Observed-over-Expected analysis as additional method for pharmacovigilance signal detection in large-scaled spontaneous adverse event reporting.

BACKGROUND: The large-scale COVID-19 vaccination campaigns in 2021 and 2022 led to a rapid increase in numbers of received adverse event reports in spontaneous reporting systems. As background incidences of naturally occurring medical events became increasingly relevant for causality assessment of potential associations with the vaccines, a novel approach for signal detection was warranted. OBJECTIVES: This article illustrates the Observed-over-Expected (O/E) analysis as an additional method for signal detection and risk assessment in large-scaled spontaneous reporting systems. METHODS: All individual case safety reports (ICSRs) concerning idiopathic peripheral facial paralysis or Bell's palsy following administration of the COVID-19 vaccines (n = 291) manufactured by Pfizer/BioNTech (Comirnaty), Moderna (Spikevax), AstraZeneca (Vaxzevria) and Janssen (JCOVDEN) received by the National Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb until 24th March 2022 were included in the O/E analysis, within a risk window of 7 and 14 days following immunisation. Dutch background incidence rates from 2019 and exposure of the Dutch population to the vaccines were obtained from the PHARMO institute and RIVM. The data was stratified in age groups, gender and administered dose in order to differentiate between population subgroups. RESULTS: Bell's palsy was reported more frequently than expected in several population subgroups following administration of all four COVID-19 vaccines, including children and adolescents. Among children, a high O/E ratio was found for boys aged 5-14 years after receiving the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. Regarding adolescents and young adults, women aged 15-24 years receiving Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, and men aged 15-24 years receiving Janssen developed Bell's palsy more often than expected. Furthermore, O/E ratios were high for individuals aged 25-64, regarding females receiving Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca and males receiving Janssen. As facial paralysis was not labelled as an adverse event for the Janssen vaccine, this analysis contributed to signalling the association and warranting further regulatory action. CONCLUSIONS: The O/E method is a useful approach for signal detection of potential adverse reactions when handling large numbers of ICSRs. Further research is needed to attest to the causality on a clinical basis.

Retroperitoneal fibrosis and ß-blocking agents: Is there an association?

AIMS: Retroperitoneal fibrosis (RPF) is a rare chronic fibro-inflammatory disorder that may be secondary to certain drugs, including ß-blocking agents (BBAs). However, their causative role is unclear. We aimed to investigate this association. METHODS: Disproportionality analysis was carried out on cases from 1985 to 4 October 2020 in VigiBase, the World Health Organization pharmacovigilance database. The Bayesian-based IC025 metric and reporting odds ratio were used in order to assess the adverse event signal. We also analysed all published case reports from the literature regarding BBA-associated RPF to assess the value of suggested supportive clinical evidence. RESULTS: In total, 1599 individual case safety reports of RPF were reported to VigiBase, of which 132 (32%) concerned 16 different single BBA. For 12 of these agents (75%), reporting of RPF was disproportionate, indicating a potential safety signal. Line listing analysis of individual case safety reports showed no consistent time interval from start of BBA to RPF diagnosis (range 0.7-264 mo). Dechallenge was negative or unknown in the majority of cases (74%). In 18 published cases from the literature, time from start of BBA to RPF diagnosis varied widely (range 3-156 mo). BBA were discontinued 6 months before (n = 1) or at the time of RPF diagnosis (n = 17). Most patients (84%) also received RPF specific treatment. Follow-up duration was short (median 5 mo [range 1-24 mo]) and in most cases (83%) relevant follow-up data were lacking. CONCLUSION: Although disproportionality analysis indicated a potential safety signal for RPF associated with BBAs, clinical evidence did not support a cause-and-effect relationship.

What Future Healthcare Professionals Need to Know About Pharmacovigilance: Introduction of the WHO PV Core Curriculum for University Teaching with Focus on Clinical Aspects.

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) can cause serious health problems, as shown in studies about drug-related hospitalizations. To build knowledge of and raise awareness about ADRs among healthcare professionals, more education in the field of ADRs and pharmacovigilance (PV) is needed. No standard exists for teaching PV at universities for medical, pharmacy, dentistry and nursing students, so a core curriculum needs to be developed to teach important aspects of PV to students. In September 2016, a stakeholders' meeting was initiated on behalf of the World Health Organization (WHO) and organized by the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb. This meeting addressed and agreed on the PV competencies students need to develop and what key aspects of the subject should be taught. Five key aspects were identified: understanding the importance of PV in the context of pharmacotherapy, and preventing, recognizing, managing and reporting ADRs. Since time and resources for PV education are limited, elements of the WHO PV core curriculum for university teaching were designed to be integrated into existing courses but can be used as a stand-alone programme. The basis of and outline for the WHO PV core curriculum for university teaching are addressed in this paper. It is expected that PV competencies for students are vital for their contribution to safe use of medicines in the future. In addition, this article aims to stimulate discussion on this subject and promote collaboration between universities, national PV centres and other stakeholders to integrate key aspects of PV in their educational programmes.

The adverse drug reaction reporting assignment for specialist oncology nurses: a preliminary evaluation of quality, relevance and educational value in a prospective cohort study.

In a new prescribing qualification course for specialist oncology nurses, we thought that it is important to emphasize pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting. We aimed to develop and evaluate an ADR reporting assignment for specialist oncology nurses. The quality of report documentation was assessed with the "Clinical Documentation tool to assess Individual Case Safety Reports" (ClinDoc). The relevance of the reports was evaluated in terms of ADR seriousness, the listing for additional monitoring of the drug by European Medicines Agency (EMA), and lack of labelling information about the ADR. Nurses' opinions of the assignment were evaluated using an E-survey. Thirty-three ADRs were reported, 32 (97%) of which were well documented according to ClinDoc. Thirteen ADRs (39%) were "serious" according to CIOMS criteria. In five cases (15%), the suspect drugs were listed for additional monitoring by EMA and in seven cases (21%), the ADR was not mentioned in the Summary of Product Characteristics. Twenty-five (78.1%) of the 32 enrolled nurses completed the E-survey. Most were > 45 years of age (68%), female (92%) and had extensive clinical experience (6-33 years). All agreed or completely agreed that the reporting assignment was useful, that it fitted in daily practice and that it increased their attention for medication/patient safety. A large majority (84.0%) agreed the assignment changed how they dealt with ADRs. Specialist oncology nurses are capable of reporting ADRs, and they considered the assignment useful. The assignment yielded valuable, relevant, and well-documented ADR reports for pharmacovigilance practice.

Feasibility and Educational Value of a Student-Run Pharmacovigilance Programme: A Prospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Pharmacovigilance, the monitoring of drug safety after marketing approval, highly depends on the adequate reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). To improve pharmacovigilance awareness and future ADR reporting among medical students, we developed and evaluated a student-run pharmacovigilance programme. METHODS: In this project, teams of medical students (first- to fifth-year) assessed real ADR reports, as submitted to the national pharmacovigilance centre. After assessment of causality, including identification of a potential pharmacological explanation for the ADR, the students wrote a personalized feedback letter to the reporter, as well as a summary for the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and World Health Organization (WHO) pharmacovigilance databases. This student assessment was then verified and evaluated by staff from The Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb (Lareb), using an e-questionnaire. Student attitudes, intentions, skills, and knowledge of ADR reporting were evaluated using the e-questionnaire, before and after participation in the programme. RESULTS: From May 2014 to January 2015, a total of 43 students assessed 100 different ADR reports selected by Lareb staff (n = 3). Student assessments were rated as useful (93%), scientifically substantiated (90%), accurate (92%), and complete (92%), and, on average, did not cost Lareb staff extra time. Medical students were positive about ADR reporting, and their awareness of ADR reporting increased significantly following participation in the programme (p < 0.05). After participation in the programme, the students intended to report serious ADRs in their future practice, and their knowledge of pharmacovigilance and ADR reporting showed they had a high overall level of pharmacological understanding. CONCLUSION: The student-run pharmacovigilance programme is a win-win venture. It offers students a valuable 'pharmacovigilance experience', creates awareness in future doctors, and has the potential to increase pharmacovigilance skills and knowledge.

Pharmacovigilance Skills, Knowledge and Attitudes in our Future Doctors - A Nationwide Study in the Netherlands.

Pharmacovigilance centres monitor the safety of drugs, based on adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reported by doctors, pharmacists and pharmaceutical companies. However, the under-reporting of ADRs remains a major problem. Our aim was to investigate preparedness of future doctors for their role in pharmacovigilance, by assessing their pharmacovigilance awareness, skills and knowledge. The study was a nationwide e-survey among medical students (third to sixth year) of all eight medical schools in the Netherlands. The survey consisted of questions regarding pharmacovigilance awareness, skills and knowledge. Overall, 874 students provided informed consent and participated (response 12%). Almost all students (96%) intended to report serious ADRs in their future practice. Almost half (44%) of the students did not know where to report an ADR, and 78% did not know which items were necessary for a good-quality ADR report. While more than 78% of the students agreed that pharmacovigilance is an important topic in their medical education, only 26% found that their current curriculum covered pharmacovigilance adequately. Although ADR reporting is considered relevant and important among future doctors, many do not know where and what to report. This is highly undesirable and should have consequences for pharmacotherapy teaching.