The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) Drug Safety Surveillance During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: On 4 February, 2020, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services declared a public health emergency related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and on 27 March, 2020 declared circumstances existed to justify the authorization of the emergency use of drug and biological products (hereafter, "drugs") for COVID-19. At the outset of the pandemic with uncertainty relating to the virus, many drugs were being used to treat or prevent COVID-19, resulting in the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) need to initiate heightened surveillance across these drugs. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the FDA's approach to monitoring the safety of drugs to treat or prevent COVID-19 across multiple data sources and the subsequent actions taken by the FDA to protect public health. METHODS: The FDA conducted surveillance of adverse event and medication error data using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System, biomedical literature, FDA-American College of Medical Toxicology COVID-19 Toxicology Investigators Consortium Pharmacovigilance Project Sub-registry, and the American Association of Poison Control Centers National Poison Data System. RESULTS: From 4 February, 2020, through 31 January, 2022, we identified 22,944 unique adverse event cases worldwide and 1052 unique medication error cases domestically with drugs to treat or prevent COVID-19. These were from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (22,219), biomedical literature (1107), FDA-American College of Medical Toxicology COVID-19 Toxicology Investigator's Consortium Sub-registry (638), and the National Poison Data System (32), resulting in the detection of several important safety issues. CONCLUSIONS: Safety surveillance using near real-time data was critical during the COVID-19 pandemic because the FDA monitored an unprecedented number of drugs to treat or prevent COVID-19. Additionally, the pandemic prompted the FDA to accelerate innovation, forging new collaborations and leveraging data sources to conduct safety surveillance to respond to the pandemic.

Repeated or Continuous Medically Supervised Ketamine Administration Associated with Hepatobiliary Adverse Events: A Retrospective Case Series.

INTRODUCTION: Emerging off-label medical uses of ketamine for the treatment of persistent conditions such as depression and chronic pain often require repeated administration. Cases reported by other countries suggest that long-term and repeated exposure to ketamine may be associated with several risks, including but not limited to hepatobiliary damage. OBJECTIVE: We aimed (1) to characterize the association between repeated administration of ketamine for off-label medical use and hepatobiliary events and (2) to describe recent trends in the use of ketamine across different clinical settings. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case series analysis, utilizing reports identified from the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database as well as the medical literature. We included all cases reported through July 2018 describing both repeated exposure to ketamine in a hospital or ambulatory setting and a hepatobiliary adverse event. We excluded cases describing ketamine abuse. We identified adverse hepatobiliary events using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA®) and summarized various case characteristics including: patient demographics, route of ketamine administration, dose, time to onset of event, type of event, and pre-existing risk factors for hepatobiliary disease. To assess trends in the demand for ketamine, we used IQVIA, National Sales Perspectives™ to provide the nationally estimated number of vials sold for ketamine from the manufacturer to all US channels of distribution from 2013 through 2017. RESULTS: We identified 14 unique cases that met selection criteria with 21 hepatobiliary adverse events including liver enzyme elevation in all cases, biliary dilation with liver cirrhosis (n = 1), biliary dilation with cholangitis (n = 1), and pericholeductal fibrosis (n = 1). Most cases received ketamine for the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome or chronic pain. In cases with a reported time to onset, the majority of events occurred within 4 days. The nationally estimated number of ketamine vials sold in the USA from manufacturers to various channels of distribution increased from 1.2 million in 2013 to 2.1 million in 2017. CONCLUSIONS: We report an association between repeated or continuous administration of ketamine and hepatobiliary adverse events. Increased awareness among clinicians may mitigate these adverse outcomes, especially in the context of growing ketamine sales.

Etonogestrel implant migration to the vasculature, chest wall, and distant body sites: cases from a pharmacovigilance database.

OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical outcomes of etonogestrel implant patients with migration to the vasculature, chest wall and other distant body sites spontaneously reported to the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a standardized Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) query in the FAERS database (through November 15, 2015), with reports coded with one or more MedDRA preferred terms that indicate complications with device placement or migration of the device from the original site of insertion to the vasculature, chest wall and other distant body sites. We excluded any cases previously described in the medical literature. RESULTS: We identified 38 cases of pronounced etonogestrel implant migration. Migration locations included the lung/pulmonary artery (n=9), chest wall (n=1), vasculature at locations other than the lung/pulmonary artery (n=14) and extravascular migrations (n=14) to other body sites (e.g., the axilla and clavicle/neck line/shoulder). The majority of cases were asymptomatic and detected when the patient desired implant removal; however, seven cases reported symptoms such as pain, discomfort and dyspnea in association with implant migration. Three cases also describe pulmonary fibrosis and skin reactions as a result of implant migration to the vasculature, chest wall and other distant body sites. Sixteen cases reported surgical removal in an operating room setting. CONCLUSIONS: Our FAERS case series demonstrates etonogestrel implant migration to the vasculature, chest wall and other body sites distant from the site of original insertion. IMPLICATIONS STATEMENT: As noted by the sponsor in current prescribing information, a key determinant in the risk for etonogestrel contraceptive implant migration appears to be improper insertion technique. Although migration of etonogestrel implants to the vasculature is rare, awareness of migration and education on proper insertion technique may reduce the risk.

Emergency use authorization for intravenous peramivir: evaluation of safety in the treatment of hospitalized patients infected with 2009 H1N1 influenza A virus.

BACKGROUND: On 23 October 2009, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for intravenous peramivir, an unapproved antiviral, to treat suspected or confirmed 2009 H1N1 influenza A virus infection. Eligible hospitalized patients were unresponsive to or unable to tolerate available antivirals or lacked dependable oral or inhaled drug delivery routes. The EUA required healthcare providers to report medication errors, selected adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and deaths to the FDA. METHODS: An FDA safety team analyzed reports submitted to the Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) and sought follow-up in selected cases. RESULTS: The FDA received AERS reports for 344 patients (including 28 children and 3 pregnant women). Many patients were critically ill on mechanical ventilation (41%) and renal replacement therapies (19%); 38% had received oseltamivir. The most frequently reported serious AEs by MedDRA preferred term were death (15%), H1N1 influenza (8%), respiratory failure (8%), acute renal failure (7%), and acute respiratory distress syndrome (7%). Six medication errors were reported. Most deaths occurred among patients who were obese, immunosuppressed, aged >65 years, or received oseltamivir. Rash was the only treatment-emergent AE attributable to peramivir. Influenza severity, comorbidities, and concomitant medications confounded additional peramivir AE assessments. Missing clinical and laboratory data precluded evaluation of some reports. CONCLUSIONS: Many peramivir recipients under the EUA were critically ill and at risk for influenza-related complications. The safety data were insufficient to assess whether peramivir affected outcome or caused adverse reactions other than rash. Clinical trials in hospitalized patients with serious influenza infections should provide additional information.