94 (61.0%) reported on adverse events with only 23.4% providing an explicit description of what constituted an adverse event. Reporting of adverse events in the abstract has increased (n=29, 30.9%) while reporting in the results section has decreased (n=83, 88.3%) over the past 6 years. Spinal manipulation was delivered to 7518 participants in the included studies. No serious adverse events were reported in any of these studies.

CONCLUSIONS

While the current level of reporting of adverse events associated with spinal manipulation in RCTs has increased since our 2016 publication on the same topic, the level remains low and inconsistent with established standards. As such, it is imperative for authors, journal editors and administrators of clinical trial registries to ensure there is more balanced reporting of both benefits and harms in RCTs involving spinal manipulation.

Swallowing outcomes in dysphagia interventions in Parkinson's disease: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

To identify all outcomes, their definitions, outcome measurement instruments (OMIs), timepoints and frequency of measurement applied in clinical trials in oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) interventions in Parkinson's disease (PD). This scoping review is the first stage of a larger project establishing a core outcome set for dysphagia interventions in Parkinson's disease (COS-DIP).

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

Six electronic databases and one trial registry were searched without language restrictions until March 2022. Bibliography lists of included studies were also reviewed. Study screening and data extraction were conducted independently by two reviewers using Covidence. The scoping review protocol is registered and published (http://hdl.handle.net/2262/97652).

RESULTS

19 studies with 134 outcomes were included. Trial outcomes were mapped to a recommended taxonomy for COSs and merged. 39 outcomes were identified. The most frequently measured were general swallowing-related outcomes, global quality-of-life outcomes and swallowing-related perceived health status outcomes. The applied outcomes, their definitions, OMIs, timepoints and frequency of measurement showed a high variability across all studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The high variability of outcomes emphasises the need for an agreed standardised COS. This will inform clinical trial design in OD in PD, increase the quality of OD trials in PD and facilitate synthesising and comparing study results to reach conclusion on the safety and effectiveness of OD interventions in PD. It will not prevent or restrict researchers from examining other outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The COS-DIP study, including the scoping review, was registered prospectively with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Database on 24 September 2021 (www.comet-initiative.org, registration number: 1942).

Novel Approaches for Dynamic Visualization of Adverse Event Data in Oncology Clinical Trials: A Case Study Using Immunotherapy Trial S1400-I (SWOG)

PURPOSE

Clinical trial adverse event (AE) data are increasingly complex and high-dimensional, especially for trials evaluating novel targeted agents and immunotherapies. Standard approaches to summarize and analyze AEs remain generally tabular, failing to describe the nature of AEs. Novel dynamic and data visualization methods are needed to enable a more comprehensive assessment of the overall toxicity profile of treatments.

METHODS

We developed methods for visualizing the numerous categorizations and types of AEs along with a dynamic approach to better reflect its highly dimensional nature without sacrificing the reporting of rare events. Circular plots displaying the proportion of maximal-grade AEs by system organ classes (SOCs) and butterfly plots displaying the proportion of AEs by severity for each AE term were developed to enable comparisons of AE patterns by treatment arm. These approaches were applied to a randomized phase III trial (S1400I; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02785952) comparing nivolumab with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with stage IV squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

RESULTS

Our visualizations revealed that patients randomly assigned to nivolumab and ipilimumab had higher rates of grade 3 or higher AEs compared with nivolumab alone for several SOCs, including musculoskeletal (5.6% v 0.8%), skin (5.6% v 0.8%), vascular (5.6% v 1.6%), and cardiac (4% v 1.6%) toxicities. They also suggested a pattern of higher prevalence of moderate GI and endocrine toxicities and showed that although the rates of cardiac and neurologic toxicities were similar, the types of events were discordant.

CONCLUSION

The graphical approaches we proposed enable a more comprehensive and intuitive evaluation of toxicity types by treatment groups, which is not apparent in tabular and descriptive reporting methods.

Supervised Relation Extraction Between Suicide-Related Entities and Drugs: Development and Usability Study of an Annotated PubMed Corpus

BACKGROUND

Drug-induced suicide has been debated as a crucial issue in both clinical and public health research. Published research articles contain valuable data on the drugs associated with suicidal adverse events. An automated process that extracts such information and rapidly detects drugs related to suicide risk is essential but has not been well established. Moreover, few data sets are available for training and validating classification models on drug-induced suicide.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to build a corpus of drug-suicide relations containing annotated entities for drugs, suicidal adverse events, and their relations. To confirm the effectiveness of the drug-suicide relation corpus, we evaluated the performance of a relation classification model using the corpus in conjunction with various embeddings.

METHODS

We collected the abstracts and titles of research articles associated with drugs and suicide from PubMed and manually annotated them along with their relations at the sentence level (adverse drug events, treatment, suicide means, or miscellaneous). To reduce the manual annotation effort, we preliminarily selected sentences with a pretrained zero-shot classifier or sentences containing only drug and suicide keywords. We trained a relation classification model using various Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformer embeddings with the proposed corpus. We then compared the performances of the model with different Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformer-based embeddings and selected the most suitable embedding for our corpus.

RESULTS

Our corpus comprised 11,894 sentences extracted from the titles and abstracts of the PubMed research articles. Each sentence was annotated with drug and suicide entities and the relationship between these 2 entities (adverse drug events, treatment, means, and miscellaneous). All of the tested relation classification models that were fine-tuned on the corpus accurately detected sentences of suicidal adverse events regardless of their pretrained type and data set properties.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first and most extensive corpus of drug-suicide relations.

Systematic review: Exploring the monitoring and reporting of unwanted events in psychotherapy trials for anorexia nervosa

OBJECTIVE

If a psychotherapeutic intervention has the capacity to produce positive change, the "deterioration effect" theory holds that it must also have the potential for negative effects. However, the definition, measurement, and reporting of unwanted events in psychotherapy is a topic of ongoing discussion. At present this area is under-explored in interventions for anorexia nervosa (AN), a severe mental illness associated with high medical and psychiatric risks. The aim of this article was to undertake a systematic review of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating psychotherapeutic interventions for AN, and to assess how unwanted events were defined, monitored, and reported alongside the trial's key findings.

METHOD

Using a systematic review methodology, this article identified 23 RCTs through database searches meeting eligibility criteria. Results are presented using a narrative summary approach.

RESULTS

Unwanted event reporting varied widely, both regarding definitions of key unwanted events (such as non-compliance or symptom deterioration) and in the amount of detail captured in each paper.

DISCUSSION

The review identified two key issues: firstly, a lack of consistent definitions and unclear causality made it difficult to distinguish between unwanted events, and adverse events caused by the interventions. Secondly, it highlighted the difficulty of defining unwanted events where different studies have different populations and goals. Recommendations are made around how the area of defining, monitoring, and reporting unwanted events in RCTs for AN can be taken forward.

PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE

Whilst psychotherapies can be effective in treating mental health conditions, negative or unwanted events can sometimes occur. This review explored how RCTs examining psychotherapy for AN report how they monitor the safety of participants, and how they report unwanted events. We found that the reporting was often inconsistent or hard to interpret, and we have made recommendations for how this can be improved in the future.

Common toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy in the treatment of melanoma: A systematic scoping review

INTRODUCTION

This systematic scoping review compares the toxicities experienced by patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) or targeted therapy (TT) for stage III (resected and unresectable) and stage IV melanoma.

METHODS

OVID Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo were searched to identify Phase III trials reporting toxicities of FDA-approved ICIs and TT for advanced melanoma. AEs that were reported by ≥ 10% of patients in the evaluated trials were included.

RESULTS

Toxicity profiles of 11208 patients from 24 studies were reviewed. The rate of AEs was lower with ICIs compared to TT. However, ICIs were associated with higher rates of long-term or permanent AEs compared to TT, where toxicities generally were shortterm and reversible with treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

The toxicity profiles of ICIs and TT vary substantially. Whilst the rate of AEs was lower with ICIs than during TT, it was also associated with higher rates of potentially chronic AEs.

Identifying and Categorizing Adverse Events in Trials of Digital Mental Health Interventions: Narrative Scoping Review of Trials in the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Registry

BACKGROUND

To contextualize the benefits of an intervention, it is important that adverse events (AEs) are reported. This is potentially difficult in trials of digital mental health interventions, where delivery may be remote and the mechanisms of actions less understood.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore the reporting of AEs in randomized controlled trials of digital mental health interventions.

METHODS

The International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number database was searched for trials registered before May 2022. Using advanced search filters, we identified 2546 trials in the category of mental and behavioral disorders. These trials were independently reviewed by 2 researchers against the eligibility criteria. Trials were included where digital mental health interventions for participants with a mental health disorder were evaluated through a completed randomized controlled trial (protocol and primary results publication published). Published protocols and primary results publications were then retrieved. Data were extracted independently by 3 researchers, with discussion to reach consensus when required.

RESULTS

Twenty-three trials met the eligibility criteria, of which 16 (69%) included a statement on AEs within a publication, but only 6 (26%) reported AEs within their primary results publication. Seriousness was referred to by 6 trials, relatedness by 4, and expectedness by 2. More interventions delivered with human support (9/11, 82%) than those with only remote or no support (6/12, 50%) included a statement on AEs, but they did not report more AEs. Several reasons for participant dropout were identified by trials that did not report AEs, of which some were identifiable or related to AEs, including serious AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant variation in the reporting of AEs in trials of digital mental health interventions. This variation may reflect limited reporting processes and difficulty recognizing AEs related to digital mental health interventions. There is a need to develop guidelines specifically for these trials to improve future reporting.

Harms reporting by systematic reviews for functional endoscopic sinus surgery: a cross-sectional analysis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the completeness of harms reporting in systematic reviews (SRs) pertaining to functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS).

METHODS

Using a cross-sectional study design, we performed a comprehensive search using MEDLINE (PubMed and Ovid), EMBASE, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases for SRs regarding FESS on May 15th, 2022. Returns were screened and data were extracted in a masked, duplicate manner. Following established methodology, we extracted general study characteristics, harms items, and overall methodological quality for each SR in our sample. Corrected covered area (CCA) was calculated for SR dyads. For data analysis, using Stata 16.1 we performed a bivariate analysis between variables.

RESULTS

Fifty-five SR's were included in our sample after excluding 375 studies that did not meet our inclusion criteria. Of the included SRs, 19 (19/55, 34.5%) did not report harms and 39 (39/55, 70.9%) reported half of the harms items or fewer. Our study found that 23 (23/55, 41.8%) of SRs demonstrated a method of harms data collection, 26 (26/55, 47.3%) of SRs had patients available for harms analysis in their results, and 25 (25/55, 45.5%) of SRs had a balanced discussion of harms and benefits of FESS. Fifty-two SRs were appraised as "critically low" quality using AMSTAR-2. A significant association was found between completeness of harms reporting (Mahady) and whether harms were listed as a primary outcome. No other associations were statistically significant. Two SR dyads had CCAs between 20% and 50% overlap and were compared for unique and shared harms.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates gaps in harms reporting regarding FESS in SRs. We recommend future studies implement guidelines such as the STROCCS guidelines or the harms extension of the PRISMA guidelines to improve harms reporting. Accurate harms reporting may advance patient safety and promote a more objective risk-benefit analysis for physicians and patients.

Emerging issues in probiotic safety: 2023 perspectives

Probiotics are used for both generally healthy consumers and in clinical settings. However, theoretical and proven adverse events from probiotic consumption exist. New probiotic strains and products, as well as expanding use of probiotics into vulnerable populations, warrants concise, and actionable recommendations on how to work toward their safe and effective use. The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics convened a meeting to discuss and produce evidence-based recommendations on potential acute and long-term risks, risks to vulnerable populations, the importance for probiotic product quality to match the needs of vulnerable populations, and the need for adverse event reporting related to probiotic use. The importance of whole genome sequencing, which enables determination of virulence, toxin, and antibiotic resistance genes, as well as clear assignment of species and strain identity, is emphasized. We present recommendations to guide the scientific and medical community on judging probiotic safety.

Diabetic ketoacidosis after the second dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in a patient with pembrolizumab-induced fulminant type 1 diabetes

We report a case of 77-year-old woman with fulminant type 1 diabetes (T1D) who developed diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) after the second dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine tozinameran. The patient had been diagnosed as having T1D associated with an immune-related adverse event caused by pembrolizumab at the age of 75. After the second dose of tozinameran, she developed DKA and needed intravenous insulin infusion and mechanical ventilation. Although the direct causal relationship between the vaccination and the DKA episode could not be proven in this case, published literatures had suggested the possibility of developing DKA after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with T1D. As the magnitude of the risk of the combination of the known adverse drug reactions of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine and T1D patients' vulnerability to sick-day conditions is not yet thoroughly assessed, future studies such as a non-interventional study with adequate sample size would be required to address this issue.

Safety of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS): a systematic review and meta-analysis

Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) has been investigated as a novel neuromodulation tool. Although taVNS is generally considered safe with only mild and transient adverse effects (AEs), those specifically caused by taVNS have not yet been investigated. This systematic review and meta-analysis on taVNS aimed to (1) systematically analyze study characteristics and AE assessment, (2) characterize and analyze possible AEs and their incidence, (3) search for predictable risk factors, (4) analyze the severity of AE, and (5) suggest an evidence-based taVNS adverse events questionnaire for safety monitoring. The articles searched were published through April 7, 2022, in Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Lilacs databases. In general, we evaluated 177 studies that assessed 6322 subjects. From these, 55.37% of studies did not mention the presence or absence of any AEs; only 24.86% of the studies described that at least one adverse event occurred. In the 35 studies reporting the number of subjects with at least one adverse event, a meta-analytic approach to calculate the risk differences of developing an adverse event between active taVNS and controls was used. The meta-analytic overall adverse events incidence rate was calculated for the total number of adverse events reported on a 100,000 person-minutes-days scale. There were no differences in risk of developing an adverse event between active taVNS and controls. The incidence of AE, in general, was 12.84/100,000 person-minutes-days of stimulation, and the most frequently reported were ear pain, headache, and tingling. Almost half of the studies did not report the presence or absence of any AEs. We attribute this to the absence of AE in those studies. There was no causal relationship between taVNS and severe adverse events. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis of transcutaneous auricular stimulation safety. Overall, taVNS is a safe and feasible option for clinical intervention.

Dropout rate in randomised controlled trials of balance and gait rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis: is it expected to be different for virtual reality-based interventions? A systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression

To assess and meta-analyse the pooled dropout rate from the randomised control trilas that use virtual reality for balance or gait rehabilitation in people with multiple sclerosis. A systematic review of randomised control trials with meta-analysis and meta-regressions was performed. A search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, the Cochrane Database, CINHAL, LILACS, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest. It was last updated in July 2022. After the selection of studies, a quality appraisal was carried out using the PEDro Scale and the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials. A descriptive analysis of main characteristics and dropout information was performed. An overall proportion meta-analysis calculated the pooled dropout rate. Odds ratio meta-analysis compared the dropout likelihood between interventions. The meta-regression evaluated the influence of moderators related to dropout. Sixteen studies with 656 participants were included. The overall pooled dropout rate was 6.6% and 5.7% for virtual reality and 9.7% in control groups. The odds ratio (0.89, p = 0.46) indicated no differences in the probability of dropouts between the interventions. The number, duration, frequency, and weeks of sessions, intervention, sex, multiple sclerosis phenotype, Expanded Disability Status Scale score, and PEDro score were not moderators (p > 0.05). Adverse events were not reported and could not be analysed as moderators. Dropouts across the virtual reality and control comparators were similar without significant differences. Nonetheless, there is a slight trend that could favour virtual reality. Standardisation in reporting dropouts and adverse events is recommended for future trials. PROSPERO database, registration number ID CRD42021284989.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10055-022-00733-4.

c4c: Paediatric pharmacovigilance: Methodological considerations in research and development of medicines for children - A c4c expert group white paper

Children frequently respond differently to therapies compared to adults. Differences also exist between paediatric age groups for pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in both efficacy and safety. Paediatric pharmacovigilance requires an understanding of the unique aspects of children with regard to, for example, drug response, growth and development, clinical presentation of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), how they can be detected and population-specific factors (e.g., more frequent use of off-label/unlicensed drugs). In recognition of these challenges, a group of experts has been formed in the context of the conect4children (c4c) project to support paediatric drug development. This expert group collaborated to develop methodological considerations for paediatric drug safety and pharmacovigilance throughout the life-cycle of medicinal products which are described in this article. These considerations include practical points to consider for the development of the paediatric section of the risk management plan (RMP), safety in paediatric protocol development, safety data collection and analysis. Furthermore, they describe the specific details of post-marketing pharmacovigilance in children using, for example, spontaneous reports, electronic health care records, registries and record-linkage, as well as the use of paediatric pharmacoepidemiology studies for risk characterisation. Next the details of the assessment of benefit-risk and challenges related to medicinal product formulation in the context of a Paediatric Investigation Plan (PIP) are presented. Finally, practical issues in paediatric signal detection and evaluation are included. This paper provides practical points to consider for paediatric pharmacovigilance throughout the life-cycle of medicinal products for RMPs, protocol development, safety data collection and analysis and PIPs.

Pharmacovigilance: reporting requirements throughout a product's lifecycle

Comprehensive methods for evaluating safety are needed to objectively assess the full risk profile of a medication. The confidence of the prescribing provider in the safety and effectiveness of pharmaceuticals is extremely important. Pharmacovigilance is a key component of drug safety regulatory processes and is paramount for ensuring the safety profile of medications used to treat patients. All participants in the healthcare system, including healthcare providers and consumers, should understand and meaningfully engage in the pharmacovigilance process; healthcare providers should integrate pharmacovigilance into everyday practice, inviting feedback from patients. This narrative review aims to give an overview of the main topics underlying pharmacovigilance and drug safety in pharmaceutical research phase after the authorization of a drug in the United States. The US Food and Drug Administration guidance and post-approval regulatory actions are considered from an industry perspective.

Plain language summary

Regulatory processes that ensure the safety of drugs is monitored Government agencies regulate the safe use of medicinal products. By determining and enforcing pharmacovigilance, the monitoring of drugs for potential risks, they safeguard the welfare of consumers of medicines. Comprehensive, documented methods for evaluating the safety of a drug during its development and its subsequent use allow identification of any risks associated with the drug's use throughout its lifetime. The comprehensive identification of safety issues associated with a drug is improved when all parties involved in the development and use of drugs participate in the pharmacovigilance process. For example, clinicians should regularly ask their patients if they are experiencing any issues with their treatment, and patients should be encouraged to report problems they encounter with a particular medication to their healthcare provider. This narrative review provides an overview of the main topics underlying pharmacovigilance and drug safety after approval of a drug in the United States. Guidelines and actions from the US Food and Drug Administration are considered from an industry perspective.