Dataset Information

Evaluation of Pre-marketing Factors to Predict Post-marketing Boxed Warnings and Safety Withdrawals.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

An important goal in drug regulation is understanding serious safety issues with new drugs as soon as possible. Achieving this goal requires us to understand whether information provided during the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug review can predict serious safety issues that are usually identified after the product is approved. However, research on this topic remains understudied. In this paper, we examine whether any pre-marketing drug characteristics are associated with serious post-marketing safety actions.

Methods

We study this question using an internal FDA database containing every new small molecule drug submitted to the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) on or after November 21, 1997, and approved and commercially launched before December 31, 2009. Serious post-marketing safety actions include whether these drugs ever experienced either a post-marketing boxed warning or a withdrawal from the market due to safety concerns. A random effects logistic regression model was used to test whether any pre-marketing characteristics were associated with either post-marketing safety action.

Results

A total of 219 new molecular entities were analyzed. Among these drugs, 11 experienced a safety withdrawal and 30 received boxed warnings by July 31, 2016. Contrary to prevailing hypotheses, we find that neither clinical trial sample sizes nor review time windows are associated with the addition of a post-marketing boxed warning or safety withdrawal. However, we do find that new drugs approved with either a boxed warning or priority review are more likely to experience post-marketing boxed warnings. Furthermore, drugs approved with boxed warnings tend to receive post-marketing boxed warnings resulting from new safety information that are unrelated to the original warning. Drugs approved with a boxed warning are 3.88 times more likely to receive a post-marketing boxed warning, while drugs approved with a priority review are 3.51 times more likely to receive a post-marketing boxed warning.

Conclusion

Although drugs approved with a boxed warning or priority review are more likely to experience serious post-marketing safety events, other information provided during the FDA drug review that is easy to quantify is generally not associated with post-marketing safety events. It appears that these post-marketing events are not discernible during a pre-marketing review and therefore might not be avoidable using current review data.

SUBMITTER: Schick A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8422863 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSocial media has become a new source for obtaining real-world data on adverse drug reactions. Many studies have investigated the use of social media to detect early signals of adverse drug reactions. However, the trustworthiness of signals derived from social media is questionable. To confirm this, a confirmatory study with a positive control (eg, new black box warnings, labeling changes, or withdrawals) is required.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the use of social media in detecting new black box warnings, labeling changes, or withdrawals in advance.MethodsThis scoping review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. A researcher searched PubMed and EMBASE in January 2021. Original studies analyzing black box warnings, labeling changes, or withdrawals from social media were selected, and the results of the studies were summarized.ResultsA total of 14 studies were included in this scoping review. Most studies (8/14, 57.1%%) collected data from a single source, and 10 (71.4%) used specialized health care social networks and forums. The analytical methods used in these studies varied considerably. Three studies (21.4%) manually annotated posts, while 5 (35.7%) adopted machine learning algorithms. Nine studies (64.2%) concluded that social media could detect signals 3 months to 9 years before action from regulatory authorities. Most of these studies (8/9, 88.9%) were conducted on specialized health care social networks and forums. On the contrary, 5 (35.7%) studies yielded modest or negative results. Of these, 2 (40%) used generic social networking sites, 2 (40%) used specialized health care networks and forums, and 1 (20%) used both generic social networking sites and specialized health care social networks and forums. The most recently published study recommends not using social media for pharmacovigilance. Several challenges remain in using social media for pharmacovigilance regarding coverage, data quality, and analytic processing.ConclusionsSocial media, along with conventional pharmacovigilance measures, can be used to detect signals associated with new black box warnings, labeling changes, or withdrawals. Several challenges remain; however, social media will be useful for signal detection of frequently mentioned drugs in specialized health care social networks and forums. Further studies are required to advance natural language processing and mine real-world data on social media.

Project description:Highlights • Active post-marketing safety surveillance on ROTASIIL, an oral rotavirus vaccine, was conducted in 9940 infants in India.• Three doses of ROTASIIL were administered at 6, 10 and 14 weeks of age, along with other EPI vaccines.• Most of the AEs were pyrexia and injection site reactions caused by the concomitant injectable vaccines.• No case of intussusception (IS) was reported.• ROTASIIL was safe and well tolerated. Background ROTASIIL, an oral live attenuated bovine-human reassortant pentavalent rotavirus vaccine, was approved in 2017. This post-marketing surveillance (PMS) was conducted to collect real-world data on the safety of ROTASIIL in India. Methods Observational, active PMS was conducted in approximately 10,000 infants aged ≥ 6 weeks. ROTASIIL was administered as a 3-dose regimen, at least 4 weeks apart, beginning at ≥ 6 weeks of age concomitantly with other Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) vaccines. Participants were followed for one month after the last dose. The adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs), including intussusception (IS) reported during the follow up period were collected. Findings A total of 9940 infants were enrolled and were considered for safety analysis. Around 9913 (99.7 %) infants received 2 doses, while 9893 (99.5 %) infants completed all three doses. Total 3693 AEs were reported in 2516 (25.3 %) participants. Most of these AEs were pyrexia (78.01 % of events) and injection-site reactions (19.14 % of events). Nearly all AEs were causally unrelated to orally administered ROTASIIL and could be caused by the concomitant injectable vaccines. Only 4 AEs (2 events of vomiting and 1 event each of discomfort and pyrexia) in 4 (<0.1 %) participants could be related to ROTASIIL. AEs were of mild or moderate severity and all resolved without any sequelae. A total of 2 SAEs (acute otitis media and skull fracture) were reported in 2 (<0.1 %) participants and were not related to ROTASIIL and recovered without sequelae. No case of IS was reported. Interpretation ROTASIIL was safe and well tolerated in this study. No safety concerns were reported. Funding The study was funded by SIIPL which is the manufacturer of the study product.