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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |