The potential antidepressant effect of antidiabetic agents: New insights from a pharmacovigilance study based on data from the reporting system databases FAERS and VigiBase.

Background: Growing evidence supports a bidirectional association between diabetes and depression; promising but limited and conflicting data from human studies support the intriguing possibility that antidiabetic agents may be used to relieve effectively depressive symptoms in diabetic patients. We investigated the potential antidepressant effects of antidiabetic drugs in a high-scale population data from the two most important pharmacovigilance databases, i.e., the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and the VigiBase. Material and methods: From the two primary cohorts of patients treated with antidepressants retrieved from FDA Adverse Event Reporting System and VigiBase we identified cases (depressed patients experiencing therapy failure) and non-cases (depressed patients experiencing any other adverse event). We then calculated the Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR), Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR), Empirical Bayes Geometric Mean (EBGM), and Empirical Bayes Regression-Adjusted Mean (ERAM) for cases versus non-cases in relation with the concurrent exposure to at least one of the following antidiabetic agent: A10BA Biguanides; A10BB Sulfonylureas; A10BG Thiazolidinediones; A10BH DPP4-inhibitors; A10BJ GLP-1 analogues; A10BK SGLT2 inhibitors (i.e., those agents for which preliminary evidence from literature supports our pharmacological hypothesis). Results: For GLP-1 analogues, all the disproportionality scores showed values <1, i.e., statistically significant, in both analyses [from the FAERS: ROR confidence interval of 0.546 (0.450-0.662); PRR (p-value) of 0.596 (0.000); EBGM (CI) of 0.488 (0.407-0.582); ERAM (CI) of 0.480 (0.398-0.569) and VigiBase: ROR (CI) of 0.717 (0.559-0.921); PRR (p-value) of 0.745 (0.033); EBGM (CI) of 0.586 (0.464-0.733); ERAM of (CI): 0.515 (0.403-0.639)]. Alongside GLP-1 analogues, DPP-4 Inhibitors and Sulfonylureas showed the greatest potential protective effect. With regard to specific antidiabetic agents, liraglutide and gliclazide were associated with a statistically significant decrease in all disproportionality scores, in both analyses. Conclusion: The findings of this study provide encouraging results, albeit preliminary, supporting the need for further clinical research for investigating repurposing of antidiabetic drugs for neuropsychiatric disorders.

The impact of anti-TNFα agents on weight-related changes: new insights from a real-world pharmacovigilance study using the FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) database.

INTRODUCTION: Studies in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) have inconsistently suggested that anti-TNFα therapy may be associated with excessive weight gain. AREAS COVERED: We performed a nested case/non-case analysis to investigate the anti-TNF-α inhibitor-associated body-changes in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. The risk was expressed as a measure of disproportionality using the reporting odds ratio (ROR) while adjusting for sex, drugs known to cause weight gain and reporter type. We also performed a time-to-onset (TTO) analysis of body weight-related events. RESULTS: Infliximab was the most commonly involved TNF-α inhibitor in body weight-related changes, reaching an aROR of 1.42 (95%CI:1. 26; 1.59). An increased risk was especially found in patients affected by rheumatic disorders, both in the adult and pediatric population. The median TTO after the start of anti- TNFα therapy was about 6-7 months for both children and adults. CONCLUSIONS: Given the potential effect of these agents on the excess weight gain in IMIDs patients, continuous attention for this side effect with appropriate counseling regarding lifestyle modifications are warranted, especially in those at high risk for obesity.

A Review of the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System for Tramadol-Related Hypoglycemia.

Background: Hypoglycemia is a rare adverse effect of tramadol that is described in the medical literature and package insert. Objective: The purpose of this study was to review reports of tramadol and hypoglycemia in the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database to determine a potential association. Methods: Disproportionality analysis with Bayesian correction was used to compare tramadol and hypoglycemia with other medications in FAERS. The results were considered significant if the fifth percentile of the Empirical Bayesian geometric mean distribution (EB05) >2. Logistic regression odds ratios was used to determine if age, diabetes medications, and renal insufficiency masked the disproportionality of hypoglycemia, with the fifth percentile of the logistic regression odds ratio (LR05) >2 indicating a potential signal. The Interaction Signal Score (INTSS) was computed to determine the influence of predisposing risk factors on the signal. Results: A total of 605 cases of tramadol-associated hypoglycemia were reported, but our results were not significant (EB05: 1.590). Tramadol-associated hypoglycemia was significant in patients who did not take diabetes medications (EB05: 2.256; LR05: 2.2104). Renal insufficiency was not found to increase the risk of tramadol-associated hypoglycemia (INTSS: 0.865). There was a significant signal for tramadol-associated hypoglycemia in patients aged 0 to 1 year (LR05: 3.0240) and 2 to 4 years (LR05: 2.6853). Conclusion and Relevance: Results of our analysis suggest a potential signal between hypoglycemia and tramadol use in patients not taking diabetes medications. Our results do not support a predisposition for tramadol-associated hypoglycemia in patients with renal insufficiency, increasing age, and/or diabetes as noted in the tramadol package insert.

Signal detection for bleeding associated with the use of direct oral anticoagulants.

PURPOSE: The potential link between serious or life-threatening bleeding and the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) was evaluated. METHODS: Qualitative and quantitative reviews of case reports of bleeding events involving dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and warfarin through March 31, 2017, were performed. A disproportionality analysis was conducted for each DOAC using an empirical Bayesian approach based on the relative reporting rate. Subanalyses were performed to assess (1) bleeding events (including mortality and life-threatening events) associated with DOACs among all adverse-event reports and (2) warfarin-related bleeding events. These analyses were conducted based on clinical definitions from the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities. RESULTS: During the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) review period, 35 adverse-event terms (in any system organ class) with a disproportionality score (EB05) of >7.5 for DOACs were identified; this accounted for 40,109 adverse-event reports. Adverse events with the highest disproportionality scores included atrial thrombosis, increased factor X level, dysfunctional uterine bleeding, high-frequency ablation, pericardial hemorrhage, and internal hemorrhage. Adverse events with the highest EB05 (>5) included internal hemorrhage, hemorrhage, and exsanguination; events with the greatest number of patient experiences included hemorrhage (6,881 events), internal hemorrhage (2,569 events), and hematoma (1,995 events). Warfarin-related events (including death or life-threatening events) were also assessed. A total of 8,729 adverse events were associated with warfarin use. The most common of these included hemorrhage (6,225 events), hematoma (2,199 events), and internal hemorrhage (270 events). CONCLUSION: The disproportionality analysis of the FAERS database suggests a quantitative signal between DOAC use and life-threatening or serious bleeding.

Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor-Associated Pancreatic Carcinoma: A Review of the FAERS Database.

BACKGROUND: To date, there is limited literature regarding the association between dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and pancreatic carcinoma. OBJECTIVE: To describe the comparative incidence of DPP-4 inhibitors and pancreatic carcinoma as reportedly available in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. The goal was to provide health care practitioners a general understanding of the drug-disease occurrence. METHODS: This is a case/noncase study utilizing Empirica Signal software to query FAERS from November 1968 to December 31, 2013. The software was used to calculate a disproportionality statistic--namely, the empirical Bayesian geometric mean (EBGM)--for reports of DPP-4 inhibitors-associated pancreatic carcinoma. The FDA considers an EBGM significant if the fifth percentile of the distribution is at least 2, defined as an EB05 ≥ 2. With use of a disproportionality analysis, DPP-4 inhibitors were compared with all agents listed in FAERS. RESULTS: A total of 156 patients experienced pancreatic carcinoma while receiving DPP-4 inhibitor therapy. An EB05 of 10.3 was determined for sitagliptin, 7.1 for saxagliptin, 4.9 for linagliptin, and 1.4 for alogliptin, compared with all other agents included in FAERS. Although an EB05 > 2 was achieved in 2 other antihyperglycemic agents, the findings were not consistent within their medication classes. CONCLUSION: There appears to be a statistical association between DPP-4 inhibitor use and pancreatic carcinoma. Causality cannot be inferred from the data provided. Additional clinical studies are needed to further explore this statistical association.

How safe are recently FDA-approved antimicrobials? A review of the FDA adverse event reporting system database.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To review quantitatively and qualitatively the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) database to provide clinicians with a general understanding of the comparative occurrence of clinically meaningful adverse events associated with 15 antimicrobial new molecular entities approved by the FDA since 2006: anidulafungin, darunavir, maraviroc, raltegravir, doripenem, telavancin, ceftaroline, boceprevir, telaprevir, fidaxomicin, bedaquiline, dolutegravir, simeprevir, sofosbuvir, and dalbavancin. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. DATA SOURCE: FDA AERS database. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Empirica Signal software was used to query the AERS database from November 1968 to December 2012. Using disproportionality analyses, we calculated a relative reporting ratio (RRR) estimate for reports of antimicrobial adverse events. The RRR estimate compares the occurrence of a specific adverse event with an index drug of interest to the occurrence of the same adverse event with similar agents or with all other FDA-approved prescription drugs. Common industry practice considers an RRR meaningful if the 5th percentile of the distribution is at least 2 (RRR05 of 2.0 or higher). Antimicrobials were compared with agents within their respective antimicrobial therapeutic class as well as with all agents in the AERS database. Seventeen adverse signals with an RRR05 of 2.0 or higher were identified from the database for six agents. Ten of the 17 signals were not included in the most up-to-date manufacturers' package inserts for four of the six agents: doripenem-associated hepatic dysfunction (RRR05 3.7) and hyperchloremia (RRR05 2.6); boceprevir-associated weight loss (RRR05 2.2); darunavir-associated premature labor (RRR05 3.1), sudden infant death syndrome (RRR05 2.9), ventricular hypertrophy (RRR05 2.7), acute coronary syndrome (RRR05 2.4), and congenital anomaly in offspring (RRR05 2.4); and raltegravir-associated congenital heart valve disorders (RRR05 2.5) and SIDS (RRR05 2.3). CONCLUSION: Clinically meaningful adverse event signals appeared to be associated with antimicrobial new molecular entities approved since 2006 including many not yet identified in package inserts. Although a disproportionality analysis suggests a quantitative signal for these associations, causality cannot be inferred from the data. Due to several key limitations in this type of analysis, investigative studies are needed to further explore these adverse event signals and the potential mechanisms by which they occur.

Potential for linezolid-related blindness: a review of spontaneous adverse event reports.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To provide clinicians with an understanding of the comparative occurrence of linezolid and blindness, and to provide any clinically relevant characteristics that may be useful in identifying the patients at risk. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. DATA SOURCE: Spontaneous reports in the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) database generated between November 1, 1997, and December 21, 2008. PATIENTS: Twenty-nine patients who experienced blindness while receiving linezolid therapy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Available information related to each case of linezolid-reported blindness in the AERS database was qualitatively and quantitatively reviewed. Optic nerve disorders, glaucoma, and treatment with linezolid for long durations were common characteristics in patients experiencing blindness. A limitation of AERS is the lack of a quantitative exposure estimate to put rare adverse events of the AERS, such as linezolid-related blindness, into perspective. To overcome this limitation, disproportionality analysis with Bayesian correction methodology was used. Disproportionality analysis uses an adverse event relative reporting ratio (RRR) to compare the occurrence of a specific adverse event with an index drug of interest to the occurrence of the same adverse event with similar agents or with all other FDA-approved prescription drugs. The disproportionality analysis was considered meaningful if the 5th percentile of the distribution of the RRR (RRR(05)) was 2 or greater. Among the 29 reported cases of linezolid use and blindness, an RRR(05) of 2.1 was determined for linezolid-related blindness compared with all other agents listed in the AERS. Also, RRR(05) values of 2.7 and 2.2 were found when linezolid was compared with all other systemic antibiotics and a select subgroup of antibiotics, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although disproportionality analyses suggested a quantitative signal for an association between linezolid use and blindness, causality cannot be inferred from the data. Thus, additional rigorous scientific analyses are warranted to explore these findings.

Signal detection methodologies to support effective safety management.

The increased focus on the safety of medical products, as well as the growing volume of available safety information, has created a need for objective quantitative approaches to supplement the medical review of individual case safety reports. Statistical algorithms can be used to identify trends and relationships in both clinical and postmarketing safety databases in support of safety signal detection. Powerful data visualization tools facilitate the medical review of the complex information generated by these methods. In addition, all these approaches need to be integrated into the daily practice of clinical safety and postmarketing pharmacovigilance.