Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer screenings in Portugal.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer screening in Portugal, and its consequences on cancer morbidity and mortality. METHODS: The pre-pandemic and pandemic periods were compared using publicly available data on performance and health outcomes indicators of the Portuguese NHS, namely the numbers and proportions of eligible individuals who underwent cancer screening (breast, cervical or colorectal). Pre-pandemic data were modelled to project hypothetical scenarios without a pandemic using an exponential smoothing algorithm, and then compared with data collected during the COVID-19 pandemic. A Markov model was developed to estimate years of life lost (YLL) due the reduction in the number of cancer screenings during the pandemic. The MS Excel and the PRISM symbolic model checker software were used. RESULTS: There was a decrease in the number of breast (13 %), cervical (15 %) and colorectal (9-11 %) cancers screenings during the first two years of the pandemic. The model projections are 506, 41, and 148 additional deaths, losses of 11, 6, and 4 months of life per patient, and 12.8 thousand, 576, and 4 thousand YLL by the population due to breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer, respectively, over a 25-year time horizon in Portugal. CONCLUSIONS: The disruption in cancer screening may contribute to increase cancer morbidity and mortality, with significant YLL. The long-term implications of the impaired cancer screening should be assessed, and proactive measures put in place to mitigate the increase in cancer morbidity, and mortality associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

The effectiveness of ibandronate in reducing the risk of nonvertebral fractures in women with osteoporosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

BACKGROUND: Ibandronate is effective in reducing the risk of vertebral fractures, but experimental evidence offers conflicting results regarding nonvertebral fractures. Real-world evidence has been published evaluating the anti-nonvertebral fracture effect of ibandronate. AIM: This meta-analysis of observational studies assessed the effectiveness of ibandronate in reducing the risk of nonvertebral fractures in women with osteoporosis. METHOD: Pubmed/Embase databases were searched for observational studies. Risks of nonvertebral fractures and hip fractures were the outcomes. Meta-analyses were performed pooling rate ratios (RRs), using random-effects models. Data were reanalysed in sensitivity analyses considering Knapp-Hartung method and Bayesian random-effects. RESULTS: Six cohort studies were included. Overall, once-monthly 150 mg oral ibandronate reduced the risk of nonvertebral fractures (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.76-0.94). Similar results were obtained when the comparison was restricted to once-monthly 150 mg risedronate, but no differences were found when the comparator was other oral bisphosphonates (weekly alendronate/risedronate). Ibandronate didn't significantly change the risk of hip fractures (RR 1.25; 95% CI 0.89-1.76). The risk of hip fracture was comparable between once monthly, 150 mg oral ibandronate and other oral bisphosphonates. Intravenous ibandronate was not effective in reducing hip fractures comparing to intravenous zoledronate. The low number of studies diminished the robustness of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that once-monthly 150 mg oral ibandronate may be as effective as other oral bisphosphonates in reducing the risk of nonvertebral fractures. However, uncertainty associated to the small number of included studies, which are characterized by heterogeneous demographics and methodologies, precluded definitive conclusions.

Topical Janus kinase inhibitors in atopic dermatitis: a safety network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Topical Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are being developed for the treatment of mild to moderate atopic dermatitis. However, comparative evidence on their safety profiles is still limited. AIM: This study aimed to compare the relative safety of topic JAK inhibitors in patients with atopic dermatitis. METHOD: Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of topical JAK inhibitors in atopic dermatitis were searched on Medline, EMBASE and clinicaltrials.gov. The following outcomes were considered: any adverse event (AE), serious AEs, AEs leading to treatment discontinuation, any infection, any application site reaction. RESULTS: Ten RCTs were included in this network meta-analysis. Tofacitinib was associated with a reduced risk of any AE when compared with ruxolitinib (OR 0.18, 95% CrI 0.03-0.92). The analyses for the remaining outcomes did not identify other statistically significant risk differences between the topical JAK inhibitors. CONCLUSION: Although tofacitinib seems to present a reduced risk of any adverse event compared with ruxolitinib, this was the only statistically significant result found between JAK inhibitors. Therefore, such findings should be interpreted with caution considering the scarce data available and the heterogeneity between the studies, and there is no robust evidence allowing pointing out clinically important differences between the safety profiles of the existing topical JAK inhibitors. Further pharmacovigilance activities are needed to confirm the safety profile of these drugs.

Performance of Aptima-HPV in the cervical cancer screening program of Portugal: a cost-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is a major concern to women's health, being the fourth most common cancer worldwide. A great percentage of these cancer is consequence of an HPV infection, namely from specific genotypes such as 16/18. Portuguese screening program subjects women to a reflex cytology triage every 5 years. Aptima® HPV is a screening test which presents better specificity than other tests which are used in Portugal (Hybrid Capture® 2 and Cobas® 4800) and still have a comparable sensitivity. The present study aims to estimate the number of diagnostic tests and costs that are avoided using Aptima® HPV compared to the use of two other tests, Hybrid Capture® 2 and Cobas® 4800, within the cervical cancer screening programme in Portugal. METHODS: A model, consisting of a decision-tree, was developed to represent the full Portuguese screening program for cervical cancer. This model is used to compare the costs resulting from using Aptima® HPV test versus the other tests used in Portugal, during 2 years. Other outcomes such as the number of additional tests and exams were also computed. This comparison considers the performance of each test (sensitivity and specificity) and assumes an equal price for every test compared. RESULTS: Cost savings resulting from the use of Aptima® HPV are estimated at approximately €382 million versus Hybrid Capture® 2 and €2.8 million versus Cobas® 4800. Moreover, Aptima® HPV prevents 265,443 and 269,856 additional tests and exams when compared with Hybrid Capture® 2 and Cobas® 4800. CONCLUSIONS: The use of Aptima® HPV resulted in lower costs as well as less additional test and exams. These values result from the greater specificity of Aptima® HPV, which signals less false positive cases and consequently avoids carrying out additional tests.

Ibandronate in the Prevention of Vertebral and Nonvertebral Osteoporotic Fractures: A Systematic Review of Experimental and Observational Studies.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate ibandronate clinical effectiveness in the prevention of osteoporosis-related vertebral fractures (VFs) and nonvertebral fractures (NVFs) in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination's guidance and reporting in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement 2020. A literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE since their inception until February 7, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analysis, experimental, and observational studies evaluating adult patients treated with ibandronate and assessed to osteoporotic fractures prevention were included. The risk of bias was assessed according to study design. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Eight references from 4 RCTs, 7 meta-analyses, and 6 observational studies were included. In RCTs, oral ibandronate was superior to placebo in the prevention of VF. However, the doses were lower than those approved. The meta-analyses confirmed these results and showed that adequate doses of oral ibandronate reduce the risk of NVF compared with insufficient doses. In observational studies, oral ibandronate (in approved doses) reduced the risk of VF compared with no treatment or risedronate or alendronate and the risk of NVF versus risedronate or alendronate; the risk of hip fractures was similar between ibandronate and other oral bisphosphonates. CONCLUSIONS: There is strong evidence that ibandronate reduces the risk of VF in postmenopausal osteoporosis. The available evidence further suggests that ibandronate may reduce the risk of NVF versus insufficient doses of ibandronate, as well as risedronate or alendronate.

The safety of systemic Janus kinase inhibitors in atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have been developed to treat moderate to severe atopic dermatitis, but there is little evidence comparing the safety profile of these drugs. The aim of this study is to compare the relative safety of the different systemic JAK inhibitors in atopic dermatitis. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched to identify phase 2/3, clinical trials (RCTs) designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of systemic JAK inhibitors in atopic dermatitis. Outcomes were the risk of any adverse event (AE), serious AEs, AEs leading to treatment discontinuation, any infection, serious infections, herpes zoster infection, and any cardiac or vascular event. RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs were included. Compared with placebo, baricitinib (odds ratio [OR] 1.25, 95% credible interval [CrI] 1.03-1.55), abrocitinib (OR 1.54, 95% CrI 1.25-1.90), and upadacitinib (OR 1.46, 95% CrI 1.19-1.81) increase the risk of any adverse event. Abrocitinib (OR 1.62, 95% CrI 1.7-2.72), upadacitinib (OR 1.67, 95% CrI 1.19-2.43), and dupilumab (OR 1.69, 95% CrI 1.02-2.79) increase the risk of infections when compared with placebo. Dupilumab has a reduced risk of herpes zoster infection when compared with upadacitinib (OR 0.23; 95% CrI 0.08-0.81) No further statistically significant risk differences between treatments were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest systemic JAK inhibitors for atopic dermatitis have a similar safety profile. However, as current data present limitations, postmarketing safety evidence will be crucial to draw definitive conclusions regarding the safety of JAK inhibitors.

Risk of Cardiovascular and Venous Thromboembolic Events Associated With Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The Janus kinases are cytoplasmic tyrosine kinases associated with membrane cytokine receptors that mediate signaling of multiple cytokines and growth factors, contributing to the pathogenesis of multiple autoimmune disorders. Janus kinase inhibitors (JKIs) are a new class of targeted therapies with proven efficacy in treating rheumatoid arthritis but are associated with an increased risk of infections. This study is aimed at assessing the risk of cardiovascular and venous thromboembolic events associated with JKIs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of JKIs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The outcomes assessed were the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolic events, and any cardiovascular event. Sensitivity analysis disaggregated the results according to background therapy, JKI licensed doses, and studies' methodological quality. RESULTS: Forty-two randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. No statistically significant risk differences were observed between the JKIs for any of the assessed outcomes. Compared with placebo, tofacitinib (odds ratio, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.89) reduces the risk of venous thromboembolism. The results of the sensitivity analysis are in line with the initial findings. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that the risk of cardiovascular and venous thromboembolic events is similar among the JKIs. Postmarketing pharmacovigilance evidence will be of utmost importance in confirming the cardiovascular safety of these drugs.

The Risk of Infections Associated With JAK Inhibitors in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The Janus kinases (JAKs) are cytoplasmic tyrosine kinases associated with membrane cytokine receptors that mediate signaling of multiple cytokines and growth factors, contributing to the pathogenesis of multiple autoimmune disorders. The JAK inhibitors are a new class of targeted therapies with proven efficacy in treating rheumatoid arthritis but are associated with an increased risk of infections. This study is aimed at comparing the relative safety of the different JAK inhibitors with regard to the risk of serious infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The outcomes assessed were the risk of total and serious infections, tuberculosis, and herpes zoster. Sensitivity analysis disaggregated the results according to background therapy and licensed doses of JAK inhibitors. RESULTS: Thirty-seven randomized controlled trials that were included met the inclusion criteria. Compared with filgotinib, adalimumab (4.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39-16.66), etanercept (6.04; 95% CI, 1.79-20.37), peficitinib (7.56; 95% CI, 1.63-35.12), tofacitinib (4.29; 95% CI, 1.43-12.88), and upadacitinib (4.35; 95% CI, 1.46-13.00) have an increased risk of herpes zoster infection. Risk differences between the drugs became statistically nonsignificant when the sensitivity analysis was conducted. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of infections seems to be similar among the currently approved JAK inhibitor drugs. Although the initial results suggested that filgotinib could have a reduced risk of herpes zoster, the sensitivity analyses did not support those findings.

Real-world intensive safety monitoring of biosimilars rituximab and trastuzumab in a Portuguese oncology hospital.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the safety profiles of two biosimilar medicines (rituximab and trastuzumab) in the treatment of cancer patients within a Portuguese oncology hospital. METHODS: This hospital-based prospective observational study followed a cohort event monitoring approach focused on signalling suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Patients undergoing treatment with rituximab biosimilar CT-P10 (Truxima®) or trastuzumab biosimilar CT-P6 (Herzuma®) were recruited over an 11-month and a 6-month period, respectively. Clinicians identified eligible patients and used paper-based forms to report all ADRs associated with biosimilar medicines. ADR case reports were assessed for seriousness, expectedness and causality in the Pharmacovigilance Unit of Coimbra. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients received biosimilar medicines (rituximab, n = 35; trastuzumab, n = 59). Of those, 4 patients (11.4%) experienced 16 ADRs with rituximab and 1 patient (1.7%) experienced 5 ADRs with trastuzumab. All case reports contained serious and expected ADRs that were at least probably related with biosimilar medicines under study. Based on the MedDRA PT coding, the most reported ADR for rituximab CT-P10 was chest discomfort (n = 4; 19.1%), followed by odynophagia (n = 2; 9.5%). Trastuzumab CT-P6 was associated with back pain, headache, pain in extremity, tachypnoea and tremor (each, n = 1; 4.8%). CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that using biosimilar rituximab and biosimilar trastuzumab to treat cancer patients in the real-world clinical setting is associated with acceptable safety profiles. No new safety problems were identified.

Rectus sheath hematoma in patients receiving subcutaneous enoxaparin: A case series of five patients.

Physicians must acknowledge the potential risk of RSH with enoxaparin. Switching home anticoagulation by enoxaparin upon hospital admission is common, but it may put patients at higher risk for RSH. Management guidelines are needed in this setting.

Risk of infections and cardiovascular and venous thromboembolic events associated with JAK inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: protocols of two systematic reviews and network meta-analyses.

INTRODUCTION: Janus kinases (JAK) inhibitors demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of adult patients with moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) but have been associated with serious cardiovascular and serious events. Two systematic reviews and network meta-analyses will be carried aiming to compare the relative safety of the different JAK inhibitors with regard to the risk of (1) cardiovascular and thromboembolic events and (2) serious infections in patients with RA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PUBMED, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov will be searched in order to identify randomised controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors in patients with RA. The following events will be assessed: (1) any cardiovascular event; major adverse cardiovascular events and venous thromboembolism and (2) any infection; serious infections; herpes zoster infection and tuberculosis. Search terms will comprise RA and drugs names, including the thesaurus terms and the International Nonproprietary Names. The assessment of the methodological quality of the included studies will be performed through the RoB 2 tool: a revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials. Network meta-analyses will be performed using STATA V.13.0. For each outcome, treatments will be ranked according to the probability of being the safest (best) alternative using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as no primary data are collected. This systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and at conference meetings.

Risk of nonarteritic ischaemic optic neuropathy with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The development of nonarteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy has been described to phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the risk of nonarteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy associated with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors exposure. A literature search was performed at MEDLINE, EMBASE, Toxline and VigiBase. Randomized controlled trials, observational studies, case reports and spontaneous reports describing nonarteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy associated with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors exposure were included. The risk of bias was assessed according to Centre for Reviews and Dissemination's (CRD) guidance. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and meta-analysis. Four observational studies, 50 case reports and 608 spontaneous reports were identified. All observational studies evaluated males treated for erectile dysfunction. Treatment with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors is not associated with an increased risk of definitive nonarteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy [odds ratio (OR) 1.16; 95% CI 0.89, 1.52, p = 0.046; I2  = 62.6%]. The methodological quality was assessed as good for three studies. Among case reports, 12 (23%) patients did not have risk factors to develop nonarteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy. Thirty-nine (78%) patients were treated for erectile dysfunction. A regular administration of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors was observed in 24 (48%) case reports. All case reports were assessed as higher risk of bias. According to the available evidence, the treatment with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors was not found to be associated with nonarteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy. Further research is needed to study such association, including possible confounding factors.

Intensive safety monitoring program of antineoplastic medicines: A pilot study in a Portuguese oncology hospital.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to test the feasibility and the usefulness of an intensive safety monitoring program to identify adverse drug reactions for medicines under additional monitoring that are used to treat cancer patients within a Portuguese oncology hospital. METHODS: This pilot intensive safety monitoring program was a three-month prospective, observational study. Patients undergoing treatment with one of the following medicines were included: nivolumab, olaparib, palbociclib, pembrolizumab, pertuzumab, ramucirumab, ribociclib, trastuzumab emtansine, or trifluridine/tipiracil. Potential eligible patients were identified by pharmacists based on prescription data. Clinicians used proper paper-based reporting forms to record adverse drug reactions. Clinical secretariats sent those reports through an electronic platform to the pharmacovigilance department for analysis. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were on treatment with selected medicines. Of those, 33 (44%) experienced adverse drug reactions: 23 (69.7%) cases were serious and 5 (15.2%) unexpected. Considering the number of patients exposed to each medicine and the number of patients experiencing adverse drug reactions, trifluridine/tipiracil (72.7%; 8/11) was associated with the highest rate of toxicity, followed by olaparib (66.7%; 2/3), trastuzumab emtansine (50.0%; 3/6), pertuzumab (47.8%; 11/23), pembrolizumab (45.5%; 5/11), palbociclib (25.0%; 1/4), and nivolumab (18.8%; 3/16). A total of 59 adverse drug reactions were identified (i.e. 1.8 adverse drug reactions/patient), mainly gastrointestinal disorders (n = 15; 25.4%), and blood and lymphatic system disorders (n = 14; 23.7%). CONCLUSION: This intensive safety monitoring program was feasible and allowed identifying serious and unexpected adverse drug reactions, adding value to pharmacovigilance and therefore contributing to improve patient safety. Further research is needed to confirm the findings of this pilot study.

Outcomes From the First 6 Years of Operation of the Central Portugal Pharmacovigilance Unit.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze and characterize the outcomes of the Central Portugal Regional Pharmacovigilance Unit over a 6-year period. METHODS: Spontaneous reports received between January 2009 and December 2014 were considered. The annual reporting ratios were estimated. The cases were characterized according to their seriousness, previous description, causality assessment, reporting professional, pharmacotherapeutic groups of the suspected drugs, and type of adverse drug reactions most frequently reported. RESULTS: The Pharmacovigilance Unit received 1277 reports that contained 3222 adverse events. In 2014, the reporting rate was estimated at 124 reports per million inhabitants. Sixty-five percent of the reports were assessed as serious. Seventy-three percent of the cases were assessed as being at least possibly related with the suspected drug. Physicians reported 49% of the cases. The suspected drugs most frequently reported were "anti-infectives for systemic use" (n = 494, 38%). The most frequently reported adverse events were "general disorders and administration site conditions" (n = 667, 21%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the continuous efforts carried out by the Central Portugal Regional Pharmacovigilance Unit in promoting spontaneous reports of suspected adverse drug reactions, the results, although representing a contribution to the postmarketing safety monitoring of drugs, are still modest illustrating the need to promote the adherence of health-care professionals to the pharmacovigilance system and to increase their reporting rates of suspected ADRs.

Recommendations to conduct and report systematic reviews in medical literature: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: This scoping review aims to identify, review and characterize the published recommendations to conduct and/or to report a systematic review in medical interventions area. METHODS: A search was carried out in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases, using systematic reviews search filters. The search comprises all recommendations to conduct and/or report a systematic review. Data on methods were extracted from each recommendation. A descriptive analysis was performed. RESULTS: Eighty-three recommendations were identified. Approximately 60% of retrieved references were published in the last 6 years. Recommendations to both conduct and report a systematic review were issued in 47% studies. The guidance presented in each recommendation to conduct and/ or report a systematic review varied. Almost 96% of the recommendations offer guidance on systematic review methods section. The need and time for updating was only recommended in 29% of recommendations. Forty percent of recommendations endorsed their methods to any subject related to medical interventions. Half of the studies did not specify the design of studies to be included in a systematic review. CONCLUSIONS: Several recommendations to conduct and/or report a systematic review were published and offered different guidance. Further research on the impact of such heterogeneity can improve systematic reviews quality.

A comparison between two recommendations to conduct and report systematic reviews on drug's safety.

BACKGROUND: Several recommendations are available to conduct and report a systematic review of adverse drug reactions. This study is aimed at identifying and comparing the methodologies of the two most commonly used recommendations to conduct and report systematic reviews on drug's safety. METHODS: Two systematic reviews were conducted following the recommendations "Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions" and "Systematic Reviews' Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidance for undertaking reviews in healthcare." The methods of each recommendation were characterized, and the results and the discussion of each systematic review were also evaluated. RESULTS: The methodologies of both recommendations are similar. The review question was structured. Both recommendations suggest to include pre- and post-marketing data. The recommended data sources differed and, consequently, the results of the systematic reviews (37 vs. 35 studies). Other aspects of search literature were identical. Different tools are suggested to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. For case reports, both recommendations only report some questions that may be helpful to assess risk of bias. The reporting of the results and discussion is also identical for both recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Few methodological differences were observed between the analyzed recommendations to conduct a systematic review on drug's safety. Combining their methods into a single and recognized recommendation could be of great value.

Effectiveness in clinical practice versus efficacy of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in clinical trials for type 2 diabetes: protocol for systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Data supporting the use of oral antidiabetic drugs mainly rely on data from premarketing clinical trials. Real-world data studies are crucial to evaluate effectiveness of drugs. The aim of this systematic review is to compare the results obtained for efficacy and effectiveness endpoints on clinical trials and those obtained from routine clinical practice of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review will include randomised controlled trials and observational studies evaluating the efficacy and effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, respectively. A literature search will be performed at Medline, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov. Search terms comprised the drug name (including the pharmacotherapeutic class and the international non-proprietary name). Data on haemoglobin A1C, blood glucose and body weight will be retrieved. The risk of bias will be independently assessed according to the checklist proposed by Downs and Black. Data will be analysed using descriptive statistics and meta-analysis when applicable. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as no primary data are collected. This systematic review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and at conference meetings.

Methodologic Assessment of the Systematic Reviews of Ophthalmic Adverse Drug Reactions Published in Ophthalmology Journals: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: This systematic review aims to characterize and review the methodology of the systematic reviews reporting ophthalmic adverse drug reactions. METHODS: This systematic review followed the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guide. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched, by all Ophthalmology journals. All systematic reviews reporting ophthalmic adverse drug reactions in the last decade were included. Data on methodology were extracted. Methodological quality was assessed through A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 scale. Descriptive analysis was performed. RESULTS: Twenty-one systematic reviews were identified. Almost 60% of the systematic reviews reported non-ophthalmic drugs. Nine (43%) systematic reviews did not follow any recommendation. A search filter was not applied in 48% systematic reviews. Observational data was the source of information most included. The methodological quality was assessed in 57% systematic reviews. A meta-analysis was performed in 57% systematic reviews. The protocol's elaboration, the explanation of the sources of information and the list of excluded articles were the domains less performed in the systematic reviews. CONCLUSION: The systematic reviews reporting ophthalmic adverse drug reactions diverged in some methodological aspects. Such an issue deserves further investigation, since discrepancies may lead to biased conclusions and, consequently, impact clinical and/or regulatory decisions.

Risk of Ophthalmic Adverse Effects in Patients Treated with MEK Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the risk of ophthalmic adverse effects associated with MEK inhibitors. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed and the Cochrane Library to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) which have been designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MEK inhibitors. Overall risk of ophthalmic adverse effects, chorioretinopathy, retinal detachment, blurred vision, uveitis, and eye haemorrhage were the assessed outcomes. Peto odds ratios (ORs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, MEK inhibitors were associated with an increased risk of ophthalmic adverse effects (OR 2.24; 95% CI 1.75-2.87; p < 0.0001; I2 = 86.5%). An increased risk was also estimated for chorioretinopathy (OR 5.44; 95% CI 2.89-10.23; p < 0.0001; I2 = 0%), retinal detachment (OR 6.54; 95% CI 3.28-13.03; p < 0.0001; I2 = 0%), and blurred vision (OR 2.30; 95% CI 1.50-3.54; p < 0.0001; I2 = 60.1%), but not for uveitis (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.14-7.03; p = 0.991; I2 = 2.9%) or eye haemorrhage (OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.04-12.39; p = 0.824; I2 = 29.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with MEK inhibitors seems to increase the risk of ophthalmic adverse effects. A need for monitoring the safety of this class of drugs exists. Regulators, clinicians, and other health care professionals must, together, be involved in this process.