Marc Maliepaard1,2, Anne C Taams3, Cynthia Sung4,5, Jalene Poh4, Yang Yu3,6. 1. Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The Netherlands. m.maliepaard@cbg-meb.nl. 2. Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. m.maliepaard@cbg-meb.nl. 3. Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Vigilance and Compliance Branch, Health Sciences Authority, Singapore, Singapore. 5. Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore. 6. Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Information on drug safety in different ethnic populations reported in public documents such as the European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs), European Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPCs) or Singapore Package Inserts (SGPIs) generally appears limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to clarify the extent of drug safety data in ethnic populations that is available in drug registration dossiers used for registration in the European Union (EU) and Singapore, and how much of this information is then included in the EPARs and SmPCs or SGPIs. METHODS: For this purpose, drug registration dossiers and these public documents for a selection of 25 drugs authorized both in the EU and Singapore were compared (note, the number of available full registration dossiers was only 24 due to a technical issue). RESULTS: Detailed safety data in ethnic groups were present in 23/24 (96%) of the drug registration dossiers, but was only present in 12/25 (48%) of the EPARs, 8/25 (32%) of the SmPCs, and 9/25 (36%) of the SGPIs. Furthermore, in many cases where ethnicity-specific safety information was provided in the SmPC or SGPIs, details on the ethnic subpopulations was not provided. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the fact that safety data analyzed with respect to ethnic populations are available in almost all screened registration dossiers, this information is often unknown to patients or prescribers as it was often not included in the EPARs, EU SmPCs or SGPIs. In order to increase the availability of such potentially important safety information, it is recommended to at least provide ethnic populations and group size in these public documents. In this way, trust in the registered drugs in different ethnic populations may be increased, and more robust treatment decisions may be obtained in clinical practice.
BACKGROUND: Information on drug safety in different ethnic populations reported in public documents such as the European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs), European Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPCs) or Singapore Package Inserts (SGPIs) generally appears limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to clarify the extent of drug safety data in ethnic populations that is available in drug registration dossiers used for registration in the European Union (EU) and Singapore, and how much of this information is then included in the EPARs and SmPCs or SGPIs. METHODS: For this purpose, drug registration dossiers and these public documents for a selection of 25 drugs authorized both in the EU and Singapore were compared (note, the number of available full registration dossiers was only 24 due to a technical issue). RESULTS: Detailed safety data in ethnic groups were present in 23/24 (96%) of the drug registration dossiers, but was only present in 12/25 (48%) of the EPARs, 8/25 (32%) of the SmPCs, and 9/25 (36%) of the SGPIs. Furthermore, in many cases where ethnicity-specific safety information was provided in the SmPC or SGPIs, details on the ethnic subpopulations was not provided. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the fact that safety data analyzed with respect to ethnic populations are available in almost all screened registration dossiers, this information is often unknown to patients or prescribers as it was often not included in the EPARs, EU SmPCs or SGPIs. In order to increase the availability of such potentially important safety information, it is recommended to at least provide ethnic populations and group size in these public documents. In this way, trust in the registered drugs in different ethnic populations may be increased, and more robust treatment decisions may be obtained in clinical practice.
Authors: S Mallal; D Nolan; C Witt; G Masel; A M Martin; C Moore; D Sayer; A Castley; C Mamotte; D Maxwell; I James; F T Christiansen Journal: Lancet Date: 2002-03-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: D S L Toh; L L Tan; D C W Aw; S M Pang; S H Lim; T Thirumoorthy; H Y Lee; Y K Tay; S K Tan; A Vasudevan; A Lateef; Y Y Chong; Y C Chan; C Loke; C L Chan; E S C Koay; E C Ren; E J D Lee; C Sung Journal: Pharmacogenomics J Date: 2014-01-07 Impact factor: 3.550
Authors: Yik-Ying Teo; Xueling Sim; Rick T H Ong; Adrian K S Tan; Jieming Chen; Erwin Tantoso; Kerrin S Small; Chee-Seng Ku; Edmund J D Lee; Mark Seielstad; Kee-Seng Chia Journal: Genome Res Date: 2009-08-21 Impact factor: 9.043
Authors: Simon Mallal; Elizabeth Phillips; Giampiero Carosi; Jean-Michel Molina; Cassy Workman; Janez Tomazic; Eva Jägel-Guedes; Sorin Rugina; Oleg Kozyrev; Juan Flores Cid; Phillip Hay; David Nolan; Sara Hughes; Arlene Hughes; Susanna Ryan; Nicholas Fitch; Daren Thorborn; Alastair Benbow Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-02-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Lisette Vromans; Gerardine Doyle; Silvia Petak-Opel; Alexander Rödiger; Martina Röttgermann; Elke Schlüssel; Eva Stetter Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2013-08-21 Impact factor: 2.692