Cargando…

Does additional monitoring status increase the reporting of adverse drug reactions? An interrupted time series analysis of EudraVigilance data

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of including a medicine in the list of medicinal products subject to additional monitoring (AM) on the reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the european economic area (EEA). METHODS: Interrupted time series using the monthly number of EEA ADR reports in Eudra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Segec, Andrej, Slattery, Jim, Morales, Daniel R., Januskiene, Justina, Kurz, Xavier, Arlett, Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7898803/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33197106
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pds.5174
_version_ 1783653939605929984
author Segec, Andrej
Slattery, Jim
Morales, Daniel R.
Januskiene, Justina
Kurz, Xavier
Arlett, Peter
author_facet Segec, Andrej
Slattery, Jim
Morales, Daniel R.
Januskiene, Justina
Kurz, Xavier
Arlett, Peter
author_sort Segec, Andrej
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of including a medicine in the list of medicinal products subject to additional monitoring (AM) on the reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the european economic area (EEA). METHODS: Interrupted time series using the monthly number of EEA ADR reports in EudraVigilance during 12 months before and after the addition to AM list. The main outcome was the change (%) in reporting of ADRs with step change as the a priori impact model. Further time series analysis was performed using Joinpoint Regression. RESULTS: The analysis included 11 active substances. No significant immediate (step change) increase of reporting was identified for any product at time of addition to AM list. We identified a significant gradual increase of ADR reporting after addition to AM list (slope change) for two out of five new products—boceprevir (10% per month, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3%–18%) and denosumab‐Xgeva (13% per month, 95% CI 4%–22%). No change was identified for Prolia, another denosumab‐containing product not subject to AM. No significant increase was identified for any product included in the AM list due to the requirement to conduct a PASS. Conversely, a gradual decrease in reporting was identified for natalizumab (−5% per month; 95% CI −10% to −1%), rivaroxaban (−5%; −8 to −3%), and varenicline (−16%; −21 to −10%). The results were corroborated by the Joinpoint analyses, which yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: We identified limited evidence that reporting of ADRs increased modestly and gradually for some new products and not for products with PASS requirement.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7898803
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78988032021-03-03 Does additional monitoring status increase the reporting of adverse drug reactions? An interrupted time series analysis of EudraVigilance data Segec, Andrej Slattery, Jim Morales, Daniel R. Januskiene, Justina Kurz, Xavier Arlett, Peter Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Original Articles PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of including a medicine in the list of medicinal products subject to additional monitoring (AM) on the reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the european economic area (EEA). METHODS: Interrupted time series using the monthly number of EEA ADR reports in EudraVigilance during 12 months before and after the addition to AM list. The main outcome was the change (%) in reporting of ADRs with step change as the a priori impact model. Further time series analysis was performed using Joinpoint Regression. RESULTS: The analysis included 11 active substances. No significant immediate (step change) increase of reporting was identified for any product at time of addition to AM list. We identified a significant gradual increase of ADR reporting after addition to AM list (slope change) for two out of five new products—boceprevir (10% per month, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3%–18%) and denosumab‐Xgeva (13% per month, 95% CI 4%–22%). No change was identified for Prolia, another denosumab‐containing product not subject to AM. No significant increase was identified for any product included in the AM list due to the requirement to conduct a PASS. Conversely, a gradual decrease in reporting was identified for natalizumab (−5% per month; 95% CI −10% to −1%), rivaroxaban (−5%; −8 to −3%), and varenicline (−16%; −21 to −10%). The results were corroborated by the Joinpoint analyses, which yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: We identified limited evidence that reporting of ADRs increased modestly and gradually for some new products and not for products with PASS requirement. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2020-12-08 2021-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7898803/ /pubmed/33197106 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pds.5174 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Segec, Andrej
Slattery, Jim
Morales, Daniel R.
Januskiene, Justina
Kurz, Xavier
Arlett, Peter
Does additional monitoring status increase the reporting of adverse drug reactions? An interrupted time series analysis of EudraVigilance data
title Does additional monitoring status increase the reporting of adverse drug reactions? An interrupted time series analysis of EudraVigilance data
title_full Does additional monitoring status increase the reporting of adverse drug reactions? An interrupted time series analysis of EudraVigilance data
title_fullStr Does additional monitoring status increase the reporting of adverse drug reactions? An interrupted time series analysis of EudraVigilance data
title_full_unstemmed Does additional monitoring status increase the reporting of adverse drug reactions? An interrupted time series analysis of EudraVigilance data
title_short Does additional monitoring status increase the reporting of adverse drug reactions? An interrupted time series analysis of EudraVigilance data
title_sort does additional monitoring status increase the reporting of adverse drug reactions? an interrupted time series analysis of eudravigilance data
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7898803/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33197106
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pds.5174
work_keys_str_mv AT segecandrej doesadditionalmonitoringstatusincreasethereportingofadversedrugreactionsaninterruptedtimeseriesanalysisofeudravigilancedata
AT slatteryjim doesadditionalmonitoringstatusincreasethereportingofadversedrugreactionsaninterruptedtimeseriesanalysisofeudravigilancedata
AT moralesdanielr doesadditionalmonitoringstatusincreasethereportingofadversedrugreactionsaninterruptedtimeseriesanalysisofeudravigilancedata
AT januskienejustina doesadditionalmonitoringstatusincreasethereportingofadversedrugreactionsaninterruptedtimeseriesanalysisofeudravigilancedata
AT kurzxavier doesadditionalmonitoringstatusincreasethereportingofadversedrugreactionsaninterruptedtimeseriesanalysisofeudravigilancedata
AT arlettpeter doesadditionalmonitoringstatusincreasethereportingofadversedrugreactionsaninterruptedtimeseriesanalysisofeudravigilancedata