Current state of biologic pharmacovigilance in the European Union: improvements are needed

Introduction: Pharmacovigilance is essential to monitoring the safety profiles of authorized medicines. Compared with small-molecule drugs, biological drugs are more complex, more susceptible to structural variability due to manufacturing processes, and have the potential to induce immune-related reactions, underscoring the importance of safety monitoring for these products. Although highly similar to reference products, biosimilars are not expected to be structurally identical. For these reasons, proper reporting of potential adverse drug reactions (ADRs) using distinguishable names and batch numbers is essential for accurate tracing of all biological drugs. To address the need for robust pharmacovigilance, the European Parliament and Council of the European Union provided legislation regarding pharmacovigilance of biologics in 2010.

Areas covered: This narrative review examines the current state of pharmacovigilance for biologics in the European Union (EU) and discusses relevant information on pharmacovigilance of biosimilars, the current EU pharmacovigilance system, and areas that could be improved.

Expert opinion: Although steps have been taken to improve pharmacovigilance of biologics in the EU, several enhancements can still be made, including additional training for healthcare professionals on ADR reporting, the use of 2D barcodes that enhance traceability, and an open discussion of potentially missed opportunities in the pharmacovigilance of biosimilars.     

The quality of spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports from the pharmacovigilance centre in western China

Background: High-quality adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports are essential for conducting drug safety monitoring in pharmacovigilance. The study aim was to assess the current quality of ADR reports in western China, and to identify problems with ADR report quality.

Research design and methods: A sample of 1139 reports received by the Shaanxi ADR Monitoring Center from January 2015 to December 2017 was selected. ADR report quality was evaluated using an ADR report quality evaluation system.

Results: None of the reports were rated as excellent and 1.40% (n = 16) as good. Report quality was better for new and serious reports than for general reports. Medical institutions generated higher quality reports than pharmaceutical manufacturers. Nurses generated higher quality reports than doctors, pharmacists, and other professionals. Reporters of different occupations showed significant differences in the quality of the indicators Reporting time limit, Intervention ADR time, ADR termination time, ADR intervention measures, Original disease, and Cause of medication (P = 0.000).

Conclusions: The ADR data quality was poor in western China, and of lower quality than reported data from previous research in other regions. Improvements in the quality and availability of ADR reports are urgently needed.     

Spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions in an Italian region: Six years of analysis and observations

Pharmacovigilance started in Italy in 1965, and from 1987 reporting of ADRs has been mandatory. Doctors have to send the filled forms on suspected ADRs to the Local Health Districts which transmit biannually all the reports to the Health Department. In a Northern Italian Region (Veneto) spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) has been studied during the period 1988–1993. This Region contributes a substantial percentage of the total Italian reports. The total number of reports was 3700, most of these (54 per cent) coming from GPs. A great variability in the reporting rate among the 36 districts of Veneto Region (range: 0–8.8 per 10,000 inhabitants per year) and an important under-reporting have been evident. Underreporting is also emphasized by the fact that in 1993 the Veneto doctors who sent at least one report were only 2.7 per cent. On the whole about 35 per cent of reports concerned minor reactions caused by drugs which have a well known toxicological profile. Comparison between reports coming from Veneto and the UK in some cases show a similar safety profile (omeprazole and simvastatin), whereas in other cases (e.g. terfenadine, glafenine, fluoxetine) no correspondence can be found. This article reveals the limits of the actual spontaneous reporting in Italy and suggests some possible measures for improving it.     

Pharmacy Students’ Attitudes Toward Reporting Serious Adverse Drug Events

Objectives. To determine pharmacy students’ attitude toward and knowledge of reporting serious adverse drug events (ADEs) to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).Method. A 58-item survey questionnaire constructed to measure respondents’ intention to report ADEs (3 items), attitude toward reporting ADEs (20 items), knowledge of ADE reporting (9 items), and demographic data was administered to all third-year (final-year) pharmacy students at the Appalachian College of Pharmacy.Results. The majority of the 58 students who responded (91% response rate) intended (84%) and planned (85.3%) to report serious ADEs when they encounter them. Most respondents had favorable attitudes toward reporting serious ADEs to the FDA; respondents believed that reporting serious ADEs was valuable (5.6 ± 1.5, mean ± SD), good (3.0 ± 1.7), and beneficial (5.7 ± 1.5). Many students also believed that ADE reporting resulted in increased risk of malpractice, compromised relationships with physicians, broken trust with patients, disruption of the normal workflow, and was time consuming. Many students had inadequate knowledge on reporting ADEs.Conclusion. Although pharmacy students had strong intentions and favorable attitudes toward ADE reporting, they had inadequate knowledge of how to report serious ADEs.