Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Im April diskutierten die Herz-Kreislauf-Spezialisten aus der ganzen Welt auf dem  Kongress des American College of Cardiology (ACC) u.a. neue Therapieansätze bei akutem Myokardinfarkt, koronarer Herzerkrankung, kardiogenem Schock oder Aortenklappenstenose. In unserem Kongress-Dossier haben wir für Sie Berichte über die „Late-Breaking Trials“ und andere wichtige Studien zusammengestellt. 
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
BioDrugs
Erschienen in: BioDrugs 4/2018

01.08.2018 | Original Research Article

Safety of Biologics Approved for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Other Autoimmune Diseases: A Disproportionality Analysis from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)

verfasst von: Ariane G. S. Araujo, Helena H. L. Borba, Fernanda S. Tonin, Luana Lenzi, Rafael Venson, Roberto Pontarolo, Astrid Wiens

Erschienen in: BioDrugs | Ausgabe 4/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

The molecular and pharmacological complexity of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs used for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) favors the occurrence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), which should be constantly monitored in post-marketing safety studies.

Objective

The aim of this study was to identify signals of disproportionate reporting (SDR) of clinical relevance related to the use of biologic drugs approved for RA and other autoimmune diseases.

Methods

All suspected ADRs registered in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System between January 2003 and June 2016 were collected. The reporting odds ratio was used as a measure of disproportionality to identify possible SDRs related to biologics. Those involving important medical events and designated medical events (DME) were prioritized.

Results

In total, 2602 SDRs were prioritized. The most commonly reported were ‘Infections and infestations’ (32.2%) and ‘Neoplasms benign, malignant, and unspecified’ (20.4%), and were mainly related to use of infliximab (25.3%, p < 0.001, and 28.8%, p = 0.002, respectively). Sixty-three signals involving DMEs were identified, most of which were related to rituximab (n = 27), and were mainly due to ‘blood disorders’. Amongst the DMEs detected for more than one biologic, ‘intestinal perforation’ and ‘pulmonary fibrosis’ were related to most of them.

Conclusions

The results of this study highlight possible safety issues associated with biologics, whose relationship should be more thoroughly investigated. Our results contribute to future research on the identification of clinically relevant risks associated with these drugs, and may help contribute to their rational and safe use.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Smolen JS, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(6):960–77.CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Patel H, Lissoos T, Rubin DT. Indicators of suboptimal biologic therapy over time in patients with ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease in the United States. PLoS One. 2017;12(4):e0175099.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Jabbar-Lopez ZK, et al. Quantitative evaluation of biologic therapy options for psoriasis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Invest Dermatol. 2017;137(8):1646–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Palmer JB, et al. Treatment patterns and costs for anti-TNFalpha biologic therapy in patients with psoriatic arthritis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016;17:261.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Singh JA, et al. Adverse effects of biologics: a network meta-analysis and Cochrane overview. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;2:Cd008794.
7.
Verhoef LM, et al. bDMARD dose reduction in rheumatoid arthritis: a narrative review with systematic literature search. Rheumatol Ther. 2017;4(1):1–24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Woodrick RS, Ruderman EM. Safety of biologic therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2011;7(11):639–52.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Giezen TJ, et al. Mapping the safety profile of biologicals: a disproportionality analysis using the WHO adverse drug reaction database, VigiBase. Drug Saf. 2010;33(10):865–78.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Coloma PM, et al. Postmarketing safety surveillance : where does signal detection using electronic healthcare records fit into the big picture? Drug Saf. 2013;36(3):183–97.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Hauben M, Aronson JK. Defining ‘signal’ and its subtypes in pharmacovigilance based on a systematic review of previous definitions. Drug Saf. 2009;32(2):99–110.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Hauben M, et al. The role of data mining in pharmacovigilance. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2005;4(5):929–48.CrossRefPubMed
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Singh JA, et al. 2015 American College of Rheumatology guideline for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016;68(1):1–26.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Smolen JS, et al. Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: 2014 update of the recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75(1):3–15.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Wong CK, et al. Standardisation of the FAERS database: a systematic approach to manually recoding drug name variants. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2015;24(7):731–7.CrossRefPubMed
24.
25.
26.
Hubbard RE, O’Mahony MS, Woodhouse KW. Medication prescribing in frail older people. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;69(3):319–26.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Cunningham G. Adverse drug reactions in the elderly and their prevention. Scott Med J. 1997;42(5):136–7.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Cutroneo PM, et al. Safety profile of biological medicines as compared with non-biologicals: an analysis of the italian spontaneous reporting system database. Drug Saf. 2014;37(11):961–70.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Hernández MV, Meineri M, Sanmartí R. Lesiones cutáneas y terapia biológica con antagonistas del factor de necrosis tumoral. Reumatología Clínica. 2013;9(1):53–61.CrossRefPubMed
30.
31.
Seabroke S, et al. Performance of stratified and subgrouped disproportionality analyses in spontaneous databases. Drug Saf. 2016;39(4):355–64.CrossRefPubMed
32.
van Puijenbroek EP, et al. A comparison of measures of disproportionality for signal detection in spontaneous reporting systems for adverse drug reactions. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2002;11(1):3–10.CrossRefPubMed
33.
34.
35.
Mendes D, Alves C, Batel-Marques F. Safety profiles of adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab: a pharmacovigilance study using a measure of disproportionality in a database of spontaneously reported adverse events. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2014;39(3):307–13.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Giezen TJ, et al. Evaluation of post-authorization safety studies in the first cohort of EU Risk Management Plans at time of regulatory approval. Drug Saf. 2009;32(12):1175–87.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Poluzzi E, et al. Data mining techniques in pharmacovigilance: analysis of the publicly accessible FDA adverse event reporting system (AERS). In: Karahoca, editor. Data mining applications in engineering and medicine. Croatia: InTech; 2012. p. 265–302.
38.
Codreanu C, Damjanov N. Safety of biologics in rheumatoid arthritis: data from randomized controlled trials and registries. Biol Targets Ther. 2015;9:1–6.
39.
Dixit R, et al. Challenges of general safety evaluations of biologics compared to small molecule pharmaceuticals in animal models. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2010;5(1):79–94.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Giezen TJ, Mantel-Teeuwisse AK, Leufkens HG. Pharmacovigilance of biopharmaceuticals: challenges remain. Drug Saf. 2009;32(10):811–7.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Giezen TJ, et al. Safety-related regulatory actions for biologicals approved in the United States and the European Union. Jama. 2008;300(16):1887–96.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Mota LMHD, et al. Segurança do uso de terapias biológicas para o tratamento de artrite reumatoide e espondiloartrites. Revista Brasileira de Reumatologia. 2015;55:281–309.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Gottlieb AB. Tumor necrosis factor blockade: mechanism of action. J Investig Dermatol Symp Proc. 2007;12(1):1–4.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Silva LC, Ortigosa LC, Benard G. Anti-TNF-alpha agents in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: mechanisms of action and pitfalls. Immunotherapy. 2010;2(6):817–33.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Mitoma H, et al. Molecular mechanisms of action of anti-TNF-alpha agents—comparison among therapeutic TNF-alpha antagonists. Cytokine. 2016;101:56–63.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Wallis RS, et al. Granulomatous infectious diseases associated with tumor necrosis factor antagonists. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38(9):1261–5.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Raaschou P, et al. Rheumatoid arthritis, anti-tumour necrosis factor treatment, and risk of squamous cell and basal cell skin cancer: cohort study based on nationwide prospectively recorded data from Sweden. BMJ. 2016;352:i262.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
48.
Wolfe F, Michaud K. Biologic treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of malignancy: analyses from a large US observational study. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;56(9):2886–95.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Lapeyre-Mestre M, et al. Pharmacoepidemiology studies: what levels of evidence and how can they be reached? Therapie. 2013;68(4):241–52.CrossRefPubMed
50.
van Vollenhoven RF, et al. Longterm safety of rituximab: final report of the rheumatoid arthritis global clinical trial program over 11 years. J Rheumatol. 2015;42(10):1761–6.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Kasi PM, et al. Clinical review: serious adverse events associated with the use of rituximab—a critical care perspective. Critical Care. 2012;16(4):231.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
52.
Alomar MJ. Factors affecting the development of adverse drug reactions (Review article). Saudi Pharm J. 2014;22(2):83–94.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Bohra C, Sokol L, Dalia S. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy and monoclonal antibodies: a review. Cancer Control. 2017;24(4):1073274817729901.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
54.
Bate A, Evans SJ. Quantitative signal detection using spontaneous ADR reporting. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2009;18(6):427–36.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Michel C, et al. Can disproportionality analysis of post-marketing case reports be used for comparison of drug safety profiles? Clin Drug Investig. 2017;37(5):415–22.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Downey C. Serious infection during etanercept, infliximab and adalimumab therapy for rheumatoid arthritis: a literature review. Int J Rheum Dis. 2016;19(6):536–50.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Berghen N, et al. Malignancies and anti-TNF therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: a single-center observational cohort study. Clin Rheumatol. 2015;34(10):1687–95.CrossRefPubMed
58.
59.
Solomon DH, Mercer E, Kavanaugh A. Observational studies on the risk of cancer associated with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: a review of their methodologies and results. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64(1):21–32.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
60.
Mok CC. Rituximab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: an update. Drug Des Dev Ther. 2013;8:87–100.CrossRef
61.
62.
Rodrigues S, et al. Autoimmune hepatitis and anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha therapy: a single center report of 8 cases. World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21(24):7584–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
63.
Mourad AA, et al. Adverse reactions to infliximab and the outcome of desensitization. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2015;115(2):143–6.CrossRefPubMed
64.
Flaig T, et al. Tocilizumab-induced pancreatitis: case report and review of data from the FDA adverse event reporting system. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2016;41(6):718–21.CrossRefPubMed
65.
Strangfeld A, et al. Risk for lower intestinal perforations in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with tocilizumab in comparison to treatment with other biologic or conventional synthetic DMARDs. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(3):504–10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
66.
Roubille C, Haraoui B. Interstitial lung diseases induced or exacerbated by DMARDS and biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2014;43(5):613–26.CrossRefPubMed
67.
Hammond IW, et al. Database size and power to detect safety signals in pharmacovigilance. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2007;6(6):713–21.CrossRefPubMed
68.
van der Heijden PG, et al. On the assessment of adverse drug reactions from spontaneous reporting systems: the influence of under-reporting on odds ratios. Stat Med. 2002;21(14):2027–44.CrossRefPubMed
69.
Blenkinsopp A, et al. Patient reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions: a review of published literature and international experience. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;63(2):148–56.CrossRefPubMed
70.
van Grootheest K, et al. Pharmacists’ role in reporting adverse drug reactions in an international perspective. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2004;13(7):457–64.CrossRefPubMed
71.
Hadi MA, et al. Pharmacovigilance: pharmacists’ perspective on spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting. Integr Pharm Res Pract. 2017;6:91–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
72.
73.
Hazell L, Shakir SA. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions : a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2006;29(5):385–96.CrossRefPubMed
74.
75.
Hartnell NR, Wilson JP. Replication of the Weber effect using postmarketing adverse event reports voluntarily submitted to the United States Food and Drug Administration. Pharmacotherapy. 2004;24(6):743–9.CrossRefPubMed
76.
Hoffman KB, et al. The Weber effect and the United States Food and Drug Administration’s adverse event reporting system (FAERS): analysis of sixty-two drugs approved from 2006 to 2010. Drug Saf. 2014;37(4):283–94.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
77.
Pariente A, et al. Impact of safety alerts on measures of disproportionality in spontaneous reporting databases: the notoriety bias. Drug Saf. 2007;30(10):891–8.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Safety of Biologics Approved for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Other Autoimmune Diseases: A Disproportionality Analysis from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)
verfasst von
Ariane G. S. Araujo
Helena H. L. Borba
Fernanda S. Tonin
Luana Lenzi
Rafael Venson
Roberto Pontarolo
Astrid Wiens
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2018
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
BioDrugs / Ausgabe 4/2018
Print ISSN: 1173-8804
Elektronische ISSN: 1179-190X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40259-018-0285-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2018

BioDrugs 4/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Current Opinion

The End of Phase 3 Clinical Trials in Biosimilars Development?

Review Article

Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibodies to Complex Membrane Protein Targets: Antigen Generation and Antibody Discovery Strategies

AdisInsight Report

Pegvaliase: First Global Approval

Leading Article

Indoleamine 2,3-Dioxygenase (IDO) Inhibition as a Strategy to Augment Cancer Immunotherapy

Review Article

Regenerative Therapies for Parkinson’s Disease: An Update

Current Opinion

Determination of Similarity Margin in Comparative Clinical Studies to Support the Development of Biosimilar Products of Neupogen® (Filgrastim, Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor [G-CSF])