Explore the vast range of titles available.

In pharmacovigilance, disproportionality analyses based on individual case safety reports are widely used to detect safety signals. Unfortunately, publishing disproportionality analyses lacks specific guidelines, often leading to incomplete and ambiguous reporting, and carries the risk of incorrect conclusions when data are not placed in the correct context. The REporting of A Disproportionality analysis for drUg Safety signal detection using individual case safety reports in PharmacoVigilance (READUS-PV) statement was developed to address this issue by promoting transparent and comprehensive reporting of disproportionality studies. While the statement paper explains in greater detail the procedure followed to develop these guidelines, with this explanation paper we present the 14 items retained for READUS-PV guidelines, together with an in-depth explanation of their rationale and bullet points to illustrate their practical implementation. Our primary objective is to foster the adoption of the READUS-PV guidelines among authors, editors, peer reviewers, and readers of disproportionality analyses. Enhancing transparency, completeness, and accuracy of reporting, as well as proper interpretation of their results, READUS-PV guidelines will ultimately facilitate evidence-based decision making in pharmacovigilance.

Background and aim Disproportionality analyses using reports of suspected adverse drug reactions are the most commonly used quantitative methods for detecting safety signals in pharmacovigilance. However, their methods and results are generally poorly reported in published articles and existing guidelines do not capture the specific features of disproportionality analyses. We here describe the development of a guideline (REporting of A Disproportionality analysis for drUg Safety signal detection using individual case safety reports in PharmacoVigilance [READUS-PV]) for reporting the results of disproportionality analyses in articles and abstracts. Methods We established a group of 34 international experts from universities, the pharmaceutical industry, and regulatory agencies, with expertise in pharmacovigilance, disproportionality analyses, and assessment of safety signals. We followed a three-step process to develop the checklist: (1) an open-text survey to generate a first list of items; (2) an online Delphi method to select and rephrase the most important items; (3) a final online consensus meeting. Results Among the panel members, 33 experts responded to round 1 and 30 to round 2 of the Delphi and 25 participated to the consensus meeting. Overall, 60 recommendations for the main body of the manuscript and 13 recommendations for the abstracts were retained by participants after the Delphi method. After merging of some items together and the online consensus meeting, the READUS-PV guidelines comprise a checklist of 32 recommendations, in 14 items, for the reporting of disproportionality analyses in the main body text and four items, comprising 12 recommendations, for abstracts. Conclusions The READUS-PV guidelines will support authors, editors, peer-reviewers, and users of disproportionality analyses using individual case safety report databases. Adopting these guidelines will lead to more transparent, comprehensive, and accurate reporting and interpretation of disproportionality analyses, facilitating the integration with other sources of evidence.

BackgroundMigraine is responsible for significant disability and societal burden. Recently, drugs targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway raised new hopes. CGRP, a potent vasodilator, plays a key role in the pathogenesis of migraine attacks. The deficiency of CGRP is involved in Raynaud’s phenomenon, which consists of abnormal vasoconstriction of the digits. We aimed to assess the potential association of Raynaud’s phenomenon with CGRP-targeting drugs, analyzing real-world data from the World Health Organization (VigiBase®).MethodsWe queried all reports of Raynaud’s phenomenon involving a CGRP-targeting drug. We sought disproportionate reporting of Raynaud’s phenomenon with these drugs. For this purpose, we relied on the calculation of the Information Component (IC). A positive lower end of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the IC defines a statistically significant association. As migraine patients are prone to Raynaud’s phenomenon, we also calculated the IC of Raynaud’s phenomenon with CGRP-targeting drugs compared to 5HT1B/D agonists (triptans), and beta-blockers used in the treatment of migraine.ResultsOverall, 99 reports of Raynaud’s phenomenon involving CGRP-targeting drugs have been yielded in VigiBase®. The most reported CGRP-targeting drug was erenumab, with 56 reports (56.6%). The median time to onset was 84 days. No fatality was notified, but one patient suffered from gangrene and extremity necrosis. As a whole, CGRP-targeting drugs were significantly associated with Raynaud’s phenomenon, with an IC of 3.3 (95%CI: 3.0–3.5). There was a disproportionate reporting of Raynaud’s phenomenon with CGRP-targeting drugs compared to triptans (IC 0.4; 95%CI: 0.1–0.6) and to beta-blockers (IC 0.5; 95%CI: 0.2–0.7) as well.ConclusionsThere is a significant disproportionality signal of Raynaud’s phenomenon with CGRP-targeting. This signal stands out when CGRP-targeting drugs are compared to other drugs used in patients with migraine. This study is limited by missing data in pharmacovigilance reports. CGRP-targeting drugs may be subject to Weber effect and reporting bias. Nonetheless, CGRP blockade might be the last straw that disrupts the physiological balance of vascular response in patients at-risk of Raynaud’s phenomenon. Pending further data regarding vascular safety of CGRP-targeting drugs, caution is warranted in these patients.

Transplant recipients face increased cancer mortality due to immunosuppressive treatments. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have improved survival rates, but data on the use of these agents in transplant recipients is scarce. ICI may trigger allograft rejection, but the absolute risk of AR between the different ICI classes remains to be defined. VigiBase (WHO's pharmacovigilance database) was queried for reports of AR involving CTLA4, PD1, or PDL1 inhibitors. Disproportionality analysis compares the proportion of reports with a specific adverse drug reaction (ADR) and a given drug to the proportion of reports with the same ADR and other drugs. A lower 95% confidence interval for the Information Component (IC) >0 suggests a signal. The comparative Reporting Odds Ratios (ROR) for AR, between PD1 and PDL1 inhibitors, was calculated. We gathered 159 AR involving an ICI, especially nivolumab (73, 45.9%), mostly affecting kidneys (87, 54.7%). Median time to onset: 28 days. Fatal outcome: 36 reports (22.6%). ICI were significantly associated with AR: IC=1.7 [1.4;1.9]. Specifically, PD1 inhibitors yielded an IC of 2.0 [1.7;2.2] (152 reports observed compared to 38 expected). By contrast, the IC of PDL1 inhibitors was negative: -2.6 [-6.4;-1.0] (1 observed, 9 expected). The comparative ROR of PD1 compared to PDL1 inhibitors was 33.7 [4.7;240.9] (p=0.0005). We confirm the association between ICI treatment and AR. Notably, PDL1 inhibitors showed surprisingly low AR reports compared to CTLA4 and PD1 inhibitors. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm whether PDL1 inhibitors indeed reduce AR risk compared to other ICI.

The recent empirical use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) revived the interest in its cardiac toxicity, increasingly sidelined over time. We aimed to assess and compare the profile of cardiac adverse drug reactions (CADRs) associated with HCQ before and during COVID‐19. We performed a retrospective comparative observational study using the French Pharmacovigilance network database between 1985 and May 2020 to assess all postmarketing CADRs associated with HCQ notified before COVID‐19 in its approved indications for lupus and rheumatoid arthritis (preCOV), and those concerning its empirical use in COVID‐19 (COV). Eighty‐five CADR in preCOV were compared with 141 CADRs in COV. The most common CADR of preCOV were cardiomyopathies (42.4%) and conduction disorders (28.2%), both statistically more frequent than in COV (P < 0.001). COV notifications significantly highlighted repolarization and ventricular rhythm disorders (78.0%, P < 0.001) as well as sinus bradycardias (14.9%, P = 0.01) as compared with preCOV. Estimated incidence of CADR was significantly higher among patients exposed to off‐label use of HCQ in COVID‐19 (2.9%) than before COVID‐19 in its approved indications (0.01%, P < 0.001). The use of HCQ in COVID‐19 sheds a new light on the spectrum of its cardiac toxicity. This fosters the value of a closer monitoring of all patients treated with HCQ, regardless of its indication, and the importance of an update of its summary of product characteristics.

Background Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) foster anti-cancer immune responses. Their efficacy comes at the cost of immune-related adverse events (IRAEs). The latter affects various organs, including kidneys, mostly as acute tubulointerstitial nephritis, the pathophysiology of which remains unclear. We conducted a multicentre case–control study to compare the characteristics of patients with renal IRAEs (ICI-AKI) with those of patients diagnosed with other IRAEs. Methods We queried the French pharmacovigilance database for all adverse events involving ICIs. Reports were classified as ICI-AKI or extrarenal IRAE. For each ICI-AKI report, four reports of extrarenal IRAEs were randomly included (control group, 4:1 ratio). Variables showing an association with a P < 0.05 were included as covariates in a multivariate analysis. Results Therefore, 167 ICI-AKI reports were compared with 668 extrarenal IRAEs. At least one concomitant extrarenal IRAE was mentioned in 44.3% of ICI-AKI reports. Patients with ICI-AKI were significantly older than patients with extrarenal IRAEs (69.1 versus 64.6 years; P = 0.0135), and chronic kidney disease was significantly more prevalent (12.0% versus 3.3%; P = 0.0125). Patients with ICI-AKI were significantly more likely to be treated with fluindione [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 6.53, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 2.21–19.31; P = 0.0007], a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID, OR 3.18, 95% CI 1.07–9.4; P = 0.0368) or a proton-pump inhibitor (PPI, OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.42–3.34; P = 0.0004). Conclusion This study is limited by a lack of data, preventing confirmation of numerous reports therefore not included in the analysis. We are unable to draw definite pathophysiological conclusions from our data. Nonetheless, we suggest that ICIs may be a ‘second-hit’ that precipitates acute kidney injury caused by another concomitant drug (fluindione, NSAID or PPI). Graphical Abstract Graphical Abstract

Abstract Aims While some concerns about vaccination-related pericarditis and/or myocarditis have been raised, no published data are available on pericarditis and/or myocarditis with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in the age group of adolescents, particularly 12–15 years. The objective of this study was to determine whether the risk of reporting pericarditis and/or myocarditis with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines varied according to dose of vaccination, age, sex, and type of pericarditis and/or myocarditis in adolescents between 12 and 17 years. Methods and results We performed an observational study reviewing all reports of adolescents vaccinated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and recorded in VigiBase®, the World Health Organization global database of individual case safety reports. We included all reports registered between 1 January 2021 and 14 September 2021. Reporting odds ratios (RORs) with their 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated to estimate the risk of reporting pericarditis and/or myocarditis. Among 4942 reports with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in adolescents, we identified 242 pericarditis and/or myocarditis. Compared with the first dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, the second dose was associated with an increased risk of reporting pericarditis and/or myocarditis (ROR 4.95; 95% CI 3.14, 7.89). The risk of reporting pericarditis and/or myocarditis was 10 times higher in boys than in girls and no difference between the two types of vaccines could be demonstrated. Conclusion This investigation including only adolescent data suggests for the first time that the second dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines increases the risk of reporting myocarditis/pericarditis compared with the first dose particularly in boys without significant difference between tozinameran and elasomeran.

Background Belatacept is a co-stimulation blocker used in kidney transplant recipients to prevent allograft rejection. Unlike calcineurin inhibitors, belatacept is non-nephrotoxic and may carry a lower risk of cardiovascular and metabolic complications. However, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) includes a broad range of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), mostly identified in small clinical trials with cyclosporine as a control, in patients exposed to other immunosuppressants. As real-world data on belatacept safety accumulate, a reassessment of its safety profile becomes essential. Methods We analyzed pharmacovigilance data from VigiBase ® , the World Health Organization global safety database, to explore discrepancies between postmarketing ADR reports and the belatacept Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC). A disproportionality analysis was performed using the Information Component, a Bayesian metric, to identify potential pharmacovigilance signals. Results We retrieved 2795 reports involving belatacept, including 424 (15.2%) fatal cases. The disproportionality analysis highlighted 51 potential signals that were not explicitly listed in the SmPC, such as Clostridium difficile infection, hepatitis B reactivation, and hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. Conversely, 47 (33.1%) of the 142 ADRs classified as “common” or “very common” in the SmPC, such as Cushing’s syndrome or depression, had fewer than three reports in VigiBase ® . Conclusions This study highlights discrepancies between the belatacept SmPC and real-world pharmacovigilance data. Several labeled ADRs were not reported frequently in VigiBase ® , suggesting that they may be less commonly observed in real-world settings. Others, particularly infections, warrant further scrutiny. Yet, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to the inherent limitations of pharmacovigilance data, including underreporting, reporting bias, and residual confounding. Pharmacovigilance approaches generate signals, but cannot definitively establish or exclude a causal relationship. Nonetheless, these findings suggest the need for periodic reassessment of belatacept’s safety profile to ensure accurate and clinically relevant information for healthcare providers.