Pharmacovigilance Reports Received from Children and Young People, and Development of Information to Aid Future Reporting from this Age Group.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the contribution of children and young people (CYP) to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) Yellow Card Scheme (YCS), and to develop age appropriate information with CYP through focus groups to help aid future reporting by this cohort. METHODS: Reports for suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in patients < 19 years of age received by the MHRA YCS from 1 January 2008 to 29 November 2018 were collated and analysed. Consultation activities with CYP from regional, national and international groups were undertaken from November 2017 to July 2018 to develop CYP-appropriate information from current available literature about reporting ADRs to the YCS. RESULTS: CYP contributed 2.3% of YCS reports for patients < 19 years (948 self-reports from a total of 41,630 YCS reports). Patients from 10 years of age contributed YCS reports, and the number of CYP reports represented in the total YCS reports rose by 3% in October 2018 compared with the previous year. Self-reported YCS from the CYP contain different suspected medications and reactions compared with YCS reported on behalf of patients aged < 19 years. The most reported medicines by self-reported YCS from CYP were adolescent vaccinations (such as the human papilloma virus [HPV] vaccine, n = 69), oral contraceptives, acne medication, anti-infectives, and antidepressants. The most commonly reported suspected ADRs submitted by CYP to the YCS were headache (n = 107), nausea and fatigue. CYP-generated reports included alternative suspected ADRs compared with adult reports about ADRs in CYP; these included depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation. The second part of the study used focus groups involving CYP from various backgrounds to develop two information leaflets regarding reporting suspected ADRs in the YCS; this was highlighted in phase I by CYP who identified divergent information needs dependent on age. Phase II-VI updated and improved the relevant information required for both age groups in a succinct and satisfactory manner. Overall, more than 300 CYP contributed to the development of the information. CONCLUSIONS: CYP's contribution to the YCS is limited, but increasing, and demonstrates distinct patterns of suspected medications and reactions. Age-appropriate information for CYP to aid reporting of suspected ADRs has been developed.

Exploring the Potential Routine Use of Electronic Healthcare Record Data to Strengthen Early Signal Assessment in UK Medicines Regulation: Proof-of-Concept Study.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic healthcare record (EHR) databases are used within pharmacoepidemiology studies to confirm or refute safety signals arising from spontaneous adverse event reports. However, there has been limited routine use of such data earlier in the signal management process, to help rapidly contextualise signals and strengthen preliminary assessment or to inform decisions regarding action including the need for further studies. This study explores the value of EHR used in this way within a regulatory environment via an automated analysis platform. METHODS: Safety signals raised at the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) between July 2014 and June 2015 were individually reviewed by a multi-disciplinary team. They assessed the feasibility of identifying the exposure and event of interest using primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) within the Commonwealth Vigilance Workbench (CVW) Longitudinal Module platform, which was designed to facilitate routine descriptive analysis of signals using EHR. Three signals, where exposure and event could be well identified, were retrospectively analysed using the platform. RESULTS: Of 69 unique new signals, 20 were for drugs prescribed predominately in secondary care or available without prescription, which would not be identified in primary care. A further 17 were brand, formulation, or dose-specific issues, were related to mortality, were relevant only to a subgroup of patients, or were drug interactions, and hence could not be reviewed using the platform given its limitations. Analyses of exposure and incidence of the adverse event could be produced using CPRD within the CMV Longitudinal Module for 32 (46%) signals. The case studies demonstrated that the data provided supporting evidence for confirming initial assessment of the signal and deciding upon the need for further action. CONCLUSIONS: CPRD can routinely provide useful early insights into clinical context when assessing a large proportion of safety signals within a regulatory environment provided that a flexible approach is adopted within the analysis platform.