OBJECTIVE: A few case reports of central nervous system (CNS) symptoms caused by amantadine intoxication have been published, detailing various types of symptoms and differing times to onset. We encountered a patient who developed CNS symptoms with amantadine. This prompted us to investigate the types, time to onset, and outcome of CNS adverse reactions to amantadine by analyzing data from a pharmacovigilance database.
METHODS: The patient was evaluated at Chutoen General Hospital, Shizuoka, Japan. Analysis was performed using the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) database.
RESULTS: In our case, the amantadine blood concentration was 4,042 ng/ml, i.e., in the toxic range. The time to onset was 26 days for dyskinesia and 90 days for depressed level of consciousness. Symptoms resolved when amantadine was discontinued. The JADER database contained 974 cases of adverse reactions to amantadine. The most frequently reported CNS adverse reaction was hallucination, with a reporting odds ratio of 64.28 (95% confidence interval=52.67-78.46). Positive signals were detected for all CNS adverse reactions. For all CNS reactions, clinical outcomes were poor in a comparatively low percentage of cases. Most CNS reactions occurred soon after administration of amantadine, usually within approximately one month.
CONCLUSIONS: Because most CNS adverse reactions to amantadine usually occur within approximately one month of initiating treatment, healthcare providers should exercise heightened vigilance in monitoring patients for such reactions during this period.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: To mitigate safety concerns, regulatory agencies must make informed decisions regarding drug usage and adverse drug events (ADEs). The primary pharmacovigilance data stem from spontaneous reports by health care professionals. However, underreporting poses a notable challenge within the current system. Explorations into alternative sources, including electronic patient records and social media, have been undertaken. Nevertheless, social media\'s potential remains largely untapped in real-world scenarios.
OBJECTIVE: The challenge faced by regulatory agencies in using social media is primarily attributed to the absence of suitable tools to support decision makers. An effective tool should enable access to information via a graphical user interface, presenting data in a user-friendly manner rather than in their raw form. This interface should offer various visualization options, empowering users to choose representations that best convey the data and facilitate informed decision-making. Thus, this study aims to assess the potential of integrating social media into pharmacovigilance and enhancing decision-making with this novel data source. To achieve this, our objective was to develop and assess a pipeline that processes data from the extraction of web forum posts to the generation of indicators and alerts within a visual and interactive environment. The goal was to create a user-friendly tool that enables regulatory authorities to make better-informed decisions effectively.
METHODS: To enhance pharmacovigilance efforts, we have devised a pipeline comprising 4 distinct modules, each independently editable, aimed at efficiently analyzing health-related French web forums. These modules were (1) web forums\' posts extraction, (2) web forums\' posts annotation, (3) statistics and signal detection algorithm, and (4) a graphical user interface (GUI). We showcase the efficacy of the GUI through an illustrative case study involving the introduction of the new formula of Levothyrox in France. This event led to a surge in reports to the French regulatory authority.
RESULTS: Between January 1, 2017, and February 28, 2021, a total of 2,081,296 posts were extracted from 23 French web forums. These posts contained 437,192 normalized drug-ADE couples, annotated with the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) Classification and Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA). The analysis of the Levothyrox new formula revealed a notable pattern. In August 2017, there was a sharp increase in posts related to this medication on social media platforms, which coincided with a substantial uptick in reports submitted by patients to the national regulatory authority during the same period.
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that conducting quantitative analysis using the GUI is straightforward and requires no coding. The results aligned with prior research and also offered potential insights into drug-related matters. Our hypothesis received partial confirmation because the final users were not involved in the evaluation process. Further studies, concentrating on ergonomics and the impact on professionals within regulatory agencies, are imperative for future research endeavors. We emphasized the versatility of our approach and the seamless interoperability between different modules over the performance of individual modules. Specifically, the annotation module was integrated early in the development process and could undergo substantial enhancement by leveraging contemporary techniques rooted in the Transformers architecture. Our pipeline holds potential applications in health surveillance by regulatory agencies or pharmaceutical companies, aiding in the identification of safety concerns. Moreover, it could be used by research teams for retrospective analysis of events.

Due to the limitation of previous studies examining adverse reports of myocarditis and pericarditis associated with vaccines other than the COVID-19 vaccine, there are challenges in establishing a comprehensive understanding of vaccine safety on a global scale. Hence, the objective of this study was to examine the worldwide burden of vaccine-associated pericarditis and myocarditis and the vaccines associated with these indications. This study utilized the World Health Organization international pharmacovigilance database, from which records of vaccine-associated pericarditis and myocarditis between 1969 and 2023 were extracted (over 130 million reports). We calculated global reporting counts, reported odds ratios (RORs), and information components (ICs) to discern the association between 19 vaccines and the occurrence of pericarditis and myocarditis across 156 countries and territories. We identified 49 096 reports (male, n = 30 013) of vaccine-associated pericarditis and myocarditis among 73 590 reports of all-cause pericarditis and myocarditis. There has been a significant increase in reports of vaccine-related cardiac adverse events over time, with a noteworthy surge observed after 2020, attributed to cases of pericarditis associated with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Smallpox vaccines were associated with most pericarditis and myocarditis reports (ROR: 73.68 [95% CI, 67.79-80.10]; IC [IC0.25]: 6.05 [5.91]), followed by COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (37.77 [37.00-38.56]; 3.07 [3.05]), anthrax vaccine (25.54 [22.37-29.16]; 4.58 [4.35]), typhoid vaccine (6.17 [5.16-7.38]; 2.59 [2.29]), encephalitis vaccine (2.00 [1.48-2.71]; 0.99 [0.47]), influenza vaccine (1.87 [1.71-2.04]; 0.90 [0.75]), and Ad5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine (1.40 [1.34-1.46]; 0.46 [0.39]). Concerning age and sex-specific risks, reports of vaccine-associated pericarditis and myocarditis were more prevalent among males and in older age groups. The age group between 12 and 17 years exhibited significant sex disproportion. Most of these adverse events had a short time to onset (median time: 1 day) and fatality rate was 0.44%. Our analysis of global data revealed an increase in pericarditis and myocarditis reports associated with vaccines, particularly live vaccines like smallpox and anthrax, notably in young males. While these adverse events are generally rare and mild, caution is warranted, especially for healthcare workers, due to potential myocardial injury-related in-hospital mortality. Further study with validated reporting is crucial to enhance accuracy in evaluating the correlation between vaccines and cardiac conditions for preventive measures.

Adverse drug reactions are a common cause of morbidity in health care. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates individual case safety reports of adverse events (AEs) after submission to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System as part of its surveillance activities. Over the past decade, the FDA has explored the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to evaluate these reports to improve the efficiency and scientific rigor of the process. However, a gap remains between AI algorithm development and deployment. This viewpoint aims to describe the lessons learned from our experience and research needed to address both general issues in case-based reasoning using AI and specific needs for individual case safety report assessment. Beginning with the recognition that the trustworthiness of the AI algorithm is the main determinant of its acceptance by human experts, we apply the Diffusion of Innovations theory to help explain why certain algorithms for evaluating AEs at the FDA were accepted by safety reviewers and others were not. This analysis reveals that the process by which clinicians decide from case reports whether a drug is likely to cause an AE is not well defined beyond general principles. This makes the development of high performing, transparent, and explainable AI algorithms challenging, leading to a lack of trust by the safety reviewers. Even accounting for the introduction of large language models, the pharmacovigilance community needs an improved understanding of causal inference and of the cognitive framework for determining the causal relationship between a drug and an AE. We describe specific future research directions that underpin facilitating implementation and trust in AI for drug safety applications, including improved methods for measuring and controlling of algorithmic uncertainty, computational reproducibility, and clear articulation of a cognitive framework for causal inference in case-based reasoning.

BACKGROUND: Ketamine and esketamine have been proven to be effective in treating adults with treatment resistant depression (TRD). Preliminary evidence indicates that, when combined with behavioral and psychological interventions, both agents may offer benefits for individuals with substance use disorder (SUD) and alcohol use disorder (AUD). Notwithstanding, concerns have been raised as to whether either or both agents are associated with abuse and/or gateway activity.
METHODS: Herein, we evaluate disproportionate reporting expressed as reporting odds ratios (ROR) for esketamine and ketamine. The outcomes of interest include alcohol problem, alcoholism, alcohol abuse, substance dependence, SUD, substance abuse, drug dependence, drug use disorder and drug abuse as codified by the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) within the FAERS. The IC025 values were significant for ketamine in cases of alcohol abuse (0.28), substance dependence (1.88), substance use disorder (0.996), substance abuse (0.61), drug dependence (0.56), drug use disorder (1.17) and drug abuse (1.22). Additionally, oxycontin showed significant IC025 values for substance dependence (0.067), substance use disorder (0.094), substance abuse (0.035), and drug dependence (0.27).
RESULTS: We observed significant increases in the reporting odds ratios (RORs) for ketamine with respect to various outcomes: alcohol abuse (ROR 2.84, 95 % CI 1.53-5.28; p = 0.0010), substance dependence (ROR 18.72, 95 % CI 8.49-41.30; p ≤ 0.0001), SUD (ROR 11.40, 95 % CI 4.24-30.65; p ≤ 0.0001), substance abuse (ROR 2.29, 95 % CI 1.73-3.04; p ≤ 0.0001), drug dependence (ROR 1.99, 95 % CI 1.64-2.42; p ≤ 0.0001), drug use disorder (ROR 4.50, 2.94-6.88; p ≤ 0.0001) and drug abuse (ROR 3.72, 3.36-4.12; p ≤ 0.0001). For esketamine, we observed that the ROR was significantly reduced for substance abuse (ROR 0.37, 95 % CI 0.22-0.63; p = 0.0003), drug dependence (ROR 0.13, 95 % CI 0.076-0.23; p ≤ 0.0001) and drug abuse (ROR 0.048, 95 % CI 0.030-0.078; p ≤ 0.0001). To our knowledge, this is the first report of spontaneous adverse events related to these outcomes of interest in the FAERS.
CONCLUSIONS: Mixed RORs were observed across aspects of SUD and AUD for both ketamine and esketamine. Due to limitations in the FAERS, establishing causal links between new onset alcohol and substance misuse with either agent remains inconclusive. Possible beneficial effects on measures of SUD and AUD were observed. It is currently unclear, but possible, whether both agents have differential ameliorative effects across dimensions of SUD and AUD, which is a focus of ongoing research.

UNASSIGNED: The study aims to obtain the real-world safety profile of tetracyclines in children younger than 8 years old and provide reference for clinical drug applications.
UNASSIGNED: We made a disproportionality analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database through OpenVigil 2 and conducted a review of case reports regarding adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of tetracyclines in children younger than 8-year-old.
UNASSIGNED: FAERS analysis identified 32 ADRs of tetracyclines in children younger than 8-year-old. Respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders contained the most frequent ADRs among all system organ classes (SOCs). The top three positive signals with the highest proportional reporting ratio (PRR) were laryngeal injury, Horner\'s syndrome and methaemoglobinaemia. Sixteen published tetracyclines-associated cases in children younger than 8-year-old were identified in the literature, concentrating in three SOCs. Gastrointestinal disorders were the most commonly reported cases (n = 12).
UNASSIGNED: Several ADRs were newly reported only in children younger than 8-year-old in our research, including Horner\'s syndrome and methemoglobinemia. We recommended that the clinical practitioners should pay attention to the ADRs both in instruction and beyond the label. Take close care of children and timely intervene when the treatment is inevitable.

OBJECTIVE: The ORAL Surveillance trial, a postmarketing safety clinical trial, found an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients treated with Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors compared to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. However, additional studies yielded mixed results and data on other JAK inhibitors are limited.
METHODS: A retrospective, pharmacovigilance study using the FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) to assess reporting of adverse cardiovascular events following treatment with JAK inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients between January 2015 and June 2023. To identify disproportionately increased reporting, an adjusted reporting odds ratio (adj.ROR) was calculated with a multivariable logistic regression model.
RESULTS: We identified safety reports of 75,407 RA patients treated with JAK inhibitors (tofacitinib, n = 52,181; upadacitinib, n = 21,006; baricitinib, n = 2,220) and 303,278 patients treated with biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs; TNF inhibitors, rituximab, and tocilizumab). The mean age was 61.2(±12) and 59.0(±13), respectively; 82 % and 81 % were women. Compared to bDMARDs, JAK inhibitors were associated with an increased reporting of VTE [n = 1,393, adj.ROR=2.11 (1.97-2.25)], stroke [n = 973, adj.ROR=1.25 (1.16-1.34)], ischemic heart disease [IHD, n = 999, adj.ROR=1.23 (1.13-1.33)], peripheral edema [n = 2699, adj.ROR=1.22 (1.17-1.28)], and tachyarrhythmias [n = 370, adj.ROR=1.15 (1.00-1.33)]. Most of the events occurred in the first year after treatment initiation. When different JAK inhibitors were compared, VTE, stroke, and IHD were more frequently reported with upadacitinib and baricitinib than tofacitinib. When stratified by age category, all safety signals were statistically significant in patients aged≤65 years.
CONCLUSIONS: In this global postmarketing study, JAK inhibitors are associated with increased reporting of VTE, stroke, IHD, and tachyarrhythmias. These adverse events were reported following all JAK inhibitors that were studied, suggesting a class effect.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacovigilance systems such as the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), are established models for adverse event surveillance that may have been missed during clinical trials. We aimed to analyze twenty-five anti-seizure medications (ASMs) in FAERS to assess for increased reporting of suicidal and self-injurious behavior.
METHODS: Twenty-five ASMs were analyzed: brivaracetam, cannabidiol, carbamazepine, clobazam, clonazepam, diazepam, eslicarbazepine, felbamate, gabapentin, lacosamide, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, perampanel, phenobarbital, phenytoin, pregabalin, primidone, rufinamide, stiripentol, tiagabine, topiramate, valproate, vigabatrin, zonisamide. Reports of \"suicidal and self-injurious behavior\" were collected from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2020, using OpenVigil 2.1 tool with indication as \"Epilepsy\". Relative reporting ratio, proportional reporting ratio, and reporting odds ratio were calculated utilizing all other drug reports for epilepsy patients as a control.
RESULTS: Significant relative operating ratio, ROR (greater than 1, p<0.05) were observed for diazepam (2.909), pregabalin (2.739), brivaracetam (2.462), gabapentin (2.185), clonazepam (1.649), zonisamide (1.462), lacosamide (1.333), and levetiracetam (1.286).
CONCLUSIONS: Of the 25 ASMs that were analyzed in this study, 4 (16%) were identified to have been linked with a likely true adverse event. These drugs included diazepam, brivaracetam, gabapenetin, and pregabalin. Although several limitations are present with the FAERS database, it is imperative to closely monitor patient comorbidities for increased risk of suicidality with the use of several ASMs.

In pharmacovigilance, disproportionality analyses based on individual case safety reports are widely used to detect safety signals. Unfortunately, publishing disproportionality analyses lacks specific guidelines, often leading to incomplete and ambiguous reporting, and carries the risk of incorrect conclusions when data are not placed in the correct context. The REporting of A Disproportionality analysis for drUg Safety signal detection using individual case safety reports in PharmacoVigilance (READUS-PV) statement was developed to address this issue by promoting transparent and comprehensive reporting of disproportionality studies. While the statement paper explains in greater detail the procedure followed to develop these guidelines, with this explanation paper we present the 14 items retained for READUS-PV guidelines, together with an in-depth explanation of their rationale and bullet points to illustrate their practical implementation. Our primary objective is to foster the adoption of the READUS-PV guidelines among authors, editors, peer reviewers, and readers of disproportionality analyses. Enhancing transparency, completeness, and accuracy of reporting, as well as proper interpretation of their results, READUS-PV guidelines will ultimately facilitate evidence-based decision making in pharmacovigilance.