Is patient exposure preapproval and postapproval a determinant of the timing and frequency of occurrence of safety issues?

BACKGROUND: The amount of drug exposure, pre and post approval, is considered to be a direct determinant of knowledge about the safety of a drug. A larger pre-approval exposed population is supposed to reduce the risk of unanticipated safety issues post-approval. The amount of use in the postapproval population is also expected to influence the occurrence and timing of safety issues. We investigated how the amount of pre and post approval exposure influences the detection of post-approval safety issues. METHODS: A cohort of innovative drugs approved in Europe was followed for the period of 2012-2016. The main outcome of interest was a new safety issue in the period. Post-approval exposure was collected at 6 month intervals, and pre-approval exposure was collected at the moment of authorisation. Other characteristics collected for the included drugs were anatomical therapeutical chemical (ATC) class, biological status, orphan status and type of approval. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to investigate the association between exposure and the hazard of having a first safety issue. RESULTS: The pre-approval exposure was not associated with the risk of safety issues after adjusting for ATC class, biological status, and treatment duration. Higher post-approval exposure was associated with more new safety issues identified (HR = 2.44 (95% CI = 1.12-5.31)) for drugs with more than 1,000 patient-years of cumulative exposure compared to drugs with less than 1,000 patient years of exposure. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that postapproval exposure influences the detection of safety issues.

The effect of exposure misclassification in spontaneous ADR reports on the time to detection of product-specific risks for biologicals: a simulation study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The availability of accurate product-specific exposure information is essential in the pharmacovigilance of biologicals, because differences in the safety profile may emerge between products containing the same active substance. In spontaneous adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports, drug exposure may, however, be misclassified, that is, attributed to the incorrect product. The aim of this study was to explore the effect of exposure misclassification on the time to detection of product-specific risks in spontaneous reporting systems. METHODS: We used data simulations to explore the effect of exposure misclassification. We simulated an active substance-specific subset of a spontaneous reporting system and used the proportional reporting ratio for signal detection. The effect of exposure misclassification was evaluated in three test cases representing product-specific ADRs that may occur for biologicals and studied in relative terms by varying the model parameters (market share and relative risk). RESULTS: We found that exposure misclassification results in the largest delay in identification of risks that have a weak association (relative risk < 2 or 3) with the product of interest and in situations where the product associated with the unique risk has a large (>50%) market share. The absolute public health impact of exposure misclassification, in terms of cases/time to detection, varied considerably across the test cases. CONCLUSION: Exposure misclassification in ADR reports may result in a delayed detection of product-specific risks, particularly in the detection of weak drug-event associations. Our findings can help inform the future implementation and refinement of product-specific and batch-specific signal detection procedures.

Understanding drug preferences, different perspectives.

AIMS: To compare the values regulators attach to different drug effects of oral antidiabetic drugs with those of doctors and patients. METHODS: We administered a 'discrete choice' survey to regulators, doctors and patients with type 2 diabetes in The Netherlands. Eighteen choice sets comparing two hypothetical oral antidiabetic drugs were constructed with varying drug effects on glycated haemoglobin, cardiovascular risk, bodyweight, duration of gastrointestinal complaints, frequency of hypoglycaemia and risk of bladder cancer. Responders were asked each time which drug they preferred. RESULTS: Fifty-two regulators, 175 doctors and 226 patients returned the survey. Multinomial conditional logit analyses showed that cardiovascular risk reduction was valued by regulators positively (odds ratio 1.98, 95% confidence interval 1.11-3.53), whereas drug choices were negatively affected by persistent gastrointestinal problems (odds ratio 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.41) and cardiovascular risk increase (odds ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.87). Doctors and patients valued these effects in a similar manner to regulators. The values that doctors attached to large changes in glycated haemoglobin and that both doctors and patients attached to hypoglycaemia and weight gain also reached statistical significance. No group's drug choice was affected by a small absolute change in risk of bladder cancer when presented in the context of other drug effects. When comparing the groups, the value attached by regulators to less frequent hypoglycaemic episodes was significantly smaller than by patients (P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Regulators may value major benefits and risks of drugs for an individual diabetes patient mostly in the same way as doctors and patients, but differences may exist regarding the value of minor or short-term drug effects.

The role of electronic healthcare record databases in paediatric drug safety surveillance: a retrospective cohort study.

AIM: Electronic healthcare record (EHR)-based surveillance systems are increasingly being developed to support early detection of safety signals. It is unknown what the power of such a system is for surveillance among children and adolescents. In this paper we provide estimates of the number and classes of drugs, and incidence rates (IRs) of events, that can be monitored in children and adolescents (0-18 years). METHODS: Data were obtained from seven population-based EHR databases in Denmark, Italy, and the Netherlands during the period 1996-2010. We estimated the number of drugs for which specific adverse events can be monitored as a function of actual drug use, minimally detectable relative risk (RR) and IRs for 10 events. RESULTS: The population comprised 4 838 146 individuals (25 575 132 person years (PYs)), who were prescribed 2170 drugs (1 610 631 PYs drug-exposure). Half of the total drug-exposure in PYs was covered by only 18 drugs (0.8%). For a relatively frequent event like upper gastrointestinal bleeding there were 39 drugs for which an association with a RR ≥4, if present, could be investigated. The corresponding number of drugs was eight for a rare event like anaphylactic shock. CONCLUSION: Drug use in children is rare and shows little variation. The number of drugs with enough exposure to detect rare adverse events in children and adolescents within an EHR-based surveillance system such as EU-ADR is limited. Use of additional sources of paediatric drug exposure information and global collaboration are imperative in order to optimize EHR data for paediatric safety surveillance.

Long-term use of 5α-reductase inhibitors and the risk of male breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The 5α-reductase inhibitors (5-ARI) finasteride and dutasteride are indicated for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia. Case reports have suggested that 5-ARIs increase the risk for male breast cancer, with no conclusive evidence. The objective of this study was to quantify the association between use of 5-ARIs and the risk for male breast cancer. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted with data from the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink database among all men aged 45 years and older in the period 1 January 1992 to 31 December 2011. Cases of men diagnosed with breast cancer were matched to up 10 controls on age and general practice. Crude and adjusted odds ratios were estimated for the risk of breast cancer associated with the use of 5-ARIs. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety-eight cases were identified and matched to 3,930 controls. Ever use of 5-ARIs was associated with an adjusted odds ratio for breast cancer of 1.08 (95 % CI 0.62-1.87) compared to non-users. Increasing cumulative duration of treatment showed no increasing risks: adjusted odds ratios for use for less than 280, for 280 to 1,036 and for more than 1,036 days were 1.21 (95 % CI 0.47-3.10), 0.94 (95 % CI 0.36-2.41) and 1.29 (95 % CI 0.54-3.08), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, there was no evidence of an association between short- or long-term treatment with 5-ARIs and the risk for breast cancer in older men.

Number of patients studied prior to approval of new medicines: a database analysis.

BACKGROUND: At the time of approval of a new medicine, there are few long-term data on the medicine's benefit-risk balance. Clinical trials are designed to demonstrate efficacy, but have major limitations with regard to safety in terms of patient exposure and length of follow-up. This study of the number of patients who had been administered medicines at the time of medicine approval by the European Medicines Agency aimed to determine the total number of patients studied, as well as the number of patients studied long term for chronic medication use, compared with the International Conference on Harmonisation's E1 guideline recommendations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: All medicines containing new molecular entities approved between 2000 and 2010 were included in the study, including orphan medicines as a separate category. The total number of patients studied before approval was extracted (main outcome). In addition, the number of patients with long-term use (6 or 12 mo) was determined for chronic medication. 200 unique new medicines were identified: 161 standard and 39 orphan medicines. The median total number of patients studied before approval was 1,708 (interquartile range [IQR] 968-3,195) for standard medicines and 438 (IQR 132-915) for orphan medicines. On average, chronic medication was studied in a larger number of patients (median 2,338, IQR 1,462-4,135) than medication for intermediate (878, IQR 513-1,559) or short-term use (1,315, IQR 609-2,420). Safety and efficacy of chronic use was studied in fewer than 1,000 patients for at least 6 and 12 mo in 46.4% and 58.3% of new medicines, respectively. Among the 84 medicines intended for chronic use, 68 (82.1%) met the guideline recommendations for 6-mo use (at least 300 participants studied for 6 mo and at least 1,000 participants studied for any length of time), whereas 67 (79.8%) of the medicines met the criteria for 12-mo patient exposure (at least 100 participants studied for 12 mo). CONCLUSIONS: For medicines intended for chronic use, the number of patients studied before marketing is insufficient to evaluate safety and long-term efficacy. Both safety and efficacy require continued study after approval. New epidemiologic tools and legislative actions necessitate a review of the requirements for the number of patients studied prior to approval, particularly for chronic use, and adequate use of post-marketing studies. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Additional risk minimisation measures in the EU - are they eligible for assessment?

PURPOSE: "Additional" risk minimisation measures (aRMMs) can be necessary to optimise the benefit-risk balance of a drug. Evaluation of effectiveness of these measures has become mandatory with the new European Union (EU) pharmacovigilance legislation in force since July 2012. The aim of this study was to classify the aRMMs in the EU with a special emphasis on the possibilities to analyse the effectiveness of these aRMMs in existing electronic healthcare databases (EHDs). METHODS: European Public Assessment Reports were reviewed to identify key elements of the aRMMs. Researchers categorised the key elements based on the objectives, i.e. knowledge change or behavioural change and sub-categorised the behavioural changes. They assessed for each key element if it would be eligible for analysis in existing EHDs. RESULTS: 68 drugs with aRMMs contained 801 key elements of which 57% aimed at behavioural changes. 22% of all key elements, all aimed behavioural changes, were assessed eligible for analysis in existing EHDs. These mainly concerned recommendations targeted at healthcare professionals regarding drug prescription, e.g. dose recommendations, contraindications or the need to perform laboratory tests for patient monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: Only a limited proportion of key elements of the aRMMs could potentially be monitored in existing EHDs as these data sources cannot capture all the required data. Due to difference between existing EHDs, not necessarily all available EHDs are appropriate for every drug or aRMM. To facilitate rapid evaluation of aRMM implementation and timely adjustments, industry and regulatory authorities should agree well-defined key elements of aRMMs leading to unambiguous actions of the target group.

Duration of Effectiveness Evaluation of Additional Risk Minimisation Measures for Centrally Authorised Medicinal Products in the EU Between 2012 and 2021.

INTRODUCTION: In studies evaluating the effectiveness of additional risk minimisation measures (aRMMs), the need for speed must be properly balanced with the quality of the study. We assessed the duration of aRMM effectiveness evaluations, using additional pharmacovigilance activities, for centrally authorised medicinal products in the European Union. METHODS: We established a cohort of medicinal products with aRMMs at marketing authorisation (MA) that were centrally authorised from July 2012-December 2021 using the European Public Assessment Reports. Evaluation studies were identified from the Risk Management Plans at the time of MA. Subsequently, we retrieved protocols, final study reports, Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) assessment reports, and PRAC minutes. We calculated the probability of completing an effectiveness evaluation within 60 months after MA using time-to-event analyses. Besides, we compared the planned final report with the actual final report date. RESULTS: We identified 134 medicinal products authorised with aRMMs, of which almost half (n = 63, 47.0%) had an effectiveness evaluation study. The probability of an evaluation for a medicinal product being completed within 60 months after MA was 20.7% (95% CI 6.8-32.6). Regarding study design, the probability of completing a study was higher for cross-sectional studies when compared to cohort studies (p = 0.002). Moreover, 81.0% of studies were delayed when compared to their planned final report date. CONCLUSION: The probability of completing an aRMM effectiveness evaluation at time for renewal of the MA was only one in five. Furthermore, estimates of the duration of studies around MA are too optimistic, with the majority being delayed.

An Exploratory Study of the Impact of COVID-19 Vaccine Spontaneous Reporting on Masking Signal Detection in EudraVigilance.

INTRODUCTION: During the signal detection process, statistical methods are used to identify drug-event combinations (DECs) which are disproportionately reported when compared with other drugs and events in the entire database. We hypothesise that the high volume of COVID-19 vaccine adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports transmitted to EudraVigilance may have affected the performance of disproportionality statistics used in routine signal detection, potentially resulting in signals either being masked, or false associations being flagged as potential signals. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to study the impact of COVID-19 vaccine spontaneous reporting on statistical signal detection in EudraVigilance. METHODS: We recalculated the reporting odds ratio (ROR) for signals that were previously discussed at the level of the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee, or signals that were retrieved from EudraVigilance, by omitting COVID-19 vaccine reports from the standard ROR calculation and then comparing the lower confidence interval (LCI) of the recalculated ROR to the LCI of the actual ROR in EudraVigilance. RESULTS: In total, 52 signals for 38 active substances were reviewed. For 35 signals, the LCI of the recalculated ROR value was lower than the LCI of the actual ROR (suggesting that COVID-19 vaccine ADR reporting had a positive effect on the strength of the signal) while for 15 signals the LCI of the recalculated ROR value was higher than the LCI of the actual ROR (suggesting that COVID-19 vaccine ADR reporting had an attenuating effect on the strength of the signal). For two signals, no change in the ROR was observed. In our analysis, six significant results were found. Five DECs were found to be masked: bleomycin and immune thrombocytopenia (actual ROR LCI = 0.94, recalculated ROR LCI = 1.02), vortioxetine and heavy menstrual bleeding (actual ROR LCI = 0.3, recalculated ROR LCI = 1.06), caplacizumab and heavy menstrual bleeding (actual ROR LCI = 0.98, recalculated ROR LCI = 3.47), ziprasidone and amenorrhoea (actual ROR LCI = 0.84, recalculated ROR LCI = 1.67), and azacitidine and pericarditis (actual ROR LCI = 0.81, recalculated ROR LCI = 2.01). For the DEC of adalimumab and immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome, the LCI of the actual ROR value was 1.14 and removing COVID-19 vaccine reporting resulted in an LCI of the recalculated ROR value of 0.94 (below threshold). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated five cases of masking and one case of false-positive association due to the influence of COVID-19 vaccine spontaneous reporting on the ROR. This suggests that the high number of adverse drug reaction reports for COVID-19 vaccines in EudraVigilance has the potential to affect routine statistical signal detection activities. The impact of COVID-19 vaccine ADR reports on current signal detection practices requires further evaluation and solutions to tackle masking issues in EudraVigilance may need to be developed.

Rituximab-induced thrombocytopenia: a cohort study.

The combined information of drug exposure and laboratory test results on an individual patient level obtained in daily clinical practice can add important information about the safety of a drug. Thrombocytopenia is a known adverse drug reaction of rituximab, which has already been identified during the preregistration trials, but knowledge on incidence and risk factors in clinical practice is limited. We, therefore, aimed to estimate the incidence and explore the risk factors for the development of rituximab-induced thrombocytopenia (a platelet count, <100 × 10(9) platelets/L) in clinical practice. Ninety patients were eligible for inclusion of which 27 developed thrombocytopenia (cumulative incidence, 30%) within 30 days after administration of rituximab and 18 patients developed grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (cumulative incidence, 20%). Patients with and without thrombocytopenia were compared to explore risk factors. Patients with a relatively low platelet count (217 vs. 324 × 10(9) /L, P = 0.011) before administration of rituximab had a higher risk for the development of thrombocytopenia, and although not statistically significant, patients treated with rituximab within the oncology setting (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.0-23.3), independent of concomitant use of cytostatics, as compared to the autoimmune diseases and patients with a high platelet distribution width (PDW) (16.1 vs. 15.8, P = 0.051). In conclusion, the incidence of rituximab-induced thrombocytopenia was higher than that identified during the clinical trials. Healthcare professionals should consider thrombocytopenia as a relevant reaction during treatment with rituximab. More frequent monitoring of the platelet count is especially advised in patients treated in the oncology indication and/or with a low platelet count and high PDW.

Patient Preferences for Rituximab Additional Risk Minimization Measures: Results From an International Online Survey.

OBJECTIVE: Patients' opinions are essential in optimizing risk minimization measures (RMMs) because they bring their real-life experience of disease management and medicines' use into the regulatory assessments. The aim of the survey launched in 2018 by the European Medicines Agency, in collaboration with the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee, was to consult targeted patient groups treated with rituximab for nononcology indications to evaluate their preferences on how to receive information on progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy and (serious) infections. Additional RMMs such as educational materials for physicians and patients including a patient alert card (PAC) and a patient brochure (PB) are in place to minimize these risks. METHODS: A question-based online survey in English created on the EU-Survey platform and disseminated primarily via relevant European patient organizations. RESULTS: Most patients (47 of 61) had knowledge of these potential adverse effects. Mostly, they were informed by a healthcare professional. Both a PAC and a PB were supported as useful tools to raise awareness of these adverse effects and thus minimize the potential risks among patients. Where the participants had to choose only 1 of these educational materials, 43 of them preferred a PAC, a shorted description that is always held by the patient and reaches the relevant healthcare professional when needed. CONCLUSIONS: Collecting patients' preferences supports periodic assessment of additional RMMs and increase transparency of regulatory processes. Considering the limitations of this initial survey, further investigation is needed to generalize the results into patients' safety outcomes.

Additional safety risk to exceptionally approved drugs in Europe?

AIMS: Regulatory requirements for new drugs have increased. Special approval procedures with priority assessment are possible for drugs with clear 'unmet medical need'. We question whether these Exceptional Circumstances (EC) or Conditional Approval (CA) procedures have led to a higher probability of serious safety issues. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed of new drugs approved in Europe between 1999 and 2009. The determinant was EC/CA vs. standard procedure approval. Outcome variables were frequency and timing of a first Direct Healthcare Professional Communication (DHPC). An association between approval procedure and the time from market approval to DHPC was assessed using Kaplan-Meyer survival analysis and Cox-regression to correct for covariates. RESULTS: In total 289 new drugs were approved. Forty-six (16.4%) were approved under EC or CA, of which seven received a DHPC (15%). This was similar to the standard approval drugs (243), of which 33 received one or more DHPC (14%, P= 0.77). The probability of acquiring a DHPC for standard approval drugs vs. EC/CA drugs during 11-year follow-up is 22% (95% CI 14%, 29%) and 26% (95% CI 8%, 44%), respectively (log-rank P= 0.726). This difference remained not significant in the Cox-regression model: hazard ratio 0.94 (95% CI 0.40, 2.20). Only drug type was identified as a confounding covariate. CONCLUSION: The EC/CA procedure is not associated with a higher probability of DHPCs despite limited clinical development data. These data do not support the view that early drug approval increases the risk of serious safety issues emerging after market approval.

Proposals for Engaging Patients and Healthcare Professionals in Risk Minimisation from an Analysis of Stakeholder Input to the EU Valproate Assessment Using the Novel Analysing Stakeholder Safety Engagement Tool (ASSET).

INTRODUCTION: Understanding the impact of regulatory actions for medicines and enablers/barriers for positive health outcomes is fundamental to effective risk minimisation measures (RMM). Therefore, the Impact Strategy of the European Union (EU) Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) includes engagement with patient communities and healthcare professional (HCP) bodies regarding RMM. However, there is uncertainty on how best to obtain stakeholder input. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to (1) analyse stakeholder input at a public hearing and dedicated meeting for the 2017-18 EU procedure on valproate teratogenicity and (2) draw proposals for enhancing PRAC engagement. METHODS: For the content analysis, the novel 'Analysing Stakeholder Safety Engagement Tool' (ASSET) was developed with 21 themes in six domains (appropriateness, access, audience, compatibility, integrability, time), based on implementation theories. RESULTS: Stakeholders provided a wide range of RMM proposals, some beyond the regulatory remit. Patients and most HCPs converged remarkably, but there was some divergence among HCPs on the informed choice objective, the therapeutic place of valproate, the RMM appropriateness, and RMM delivery to HCPs and patients. Ethical aspects emerged as relevant for regulatory decision making, and crucial input gaps were identified from an RMM implementation perspective. Nine pilotable proposals for PRAC were made regarding: (A) Agreeing on appropriate RMM with stakeholders and catalysing healthcare leadership for implementation; (B) Building-up stakeholder input on all elements critical to RMM implementation guided by the ASSET; and (C) Collaborating with all stakeholders for monitoring implementation and evaluating RMM. CONCLUSIONS: New implementation theory-based approaches are promising for enhancing the valuable dialogue between regulators, patients and HCPs and achieving patient safety. EU PAS REGISTER NUMBER: EUPAS35947.

Dissemination of Direct Healthcare Professional Communications on Medication Errors for Medicinal Products in the EU: An Explorative Study on Relevant Factors.

INTRODUCTION: When serious medication errors (ME) are identified, communication to the field may be necessary. In the EU, communication of serious safety issues, such as medication errors associated with adverse drug reactions, is done through direct healthcare professional communications (DHPCs). We aimed to identify how often DHPCs about medication errors are distributed, and we explored factors associated with these ME DHPCs. METHODS: We performed a descriptive study of all centrally authorised products (CAPs) approved before 1 May 2019 in the EU. All DHPCs issued between 1 January 2001 and 1 May 2019 were reviewed for ME content. Characteristics of CAPs were collected from the website of the European Medicines Agency. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to estimate the 5- and 10-year probability of the occurrence of a first ME DHPC. A logistic regression was performed to explore risk factors for ME DHPCs. RESULTS: A total of 678 CAPs were included, of which 35 required an ME DHPC during the study period. The 5-year probability for a CAP to have a first ME DHPC was 2.5% (95% CI 1.1-3.9) and the 10-year probability was 4.4% (95% CI 2.2-6.5). Among products with an ME DHPC, the 5-year probability of a second ME DHPC was 21.3% (95% CI 0.2-38.0). The risk of ME DHPCs was increased for products with multiple pharmaceutical formulations, enteral liquid or parenteral injection preparations, and products classified as nervous system agents or antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents. CONCLUSIONS: The absolute number of ME DHPCs for CAPs is low and does not give rise to immediate concern. We identified potential risk factors for ME DHPCs that should be taken into account during approval procedures or line extensions.

Introduction or Discontinuation of Additional Risk Minimisation Measures During the Life Cycle of Medicines in Europe.

INTRODUCTION: Additional risk minimisation measures (aRMMs) may be required to minimise important risks of medicines. aRMMs may be required at the time of authorisation, but may also be introduced or discontinued during the product life cycle as new safety information arises. The aim of this study is to describe post-authorisation introductions of new aRMMs and discontinuations of existing aRMMs for medicines authorised in the European Union (EU). METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study that included all new active substances authorised through the EU centralised procedure between January 1st 2006 and December 31st 2017. Data was extracted from European Public Assessment Reports available on the website of the European Medicines Agency (ema.europa.eu). Medicines were followed up from the date of marketing authorisation (MA) until first introduction or discontinuation of aRMMs, excluding Direct Healthcare Professional Communications (DHPCs), withdrawal/suspension/revocation of the MA, or July 1st 2018, when data extraction took place. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse frequency data, and survival analysis was used to calculate 5- and 10-year probability of introduction or discontinuation of aRMMs. RESULTS: A total of 476 medicines were authorised during the study period. The probability of getting aRMMs after authorisation for products authorised without aRMMs was 3.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-5.7] within 5 years after authorisation and 6.9% (95% CI 2.6-11) within 10 years after authorisation. For products authorised with aRMMs, the probability of discontinuation of aRMMs was 0.9% (95% CI 0-2.6) within 5 years and 8.3% (95% CI 0-16.1) within 10 years after authorisation. CONCLUSIONS: We found low probabilities of introduction and discontinuation of aRMMs (excluding DHPCs) during the product life cycle for medicines authorised between 2006 and 2017. The low rate of discontinuation may potentially be due to a lack of robust data on effectiveness of aRMMs. Further research is needed to get more insight into the dynamics of aRMMs during the medicine life cycle.

The association of serum testosterone levels and ventricular repolarization.

UNLABELLED: It is assumed that testosterone is an important regulator of gender-related differences in ventricular repolarization. Therefore, our aim was to study whether serum levels of testosterone are associated with QTc, QT and RR interval variation. SETTING: two independent population-based cohort studies. PARTICIPANTS: 445 male participants (> or =55 years) from the Rotterdam study cohort and 1,428 male participants from the study of health in Pomerania (SHIP) with an electrocardiogram who were randomly sampled for assessment of serum testosterone at baseline, after exclusion of participants with testosterone altering drugs, QTc prolonging drugs or dig(it)oxin, left ventricular hypertrophy and left and right bundle branch block. ENDPOINTS: length of the QTc, QT and RR intervals. ANALYSIS: linear regression model, adjusted for the two individual studies and a pooled analysis of both studies. The pooled analysis of the Rotterdam study and SHIP showed that the QTc interval gradually decreased among the tertiles (P value for trend 0.024). The third tertile of serum testosterone was associated with a lower QTc interval compared to the first tertile [-3.4 ms (-6.5; -0.3)]. However, the third tertile of serum testosterone was not associated with a lower QT interval compared to the first tertile [-0.7 ms (-3.1; 1.8)]. The RR interval gradually increased among the tertiles (P value for trend 0.002) and the third tertile of serum testosterone showed an increased RR interval compared to the first tertile [33.5 ms (12.2; 54.8)]. In the pooled analysis of two population-based studies, serum testosterone levels were not associated with the QT interval, which could be due to a lack of power. Lower QTc intervals in men with higher serum testosterone levels could be due to the association of serum testosterone with prolongation of the RR interval.

Description of the Risk Management of Medication Errors for Centrally Authorised Products in the European Union.

INTRODUCTION: Medication errors can have serious consequences for patients. To prevent the occurrence of medication errors in clinical practice, safety concerns may be included in the risk management plan and subsequently be addressed with routine and/or additional risk minimisation measures. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe safety concerns around medication errors and the risk minimisation measures for centrally authorised products in the European Union. METHODS: All safety concerns included in the risk management plans of originator centrally authorised products, authorised between 1 January, 2010 and 31 December, 2017, were collected from the European Public Assessment Report registry. Medication error safety concerns were categorised by Anatomical Therapeutic Classification code, year of authorisation, type of medication error and type of risk minimisation measure. RESULTS: During the study period, 311 centrally authorised products were approved, of which 84 had at least one medication error safety concern. The proportion of centrally authorised products with medication error safety concerns showed variation between 2010 and 2017 ranging from 15.2% to 36.4%. In total, 95 medication error safety concerns were identified. The type of medication error was highly variable, drug administration error was listed most frequently (n = 17). For 27 out of 95 medication error safety concerns, corresponding to 23 centrally authorised products, additional risk minimisation measures were required. All additional risk minimisation measures consisted of educational material targeted at healthcare professionals (85.2%) and/or patients (51.9%). For 78.3% of centrally authorised products with additional risk minimisation measures for medication errors, studies to evaluate the effectiveness of the additional risk minimisation measures were agreed upon. CONCLUSIONS: Medication error safety concerns were listed for almost a quarter of centrally authorised products approved during the study period. Further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness and continued need for additional risk minimisation measures for medication errors.

Fatal outcomes following immunization errors as reported to the EudraVigilance: A case series.

BACKGROUND: Serious adverse reactions after immunization are rare but do occur. In very rare instances, cases with fatal outcome have been reported. These reports can have a huge impact and even more so when due to an immunization error. The aim of this study is to systematically review immunization errors with fatal outcomes in EudraVigilance. METHODS: This was a case-series analysis of Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) reporting immunization errors and a fatal outcome. To determine the level of certainty of a causal association between the immunization errors and fatal outcomes two independent reviewers assessed all ICSRs using the WHO tool "Causality assessment of an Adverse Event Following Immunization (AEFI)". In accordance with the tool, the ICSRs were classified as consistent, indeterminate, inconsistent/coincidental, or unclassifiable. In addition, we estimated the contribution of reported errors to the fatal outcomes as large, moderate, small, none, or unclassifiable using a classification developed for this study. RESULTS: A total of 154 ICSRs met the inclusion criteria. Vaccines reported most frequently were pneumococcal (33), rabies (27) and influenza vaccines (24). Most frequently reported errors were non-compliance with recommended schedules of immunization (63). The most frequently reported vaccine-error combination was rabies vaccines and non-compliance with a recommended schedule of immunization (23). Twelve cases were classified as consistent with causal association and had a large error contribution. These cases concerned a cluster of six cases reporting incorrect handling of multi-dose vials containing measles vaccine and six cases reporting administration of live-attenuated vaccines to immunocompromised patients. DISCUSSION: In this study, we showed that fatal outcomes following immunization errors are very rare. Four key issues were the importance of: (1) quality control of multi-dose vaccines, (2) screening patients for immunocompromising factors, (3) education on the importance of adherence, and (4) measures to improve distinction between vaccines and medicines.

Psychotropic drugs associated with corrected QT interval prolongation.

AIMS: To study whether listed putative corrected QT (QTc)-prolonging psychotropic drugs indeed prolong the QTc interval under everyday circumstances and to evaluate whether this is a class effect or an individual drug effect, we conducted a prospective population-based cohort study. METHODS: This study was conducted as part of the Rotterdam Study and included 3377 men and 4845 women (>or=55 years) who had triennial electrocardiograms (ECGs). The primary end points of the study were the length of the QTc interval at each ECG, the difference in QTc interval between consecutive ECGs within one person, and the risk of an abnormally prolonged QTc interval. Drug use at the index date was obtained from automated dispensing records. The associations were examined by means of a repeated measurement analysis, adjusted for age, sex, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, myocardial infarction, heart failure, and use of class 1 QTc-prolonging drugs. RESULTS: Of the 8222 participants, 813 participants (9.9%) developed QTc prolongation during follow-up and 492 participants (74.4% women) used psychotropic drugs at the time of an ECG. Starting tricyclic antidepressants increased the QTc interval significantly with 6.9 milliseconds (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1-10.7 milliseconds) between consecutive ECGs in comparison with consecutive ECGs of participants not using tricyclic antidepressants, in particular starting amitriptyline (8.5 milliseconds; 95% CI, 2.8-14.2 milliseconds), maprotiline (13.9 milliseconds; 95% CI, 3.6-24.3 milliseconds), and nortriptyline (35.3 milliseconds; 95% CI, 8.0-62.6 milliseconds). Starting lithium also increased the QTc interval significantly (18.6 milliseconds; 95% CI, 4.8-32.4 milliseconds). CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based prospective cohort study, we confirmed the importance of antidepressants and antipsychotics as potential contributors to QTc prolongation. Especially, starting tricyclic antidepressant drugs (as a class) is associated with a significant intraindividual increase in the QTc interval in comparison to the change in nonusers. The tricyclic antidepressants seem to prolong the QTc interval as a class effect.

Population-based studies of antithyroid drugs and sudden cardiac death.

AIM: Thyroid free T4 is associated with QTc-interval prolongation, which is a risk factor for sudden cardiac death (SCD). Hyperthyroidism has been associated with SCD in case reports, but there are no population-based studies confirming this. The aim was to investigate whether use of antithyroid drugs (as a direct cause or as an indicator of poorly controlled hyperthyroidism) is associated with an increased risk of SCD. METHODS: We studied the occurrence of SCD in a two-step procedure in two different Dutch populations. First, the prospective population-based Rotterdam Study including 7898 participants (> or =55 years old). Second, we used the Integrated Primary Care Information (IPCI) database, which is a longitudinal general practice research database to see whether we could replicate results from the first study. Drug use at the index date was assessed with prescription information from automated pharmacies (Rotterdam Study) or drug prescriptions from general practices (IPCI). We used a Cox proportional hazards model in a cohort analysis, adjusted for age, gender and use of QTc prolonging drugs (Rotterdam Study) and conditional logistic regression analysis in a case-control analysis, matched for age, gender, practice and calendar time and adjusted for arrhythmia and cerebrovascular ischaemia (IPCI). RESULTS: In the Rotterdam Study, 375 participants developed SCD during follow-up. Current use of antithyroid drugs was associated with SCD [adjusted hazard ratio 3.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.7, 8.7]. IPCI included 1424 cases with SCD and 14 443 controls. Also in IPCI, current use of antithyroid drugs was associated with SCD (adjusted odds ratio 2.9; 95% CI 1.1, 7.4). CONCLUSIONS: Use of antithyroid drugs was associated with a threefold increased risk of SCD. Although this might be directly caused by antithyroid drug use, it might be more readily explained by underlying poorly controlled hyperthyroidism, since treated patients who developed SCD still had low thyroid-stimulating hormone levels shortly before death.