Dataset Information

Stimulated reporting: the impact of US food and drug administration-issued alerts on the adverse event reporting system (FAERS).

ABSTRACT:

Background

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) uses the Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to support post-marketing safety surveillance programs. Currently, almost one million case reports are submitted to FAERS each year, making it a vast repository of drug safety information. Sometimes cited as a limitation of FAERS, however, is the assumption that "stimulated reporting" of adverse events (AEs) occurs in response to warnings, alerts, and label changes that are issued by the FDA.

Objective

To determine the extent of "stimulated reporting" in the modern-day FAERS database.

Methods

One hundred drugs approved by the FDA between 2001 and 2010 were included in this analysis. FDA alerts were obtained by a comprehensive search of the FDA's MedWatch and main websites. Publicly available FAERS data were used to assess the "primary suspect" AE reporting pattern for up to four quarters before, and after, the issuance of an FDA alert.

Results

A few drugs did demonstrate "stimulated reporting" trends. A majority of the drugs, however, showed little evidence for significant reporting changes associated with the issuance of alerts. When we compared the percentage changes in reporting after an FDA alert with those after a sham "control alert", the overall reporting trends appeared to be quite similar. Of 100 drugs analyzed for short-term reporting trends, 21 real alerts and 25 sham alerts demonstrated an increase (greater than or equal to 1 %) in reporting. The long-term analysis of 91 drugs showed that 24 real alerts and 28 sham alerts demonstrated a greater than or equal to 1 % increase.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that most of modern day FAERS reporting is not significantly affected by the issuance of FDA alerts.

SUBMITTER: Hoffman KB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4206770 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background There are limited real-world studies on the differences in leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA), H1-antihistamines (H1-AH), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) associated neuropsychiatric events. In this study, we aimed to analyze the characteristics of drug associated neuropsychiatric events, and compare the differences among different drug categories. Methods Disproportionality analysis and Bayesian analysis were used in data mining to identify suspected neuropsychiatric events associated with LTRA, H1-AH, and ICS based on the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) from January 2004 to September 2020. Demographic information, time interval to onset, and death rates of LTRA, H1-AH, and ICS-associated neuropsychiatric events were also analyzed. Results A total of 9475 neuropsychiatric events were identified. The number of neuropsychiatric events related to LTRA, H1-AH, and ICS were 5201 (54.89%), 3226 (34.05%), and 1048 (11.06%), respectively. LTRA related neuropsychiatric events were more common in patients aged 4–6 years (18.66%). H1-AH and ICS related neuropsychiatric events were more common in patients aged 18–44 years (29.92%) and older than 65 years (30.60%), respectively. Montelukast was highly associated with neuropsychiatric events, with a high reporting odds ratio (ROR). Most neuropsychiatric symptoms occurred within the first 10 days after drug initiation (78.63% for LTRA, 91.39% for H1-AH, and 84.07% for ICS). The death rate due to neuropsychiatric events of first generation H1-AH was significantly higher than that of LTRA and ICS (p < 0.001). Conclusions LTRA associated neuropsychiatric events reported in FAERS were most frequent in 4 to 6-year-old children. Most reported cases occurred within the first 10 days after drug initiation. The second generation H1-AH was relatively safe for neuropsychiatric events compared with the first generation. The fatality rate due to first generation H1-AH associated neuropsychiatric events was higher than that of LTRA and ICS. More attention should be paid to specific patients treated with LTRA and H1-AH.

Project description:ObjectivesPaclitaxel is a highly effective antitumor agent with notable adverse events, including hypersensitivity reactions, peripheral neuropathy, arthralgia, myalgias, and neutropenia. Solvent-based paclitaxel causes severe allergic, hypersensitivity, and anaphylactic reactions. Nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel was recently developed and provides an advantage over solvent-based paclitaxel in avoiding solvent/surfactant-related adverse events. The aim of this study was to assess the adverse event profiles of solvent-based paclitaxel and nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel formulations using data from the spontaneous adverse event reporting system of the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database.MethodsThis study relied on Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities preferred terms and standardized queries, and calculated the reporting ratio and reporting odds ratios of paclitaxel formulations.ResultsOf 8,867,135 reports recorded in the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database from January 2004 to December 2016, 3469 and 4447 adverse events corresponded to solvent-based paclitaxel and nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel, respectively. Reporting odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for anaphylactic reaction (standardized MedDRA query code: 20000021) associated with the use of solvent-based paclitaxel and nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel were 1.69 (1.56-1.84) and 0.75 (0.68-0.83), respectively. Reporting odds ratio signal for anaphylactic reaction was not detected for nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel. Reporting odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for acute renal failure (standardized MedDRA query code: 20000003) associated with the use of solvent-based paclitaxel and nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel were 0.75 (0.58-0.98) and 1.60 (1.37-1.89), respectively.ConclusionThis is the first study to evaluate the adverse event profile of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel using US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System data. Considering that the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database does not allow to infer causality or risk ranking, the different reporting frequencies of anaphylactic reaction and acute renal failure between solvent-based paclitaxel and nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel must be further investigated via analytical observational research.

Project description:IntroductionAnticholinergic adverse effects (AEs) are a problem for elderly people. This study aimed to answer the following questions. First, is an analysis of anticholinergic AEs using spontaneous adverse drug event databases possible? Second, what is the main drug suspected of inducing anticholinergic AEs in the databases? Third, do database differences yield different results?MethodsWe used two databases: the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database (FAERS) and the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report database (JADER) recorded from 2004 to 2020. We defined three types of anticholinergic AEs: central nervous system (CNS) AEs, peripheral nervous system (PNS) AEs, and a combination of these AEs. We counted the number of cases and evaluated the ratio of drug-anticholinergic AE pairs between FAERS and JADER. We computed reporting odds ratios (RORs) and assessed the drugs using Beers Criteria®.ResultsConstipation was the most reported AE in FAERS. The ratio of drug-anticholinergic AE pairs was statistically significantly larger in FAERS than JADER. Overactive bladder agents were suspected drugs common to both databases. Other drugs differed between the two databases. CNS AEs were associated with antidementia drugs in FAERS and opioids in JADER. In the assessment using Beers Criteria®, signals were detected for almost all drugs. Between the two databases, a significantly higher positive correlation was observed for PNS AEs (correlation coefficient 0.85, P = 0.0001). The ROR was significantly greater in JADER.ConclusionsThere are many methods to investigate AEs. This study shows that the analysis of anticholinergic AEs using spontaneous adverse drug event databases is possible. From this analysis, various suspected drugs were detected. In particular, FAERS had many cases. The differences in the results between the two databases may reflect differences in the reporting countries. Further study of the relationship between drugs and CNS AEs should be conducted.