Shamiya Sadiq1, Vijay Khajuria2, Vishal R Tandon3, Annil Mahajan4, Jang B Singh5. 1. Postgraduate, Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, GMC , Jammu, India . 2. Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, GMC , Jammu, India . 3. Assistant Professor, and In-charge ADRM Centre (Under PvPI) Postgraduate Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Govt. Medical College , Jammu, J&K, India . 4. Professor and Head, Department of Internal Medicine, Govt Medical College , Jammu, J&K, India . 5. Lecturer, Department of Internal Medicine, Govt Medical College , Jammu, J&K, India .
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Adverse drug reactions are very common among patients on anti-tubercular treatment alone or in combination with highly active antiretroviral therapy but comparatively studied very less. Hence, the current study was done to evalaute the adverse drug reaction (ADR) profile in patients receiving anti-tubercular treatment (ATT) and ATT with highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A one year prospective, cross-sectional observational study was undertaken using suspected adverse drug data collection form available under Pharmacovigilance Programme of India. RESULTS: Seventy four patients receiving ATT & 32 patients on both ATT & HAART presented with 74 and 45 adverse drug events (ADE) respectively. Males were more affected than females in both the groups. DOTS category- 1 regimen was mostly responsible for ADE in both the groups. Epigastric pain was the most common ADE in TB patients, while anaemia was the most common presentation in TB with HIV group. On comparison, ADE rate of TB with HIV co-morbid patients was more (55.8%) than TB patients (0.36%) (p < 0.001). Urban population presented more with ADR in TB/HIV group unlike rural population in TB group (p<0.0001). Whereas, illiterate were more involved in TB group unlike literate in TB/HIV group (p<0.05). Type A reactions were more common in TB group (p < 0.001). Addition of drugs for the management of ADR events was more in TB/HIV group (p < 0.001) as compared to TB group. Rest all the parameters were comparable. CONCLUSION: The study underscores that concomitant HAART and ATT, result in more ADRs in comparison to ATT alone demanding collaboration & integration of National AIDS Control programme and PvPI to enhance drug safety in this field.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Adverse drug reactions are very common among patients on anti-tubercular treatment alone or in combination with highly active antiretroviral therapy but comparatively studied very less. Hence, the current study was done to evalaute the adverse drug reaction (ADR) profile in patients receiving anti-tubercular treatment (ATT) and ATT with highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A one year prospective, cross-sectional observational study was undertaken using suspected adverse drug data collection form available under Pharmacovigilance Programme of India. RESULTS: Seventy four patients receiving ATT & 32 patients on both ATT & HAART presented with 74 and 45 adverse drug events (ADE) respectively. Males were more affected than females in both the groups. DOTS category- 1 regimen was mostly responsible for ADE in both the groups. Epigastric pain was the most common ADE in TBpatients, while anaemia was the most common presentation in TB with HIV group. On comparison, ADE rate of TB with HIV co-morbid patients was more (55.8%) than TBpatients (0.36%) (p < 0.001). Urban population presented more with ADR in TB/HIV group unlike rural population in TB group (p<0.0001). Whereas, illiterate were more involved in TB group unlike literate in TB/HIV group (p<0.05). Type A reactions were more common in TB group (p < 0.001). Addition of drugs for the management of ADR events was more in TB/HIV group (p < 0.001) as compared to TB group. Rest all the parameters were comparable. CONCLUSION: The study underscores that concomitant HAART and ATT, result in more ADRs in comparison to ATT alone demanding collaboration & integration of National AIDS Control programme and PvPI to enhance drug safety in this field.
Authors: J Fellay; K Boubaker; B Ledergerber; E Bernasconi; H Furrer; M Battegay; B Hirschel; P Vernazza; P Francioli; G Greub; M Flepp; A Telenti Journal: Lancet Date: 2001-10-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Gillian L Dean; Simon G Edwards; Natalie J Ives; Gail Matthews; Emma F Fox; Lesley Navaratne; Martin Fisher; Graham P Taylor; Rob Miller; Chris B Taylor; Annemiek de Ruiter; Anton L Pozniak Journal: AIDS Date: 2002-01-04 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Henry Namme Luma; Marie-Solange Doualla; Simeon-Pierre Choukem; Elvis Temfack; Gloria Ashuntantang; Henry Achu Joko; Sinata Koulla-Shiro Journal: Pan Afr Med J Date: 2012-07-27
Authors: Daniel G Datiko; Mohammed A Yassin; Luelseged T Chekol; Lopisso E Kabeto; Bernt Lindtjørn Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2008-07-30 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: María B Arriaga; Ninfa M C Torres; Nelia C N Araujo; Simone C C Caldas; Bruno B Andrade; Eduardo M Netto Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-12-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Josiah T Masuka; Precious Chipangura; Priscilla P Nyambayo; Andy Stergachis; Star Khoza Journal: Clin Drug Investig Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 3.580
Authors: Conor D Tweed; Angela M Crook; Evans I Amukoye; Rodney Dawson; Andreas H Diacon; Madeline Hanekom; Timothy D McHugh; Carl M Mendel; Sarah K Meredith; Michael E Murphy; Saraswathi E Murthy; Andrew J Nunn; Patrick P J Phillips; Kasha P Singh; Melvin Spigelman; Genevieve H Wills; Stephen H Gillespie Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2018-07-11 Impact factor: 3.090