Investigating the Safety Profile of Fast-Track COVID-19 Drugs Using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System Database: A Comparative Observational Study.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1002/pds.70043
Hyo Jung Kim, Jeong-Hwa Yoon, Kye Hwa Lee
{"title":"Investigating the Safety Profile of Fast-Track COVID-19 Drugs Using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System Database: A Comparative Observational Study.","authors":"Hyo Jung Kim, Jeong-Hwa Yoon, Kye Hwa Lee","doi":"10.1002/pds.70043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) granted emergency use authorization (EUA) for multiple coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) drugs as a medical countermeasure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite these drugs' fast-track nature, concerns persist regarding their efficacy and potential adverse effects. Thus, the continuous surveillance and understanding of these drugs' safety profiles are crucial in such scenarios.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, we aimed to compare the adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of four fast-track COVID-19 drugs to explore the potential of real-world data for providing prompt feedback in clinical settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To evaluate the post-marketing safety of fast-track COVID-19 drugs, we descriptively evaluated the ADRs of four COVID-19 drugs (bebtelovimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and remdesivir) using FAERS data reported from January 2020 to June 2022. We examined FAERS case records of COVID-19 drugs reported as the \"primary suspect drug\" as a case group and the records of other drugs as the control. \"Serious adverse drug reactions (SADRs)\" were defined based on FDA guidelines. Using reporting odds ratios, disproportionality analysis was conducted to determine significant signals for ADRs related to each of the four drugs compared with those of others, both at the preferred term (PT) and system organ class (SOC) levels. To explore the occurrence of reporting each serious outcome reported to the four drugs, we fitted logistic regression models, adjusting for age and sex.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period, 5 248 221 cases were submitted to FAERS, including 17 275 cases of the four COVID-19 drugs: bebtelovimab (532 cases), molnupiravir (1106 cases), nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (9217 cases), and remdesivir (6420 cases). A total of 64, 46, 116, and 207 PTs with significant disproportionality were identified for each drug, respectively. \"Infusion-related reaction\" (18.4%), \"diarrhea\" (7.4%), \"dysgeusia\" (11.4%), and \"increased alanine aminotransferase\" (14.5%) were the most frequently reported SADRs for bebtelovimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and remdesivir, respectively. Among the 27 SOCs, statistically significant signals were observed in 10, 3, 0, and 8 SOCs for bebtelovimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and remdesivir, respectively. Remdesivir showed a higher occurrence for the reporting of death or life-threatening ADRs compared with the control (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 2.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.23-2.59; adjusted OR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.64-2.02, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We identified potential ADRs associated with COVID-19 drugs and provided insights into their real-world safety. This study demonstrated that real-world data and real-time safety reviews could be effective methods for the timely detection of ADR signals of drugs that have received fast-track approval, as exemplified by COVID-19 drugs. These findings underscore the importance of the continued surveillance, efficient data processing, and establishment of automated pipelines for real-time safety reviews.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"33 11","pages":"e70043"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70043","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) granted emergency use authorization (EUA) for multiple coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) drugs as a medical countermeasure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite these drugs' fast-track nature, concerns persist regarding their efficacy and potential adverse effects. Thus, the continuous surveillance and understanding of these drugs' safety profiles are crucial in such scenarios.

Objective: Using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, we aimed to compare the adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of four fast-track COVID-19 drugs to explore the potential of real-world data for providing prompt feedback in clinical settings.

Methods: To evaluate the post-marketing safety of fast-track COVID-19 drugs, we descriptively evaluated the ADRs of four COVID-19 drugs (bebtelovimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and remdesivir) using FAERS data reported from January 2020 to June 2022. We examined FAERS case records of COVID-19 drugs reported as the "primary suspect drug" as a case group and the records of other drugs as the control. "Serious adverse drug reactions (SADRs)" were defined based on FDA guidelines. Using reporting odds ratios, disproportionality analysis was conducted to determine significant signals for ADRs related to each of the four drugs compared with those of others, both at the preferred term (PT) and system organ class (SOC) levels. To explore the occurrence of reporting each serious outcome reported to the four drugs, we fitted logistic regression models, adjusting for age and sex.

Results: During the study period, 5 248 221 cases were submitted to FAERS, including 17 275 cases of the four COVID-19 drugs: bebtelovimab (532 cases), molnupiravir (1106 cases), nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (9217 cases), and remdesivir (6420 cases). A total of 64, 46, 116, and 207 PTs with significant disproportionality were identified for each drug, respectively. "Infusion-related reaction" (18.4%), "diarrhea" (7.4%), "dysgeusia" (11.4%), and "increased alanine aminotransferase" (14.5%) were the most frequently reported SADRs for bebtelovimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and remdesivir, respectively. Among the 27 SOCs, statistically significant signals were observed in 10, 3, 0, and 8 SOCs for bebtelovimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and remdesivir, respectively. Remdesivir showed a higher occurrence for the reporting of death or life-threatening ADRs compared with the control (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 2.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.23-2.59; adjusted OR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.64-2.02, respectively).

Conclusions: We identified potential ADRs associated with COVID-19 drugs and provided insights into their real-world safety. This study demonstrated that real-world data and real-time safety reviews could be effective methods for the timely detection of ADR signals of drugs that have received fast-track approval, as exemplified by COVID-19 drugs. These findings underscore the importance of the continued surveillance, efficient data processing, and establishment of automated pipelines for real-time safety reviews.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用 FDA 不良事件报告系统数据库调查快速通道 COVID-19 药物的安全性概况:比较观察研究
背景:美国食品和药物管理局(US FDA)批准了多种冠状病毒病 2019(COVID-19)药物的紧急使用授权(EUA),作为 COVID-19 大流行期间的医疗对策。尽管这些药物可快速使用,但人们对其疗效和潜在不良反应的担忧依然存在。因此,在这种情况下,持续监测和了解这些药物的安全性概况至关重要:利用美国食品及药物管理局不良事件报告系统(FAERS)数据库,我们旨在比较四种快速通道 COVID-19 药物的不良反应(ADRs),以探索真实世界数据在临床环境中提供及时反馈的潜力:为了评估COVID-19快速通道药物上市后的安全性,我们利用2020年1月至2022年6月期间报告的FAERS数据,描述性地评估了四种COVID-19药物(贝特罗单抗、莫鲁吡拉韦、尼伐雷韦/利托那韦和雷米地韦)的不良反应。我们研究了作为 "主要可疑药物 "报告的 COVID-19 药物的 FAERS 病例记录作为病例组,其他药物的记录作为对照组。"严重药物不良反应 (SADR)" 是根据 FDA 指南定义的。利用报告几率比,进行了不相称性分析,以确定在首选术语(PT)和系统器官分类(SOC)层面,与其他药物相比,与四种药物相关的不良反应均有显著信号。为了探讨四种药物的每种严重后果的发生率,我们建立了逻辑回归模型,并对年龄和性别进行了调整:研究期间,FAERS共收到5 248 221个病例,其中17 275个病例涉及四种COVID-19药物:贝特罗单抗(532个病例)、莫鲁吡拉韦(1106个病例)、尼伐雷韦/利托那韦(9217个病例)和雷米地韦(6420个病例)。每种药物分别共有 64 例、46 例、116 例和 207 例出现明显比例失调的 PT。"输液相关反应"(18.4%)、"腹泻"(7.4%)、"消化不良"(11.4%)和 "丙氨酸氨基转移酶升高"(14.5%)分别是贝特罗单抗、莫鲁吡韦、尼尔马特韦/利托那韦和雷米地韦最常报告的 SADR。在 27 个 SOC 中,贝特罗单抗、莫鲁吡韦、奈伐韦/利托那韦和雷米替韦分别在 10 个、3 个、0 个和 8 个 SOC 中观察到具有统计学意义的信号。与对照组相比,雷米替韦报告死亡或危及生命的不良反应的发生率更高(调整后比值比(OR)=2.44,95% 置信区间(CI)=2.23-2.59;调整后比值比(OR)=1.82,95% 置信区间(CI)=1.64-2.02):我们发现了与 COVID-19 药物相关的潜在不良反应,并深入了解了这些药物在真实世界中的安全性。这项研究表明,真实世界数据和实时安全性审查是及时发现已获快速批准药物(如 COVID-19 药物)的 ADR 信号的有效方法。这些发现强调了持续监控、高效数据处理和建立实时安全性审查自动化管道的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
173
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report. Particular areas of interest include: design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology; comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world; methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology; assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy; patterns of drug utilization; relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines; evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.
期刊最新文献
Core Concepts in Pharmacoepidemiology: Time-To-Event Analysis Approaches in Pharmacoepidemiology. Hydrochlorothiazide Use and Risk of Skin Cancer: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study. The Oncology QCARD Initiative: Fostering efficient evaluation of initial real-world data proposals. Validation Study of the Claims-Based Algorithm Using the International Classification of Diseases Codes to Identify Patients With Coronavirus Disease in Japan From 2020 to 2022: The VENUS Study. A Validated Algorithm to Identify Hepatic Decompensation in the Veterans Health Administration Electronic Health Record System.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1