Florence van Hunsel, Joep Scholl, Misha Vrolijk, Corine Ekhart
{"title":"维生素B6膳食补充剂剂量最大化的调节作用对神经病变报告模式的影响。","authors":"Florence van Hunsel, Joep Scholl, Misha Vrolijk, Corine Ekhart","doi":"10.1002/pds.70108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vitamin B6 deficiency is linked to neurological disorders. However, supplementation with high doses of vitamin B6 has also been linked to neuropathy as an adverse drug reaction. Review of cases from the Dutch Spontaneous Reporting System (SRS) and other data led to a regulatory action to lower the maximum daily dose (DD) of vitamin B6 in supplements to 21 mg/day from October 1, 2018.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to investigate if there was an effect of the regulatory action in 2018 on maximum daily dosage for vitamin B6 on the reporting pattern of neuropathy to the SRS in the Netherlands.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We investigated trends in the number of reports received until December 31, 2023, DD mentioned in the reports, and the correlation between DD and plasma vitamin B6 levels. A change point analysis was used to get insight into the pattern of reports over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and twenty-four reports were included. After the regulatory action for dose maximization from October 2018, only one report mentions a dosage which is much higher than the recommended 21 mg DD. Only 15% of the variability in plasma levels mentioned in reports can be explained by the DD. Twelve statistical change points were noted, especially around some peaks in the reporting pattern for instance in 2018. However, from the second half of 2019, the number of reports on vitamin B6 and neuropathy per time period is lower and no change points were detected.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although our study has limitations, we clearly see an effect of regulatory action on the doses of vitamin B6 used in neuropathy reports. However, some cases describing neuropathy related to vitamin B6 supplementation with lower doses are still reported after the regulatory action in 2018. Therefore, the association between low-dose vitamin B6 products and neuropathy should be studied further.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 2","pages":"e70108"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11779544/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Regulatory Action on Dose Maximalization for Vitamin B6 Dietary Supplements on the Reporting Pattern for Neuropathy.\",\"authors\":\"Florence van Hunsel, Joep Scholl, Misha Vrolijk, Corine Ekhart\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pds.70108\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vitamin B6 deficiency is linked to neurological disorders. However, supplementation with high doses of vitamin B6 has also been linked to neuropathy as an adverse drug reaction. Review of cases from the Dutch Spontaneous Reporting System (SRS) and other data led to a regulatory action to lower the maximum daily dose (DD) of vitamin B6 in supplements to 21 mg/day from October 1, 2018.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to investigate if there was an effect of the regulatory action in 2018 on maximum daily dosage for vitamin B6 on the reporting pattern of neuropathy to the SRS in the Netherlands.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We investigated trends in the number of reports received until December 31, 2023, DD mentioned in the reports, and the correlation between DD and plasma vitamin B6 levels. A change point analysis was used to get insight into the pattern of reports over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and twenty-four reports were included. After the regulatory action for dose maximization from October 2018, only one report mentions a dosage which is much higher than the recommended 21 mg DD. Only 15% of the variability in plasma levels mentioned in reports can be explained by the DD. Twelve statistical change points were noted, especially around some peaks in the reporting pattern for instance in 2018. However, from the second half of 2019, the number of reports on vitamin B6 and neuropathy per time period is lower and no change points were detected.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although our study has limitations, we clearly see an effect of regulatory action on the doses of vitamin B6 used in neuropathy reports. However, some cases describing neuropathy related to vitamin B6 supplementation with lower doses are still reported after the regulatory action in 2018. Therefore, the association between low-dose vitamin B6 products and neuropathy should be studied further.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"volume\":\"34 2\",\"pages\":\"e70108\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11779544/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70108\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70108","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of Regulatory Action on Dose Maximalization for Vitamin B6 Dietary Supplements on the Reporting Pattern for Neuropathy.
Background: Vitamin B6 deficiency is linked to neurological disorders. However, supplementation with high doses of vitamin B6 has also been linked to neuropathy as an adverse drug reaction. Review of cases from the Dutch Spontaneous Reporting System (SRS) and other data led to a regulatory action to lower the maximum daily dose (DD) of vitamin B6 in supplements to 21 mg/day from October 1, 2018.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate if there was an effect of the regulatory action in 2018 on maximum daily dosage for vitamin B6 on the reporting pattern of neuropathy to the SRS in the Netherlands.
Methods: We investigated trends in the number of reports received until December 31, 2023, DD mentioned in the reports, and the correlation between DD and plasma vitamin B6 levels. A change point analysis was used to get insight into the pattern of reports over time.
Results: Two hundred and twenty-four reports were included. After the regulatory action for dose maximization from October 2018, only one report mentions a dosage which is much higher than the recommended 21 mg DD. Only 15% of the variability in plasma levels mentioned in reports can be explained by the DD. Twelve statistical change points were noted, especially around some peaks in the reporting pattern for instance in 2018. However, from the second half of 2019, the number of reports on vitamin B6 and neuropathy per time period is lower and no change points were detected.
Conclusions: Although our study has limitations, we clearly see an effect of regulatory action on the doses of vitamin B6 used in neuropathy reports. However, some cases describing neuropathy related to vitamin B6 supplementation with lower doses are still reported after the regulatory action in 2018. Therefore, the association between low-dose vitamin B6 products and neuropathy should be studied further.
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.