Myocardial infarction associated with erenumab: A case report.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies acting on the calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor (CGRP-mabs) are novel drugs for resistant migraine prophylaxis. As CGRP-mabs cause inhibition of vasodilatation, their use is reserved to patients with no recent history of cardiovascular diseases. We report a case of myocardial infarction associated with erenumab. CASE: A 57-year-old woman with a familial history of coronaropathy was first treated with erenumab 70 mg for 6 months and then increased to 140 mg. Almost 5 months after, the patient presented chest pain, increased troponin, and abnormal electrocardiogram. A myocardial infarction without coronarography abnormality was diagnosed through MRI. CONCLUSION: Further evidence is needed to assess the risk of myocardial infarction in patients treated with a CGRP-mab. In patients over 40 years of age, the risk of coronary or cardiovascular events should be assessed using risk tables or algorithms to take into account cardiovascular risk factors. This may be complemented by appropriate examinations to measure the burden of coronary atherosclerosis, if necessary.

TNF-α inhibitors and psychiatric adverse drug reactions in the spectrum of bipolar (manic) or psychotic disorders: Analysis from the French pharmacovigilance database.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe reports of psychiatric adverse drug reaction (ADR) in the spectrum of bipolar (manic features) or psychotic disorders that occurred under tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors therapy. METHODS: We searched the French pharmocovigilance database for reports of psychiatric ADR in the spectrum of bipolar (manic features) or psychotic disorders during treatment with TNF-α inhibitors. Psychiatric symptoms were divided in 2 categories: (i) confirmed diagnosis of manic episode or acute psychosis and (ii) psychiatric symptoms with psychotic or manic features but not meeting sufficient criteria for diagnosis of psychosis or manic disorder. RESULTS: Overall, 9942 reports of ADR were registered in the French pharmacovigilance database with TNF-α inhibitors, including 243 reports of psychiatric ADR. Among them, we identified 41 reports of psychotic or manic disorders as define above: 9 characterised manic episodes and 32 psychiatric disorders with psychotic or manic features. TNF-α inhibitors were the only medication suspected in 23 reports (56%). The delay between starting TNF-α inhibitors treatment and onset of symptoms varied from hours to years with a median time of 40 days. Psychiatric symptoms improved in 22/23 patients in whom the TNF-α inhibitor was withdrawn. CONCLUSION: Depressive disorders are well-known ADR of TNF-α inhibitors, but we report, here, 41 reports of psychiatric ADR diagnosed as manic or psychotic disorders or in the spectrum of bipolar or psychotic disorders with these treatments. Epidemiological studies are needed to confirm this signal.

Contribution of Causality Assessment for an Automated Detection of Safety Signals: An Example Using the French Pharmacovigilance Database.

INTRODUCTION: Qualitative approaches based on drug causality assessment estimate the causal link between a drug and the occurrence of an adverse event from individual case safety reports. Quantitative approaches based on disproportionality analyses were developed subsequently to allow automated statistical signal detection from pharmacovigilance databases. This study assessed the potential value of causality assessment for automated safety signal detection. METHODS: All drug-serious adverse event pairs with a positive rechallenge and a semiology suggestive of drug causality were identified in the French pharmacovigilance database (BNPV) from 2011 to 2017. The results were compared with those obtained from automated disproportionality analyses of the BNPV/World Health Organization (WHO) VigiBase®, complemented by the list of signals validated by the WHO-UMC (Uppsala Monitoring Centre). Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPCs), Martindale®, Meyler's® and MedLINE® were used as other sources of information for the purpose of comparison. RESULTS: Of the 155 pairs of interest, 115 (74.2%) were also identified by another source of information. Since the individual case reporting in the BNPV, 23 (14.8%) of the adverse events (AEs) have been added to the SmPC, seven of which were not identified by disproportionality. Finally, 40 pairs were not identified by any other source of information, 13 of which were considered as potential new safety signals after analysis of case reports by pharmacovigilance experts. The signals identified by causality assessment involved antineoplastic and immunomodulatory drugs especially, in comparison with signals identified by WHO-UMC or by disproportionality within the BNPV. CONCLUSION: The approach therefore appears useful as an additional tool for safety signal detection, especially for antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents.

Cardiac failure in patients treated with azacitidine, a pyrimidine analogue: Case reports and disproportionality analyses in Vigibase.

AIMS: Azacitidine (AZA), a pyrimidine analogue, is validated for high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome or low-blast acute myeloid leukaemia in unfit patients for more intensive treatment. This study assessed the putative link between cardiac failure (CF) and AZA exposure. METHODS: Cases of CF in patients treated with AZA were retrospectively collected and described from several centres of the Groupe Francophone des Myélodysplasies. A description analysis and a disproportionality analysis using Vigibase, the WHO Global Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) database, were conducted on ICSRs by the Standardized MedDRA Queries (SMQ broad) cardiac failure and by preferred terms cardiac failure and cardiac failure acute. The reported odds ratio (ROR) and its 95% 2-sided confidence interval was computed by comparing the proportion of CF reports with the suspected drug (AZA) and the proportion of reports of the same adverse drug reaction with all other suspected drugs in the database during the same period. RESULTS: In the 4 case reports, all patients presented a cardiovascular history. In 1 patient, CF recurred after AZA re-challenge. The pharmacovigilance analysis in Vigibase retrieved 307 ICSRs of CF (SMQ) with AZA. Significant disproportionality signals associated with AZA were identified by using the SMQ cardiac failure (ROR 1.3) and the preferred terms cardiac failure (ROR 5.1) and cardiac failure acute (ROR 23.2). CONCLUSION: This study points to the potential role of AZA in the occurrence of CF. Cardiac evaluation before AZA initiation and regular monitoring of cardiac function during AZA treatment should be performed in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease.

Drug-induced aseptic meningitis: 329 cases from the French pharmacovigilance database analysis.

AIMS: Drug-induced aseptic meningitis (DIAM) is an adverse drug reaction of exclusion; only few studies have addressed this iatrogenic disease. The aim was to characterize DIAM and to identify suspected drugs. METHODS: Data were collected from the analysis of the French Pharmacovigilance Database from inception (1 January 1985) to 8 March 2017. All cases were initially analysed according to the French imputability method by institutional pharmacologists (clinicians or pharmacists). Further analyses of well documented cases were then performed. RESULTS: In this study, 329 cases of aseptic meningitis were retrieved from the French Pharmacovigilance Database for a total of 429 suspected drugs. Analysis of 203 well documented cases, including 282 drugs, showed that the main reported classes were intravenous polyvalent immunoglobulin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), vaccines, antimicrobials, intrathecal antimetabolites, corticosteroids and antalgics/anaesthetics (except NSAIDs). Lymphocytic (33.0%) and purulent (44.8%) meningitis represented the majority of cases of aseptic meningitis. In other cases, the cerebrospinal fluid was mixed (45-55% of neutrophils +45-55% of lymphocytes) or data about cerebrospinal fluid composition were lacking. Most DIAM cases (96%) had a favourable reported outcome with full recovery or minimal residual symptoms. CONCLUSION: The most frequently involved drugs in DIAM were intravenous polyvalent immunoglobulin, NSAIDs, vaccines, and antimicrobials and this without being able to differentiate them in terms of biological characteristics. Although further studies are needed to better understand the pathophysiological mechanisms of DIAM, a continuous enrichment of pharmacovigilance databases is essential to identify new signals and to help clinicians in the understanding of DIAM.

[Alitretinoin (Toctino®): A French follow-up study of harmacovigilance]. / Alitrétinoïne (Toctino®) : données françaises de pharmacovigilance.

INTRODUCTION: The adverse reaction profile of alitretinoin, a retinoid indicated in severe topical corticosteroid-refractory chronic hand eczema, is similar to that of other oral retinoids, especially isotretinoin. The objective of this study was to detect new adverse effects (not listed) of alitretinoin and to estimate the number of pregnancies exposed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All cases of ADR reported in France with alitretinoin between October 1st, 2012 and February 29th, 2016 were analysed. RESULTS: During the 41 months of follow-up, 52 cases of serious adverse drug reaction (ADR) and 88 cases of non-serious and unexpected ADR were notified. The most frequent serious ADRs were psychiatric, neurological and dermatological. Psychiatric disorders, mainly depression and suicidal ideation represented 23% of serious ADRs. New adverse drug reactions were detected: myocardial infarction, pancreatitis and digestive haemorrhage. Three pregnancies exposed during the teratogenic risk period, were registered. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The safety profile of alitretinoin matches that of other retinoids. However, the rate of psychiatric disorders appears to be high. Otherwise, the risk of myocardial infarction in patients with cardiovascular risk factor should be considered as a safety concern. It could be explained by the hyperlipemic effects of alitretinoin and studies suggest a cardiovascular risk with retinoids through their effects on lipids (class effect), especially for patients with others cardiovascular risk factors. Pancreatitis and digestive hemorrhage are described with isotretinoin. The rate of reporting of pregnancy induced by a non-compliance with the Pregnancy Prevention Program is near the rate observed with isotretinoin. The high incidence of serious ADR and the non-application of pregnancy prevention program lead the French National Agency for Medicines to limit the first prescription of alitretinoin to dermatologists.

Adverse consequences of low-dose methotrexate medication errors: data from French poison control and pharmacovigilance centers.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study are to carefully describe the context of methotrexate medication errors, to details medical consequences and management approaches, and to determine the rate of fatal outcome. METHODS: Data on methotrexate medication errors were obtained from the French network of poison control and pharmacovigilance centres, which collected and documented reported drug-induced adverse effects. Cases were included if the intake was more than 2-fold the intended weekly dose or a weekly cumulative dose ≥ 30 mg and a follow-up of at least 4 days after the last dose. Data were analysed for demographics, treatment indication, prescribed dose, drug interactions, clinical complications and medical outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy four patients were included. The causes of methotrexate errors resulted from an erroneous prescription renewal (23.3%), incomprehensiveness of the weekly schedule by patients or at-home caregivers (56.2%) and administration of a wrong dose by a health care professional (20.5%). Of the 70 patients who took methotrexate daily, the mean daily dose received over the whole duration of the error was 9.6 ± 4.1 mg (range 2.5-22.5) with a mean duration of the error of 11.7 ± 12.2 days (range 2 to 90). Thirteen (18%) patients remained asymptomatic and 61 (82%) developed complications of which 46 (62.2%) were severe. Nine (14.8%) patients died within 11 to 45 days after the first dosing error. Compared to patients with no or mild symptoms, those with severe symptoms were more likely to be older (75.6 ± 10.8 vs. 69.5 ± 12.9 years) and to be exposed to a higher cumulative dose (94.8 ± 46.2 vs. 68.0 ± 45.7 mg). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that dosing errors with methotrexate can be lethal and persisted despite several warnings from drug agencies. Further measures are awaited from the European Medicine Agency.

Rhabdomyolysis after co-administration of a statin and fusidic acid: an analysis of the literature and of the WHO database of adverse drug reactions.

Following a severe case of rhabdomyolysis in our University Hospital after a co-administration of atorvastatin and fusidic acid, we describe this interaction as this combination is not clearly contraindicated in some countries, particularly for long-term treatment by fusidic acid. All cases of rhabdomyolysis during a co-administration of a statin and fusidic acid were identified in the literature and in the World and Health Organization database, VigiBase® . In the literature, 29 cases of rhabdomyolysis were identified; mean age was 66 years, median duration of co-administration before rhabdomyolysis occurrence was 21 days, 28% of cases were fatal. In the VigiBase® , 182 cases were retrieved; mean age was 68 years, median duration of co-administration before rhabdomyolysis was 31 days and 24% of cases were fatal. Owing to the high fatality associated with this co-administration and the long duration of treatment before rhabdomyolysis occurrence, fusidic acid should be used if there is no appropriate alternative, as long as statin therapy is interrupted for the duration of fusidic acid therapy, and perhaps a week longer. Rarely will interruption of this sort have adverse consequences for the patient.

Vaccine Case-Population: A New Method for Vaccine Safety Surveillance.

INTRODUCTION: The case-population approach compares exposure among cases to that of their source population. By using aggregated data to estimate the denominator, this approach can provide a real-time estimate of an association that could be particularly valuable to explore urgent vaccine safety concerns and to generate signals during a vaccine campaign. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to present the vaccine case-population method, a method derived from the case-population approach and adapted for vaccine safety surveillance, and to test it using several published examples. METHODS: For the vaccine case-population method, exposure in the population is estimated from the sum of at-risk periods using the number of vaccinated individuals, or data of vaccine sales, and the at-risk period considered for the vaccine-event pair. The vaccine case-population method was applied to data from published case-control studies retrieved from the MEDLINE database and having quantified risks associated with vaccines. Odds ratios derived from the vaccine case-population method were compared with those from published case-control studies. RESULTS: A total of 20 vaccine-event pairs were retrieved in which the vaccine case-population method could be applied. For all identified vaccine-event pairs, when a significant association was found using the vaccine case-population method, a significant association was also found in the corresponding case-control study. Conversely, when no association was found by the vaccine case-population method, no association was found in the corresponding case-control study. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the vaccine case-population method can produce coherent conclusions and may be used in the future for prospective investigation of urgent vaccine safety concerns or for the prospective generation of vaccine safety signals. This method could also be used to identify selection bias from cases excluded from the case-control study.

Causality assessment in pharmacovigilance: The French method and its successive updates.

The methods for causality assessment of adverse drug reactions were developed in the 1970s and 1980s, alongside the development of pharmacovigilance. The French method is one of the earlier of these, following on from the pioneering works by Irey and Karch and Lasagna. Initially published in 1978, it was updated in 1985, and again in 2011. The main alterations to the original method are presented in tables annexed to this paper. The successive versions improved the presentation, provided more formalised definitions of the criteria for assessing causality, while at the same time ensuring the method remained easy to use. Causality assessment enables the causal link between a drug and the occurrence of an adverse reaction to be formalised and explained. It contributes to diagnosis, and to determining the action to be taken in case of an adverse drug reaction. It can contribute to the quality and the relevance of the data stored in pharmacovigilance databases.

Validation and Reproducibility of the Updated French Causality Assessment Method: an Evaluation by Pharmacovigilance Centres & Pharmaceutical Companies.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the validity and reproducibility of the updated version of the French causality assessment method in conditions approaching real-life use. METHODS: A random sample of 31 drug-event pairs from the French pharmacovigilance database was assessed by the consensual judgement of three experts (gold standard). Separately, a team from a pharmacovigilance centre (PhVC) and another from a pharmaceutical company assessed these pairs using the current method, then with the updated method. To test the inter- and intra-rater reproducibility, two seniors and two juniors from a PhVC and a pharmaceutical company assessed the pairs twice with the updated method. A weighted kappa coefficient was used to measure the agreement of the two causality assessment methods with the consensual expert judgement (validity) as well as the agreement of the updated causality assessment over time (intra-rater reproducibility) and between evaluators (inter-rater reproducibility). RESULTS: Agreement between the current method and consensual expert judgement was fair for the PhVC team (weighted kappa [Kw] 0.33) and moderate for the pharmaceutical company team (Kw 0.41). For the updated method, agreement was better for both the PhVC (Kw 0.58) and the pharmaceutical company (Kw 0.52) teams. The inter- and intra-rater reproducibility of the updated method based on the intrinsic imputability was satisfactory overall (Kw 0.30-0.91). Discrepancies between evaluations from PhVC and pharmaceutical companies were observed with the updated method. CONCLUSION: The updated method performed better than the current one for drug causality assessment, suggesting that it should be used in routine pharmacovigilance.

Estimating time-to-onset of adverse drug reactions from spontaneous reporting databases.

BACKGROUND: Analyzing time-to-onset of adverse drug reactions from treatment exposure contributes to meeting pharmacovigilance objectives, i.e. identification and prevention. Post-marketing data are available from reporting systems. Times-to-onset from such databases are right-truncated because some patients who were exposed to the drug and who will eventually develop the adverse drug reaction may do it after the time of analysis and thus are not included in the data. Acknowledgment of the developments adapted to right-truncated data is not widespread and these methods have never been used in pharmacovigilance. We assess the use of appropriate methods as well as the consequences of not taking right truncation into account (naive approach) on parametric maximum likelihood estimation of time-to-onset distribution. METHODS: Both approaches, naive or taking right truncation into account, were compared with a simulation study. We used twelve scenarios for the exponential distribution and twenty-four for the Weibull and log-logistic distributions. These scenarios are defined by a set of parameters: the parameters of the time-to-onset distribution, the probability of this distribution falling within an observable values interval and the sample size. An application to reported lymphoma after anti TNF- α treatment from the French pharmacovigilance is presented. RESULTS: The simulation study shows that the bias and the mean squared error might in some instances be unacceptably large when right truncation is not considered while the truncation-based estimator shows always better and often satisfactory performances and the gap may be large. For the real dataset, the estimated expected time-to-onset leads to a minimum difference of 58 weeks between both approaches, which is not negligible. This difference is obtained for the Weibull model, under which the estimated probability of this distribution falling within an observable values interval is not far from 1. CONCLUSIONS: It is necessary to take right truncation into account for estimating time-to-onset of adverse drug reactions from spontaneous reporting databases.

Five cases of sprue-like enteropathy in patients treated by olmesartan.

We describe five cases of sprue-like enteropathy during treatment with olmesartan, an angiotensin II receptor antagonist indicated for the treatment of hypertension. Patients presented severe diarrhoea, significant weight loss or dehydration, with or without intestinal villous atrophy. Clinical signs ceased upon drug discontinuation in all cases; olmesartan was reintroduced in two cases and rechallenge was positive in both. These add to the previously reported cases that led to a label change for olmesartan in the United States. However, all cases were observed in a small gastroenterology unit, which suggests that this adverse effect may not be rare. A preliminary search for the other angiotensin II receptor antagonists in the French pharmacovigilance system found severe diarrhoea and colitis, but no case with villous atrophy. Therefore, in the presence of severe diarrhoea, olmesartan or other angiotensin II receptor antagonists should be discontinued, even if the treatment has been taken for several months or years.

Comparison of three methods (an updated logistic probabilistic method, the Naranjo and Liverpool algorithms) for the evaluation of routine pharmacovigilance case reports using consensual expert judgement as reference.

BACKGROUND: An updated probabilistic causality assessment method and the Liverpool algorithm presented as an improved version of the Naranjo algorithm, one of the most used and accepted causality assessment methods, have recently been proposed. OBJECTIVE: In order to test the validity of the probabilistic method in routine pharmacovigilance, results provided by the Naranjo and Liverpool algorithms, as well as the updated probabilistic method, were each compared with a consensual expert judgement taken as reference. METHODS: A sample of 59 drug-event pairs randomly sampled from spontaneous reports to the French pharmacovigilance system was assessed by expert judgement until reaching consensus and by members of a pharmacovigilance unit using the updated probabilistic method, the Naranjo and Liverpool algorithms. Probabilities given by the probabilistic method, and categories obtained by both the Naranjo and the Liverpool algorithms were compared as well as their sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values. RESULTS: The median probability for drug causation given by the consensual expert judgement was 0.70 (inter-quartile range, IQR 0.54-0.84) versus 0.77 (IQR 0.54-0.91) for the probabilistic method. For the Naranjo algorithm, the 'possible' causality category was predominant (61 %), followed by 'probable' (35 %), 'doubtful', and 'almost certain' categories (2 % each). Category distribution obtained with the Liverpool algorithm was similar to that obtained by the Naranjo algorithm with a majority of 'possible' (61 %) and 'probable' (30 %) followed by 'definite' (7 %) and 'unlikely' (2 %). For the probabilistic method, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 0.96, 0.56, 0.92 and 0.71, respectively. For the Naranjo algorithm, depending on whether the 'possible' category was considered in favour or in disfavour of drug causation, sensitivity was, respectively, 1 or 0.42, specificity 0.11 or 0.89, negative predictive value 1 or 0.22 and positive predictive value 0.86 or 0.95; results were identical for the Liverpool algorithm. CONCLUSION: The logistic probabilistic method gave results closer to the consensual expert judgment than either the Naranjo or Liverpool algorithms whose performance were strongly dependent on the meaning given to the 'possible' category. Owing to its good sensitivity and positive predictive value and by providing results as continuous probabilities, the probabilistic method seems worthy to use for a trustable assessment of adverse drug reactions in routine practice.

Updating the French method for the causality assessment of adverse drug reactions.

The Imputability Working Group (CRI) updated the French drug reaction causality assessment method. This tripartite group is made up of staff from the French network of regional pharmacovigilance centres, pharmaceutical companies, and the French National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products (ANSM). After reviewing the strengths and weaknesses of the previous method, several ideas for improvement were proposed: a better-worded and more discriminating scale for certain chronological and semiological criteria, a larger scale for the intrinsic score (increased from 5 to 7 levels), a new bibliographical scale to differentiate between expected and unexpected adverse drug reactions, and a new informativeness scale.

An updated method improved the assessment of adverse drug reaction in routine pharmacovigilance.

OBJECTIVE: Updating a logistic causality assessment method to improve its agreement with consensual expert judgment (CEJ). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A random sample of 53 drug-event pairs from a pharmacovigilance database were evaluated independently by CEJ and by a group of experts in pharmacovigilance using the logistic method. Causes of disagreement between both approaches were analyzed, and changes in the assessment of some criteria of the logistic method were proposed and tested in models. The model giving results closest to the CEJ was retained and compared with the initial version on another set of drug-event pairs. RESULTS: Finally, only the criterion "Search for nondrug cause" was changed into "Search for other causes." The assessment not investigated, possible other cause decreased the probability of drug causation instead of being neutral, whereas the assessment not applicable, not required remained neutral. This new version presents much improved specificity (0.56 vs. 0.33), relatively good sensitivity (0.96), and positive and negative predictive values (0.92 and 0.71). CONCLUSION: The updated logistic method presented here improves the initial version that had poor specificity and tended to overestimate drug causation. This new version presents satisfactory characteristics to be used in routine pharmacovigilance.

[Update of the French drug reaction assessment method]. / Réactualisation de la méthode française d'imputabilité des effets indésirables des médicaments.

A tripartite group, entitled « CRI ¼ (for Cercle de réflexion sur l'imputabilité), involving French pharmacovigilance staff from the French network of the Regional centers of pharmacovigilance, from pharmaceutical companies, and from French Health Authorities (Agence française de sécurité sanitaire des produits de santé) has worked to update the French drug reaction assessment method. Following assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the previous method, several points for improvement are proposed: a more precise wording and a more discriminating scale for some of the chronological and semiological criteria, a wider distribution of the intrinsic score from 5 to 7 levels, a new bibliographic scale for differentiating expected and unexpected adverse drug reactions, and a new informativness scale. This updated method would lead to a more relevant assessment of relationship between a drug and the occurrence of an adverse reaction. Furthermore, this method is a teaching tool to assess the level of relationship between a drug and the occurrence of an adverse reaction.