Table1_Myocarditis and pericarditis in individuals exposed to the Ad26.COV2.S, BNT162b2 mRNA, or mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.xlsx

ImportanceThere is a high level of public and professional interest related to potential safety issues of the COVID-19 vaccines; however, no serious adverse cardiovascular events were reported in phase 3 randomized controlled trials of their safety and efficacy. Moreover, none of the case series from the United States (US) of these potential complications have been population-based.ObjectivesTo estimate the reporting rates of myocarditis and pericarditis in the US using the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and to assess if these adverse events were disproportionally reported among the different COVID-19 vaccines.Design, setting, and participantsAll cases of myocarditis and pericarditis from VAERS reported up to July 28, 2021.ExposureSingle-dose Ad26.COV2.S, BNT162b2 mRNA, or mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations.Main outcomes and measuresReporting rates were computed by dividing the total number of cases of myocarditis and pericarditis (combined) by the total number of vaccine doses administered. Disproportionality analyses were performed to evaluate disproportional reporting of myocarditis and pericarditis for the Ad26.COV2.S and mRNA-1273 vaccines vs. the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine.ResultsBy July 28, 2021, 1392, 699, and 68 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis had been reported out of 1.91, 1.38, and 1.33 million administered doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccines, respectively. Median times to event were 3 days, 3 days, and 9 days for the BNT162b2 mRNA, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccines. The reporting rates for myocarditis or pericarditis were 0.00073 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI 0.00069–0.00077), 0.00051 (95% CI 0.00047–0.00055), and 0.00005 events per dose (95% CI 0.00004–0.00006) for the BNT162b2 mRNA, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccines, respectively. Myocarditis and pericarditis were disproportionally reported following the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine when compared with the other vaccines, using both disproportionality measures.Conclusions and relevanceWe found reporting rates of myocarditis and pericarditis to be less than 0.1% after COVID-19 vaccination. Rates were highest for the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, followed by the mRNA-1273 and Ad26.COV2.S, respectively. However, the reporting rates of myocarditis and pericarditis secondary to vaccination remains less common than those seen for SARS-CoV-2 infection.</p

Table_2_Pillars and Pitfalls of the New Pharmacovigilance Legislation: Consequences for the Identification of Adverse Drug Reactions Deriving From Abuse, Misuse, Overdose, Occupational Exposure, and Medication Errors.docx

<p>Rationale: The aim of this study is to investigate if following the implementation of the Regulation EU/1235/2010 and the Directive 2010/84/EU there was an increase of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) deriving from a medication error, abuse, misuse, overdose, or occupational exposure. Other objectives are the identification of drugs mostly involved in such cases, to establish if the codification of aforementioned conditions is performed correctly and, whenever codification errors exist, to identify predictors of codification errors. Finally, we estimated the magnitude of these errors on signal detection activities.</p><p>Methods: ICSRs sent through Campania Region (Italy) spontaneous reporting system from July 2nd 2012 to December 31th 2017 were used as data source. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of codification errors. Four measures of disproportionality were used to investigate the magnitude of codification errors on a known safety signal or rather the association between benzodiazepines derivatives and abuse.</p><p>Results: In all, 358 (1.4%) out of 25610 ICSRs reported “non-normal use” of drugs, mainly as cases of abuse. Drugs mostly involved in abuse were “Benzodiazepines derivatives” (171/358; 47.8%). For medication errors instead, “Other antiseptics and disinfectants” (9/358; 2.5%). At the first quality control, 125 (34.9%) out of 358 ICSRs did not have a codification of “non-normal use” or codifications were performed wrongly. Codification errors included misclassification of abuse as overdose (10/125; 8.0%) and misclassification of medication error as overdose (7/125; 5.6%) or abuse (7/125; 5.6%). Compared to pharmaceutical companies, patients/citizens (as reporters) had a 24.88 higher odd (Reporting Odds Ratio 24.88, 95%CI 1.82–449.95; p-value: 0.02) of performing un-classification or misclassification of aforementioned codifications. Codification errors were associated with the underestimation of measure of disproportionality' estimates in the identification of the safety signal “Benzodiazepine derivatives /abuse”.</p><p>Conclusion: In conclusion, this study found that in Campania Region (southern Italy) there was an exponential increase of ICSR reporting “non-normal use,” mainly as cases of abuse, with an improvable proportion of cases misclassified/unclassified. Moreover, this study found that ICSRs sent by patients/citizens were associated with an increased odd of un-classification or misclassification that had a relevant impact on signal detection activities.</p

Image_4_Pillars and Pitfalls of the New Pharmacovigilance Legislation: Consequences for the Identification of Adverse Drug Reactions Deriving From Abuse, Misuse, Overdose, Occupational Exposure, and Medication Errors.TIF

<p>Rationale: The aim of this study is to investigate if following the implementation of the Regulation EU/1235/2010 and the Directive 2010/84/EU there was an increase of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) deriving from a medication error, abuse, misuse, overdose, or occupational exposure. Other objectives are the identification of drugs mostly involved in such cases, to establish if the codification of aforementioned conditions is performed correctly and, whenever codification errors exist, to identify predictors of codification errors. Finally, we estimated the magnitude of these errors on signal detection activities.</p><p>Methods: ICSRs sent through Campania Region (Italy) spontaneous reporting system from July 2nd 2012 to December 31th 2017 were used as data source. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of codification errors. Four measures of disproportionality were used to investigate the magnitude of codification errors on a known safety signal or rather the association between benzodiazepines derivatives and abuse.</p><p>Results: In all, 358 (1.4%) out of 25610 ICSRs reported “non-normal use” of drugs, mainly as cases of abuse. Drugs mostly involved in abuse were “Benzodiazepines derivatives” (171/358; 47.8%). For medication errors instead, “Other antiseptics and disinfectants” (9/358; 2.5%). At the first quality control, 125 (34.9%) out of 358 ICSRs did not have a codification of “non-normal use” or codifications were performed wrongly. Codification errors included misclassification of abuse as overdose (10/125; 8.0%) and misclassification of medication error as overdose (7/125; 5.6%) or abuse (7/125; 5.6%). Compared to pharmaceutical companies, patients/citizens (as reporters) had a 24.88 higher odd (Reporting Odds Ratio 24.88, 95%CI 1.82–449.95; p-value: 0.02) of performing un-classification or misclassification of aforementioned codifications. Codification errors were associated with the underestimation of measure of disproportionality' estimates in the identification of the safety signal “Benzodiazepine derivatives /abuse”.</p><p>Conclusion: In conclusion, this study found that in Campania Region (southern Italy) there was an exponential increase of ICSR reporting “non-normal use,” mainly as cases of abuse, with an improvable proportion of cases misclassified/unclassified. Moreover, this study found that ICSRs sent by patients/citizens were associated with an increased odd of un-classification or misclassification that had a relevant impact on signal detection activities.</p

Flowchart.

<p>Flowchart of the study population and sensitivity analysis subpopulations. </p

Survival curves.

<p>(a) Kaplan-Meier curve for all-cause mortality—main analysis–comparison among patients with and without chronic kidney disease. (b) Kaplan-Meier curve for all-cause mortality—first sensitivity analysis—comparison among patients with and without chronic kidney disease using a propensity-matched subpopulation. (c) Kaplan-Meier curve for all-cause mortality—second sensitivity analysis—comparison among patients with and without eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73m² using a propensity-matched subpopulation. (d) Cumulative incidence for cardiovascular mortality—main analysis–comparison among patients with and without chronic kidney disease (Chi-square test statistic: 28.263; p-value < 0.001). (e) Cumulative incidence for cardiovascular mortality—first sensitivity analysis—comparison among patients with and without chronic kidney disease using a propensity-matched subpopulation. (f) Cumulative incidence for cardiovascular mortality—second sensitivity—analysis comparison among patients with and without eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73m² using a propensity-matched subpopulation. Comparison among survival curves for all-causes was performed using log-rank test and the p-value was shown in the figure.</p

Summary of the unadjusted and adjusted Hazard Ratio for all-causes and cardiovascular mortality for all analysis.

<p>Summary of the unadjusted and adjusted Hazard Ratio for all-causes and cardiovascular mortality for all analysis.</p

Demographic characteristics of all patients (N = 37,981) with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and/or atrial flutter as hospitalization diagnosis from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 2012 identified in Danish nationwide administrative registries and treated with digoxin for these pathologies.

<p>Demographic characteristics of all patients (N = 37,981) with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and/or atrial flutter as hospitalization diagnosis from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 2012 identified in Danish nationwide administrative registries and treated with digoxin for these pathologies.</p

Table_1_Pillars and Pitfalls of the New Pharmacovigilance Legislation: Consequences for the Identification of Adverse Drug Reactions Deriving From Abuse, Misuse, Overdose, Occupational Exposure, and Medication Errors.docx

<p>Rationale: The aim of this study is to investigate if following the implementation of the Regulation EU/1235/2010 and the Directive 2010/84/EU there was an increase of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) deriving from a medication error, abuse, misuse, overdose, or occupational exposure. Other objectives are the identification of drugs mostly involved in such cases, to establish if the codification of aforementioned conditions is performed correctly and, whenever codification errors exist, to identify predictors of codification errors. Finally, we estimated the magnitude of these errors on signal detection activities.</p><p>Methods: ICSRs sent through Campania Region (Italy) spontaneous reporting system from July 2nd 2012 to December 31th 2017 were used as data source. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of codification errors. Four measures of disproportionality were used to investigate the magnitude of codification errors on a known safety signal or rather the association between benzodiazepines derivatives and abuse.</p><p>Results: In all, 358 (1.4%) out of 25610 ICSRs reported “non-normal use” of drugs, mainly as cases of abuse. Drugs mostly involved in abuse were “Benzodiazepines derivatives” (171/358; 47.8%). For medication errors instead, “Other antiseptics and disinfectants” (9/358; 2.5%). At the first quality control, 125 (34.9%) out of 358 ICSRs did not have a codification of “non-normal use” or codifications were performed wrongly. Codification errors included misclassification of abuse as overdose (10/125; 8.0%) and misclassification of medication error as overdose (7/125; 5.6%) or abuse (7/125; 5.6%). Compared to pharmaceutical companies, patients/citizens (as reporters) had a 24.88 higher odd (Reporting Odds Ratio 24.88, 95%CI 1.82–449.95; p-value: 0.02) of performing un-classification or misclassification of aforementioned codifications. Codification errors were associated with the underestimation of measure of disproportionality' estimates in the identification of the safety signal “Benzodiazepine derivatives /abuse”.</p><p>Conclusion: In conclusion, this study found that in Campania Region (southern Italy) there was an exponential increase of ICSR reporting “non-normal use,” mainly as cases of abuse, with an improvable proportion of cases misclassified/unclassified. Moreover, this study found that ICSRs sent by patients/citizens were associated with an increased odd of un-classification or misclassification that had a relevant impact on signal detection activities.</p

Image_5_Pillars and Pitfalls of the New Pharmacovigilance Legislation: Consequences for the Identification of Adverse Drug Reactions Deriving From Abuse, Misuse, Overdose, Occupational Exposure, and Medication Errors.TIF

<p>Rationale: The aim of this study is to investigate if following the implementation of the Regulation EU/1235/2010 and the Directive 2010/84/EU there was an increase of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) deriving from a medication error, abuse, misuse, overdose, or occupational exposure. Other objectives are the identification of drugs mostly involved in such cases, to establish if the codification of aforementioned conditions is performed correctly and, whenever codification errors exist, to identify predictors of codification errors. Finally, we estimated the magnitude of these errors on signal detection activities.</p><p>Methods: ICSRs sent through Campania Region (Italy) spontaneous reporting system from July 2nd 2012 to December 31th 2017 were used as data source. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of codification errors. Four measures of disproportionality were used to investigate the magnitude of codification errors on a known safety signal or rather the association between benzodiazepines derivatives and abuse.</p><p>Results: In all, 358 (1.4%) out of 25610 ICSRs reported “non-normal use” of drugs, mainly as cases of abuse. Drugs mostly involved in abuse were “Benzodiazepines derivatives” (171/358; 47.8%). For medication errors instead, “Other antiseptics and disinfectants” (9/358; 2.5%). At the first quality control, 125 (34.9%) out of 358 ICSRs did not have a codification of “non-normal use” or codifications were performed wrongly. Codification errors included misclassification of abuse as overdose (10/125; 8.0%) and misclassification of medication error as overdose (7/125; 5.6%) or abuse (7/125; 5.6%). Compared to pharmaceutical companies, patients/citizens (as reporters) had a 24.88 higher odd (Reporting Odds Ratio 24.88, 95%CI 1.82–449.95; p-value: 0.02) of performing un-classification or misclassification of aforementioned codifications. Codification errors were associated with the underestimation of measure of disproportionality' estimates in the identification of the safety signal “Benzodiazepine derivatives /abuse”.</p><p>Conclusion: In conclusion, this study found that in Campania Region (southern Italy) there was an exponential increase of ICSR reporting “non-normal use,” mainly as cases of abuse, with an improvable proportion of cases misclassified/unclassified. Moreover, this study found that ICSRs sent by patients/citizens were associated with an increased odd of un-classification or misclassification that had a relevant impact on signal detection activities.</p

Anatomical templates of lymph node dissection for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review of the literature

<p><b>Introduction:</b> Indications and techniques of lymph node dissection (LND) for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) are still controversial.</p> <p><b>Areas covered:</b> In this study, a systematic review of the English-language literature was performed up to 1 July 2016 using the Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Sciences databases to provide a detailed overview of the most commonly dissected surgical templates of LND for UTUC according to <i>laterality</i> and <i>location</i> of the tumor. Overall, sixteen studies were analyzed. Based on the shared experiences in the scientific literature, the LND template typically included: for <i>right-sided</i> tumors of the renal pelvis, upper third and middle third of the ureter, the renal hilar, paracaval, precaval and retrocaval nodes, while for l<i>eft-sided tumors</i> the renal hilar, paraaortic and preaortic nodes. For tumors of the lower ureter, an extended pelvic LND was performed in most cases; however, the paracaval, paraaortic or presacral nodes were dissected in selected series.</p> <p><b>Expert commentary:</b> LND is not routinely performed at the time of surgery for UTUC and both indication and extent of LND vary among surgeons and institutions. Future high-quality studies are needed to define the most accurate LND templates and to assess their oncological efficacy and surgical morbidity.</p