{"title":"用于监测抗病毒药物不良事件的主动药物警戒策略比较:系统回顾。","authors":"Renato Ferreira-da-Silva, Joana Reis-Pardal, Manuela Pinto, Matilde Monteiro-Soares, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto, Manuela Morato, Jorge Junqueira Polónia, Inês Ribeiro-Vaz","doi":"10.1007/s40264-024-01470-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The safety of antiviral agents in real-world clinical settings is crucial, as pre-marketing studies often do not capture all adverse events (AE). Active pharmacovigilance strategies are essential for detecting and characterising these AE comprehensively.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to identify and characterise active pharmacovigilance strategies used in real-world clinical settings for patients under systemic antiviral agents, focusing on the frequency of AE and the clinical data sources used.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review by searching three electronic bibliographic databases targeting observational prospective active pharmacovigilance studies, phase IV clinical trials for post-marketing safety surveillance, and interventional studies assessing active pharmacovigilance strategies, focusing on individuals exposed to systemic antiviral agents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 36 primary studies, predominantly using Drug Event Monitoring (DEM), with a minority employing sentinel sites and registries. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) was the most common condition, with the majority using DEM. Within the DEM, there was a wide range of incidences of patients experiencing at least one AE, and most of these studies used one or two data sources. Sentinel site studies were less common, with two on hepatitis C virus (HCV) and one on HIV, each relying on one or two data sources. The single study using a registry focusing on HIV therapy reported using just one data source. Patient interviews were the most common data source, followed by medical records and laboratory tests. The quality of the studies was considered 'good' in 18/36, 'fair' in 1/36, and 'poor' in 17/36 studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DEM was the predominant pharmacovigilance strategy, employing multiple data sources, and appears to increase the likelihood of detecting higher AE incidence. Establishing such a framework would facilitate a more detailed and consistent approach across different studies and settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":11382,"journal":{"name":"Drug Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of Active Pharmacovigilance Strategies Used to Monitor Adverse Events to Antiviral Agents: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Renato Ferreira-da-Silva, Joana Reis-Pardal, Manuela Pinto, Matilde Monteiro-Soares, Bernardo Sousa-Pinto, Manuela Morato, Jorge Junqueira Polónia, Inês Ribeiro-Vaz\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40264-024-01470-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The safety of antiviral agents in real-world clinical settings is crucial, as pre-marketing studies often do not capture all adverse events (AE). Active pharmacovigilance strategies are essential for detecting and characterising these AE comprehensively.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to identify and characterise active pharmacovigilance strategies used in real-world clinical settings for patients under systemic antiviral agents, focusing on the frequency of AE and the clinical data sources used.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review by searching three electronic bibliographic databases targeting observational prospective active pharmacovigilance studies, phase IV clinical trials for post-marketing safety surveillance, and interventional studies assessing active pharmacovigilance strategies, focusing on individuals exposed to systemic antiviral agents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 36 primary studies, predominantly using Drug Event Monitoring (DEM), with a minority employing sentinel sites and registries. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) was the most common condition, with the majority using DEM. Within the DEM, there was a wide range of incidences of patients experiencing at least one AE, and most of these studies used one or two data sources. Sentinel site studies were less common, with two on hepatitis C virus (HCV) and one on HIV, each relying on one or two data sources. The single study using a registry focusing on HIV therapy reported using just one data source. Patient interviews were the most common data source, followed by medical records and laboratory tests. The quality of the studies was considered 'good' in 18/36, 'fair' in 1/36, and 'poor' in 17/36 studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DEM was the predominant pharmacovigilance strategy, employing multiple data sources, and appears to increase the likelihood of detecting higher AE incidence. Establishing such a framework would facilitate a more detailed and consistent approach across different studies and settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drug Safety\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-024-01470-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-024-01470-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Comparison of Active Pharmacovigilance Strategies Used to Monitor Adverse Events to Antiviral Agents: A Systematic Review.
Introduction: The safety of antiviral agents in real-world clinical settings is crucial, as pre-marketing studies often do not capture all adverse events (AE). Active pharmacovigilance strategies are essential for detecting and characterising these AE comprehensively.
Objective: The aim of this study was to identify and characterise active pharmacovigilance strategies used in real-world clinical settings for patients under systemic antiviral agents, focusing on the frequency of AE and the clinical data sources used.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review by searching three electronic bibliographic databases targeting observational prospective active pharmacovigilance studies, phase IV clinical trials for post-marketing safety surveillance, and interventional studies assessing active pharmacovigilance strategies, focusing on individuals exposed to systemic antiviral agents.
Results: We included 36 primary studies, predominantly using Drug Event Monitoring (DEM), with a minority employing sentinel sites and registries. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) was the most common condition, with the majority using DEM. Within the DEM, there was a wide range of incidences of patients experiencing at least one AE, and most of these studies used one or two data sources. Sentinel site studies were less common, with two on hepatitis C virus (HCV) and one on HIV, each relying on one or two data sources. The single study using a registry focusing on HIV therapy reported using just one data source. Patient interviews were the most common data source, followed by medical records and laboratory tests. The quality of the studies was considered 'good' in 18/36, 'fair' in 1/36, and 'poor' in 17/36 studies.
Conclusion: DEM was the predominant pharmacovigilance strategy, employing multiple data sources, and appears to increase the likelihood of detecting higher AE incidence. Establishing such a framework would facilitate a more detailed and consistent approach across different studies and settings.
期刊介绍:
Drug Safety is the official journal of the International Society of Pharmacovigilance. The journal includes:
Overviews of contentious or emerging issues.
Comprehensive narrative reviews that provide an authoritative source of information on epidemiology, clinical features, prevention and management of adverse effects of individual drugs and drug classes.
In-depth benefit-risk assessment of adverse effect and efficacy data for a drug in a defined therapeutic area.
Systematic reviews (with or without meta-analyses) that collate empirical evidence to answer a specific research question, using explicit, systematic methods as outlined by the PRISMA statement.
Original research articles reporting the results of well-designed studies in disciplines such as pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacovigilance, pharmacology and toxicology, and pharmacogenomics.
Editorials and commentaries on topical issues.
Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in Drug Safety Drugs may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.