Literature DB >> 28417320

Patient Reporting in the EU: Analysis of EudraVigilance Data.

Marin Banovac1, Gianmario Candore2, Jim Slattery2, Francois Houÿez3, David Haerry4, Georgy Genov2, Peter Arlett2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: New pharmacovigilance legislation was adopted in the EU in 2010 and became operational in July 2012. The legislation placed an obligation on all national competent authorities (NCAs) and marketing authorisation holders (MAHs) to record and report cases of suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) received from patients.
OBJECTIVES: This descriptive study aims to provide insight into patient reporting for the totality of the EU by querying the EudraVigilance (EV) database for the period of 3 years before the new pharmacovigilance legislation became operational and the 3 years after as well as comparing patient reports with those from healthcare professionals (HCPs) where feasible.
METHODS: We queried the EV database for the following characteristics of patient and HCP reports: demographics (patient sex and age), seriousness, reported ADR terms, reported indications, number of ADRs per report, time to report an ADR, and most reported substances. Wherever feasible, direct comparisons between patient reports and HCP reports were performed using relative risks.
RESULTS: The EV database contained a total of 53,130 patient reports in the 3 years preceding the legislation operation period and 113,371 in the 3 years after. Member states contributing the most patient reports to the EV database were the Netherlands, the UK, Germany, France and Italy. The results for indications and substances show that patients were more likely than HCPs to report for genitourinary, hormonal and reproductive indications. Patients reported more in general disorders and administration site conditions Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) System Organ Class (SOC), whereas HCPs reported more Preferred Terms (PTs) belonging in the Investigations SOC. However, 13 of the 20 reactions most frequently reported by patients were also among the top 20 reactions reported by HCPs.
CONCLUSION: Patient reporting complemented reporting by HCPs. Patients were motivated to report ADRs, especially those that affected their quality of life. Sharing these results with NCAs and patient associations can inform training and awareness on patient reporting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28417320     DOI: 10.1007/s40264-017-0534-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drug Saf        ISSN: 0114-5916            Impact factor:   5.606


  14 in total

Review 1.  Experiences with adverse drug reaction reporting by patients: an 11-country survey.

Authors:  Florence van Hunsel; Linda Härmark; Shanthi Pal; Sten Olsson; Kees van Grootheest
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2012-01-01       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 2.  The value of patient reporting to the pharmacovigilance system: a systematic review.

Authors:  Pedro Inácio; Afonso Cavaco; Marja Airaksinen
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2016-10-12       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 3.  Do women have more adverse drug reactions?

Authors:  M Rademaker
Journal:  Am J Clin Dermatol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 7.403

Review 4.  Consumer adverse drug reaction reporting: a new step in pharmacovigilance?

Authors:  Kees van Grootheest; Linda de Graaf; Lolkje T W de Jong-van den Berg
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 5.606

5.  Adverse drug reactions as cause of admission to hospital: prospective analysis of 18 820 patients.

Authors:  Munir Pirmohamed; Sally James; Shaun Meakin; Chris Green; Andrew K Scott; Thomas J Walley; Keith Farrar; B Kevin Park; Alasdair M Breckenridge
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-07-03

Review 6.  Hospital admissions associated with adverse drug reactions: a systematic review of prospective observational studies.

Authors:  Chuenjid Kongkaew; Peter R Noyce; Darren M Ashcroft
Journal:  Ann Pharmacother       Date:  2008-07-01       Impact factor: 3.154

Review 7.  Patient versus healthcare professional spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jackie Inch; Margaret C Watson; Stella Anakwe-Umeh
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 8.  Gender differences in pharmacological response.

Authors:  Gail D Anderson
Journal:  Int Rev Neurobiol       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.230

9.  Patient-Reported Safety Information: A Renaissance of Pharmacovigilance?

Authors:  Linda Härmark; June Raine; Hubert Leufkens; I Ralph Edwards; Ugo Moretti; Viola Macolic Sarinic; Agnes Kant
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 5.606

10.  What can we learn from parents about enhancing participation in pharmacovigilance?

Authors:  Janine Arnott; Hannah Hesselgreaves; Anthony J Nunn; Matthew Peak; Munir Pirmohamed; Rosalind L Smyth; Mark A Turner; Bridget Young
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 4.335

View more
  17 in total

1.  Current trends in pharmacovigilance: value and gaps of patient reporting.

Authors:  Pedro Inácio; Afonso Cavaco; Marja Airaksinen
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2018-07-13

2.  Comment on "Patient Reporting in the EU: Analysis of EudraVigilance Data".

Authors:  Farid Kheloufi; Anne Default; Frank Rouby; Olivier Blin; Joelle Micallef
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 3.  Evolution of adverse drug reactions reporting systems: paper based to software based.

Authors:  M T Madhushika; T P Weerarathna; P L G C Liyanage; S S Jayasinghe
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 3.064

Review 4.  Reaching beyond maximum grade: progress and future directions for modernising the assessment and reporting of adverse events in haematological malignancies.

Authors:  Gita Thanarajasingam; Lori M Minasian; Vishal Bhatnagar; Franco Cavalli; R Angelo De Claro; Amylou C Dueck; Tarec C El-Galaly; Neil Everest; Jan Geissler; Christian Gisselbrecht; Nicole Gormley; John Gribben; Mary Horowitz; S Percy Ivy; Caron A Jacobson; Armand Keating; Paul G Kluetz; Yok Lam Kwong; Richard F Little; Matthew J Matasar; Maria-Victoria Mateos; Kristen McCullough; Robert S Miller; Mohamad Mohty; Philippe Moreau; Lindsay M Morton; Sumimasa Nagai; Abhilasha Nair; Loretta Nastoupil; Kaye Robertson; Surbhi Sidana; Karin E Smedby; Pieter Sonneveld; Kyriaki Tzogani; Flora E van Leeuwen; Galina Velikova; Diego Villa; John R Wingard; John F Seymour; Thomas M Habermann
Journal:  Lancet Haematol       Date:  2022-05       Impact factor: 30.153

5.  Dedicated mobile application for drug adverse reaction reporting by patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (Vigip-SEP study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Gilles Defer; Florian Le Caignec; Sophie Fedrizzi; François Montastruc; Damien Chevanne; Jean-Jacques Parienti; Laure Peyro-Saint-Paul
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 6.  EudraVigilance Medicines Safety Database: Publicly Accessible Data for Research and Public Health Protection.

Authors:  Rodrigo Postigo; Sabine Brosch; Jim Slattery; Anja van Haren; Jean-Michel Dogné; Xavier Kurz; Gianmario Candore; Francois Domergue; Peter Arlett
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 5.606

7.  Does patient reporting lead to earlier detection of drug safety signals? A retrospective comparison of time to reporting between patients and healthcare professionals in a global database.

Authors:  Leàn Rolfes; Florence van Hunsel; Ola Caster; Henric Taavola; Katja Taxis; Eugène van Puijenbroek
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018-04-19       Impact factor: 4.335

8.  Assessment of factors associated with completeness of spontaneous adverse event reporting in the United States: A comparison between consumer reports and healthcare professional reports.

Authors:  Tadashi Toki; Shunsuke Ono
Journal:  J Clin Pharm Ther       Date:  2019-11-25       Impact factor: 2.512

9.  A patient-centred web-based adverse drug reaction reporting system identifies not yet labelled potential safety issues.

Authors:  J Hasford; F Bruchmann; M Lutz; P Thürmann; S Schmiedl
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 2.953

10.  Spontaneous Reporting on Adverse Events by Consumers in the United States: An Analysis of the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System Database.

Authors:  Tadashi Toki; Shunsuke Ono
Journal:  Drugs Real World Outcomes       Date:  2018-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.