Are consumers ready to take part in the Pharmacovigilance System?—a Portuguese preliminary study concerning ADR reporting

BACKGROUND: New pharmacovigilance legislation allows consumers to report adverse drug reactions (ADRs) directly to competent authorities in all European Union countries. Consumer reporting is available in Portugal since July 2012. In 2013, the National Pharmacovigilance System (SNF) had received 3461 spontaneous ADR reports, of which only 1.4% (n = 50) were from consumers. Consumer reporting could be one opportunity to reduce underreporting. AIM: The aim of this study was to describe the attitudes and knowledge of the general public regarding spontaneous reporting and the reasons and opinions that can influence consumers' ADR underreporting. METHODS: A descriptive-correlational study was performed looking for consumers' attitudes and knowledge regarding spontaneous reporting. A 6-month survey was conducted from June to November 2013 in general adult consumers from a community pharmacy in Coimbra, Portugal, who used prescribed medicines or over-the-counter (OTC) drugs. Attitudes and opinions were surveyed by personal interview in a closed-answer questionnaire using a Likert scale. Questionnaires from healthcare professionals or incomplete ones were not considered. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square (χ(2)) tests, and Spearman's correlation coefficients. RESULTS: One thousand eighty-four questionnaires were collected (response rate of 81.1%) and 948 completed were selected for analysis. Of the respondents, 44.1% never heard about SNF. Younger people and those with a higher education were significantly more likely to be aware of SNF. Only one consumer had previously reported directly an ADR. Reporting ADRs indirectly through a healthcare professional (HCP) was preferred by 62.4%. The main reasons for consumers reporting spontaneous ADR would be the severity of reactions (81.1% agreed or strongly agreed) and worries about their situation (73.4% agreed or strongly agreed). Only weak and moderate correlations were found between studied statements.. CONCLUSIONS: Consumers are more likely to do spontaneous report about severe reactions or if they are worried about the symptoms. Tailored and proactive information on ADR reporting and educational interventions on consumers could increase the number of reports from consumers in Portugal.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Numbers of spontaneous reports:How to use and interpret?

Due to the high intensity of the COVID-19 vaccination campaigns and heightened attention for safety issues, the number of spontaneous reports has surged. In the Netherlands, pharmacovigilance centre Lareb has received more than 100,000 reports on AEFI associated with Covid-19 vaccination. It is tempting to interpret absolute numbers of reports of AEFIs in signal detection. Signal detection of spontaneously reported adverse drug reaction, has its origin in case-by-case analysis where all case reports are assessed by clinically qualified assessors. The concept of clinical review of cases - even if only a few per country - followed by sharing concerns of suspicions of potential adverse reactions again proved the strength of the system. Disproportionality analysis can be useful in signal identification, and comparing reported cases with expected based on background incidence can be useful to support signal detection. However, they cannot be used without an in-depth analysis of the underlying clinical data and pharmacological mechanism. This in-depth analysis has been performed, and is ongoing, for the signal of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) in relation to the AstraZeneca and Janssen Covid-19 vaccines (4, 5). Although no frequency or incidence rates, reporting rates can provide an impression of the occurrence of the event. But the unknown underreporting should also be part of this context. To quantify the incidence rates, follow-up epidemiological studies are needed

Post-Menopausal Vaginal Hemorrhage Related to the Use of a Hop-Containing Phytotherapeutic Product

Two 54-year-old women developed abdominal cramps and vaginal hemorrhage as a result of endometrial hyperplasia during treatment with a hop-containing phytotherapeutic product (MenoCool®) for post-menopausal complaints. The women used the hop-containing phytotherapeutic product (418 mg of hop per tablet) twice daily (1 and 0.5 tablets by both patient A and B). Patient A developed abdominal cramps and vaginal hemorrhage after 2 months of use. After gynecological examination, she was diagnosed with endometrial hyperplasia. The patient was treated with a curettage. The hop-containing phytotherapeutic product was discontinued, and the patient recovered. Patient B developed abdominal pain/cramps and vaginal hemorrhage after 5 months of use. A cervix smear, internal examination, and ultrasound were performed. Due to the thickness of the endometrium, a pipelle endometrial biopsy was performed. Results showed no indication for cervix cancer. The use of MenoCool®was ceased; follow-up information received from the patient shortly thereafter indicated that she had almost entirely recovered from the abdominal pain/cramps and vaginal hemorrhage. Hop (Humulus lupulus) has phytoestrogenic properties that may be the cause of endometrial hyperplasia and subsequent vaginal hemorrhage. A Naranjo assessment score of 5 was obtained for both cases, indicating a probable relationship between the patient’s endometrial proliferation and subsequent vaginal hemorrhage and their use of the suspect drug

Monitoring the safety of influenza A (H1N1) vaccine using web-based intensive monitoring

BACKGROUND: When adjuvant vaccines against the pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus became available after an accelerated registration process, safety issues dominated the public debate. As part of the immunisation campaign, the Dutch government installed an active monitoring of possible adverse events following immunisation (AEFIs). As part of the monitoring we conducted an anonymous prospective cohort study to identify and quantify the occurrence of AEFIs related to pandemic vaccination among the population immunised in general practice. METHOD: Adults aged 60 years and older or persons with a risk-elevating medical condition recommended for vaccination in general practice were eligible for participation. After receipt of the first pandemic vaccine the administrator handed over an information flyer of the web-based monitoring program. The patient could sign up for study participation online. Within one week, three weeks and three months after the first immunisation questions were asked about demographics and health, immunisations, injections site reactions and labeled reactions as well as other possible new AEFIs. RESULTS: In all, 3569 participants filled in the first questionnaire. Corresponding figures for the second and third questionnaires were 3395 (95.1%) and 3162 (88.6%). Mean age was 58 years (SD 15) and 50.1% was female. Main indication was 60 years or older followed by presence of pulmonary or cardiovascular disease. Of all participants, 1311 (37%) reported an AEFI. Unexpected serious reactions were not reported nor were there signals of possible new AEFIs. The occurrence of an AEFI was determined by gender, age and type of co-morbidity. CONCLUSION: The web-based intensive monitoring system among patient immunised in general practice revealed AEFIs due to pandemic vaccination in one-third of participants. There were no unexpected serious adverse events in this population. This advanced methodology can be further developed to monitor real-time use and AEFIs of vaccines

Time to onset in statistical signal detection revisited:A follow-up study in long-term onset adverse drug reactions

PURPOSE: In a previous study, we developed a signal detection method using the time to onset (TTO) of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The aim of the current study was to investigate this method in a subset of ADRs with a longer TTO and to compare its performance with disproportionality analysis. METHODS: Using The Netherlands's spontaneous reporting database, TTO distributions for drug-ADR associations with a median TTO of 7 days or more were compared with other drugs with the same ADR using the two-sample Anderson-Darling (AD) test. Presence in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) was used as the gold standard for identification of a true ADR. Twelve combinations with different values for the number of reports and median TTO were tested. Performance in terms of sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) was compared with disproportionality analysis. A sensitivity analysis was performed to compare the results with those from the previous study. RESULTS: A total of 38 017 case reports, containing 32 478 unique drug-ADR associations. Sensitivity was lower for the TTO method (range 0.08-0.34) compared with disproportionality analysis (range 0.60-0.87), whereas PPV was similar for both methods (range 0.93-1.0). The results from the sensitivity analysis were similar to the original analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Because of its low sensitivity, the developed TTO method cannot replace disproportionality analysis as a signal detection tool. It may be useful in combination with other methods

Validation of a Novel Method to Assess the Clinical Quality of Information in Pregnancy-Related Pharmacovigilance Case Reports: A ConcePTION Project.

To assess the causal relationship between a medicinal product and a reported event, relevant information needs to be present. Information elements for assessing cases of exposure to medicinal products during pregnancy were predefined and used in a new tool to assess the quality of information. However, the extent in which the presence or absence of these predefined information elements is associated with the overall clinical quality of these cases, as evaluated by pharmacovigilance experts, remains uncertain. We aimed to validate a novel method to assess the clinical quality of information in real-world pregnancy pharmacovigilance case reports. The clinical quality of case reports regarding medicinal product exposure and pregnancy-related outcomes was appraised from spontaneous reports, literature, Teratology Information Services (UK and Switzerland), The Dutch Pregnancy Drug Register, the Gilenya pregnancy registry and the Enhanced PV programme of Novartis. Assessment was done by means of the novel standardised tool based on the presence and relevance of information, and by expert judgement. The novel tool was validated compared to the expert assessment as the gold standard expressed as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves, after which the sensitivity and specificity were calculated using cross-tabulations. Inter-rater variability was determined by means of weighted Cohen's kappa. One hundred and eighty-six case reports were included. The clinical quality score as assessed by the novel method was divided into three categories with cut-off values of 45% (poor to intermediate) and 65% (intermediate to excellent). Sensitivity was 0.93 and 0.96 for poor to intermediate and intermediate to excellent, respectively. Specificity was respectively 0.52 and 0.73. Inter-rater variability was 0.65 (95% confidence interval 0.53-0.78) for the newly developed approach, and 0.40 (95% confidence interval 0.28-0.52) for the gold standard assessment. The tool described in this study using the presence and relevance of elements of information is the first designed, validated and standardised method for the assessment of the quality of information of case reports in pregnancy pharmacovigilance data. This method confers less inter-rater variability compared with a quality assessment by experts of pregnancy-related pharmacovigilance data

Adverse Drug Reactions of Intranasal Corticosteroids in the Netherlands:An Analysis from the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Center

BACKGROUND: Intranasal corticosteroids are one of the cornerstone treatment options for allergic rhinitis and chronic sinusitis complaints. Safety information in the summary of product characteristics may not be representative for observations in daily clinical practice. The Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Center (Lareb) collects post-marketing safety information, using spontaneous reporting systems. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to analyse reports of adverse drug reactions associated with intranasal corticosteroids reported in the Dutch spontaneous reporting database of the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Center Lareb to obtain insight into real-world safety data. METHODS: We retrospectively examined all adverse drug reactions of intranasal corticosteroids reported to the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Center Lareb, entered into the database from 1991 until 1 July, 2020. RESULTS: In total, 2263 adverse drug reactions after intranasal corticosteroid use were reported in 1258 individuals. Headache (n = 143), epistaxis (n = 124) and anosmia (n = 57) were reported most frequently. Nasal septum perforation (reporting odds ratio 463.2; 95% confidence interval: 186.7-1149.7) had the highest reporting odds ratio, followed by nasal mucosal disorder (reporting odds ratio 104.5; 95% confidence interval 36.3-301.3) and hyposmia (reporting odds ratio 90.8; 95% confidence interval 45.1-182.7). Moreover, 101 (4.5%) reports were classified as serious by Lareb, including reports of Cushing's syndrome, adrenal cortical hypofunction and growth retardation. CONCLUSIONS: Many side effects are consistent with the safety information in the summary of product characteristics of intranasal corticosteroids. Several serious (systemic) side effects are reported and it is important to realise that intranasal corticosteroids may contribute to the development. Healthcare providers and patients should be aware of the potential (individual) adverse drug reactions of intranasal corticosteroids. This information could help in discussing treatment options