Abstract
Marketing authorization holders should report adverse drug reactions (ADRs) derived from spontaneous case reports and literature for their medicinal products to competent authorities. Yet the difference in quality of data from both sources has never been analyzed. To this end, YES Pharmaceutical Development Services in cooperation with the German Medicines Manufacturers Association has conducted an analysis examining more than 25,100 spontaneous and literature cases that occurred between 2007 and 2008. Reporting rates of ADRs for specific drug substances (DSs), expectedness, and the system organ class (SOC) referred to were examined. It was found that the distribution of ADRs to specific SOCs differs between both groups for selected DSs. For more than 37% of the DSs being evaluated, a difference of 10% or more regarding reporting rates of unexpected ADRs was observed between both groups. These findings underline the substantial importance of regular literature reviews in addition to the spontaneous reporting system for a sufficient safety assessment of medicinal products.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Hauben M. Signal detection in the pharmaceutical industry: integrating clinical and computational approaches. Drug Saf. 2007;30:627–630.
Hauben M, Reich L. A case report of rhabdomyolysis with pentamidine that prompted a retrospective evaluation of a pharmacovigilance tool under investigation. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004;58:675–676.
Newcombe RG. Interval estimation for the difference between independent proportions: comparison of eleven methods. Stat Med. 1998;17:873–890.
Haramburu F, Bégaud B, Moride Y. Temporal trends in spontaneous reporting of unlabelled adverse drug reactions. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1997;44:299–301.
Olivier P, Montastruc JL. The nature of the scientific evidence leading to drug withdrawals for pharmacovigilance reasons in France. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2006;15:808–812.
Tavassoli N, Lapeyre-Mestre M, Sommet A, Montastruc JL. Reporting rate of adverse drug reactions to the French pharmacovigilance system with three step 2 analgesic drugs: dextro-propoxyphene, tramadol and codeine (in combination with paracetamol). Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;68:422–426.
Kopečná E, Deščíková V, Vlček J, Mladá J. Adverse drug reaction reporting in the Czech Republic 2005–2009. Int J Clin Pharm. 2011;33:683–689.
Pariente A, Gregoire F, Fourrier-Reglat A, Haramburu F, Moore N. Impact of safety alerts on measures of disproportionality in spontaneous reporting databases: the notoriety bias. Drug Saf. 2007;30:891–898.
Kelly WN, Arellano FM, Barnes J, et al. Guidelines for submitting adverse event reports for publication. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2007;16:581–587.
Impicciatore P, Mucci M. Completeness of published case reports on suspected adverse drug reactions: evaluation of 100 reports from a company safety database. Drug Saf. 2010;33:765–773.
Thiessard F, Roux E, Miremont-Salamé G, et al. Trends in spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports to the French pharmacovigilance system (1986–2001). Drug Saf. 2005;28:731–740.
Chang DF, Campbell JR. Intraoperative floppy iris syndrome associated with tamsulosin. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;3:664–673.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Klose, J., Fröhling, S., Kroth, E. et al. Safety Information From Spontaneous and Literature Adverse Reaction Reports: A Comparison. Ther Innov Regul Sci 47, 248–255 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1177/0092861512463920
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0092861512463920