生物制剂治疗风湿病的药物不良反应分析——科学文献的系统综述

Q3 Medicine Revmatologiia (Bulgaria) Pub Date : 2019-12-01 DOI:10.35465/27.4.2019.pp3-17
Първова, Е. Христов, А. Рангелов, I. Parvova, E. Hristov, A. Rangelov
{"title":"生物制剂治疗风湿病的药物不良反应分析——科学文献的系统综述","authors":"Първова, Е. Христов, А. Рангелов, I. Parvova, E. Hristov, A. Rangelov","doi":"10.35465/27.4.2019.pp3-17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To analyze reports of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occurring during and after treatment of rheumatologic diseases with biological medicinal products (BMPs), published in the scientific literature; to determine the type, frequency, grade of severity and evaluate the causality with the ongoing treatment. The literature search was conducted in MEDLINE and PubMed databases for the period from November 2002 to November 2016. We found 710 publications, and 225 papers were selected for data extraction. We carried out descriptive and variational analyses as basic statistical analyses. We defined mean values, standard deviation, minimum, maximum, 95% confidence intervals. We assessed the results using PICOS instrument – population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and study design. The analyzed population included 137,564 patients with rheumatic diseases. Original articles and reviews account for the largest share of publications - 183 (81.33%). The most frequently used medicinal products were monoclonal antibodies. We found data of 284 types of ADRs. The most commonly reported ADRs were: common infections, development (activation) of tuberculosis infection, malignancies. ADRs were found in 12,979 patients, i.е. in 9,43% of the population, there was at least one ADR. Our systematic review has shown increased interest in the pharmacovigilance of biological medicinal products. The larger share of scientific publications, however, use non-standardized terminology to describe ADRs, which is not in line with the current pharmacovigilance concept. Ignorance of the notions, inaccurate and incorrect handling of scientific-regulatory terminology, and errors in ADRs reporting and publication in scientific literature do not allow for systematic reviews in this field.","PeriodicalId":38954,"journal":{"name":"Revmatologiia (Bulgaria)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of adverse drug reactions in the treatment of rheumatological diseases with biological medicinal products – a systematic review of scientific publications\",\"authors\":\"Първова, Е. Христов, А. Рангелов, I. Parvova, E. Hristov, A. Rangelov\",\"doi\":\"10.35465/27.4.2019.pp3-17\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"To analyze reports of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occurring during and after treatment of rheumatologic diseases with biological medicinal products (BMPs), published in the scientific literature; to determine the type, frequency, grade of severity and evaluate the causality with the ongoing treatment. The literature search was conducted in MEDLINE and PubMed databases for the period from November 2002 to November 2016. We found 710 publications, and 225 papers were selected for data extraction. We carried out descriptive and variational analyses as basic statistical analyses. We defined mean values, standard deviation, minimum, maximum, 95% confidence intervals. We assessed the results using PICOS instrument – population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and study design. The analyzed population included 137,564 patients with rheumatic diseases. Original articles and reviews account for the largest share of publications - 183 (81.33%). The most frequently used medicinal products were monoclonal antibodies. We found data of 284 types of ADRs. The most commonly reported ADRs were: common infections, development (activation) of tuberculosis infection, malignancies. ADRs were found in 12,979 patients, i.е. in 9,43% of the population, there was at least one ADR. Our systematic review has shown increased interest in the pharmacovigilance of biological medicinal products. The larger share of scientific publications, however, use non-standardized terminology to describe ADRs, which is not in line with the current pharmacovigilance concept. Ignorance of the notions, inaccurate and incorrect handling of scientific-regulatory terminology, and errors in ADRs reporting and publication in scientific literature do not allow for systematic reviews in this field.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38954,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revmatologiia (Bulgaria)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revmatologiia (Bulgaria)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35465/27.4.2019.pp3-17\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revmatologiia (Bulgaria)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35465/27.4.2019.pp3-17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

分析科学文献中发表的生物药物治疗风湿病期间和之后发生的药物不良反应的报告;以确定类型、频率、严重程度,并评估与正在进行的治疗的因果关系。文献检索在MEDLINE和PubMed数据库中进行,检索时间为2002年11月至2016年11月。我们发现710篇出版物,225篇论文被选中进行数据提取。我们进行了描述性和变分分析作为基本统计分析。我们定义了平均值、标准差、最小值、最大值、95%置信区间。我们使用PICOS工具评估了结果——人群、干预、比较、结果和研究设计。分析人群包括137564名风湿性疾病患者。原创文章和评论在出版物中所占份额最大,为183篇(81.33%)。最常用的药物是单克隆抗体。我们发现284种ADR的数据。最常见的不良反应报告有:常见感染、肺结核感染的发展(激活)、恶性肿瘤。在12979名患者中发现了ADR,即在9.43%的人群中,至少有一例ADR。我们的系统综述表明,人们对生物药品的药物警戒越来越感兴趣。然而,更多的科学出版物使用非标准化术语来描述ADR,这不符合当前的药物警戒概念。对概念的无知、对科学监管术语的不准确和不正确处理,以及科学文献中ADR报告和发表的错误,都不允许在该领域进行系统审查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Analysis of adverse drug reactions in the treatment of rheumatological diseases with biological medicinal products – a systematic review of scientific publications
To analyze reports of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occurring during and after treatment of rheumatologic diseases with biological medicinal products (BMPs), published in the scientific literature; to determine the type, frequency, grade of severity and evaluate the causality with the ongoing treatment. The literature search was conducted in MEDLINE and PubMed databases for the period from November 2002 to November 2016. We found 710 publications, and 225 papers were selected for data extraction. We carried out descriptive and variational analyses as basic statistical analyses. We defined mean values, standard deviation, minimum, maximum, 95% confidence intervals. We assessed the results using PICOS instrument – population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and study design. The analyzed population included 137,564 patients with rheumatic diseases. Original articles and reviews account for the largest share of publications - 183 (81.33%). The most frequently used medicinal products were monoclonal antibodies. We found data of 284 types of ADRs. The most commonly reported ADRs were: common infections, development (activation) of tuberculosis infection, malignancies. ADRs were found in 12,979 patients, i.е. in 9,43% of the population, there was at least one ADR. Our systematic review has shown increased interest in the pharmacovigilance of biological medicinal products. The larger share of scientific publications, however, use non-standardized terminology to describe ADRs, which is not in line with the current pharmacovigilance concept. Ignorance of the notions, inaccurate and incorrect handling of scientific-regulatory terminology, and errors in ADRs reporting and publication in scientific literature do not allow for systematic reviews in this field.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Revmatologiia (Bulgaria)
Revmatologiia (Bulgaria) Medicine-Rheumatology
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Taxane-induced scleroderma-like skin changes – review of the literature and case report A case of SAPHO syndrome treated with zoledronic acid and hydroxychloroquine Efficacy of rituximab in difficult to treatment patients with polymyositis Necrotizing Raynaud's phenomenon after recurrent COVID-19 infection Capillaroscopy in COVID-19
×
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