Safety of fingolimod in patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: A descriptive analysis of data from the EudraVigilance database.

The most prevalent disease course of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Fingolimod (Gilenya®) was the first oral disease-modifying therapy to RRMS. Patients affected by MS require long-term treatment, making the ongoing evaluation of the safety profile of fingolimod imperative. The aim of this study was to analyze the post-marketing pharmacovigilance data of fingolimod in Europe. Data of 12-year period (1 January 2011-19 June 2023) were obtained from EudraVigilance, and a descriptive analysis using drug-reaction pairs was performed. A total of 22,957 reports were collected. The most reported adverse events (AEs) were related to nervous system disorders SOC (multiple sclerosis relapse n = 2271; 3.51%, headache n = 921; 1.42%, central nervous system lesion n = 893; 1,38%, dizziness 769; 1,19%, hypoaesthesia 487; 0.75% and multiple sclerosis 449; 0.69%), followed by investigations (lymphocyte count decreased n = 1648; 2.55%, white blood cell count decreased n = 833; 1.29%), blood and lymphatic system disorder (lymphopenia n = 1146; 1.77%), and general disorders and administration site condition (fatigue n = 1106; 1.71%, gait disturbance 564; 0.87%). A percentage of 23.00% of serious adverse events (SAEs), among the most reported were multiple sclerosis relapse (n = 2271; 15.27%), macular oedema (n = 793; 5.33%), bradycardia (n = 678; 4.56%), leukopenia (n = 533; 3.58%), and multiple sclerosis (n = 449; 3.02%). Most of AEs were non-serious, some SAEs related to cardiac, ophthalmic and infectious disorders emerged: their prevalence, along with the alignment of reported AEs with existing literature, supports the overall safety of fingolimod. Considering the rare and long-term ADRs that may arise in patients chronically treated for MS, continuous pharmacovigilance remains essential.

PAttern of drug use in PEdiatrics: An observational study in Italian hOSpitals (the PAPEOS study).

AIMS: To assess the extent of off-label drug use and the occurrence of suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) among paediatric patients in Italian hospitals. METHODS: We conducted a 2-year prospective cohort study across 22 Italian hospital wards from September 2020 to September 2022. As part of the surveillance project, we performed a 6-month retrieval of all reported ADRs and evaluated all drug prescriptions for their possible off-label use. Following an educational project on pharmacovigilance addressed to healthcare professionals in participating wards, the same data collection was performed. RESULTS: Among the 892 patients included in the study, 64% were admitted to paediatric wards and 36% to neonatal wards. Fifty per cent of all drugs prescribed were used off-label and mainly concerned the administration of a different dose from the one authorized. In neonatal wards, off-label prescriptions occurred slightly more often, with antibacterials being the most frequently used off-label drugs. A total of 35 reports of suspected ADRs were collected, five before the educational project and 30 afterwards. Based on product licence, 10 of the total 35 reports concerned at least one off-label drug use. CONCLUSIONS: The off-label use of drugs in treating paediatric patients was extensive in Italian hospitals. Regulatory interventions are needed to promote the use of drugs based on the latest available literature and improve ADR reporting on children. Paediatric indications and dosages of the drugs most commonly used in children should be supported by appropriate ad hoc studies.

Safety profile of paediatric COVID-19 vaccines: An analysis of the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

AIM: To provide further evidence on the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in paediatrics by analysing the spontaneous reports of adverse effects related to these vaccines. METHODS: Reports related to US paediatric population (from 0 to 17 years) vaccinated with authorised COVID-19 vaccines were extracted from Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System from December 2020 to 17 November 2022. We conducted a descriptive analysis of Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI), calculating reporting rate of serious AEFIs and focusing on myocarditis and Guillain-Barré Syndrome after mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. RESULTS: Overall, 52 720 reports were retrieved: 77% (40541)-Pfizer-BioNTech, 19% (10083)-Moderna, a small proportion for other vaccines 4% (2096). Most of AEFIs were non-serious and listed in corresponding SPCs. Of serious AEFIs, 96% were related to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Roughly 91% (47874) were related to people from 6 to 17 years, a small percentage of 9% (4773) to the younger group (0-5 years). In both groups, most of the reports were related to mRNA vaccines and the percentage of AEFIs experienced by females were similar to males. CONCLUSIONS: Data showed that events most frequently reported were non-serious and listed in the corresponding SPCs, extending the evidence of safety of COVID-19 vaccines authorised in the United States in children.

Comparative Safety Profiles of Oncology Biosimilars vs. Originators in Europe: An Analysis of the EudraVigilance Database.

In the last decades, the clinical management of oncology patients has been transformed by the introduction of biologics. The high costs associated with the development and production of biologics limit patient access to these therapies. The expiration of exclusive patents for biologics has led to the development and market introduction of biosimilars, offering the reduction of costs for cancer treatments. Biosimilars are highly similar to the reference products in terms of structure, biological activity, efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity. Therefore, the monitoring of biosimilars' safety in real-world clinical practice though pharmacovigilance is essential. This study aimed to analyze the post-marketing pharmacovigilance data of biosimilar monoclonal antibodies used in oncology and compare them with respective reference products. Data of a 2-year period (1 January 2021-31 December 2022) were retrieved from EudraVigilance, and descriptive and comparative analysis were performed using the Reporting Odds Ratio to evaluate the distribution of medicine-reaction pairs related to biosimilars of three antitumor biological products and their corresponding reference products: bevacizumab, rituximab, and trastuzumab. The results showed that most frequently reported ADRs for biosimilars were non-serious and consistent with the safety profiles of reference products. These findings provide reassurance regarding safety equivalence of biosimilars and support their use as valid alternatives to originator biologics.

Real-life safety profile of mRNA vaccines for COVID-19: An analysis of VAERS database.

INTRODUCTION: Since the first COVID-19 messenger RNA vaccines became available globally for emergency or conditional use, post-marketing surveillance activities have been implemented for the monitoring of any adverse events that might arise in daily clinical practice and were not detected earlier during clinical trials. METHODS: Safety data concerning the BNT162b2 and the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines were collected from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for the period from December 2020 to October 15, 2021. In addition to a descriptive analysis of individuals who experienced an adverse event after vaccination, a case-non-case analysis was performed by using the Reporting Odds Ratio with 95 % confidence interval as statistical parameter for detecting differences in reporting rates between the two mRNA vaccines. RESULTS: At the cut-off date, a total of 758,040 reports were submitted to VAERS, of which 439,401 were related to the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) vaccine and 318,639 to the Moderna vaccine (mRNA-1273). Most common adverse events following immunization for both mRNA vaccines were headache, fatigue, pyrexia, dizziness, nausea, pain, chills, and pain in extremity. A disproportionality was found for BNT162b2 as compared with mRNA-1273 for some events of special interest, such as myocarditis [ROR 2.00; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.93-2.06], Bell's palsy (1.34; 1.29-1.39), and anaphylactic shock (3.23; 2.96-3.53). CONCLUSION: Even if some rare adverse events were identified, our survey of post-marketing surveillance has provided further evidence of the favourable safety profile of mRNA vaccines.

Safety of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy: a VAERS based analysis.

PURPOSE: Since vaccination against COVID-19 is recommended in pregnant people, we aimed to provide further evidence on the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy. METHODS: Data on COVID-19 vaccines adverse events following immunizations (AEFIs) in pregnant people were retrieved from the open-access Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from December 2020 to April 2022. RESULTS: From December 2020 to April 1, 2022, a total of 4,869 reports involving pregnant women at COVID-19 vaccination were reported to VAERS. Among vaccines recipients, most belonged to the age group between 30 and 39 years old (3,029; 62.21%) and nearly half experienced an adverse event within 48 h of immunization (2,344; 48.14%). Overall, 21,816 suspected adverse reactions associated with COVID-19 vaccines were reported, and for as many as 80.43% of patients, they were described as non-serious. Most reactions occurred after administration of the mRNA-1273 (53.34%) and the BNT162b2 (40.68%) vaccines, while only a small proportion were related to the Johnson & Johnson's vaccine (5.69%). The most common non-pregnancy specific adverse events were headache (482; 2.21%), fatigue (472; 2.16%), and pyrexia (436; 2.00%), while adverse pregnancy outcomes with the highest reporting rate were abortions spontaneous (762; 3.49%), and vaginal haemorrhage (229; 1.05%). CONCLUSION: This post-marketing survey on VAERS data have provided updated evidence on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy, thus supporting clinicians in recommending maternal immunization.

Level of therapeutic innovation from the registration studies of the new drugs for the prophylaxis of migraine.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Migraine is one of the most prevalent and disabling medical illnesses. Preventive drugs are used to reduce the frequency, severity, and duration of attacks. Most patients were no longer on their medication due to contraindications or poor clinical response. Therefore, there is need for novel prophylactic agents for migraine. New preventive treatments are those of the class of calcitonin gene related peptide (CGRP)-targeting therapies. We aimed to assess the real level of therapeutic innovation of these new drugs. METHODS: The information on the new drugs was collected from several documents, including the European public assessment reports. The level of therapeutic innovation was assessed with the algorithm published by some of us in 2006. RESULTS: All new approved drugs (eptinezumab, galcanezumab, fremanezumab, erenumab) are indicated for the prophylaxis of migraine in adults who have at least four migraine days for month. All these drugs have been tested only in comparison to placebo. Their level of therapeutic innovation was only modest, that is, the lowest value of our algorithm. DISCUSSION: The new monoclonal antibodies of the class of CGRP targeting therapies have been authorized with efficacy data only against placebo. They do not offer additional clinical benefits compared to available therapies for the prevention of migraine attacks, with the exception of a lower frequency of administration and a more rapid effect. All this assigns to these drugs only a modest role in therapy according to our algorithm for therapeutic innovation with a significantly higher cost than similar therapies.

Safety Profile of Molnupiravir in the Treatment of COVID-19: A Descriptive Study Based on FAERS Data.

Concerns have been raised about the actual benefit and safety of molnupiravir, a new antiviral treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In order to provide additional evidence to support its use, we aimed to evaluate the real safety profile based on post-marketing pharmacovigilance data. Molnupiravir safety data were captured from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). We performed a descriptive analysis of the baseline demographic characteristics of patients who experienced at least one adverse drug reaction (ADRs) related to molnupiravir, and then evaluated those most frequently reported. As of 31 March 2022, 612 reports of ADRs related to molnupiravir were submitted to the FDA, 301 (49.18%) were related to females and 281 (45.92%) to males. Most reports (524; 85.62%) were submitted by healthcare professionals and 345 (56.37%) concerned serious outcomes. The most common reported ADRs were diarrhoea (57; 4.51%), rash (36; 2.85), nausea (29; 2.30%), and COVID-19 pneumonia (22; 1.74%). The most frequent adverse reactions reported with molnupiravir in the U.S. post-marketing experience are consistent with the safety evaluation of the antiviral medicine. Even if no evident safety concerns emerged, an unexpectedly high rate of serious adverse reactions together with a few cases of potential new adverse reactions occurred.