Pharmacovigilance as a tool for safety and monitoring: a review of general issues and the specific challenges with end-stage renal failure patients

Underreporting and Triggering Factors for Reporting ADRs of Two Ophthalmic Drugs: A Comparison between Spontaneous Reports and Active Pharmacovigilance Databases

(1) Aims of the study: calculating the underreporting ratio for two different medications, a fixed combination of 0.5% timolol + 0.2% brimonidine + 2.0% dorzolamide (antiglaucoma) and a fixed combination of sodium hyaluronate 0.1% + chondroitin sulfate 0.18% (artificial tears) for characterizing the features influencing the reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in spontaneous reporting. (2) Methods: The underreporting ratio was calculated by comparing the adverse drug reactions reported in the spontaneous reporting database for every 10,000 defined daily doses marketed and the adverse drug reactions from an active surveillance study for every 10,000 defined daily doses used for different drugs (antiglaucoma and artificial tears). The factors related to the report in spontaneous reporting through statistical tests were also determined. (3) Results: The underreporting ratio of spontaneous reporting was 0.006029% for antiglaucoma and 0.003552% for artificial tears. Additionally, statistically significant differences were found for severity, unexpected adverse drug reactions, and incidence of adverse drug reactions in females when compared with spontaneous reporting and active surveillance. (4) Conclusions: The underreporting ratio of ADRs related to ophthalmic medications indicates worry since the cornerstone of pharmacovigilance focuses on spontaneous reporting. Additionally, since underreporting seems to b selective, the role of certain aspects, such as gender, seriousness, severity, and unexpected ADRs, must be considered in future research.

Safety and Effectiveness of Sodium Stibogluconate and Paromomycin Combination for the Treatment of Visceral Leishmaniasis in Eastern Africa: Results from a Pharmacovigilance Programme

INTRODUCTION

In 2010, WHO recommended a new first-line treatment for visceral leishmaniasis (VL) in Eastern Africa. The new treatment, a combination of intravenous (IV) or intramuscular (IM) sodium stibogluconate (SSG) and IM paromomycin (PM) was an improvement over SSG monotherapy, the previous first-line VL treatment in the region. To monitor the new treatment's safety and effectiveness in routine clinical practice a pharmacovigilance (PV) programme was developed.

METHODS

A prospective PV cohort was developed. Regulatory approval was obtained in Sudan, Kenya, Uganda and Ethiopia. Twelve sentinel sites sponsored by the Ministries of Health, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) and Drugs for Neglected Diseases initiative (DNDi) participated. VL patients treated using the new treatment were consented and included in a common registry that collected demographics, baseline clinical characteristics, adverse events, serious adverse events and treatment outcomes. Six-monthly periodic safety update reports (PSUR) were prepared and reviewed by a PV steering committee.

RESULTS

Overall 3126 patients were enrolled: 1962 (62.7%) from Sudan, 652 (20.9%) from Kenya, 322 (10.3%) from Ethiopia and 190 (6.1%) from Uganda. Patients were mostly male children (68.1%, median age 11 years) with primary VL (97.8%). SSG-PM initial cure rate was 95.1%; no geographical differences were noted. HIV/VL co-infected patients and patients older than 50 years had initial cure rates of 56 and 81.4%, respectively, while 1063 (34%) patients had at least one adverse event (AE) during treatment and 1.92% (n = 60) had a serious adverse event (SAE) with a mortality of 1.0% (n = 32). There were no serious unexpected adverse drug reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

This first regional PV programme in VL supports SSG-PM combination as first-line treatment for primary VL in Eastern Africa. SSG-PM was effective and safe except in HIV/VL co-infected or older patients. Active PV surveillance of targeted safety, effectiveness and key VL outcomes such us VL relapse, PKDL and HIV/VL co-infection should continue and PV data integrated to national and WHO PV databases.

Safety of Factor XIII Concentrate: Analysis of More than 20 Years of Pharmacovigilance Data

BACKGROUND

Plasma-derived factor XIII (FXIII) concentrate is an effective treatment for FXIII deficiency. We describe adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reported during pharmacovigilance monitoring of Fibrogammin®/Corifact® and review published safety data.

METHODS

Postmarketing safety reports recorded by CSL Behring from June 1993 to September 2013 were analyzed. Clinical studies published during the same period were also reviewed.

RESULTS

Commercial data indicated that 1,653,450,333 IU FXIII concentrate were distributed over the review period, equivalent to 1,181,036 doses for a 70 kg patient. 75 cases were reported (one/15,700 standard doses or 22,046,000 IU). Reports of special interest included 12 cases of possible hypersensitivity reactions (one/98,400 doses or 137,787,500 IU), 7 with possible thromboembolic events (one/168,700 doses or 236,207,200 IU), 5 of possible inhibitor development (one/236,200 doses or 330,690,100 IU), and 20 of possible pathogen transmission (one/59,100 doses or 82,672,500 IU). 19 pathogen transmission cases involved viral infection; 4 could not be analyzed due to insufficient data, but for all others a causal relationship to the product was assessed as unlikely. A review of published literature revealed a similar safety profile.

CONCLUSION

Assessment of ADRs demonstrated that FXIII concentrate carries a low risk of ADRs across various clinical situations, suggesting a favorable safety profile.

Completeness of adverse drug reactions reports of the Saudi adverse event reporting system

OBJECTIVES

To assess completeness of reports in the Saudi Adverse Event Reporting System (SAERS), which is a part of the Saudi Food and Drug Authority pharmacovigilance system for monitoring the safety of medications.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia using the reports that were received between December 2009 and June 2012 in the SAERS. The completeness was assessed by reviewing the components of the adverse drug reactions (ADRs) form, and how many fields were completed. Descriptive statistics are reported.

RESULT

There were 14,783 reports during the study period. Eighty percent of these reports were spontaneous reports. Information related to the drug (99%) and adverse events (98%) of the reports were completed. While the patient's demographic data were completed only in 38% of all reports, the least completed item in the ADRs form was the reporter information (15%). The most reported drug class was tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (7%), whereas events involving the respiratory organ system were the most frequently reported (4.5%).

CONCLUSION

Although the SAERS is considered new, it has a high number of reports. More efforts are needed to improve the completeness of the SAERS to be a good source to assess the signals between events and suspected drugs, especially when there is a high number of reports.

A systematic review of agomelatine-induced liver injury

Agomelatine is an antidepressant with a unique mechanism of action. Since its marketing in 2009, concerns have been raised regarding its potential to induce liver injury. The authors therefore address the need to comprehensively evaluate the potential risk posed by agomelatine of inducing liver injury by reviewing data from published and unpublished clinical trials in both the pre- and postmarketing settings, as well as data from non-interventional studies, pharmacovigilance database reviews and one case report. Recommendations for clinicians are also provided.

In this review, agomelatine was found to be associated with higher rates of liver injury than both placebo and the four active comparator antidepressants used in the clinical trials for agomelatine, with rates as high as 4.6% for agomelatine compared to 2.1% for placebo, 1.4% for escitalopram, 0.6% for paroxetine, 0.4% for fluoxetine, and 0% for sertraline. The review also provides evidence for the existence of a positive relationship between agomelatine dose and liver injury. Furthermore, rates of liver injury were found to be lower in non-interventional studies. Findings from pharmacovigilance database reviews and one case report also highlight the risk of agomelatine-induced liver injury.

As agomelatine does pose a risk of liver injury, clinicians must carefully monitor liver function throughout treatment. However, agomelatine’s unique mechanism of action and favourable safety profile render it a valuable treatment option.

A quantitative analysis of agomelatine-induced liver injury is lacking in the literature and would be welcomed.