Profile of adverse drug reaction reports in South Africa: An analysis of VigiBase® for the year 2017
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7196/SAMJ.2023.v113i5.16522Keywords:
adverse drug reactionAbstract
Background. The South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) monitors the safety of health products by collecting and evaluating adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports submitted by healthcare professionals, patients and pharmaceutical companies. The reports are shared with the World Health Organization (WHO) Programme for International Drug Monitoring. A demographic and clinical profile of ADR reports will improve our understanding of ADR reporting in South Africa to enhance training of reporters at all levels.
Objectives. This study describes the demographic and clinical profile of spontaneous ADR reports received by the SAHPRA during the year 2017.
Methods. A retrospective, cross-sectional study was conducted to describe all ADR reports submitted by South Africa to VigiBase®, the WHO global database of Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs), during 2017. The demographic profile included patient characteristics (age and sex), type of reporter and the vigiGrade™ completeness score for each ICSR. The clinical profile included characteristics of the case, medicine(s) and reaction(s).
Results. A total of 8 438 reports with a mean completeness score of 0.456 (SD = 0.221) were assessed. Females and males represented 61.96% and 33.05% of cases, respectively (if sex was reported). All age groups were represented; however, 76.28% involved adults (aged 19-64 years). Physicians submitted the most reports (39.66%). Consumers were the reporters in 29.39% of cases. Pharmacists submitted only 4.45% of the reports. Anti-infective medicines were the most reported Anatomical Therapeutic Class (20.08%), while Human Immunodeficiency Virus was the top indication reported (10.27%). The highest number of MedDRA preferred terms used to describe reactions belonged to the System Organ Class, general disorder and administration site conditions. In 55.87% of the reports, the cases were reported as serious and 12.47% fatal. Death was the most reported MedDRA preferred term used to describe a reaction (5.17%).
Conclusions. This was the first study that described ADR reports received by SAHPRA and improves our understanding of reporting in the country. The core clinical elements that are important in signal detection were often not included in reports. The findings demonstrated that patients were more active contributors to the national pharmacovigilance database than pharmacists. Reporters should be trained in pharmacovigilance and ADR reporting processes to increase the quantity and completeness of reports.
References
Abubakar AR, Simbak NB, Haque M. Adverse drug reactions: predisposing factors, modern classifications and causality assessment. Res J Pharm Technol 2014;7(9):1091-1098.
Alomar MJ. Factors affecting the development of adverse drug reactions (Review article). Saudi Pharm J 2014;22(2):83-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsps.2013.02.003
Goldman SA. Limitations and strengths of spontaneous reports data. Clin Ther 1998;20:C40-C44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2918(98)80007-6
Rolfes L, van Hunsel F, van der Linden L, et al. The quality of clinical information in adverse drug reaction reports by patients and healthcare professionals: a retrospective comparative analysis. Drug Saf 2017;40(7):607-614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-017-0530-5
Alomar M, Tawfiq AM, Hassan N, et al. Post marketing surveillance of suspected adverse drug reactions through spontaneous reporting: current status, challenges and the future. Ther Adv Drug Saf 2020;11:1-11. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2042098620938595
Weinshilboum R. Inheritance and drug response. N Engl J Med 2003;348(6):529-537. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra020021
World Health Organization. The importance of pharmacovigilance: safety monitoring of medicinal products. World Health Organization. 2002. (Accessed 23 September 2021). https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/42493
Paludetto M-N, Olivier-Abbal P, Montastruc J-L. Is spontaneous reporting always the most important information supporting drug withdrawals for pharmacovigilance reasons in France? Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2012;21(12):1289-1294. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.3333
Giardina C, Cutroneo PM, Mocciaro E, et al. Adverse drug reactions in hospitalised patients: results of the FORWARD (Facilitation of Reporting in Hospital Ward) Study. Front Pharmacol 2018;9:350-350. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2018.00350
World Health Organization. Safety of medicines: a guide to detecting and reporting adverse drug reactions: why health professionals need to take action. 2002. (Accessed 23 September 2021). https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/67378
Waller P, Harrison-Woolrych M. An Introduction to Pharmacovigilance. 2nd ed. Wiley; 2017.
Fornasier G, Francescon S, Leone R, et al. An historical overview over Pharmacovigilance. Int J Clin Pharm 2018;40(4):744-747. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-018-0657-1
Haque A, Daniel S, Maxwell T, et al. Postmarketing surveillance studies: an industry perspective on changing global requirements and implications. Clin Ther 2017;39(4):675-685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.03.011
Brewer T, Colditz GA. Post-marketing surveillance and adverse drug reactions: current perspectives and future needs. JAMA 1999;281(9):824-829. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.281.9.824
Bouvy JC, De Bruin ML, Koopmanschap MA. Epidemiology of adverse drug reactions in Europe: a review of recent observational studies. Drug Saf 2015;38(5):437-453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-015-0281-0
Arnaud M, Bégaud B, Thurin N, et al. Methods for safety signal detection in healthcare databases: a literature review. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2017;16(6):721-732. https://doi.org/10.1080/14740338.2017.1325463
Kumar A, Khan H. Signal detection and their assessment in pharmacovigilance. Open Pharma Sci J 2015;2:66-73. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874844901502010066
Palleria C, Leporini C, Chimirri S, et al. Limitations and obstacles of the spontaneous adverse drugs reactions reporting: two “challenging” case reports. J Pharmacol Pharmacother 2013;4(Suppl 1):S66-S72. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-500X.120955
Lester J, Neyarapally GA, Lipowski E,et al. Evaluation of FDA safety‐related drug label changes in 2010. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2013;22(3):302-305. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.3395
Mehta U, Kalk E, Boulle A, et al. Pharmacovigilance: A public health priority for South Africa. S Afr Health Rev 2017;2017:125-133.
Lindquist M. VigiBase®, the WHO Global ICSR Database System: Basic Facts. Drug Inf J 2008;42(5):409-419. https://doi.org/10.1177/009286150804200501
International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use. Post-Approval Safety Data Management: Definitions and Standards for Expedited Reporting E2D. Accessed 15 December 2019. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/E2D_Guideline.pdf
SAHPRA. 2020. Adverse drug reactions & quality problem reporting form. (Accessed 5 June 2022). https://www.sahpra.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/6.04_ARF1_v5.1_27Jan2020.pdf
SAHPRA. 2022. Adverse drug reaction and product quality reporting. (Accessed 5 June 2022). https://primaryreporting.who-umc.org/ZA
SAHPRA. 2022. MedSafety app. Accessed 5 June 2022. https://medsafety.sahpra.org.za/
Uppsala Monitoring Centre. 2022. A mine of information on potential safety risks. (Accessed 5 June 2022). https://who-umc.org/pv-products/vigiflow/#:~:text=VigiFlow%20is%20a%20web%2Dbased,triage%20and%20assessment%20of%20cases.
Alshammari TM, Al-Kathiri WaH, Louet HL,et al. Completeness of adverse drug reactions reports of the Saudi adverse event reporting system. Saudi Med J 2015;36(7):821-828. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2015.7.11751
Awodele O, Aliu R, Ali I, et al. Patterns of adverse drug reaction signals in NAFDAC pharmacovigilance activities from January to June 2015: safety of drug use in Nigeria. Pharmacol Res Perspect 2018;6(5):e00427. https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.427
Aagaard L, Strandell J, Melskens L,et al. Global patterns of adverse drug reactions over a decade. Drug Saf 2012;35(12):1171-1182. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03262002
Thiessard F, Roux E, Miremont-Salamé G, et al. Trends in spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports to the French pharmacovigilance system (1986—2001). Drug Saf 2005;28(8):731-740. https://doi.org/10.2165/00002018-200528080-00007
Kiguba R, Ndagije HB, Nambasa V, et al. Adverse drug reaction onsets in Uganda’s VigiBase®: delayed international visibility, data quality and illustrative signal detection analyses. Pharmaceut Med 2018;32(6):413-427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40290-018-0253-7
Masuka JT, Khoza S. An analysis of the trends, characteristics, scope, and performance of the Zimbabwean pharmacovigilance reporting scheme. Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2020/10/01 2020;8(5):e00657. https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.657
Bergvall T, Norén GN, Lindquist M. vigiGrade: A tool to identify well-documented individual case reports and highlight systematic data quality issues. Drug Saf 2014;37(1):65-77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-013-0131-x
Lagerlund O, Strese S, Fladvad M, et al. WHODrug: A global, validated and updated dictionary for medicinal information. Thera Innov Reg Sci 2020;54(5):1116-1122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-020-00130-6
WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology. ATC Structure and Principles. 15 February, 2018. (Accessed 1 December 2020). https://www.whocc.no/atc/structure_and_principles/
MedDRA® (Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities). MedDRA® Hierarchy. 2020. (Accessed 21 November 2020). https://www.meddra.org/how-to-use/basics/hierarchy
IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows. Version 25. 2019.
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). Reporting adverse drug reactions; definitions of terms and criteria for their use. 1999. (Accessed 20 November 2020). https://cioms.ch/publications/product/reporting-adverse-drug-reactions-definitions-of-terms-and-criteria-for-their-use/
Agu KA, Oparah AC. Adverse drug reactions to antiretroviral therapy: results from spontaneous reporting system in Nigeria. Perspect clin res 2013;4(2):117-124. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-3485.111784
Agu KA, Isah MA, Oqua D, et al. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in patients on antiretroviral therapy: a study of pharmaceutical care in HIV interventions in Nigeria. West African J Pharm 2013;24:30-42.
Ampadu HH, Hoekman J, de Bruin ML, et al. Adverse drug reaction reporting in Africa and a comparison of individual case safety report characteristics between Africa and the rest of the world: analyses of spontaneous reports in VigiBase®. Drug Saf 2016;39(4):335-345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-015-0387-4
Anebo ZG, Abacioglu N. Patterns of adverse drug reaction reporting in Ethiopia: a database analysis of spontaneous reports from 2013 to 2018. Asian Pac J Trop Med 2022;15(2):56-62. https://doi.org/10.4103/1995-7645.338436
Watson S, Caster O, Rochon PA, et al. Reported adverse drug reactions in women and men: aggregated evidence from globally collected individual case reports during half a century. E Clin Med 2019;17:e100188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2019.10.001
Hadi MA, Neoh CF, Zin RM, et al. Pharmacovigilance: pharmacists’ perspective on spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting. Integrated pharm res pract 2017;6:91-98. https://doi.org/10.2147/IPRP.S105881
Jordaan PH. Pharmacists’ perception towards pharmacovigilance and the reporting of adverse drug reactions in South Africa. Dissertation - MPharm. North-West University. 2020. https://repository.nwu.ac.za/handle/10394/34958
. Haines HM, Meyer JC, Summers RS, et al. Knowledge, attitudes and practices of health care professionals towards adverse drug reaction reporting in public sector primary health care facilities in a South African district. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2020;76(7):991-1001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-020-02862-8
Terblanche A. Pharmacovigilance and the reporting of adverse drug reactions. SA Pharm J 2018(6): 238-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548331.2017.1381013
Sienkiewicz K, Burzyńska M, Rydlewska-Liszkowska I, et al. The Importance of Direct Patient Reporting of Adverse Drug Reactions in the Safety Monitoring Process. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021;19(1):413. https://doi.org/10.3390%2Fijerph19010413
Health Action International. Direct patient reporting in the European Union: a snapshot of reporting systems in seven member states. 2015. (Accessed 22 November 2020). https://haiweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Direct-Patient-Reporting-in-the-EU.pdf
Pillay S, Mulubwa M, Viljoen M. Parental reporting of adverse drug reactions in South Africa: An online survey. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med 2021;13(1):e1-e8. https://doi.org/10.4102%2Fphcfm.v13i1.2880
Alsbou M, Abdeen G, Batarseh A, et al. Analysis of the national pharmacovigilance database in Jordan (2010-2014). Biomed Pharmacol J 2017;10:319-328. https://dx.doi.org/10.13005/bpj/1112
Ozcan G, Aykac E, Kasap Y, et al. Adverse drug reaction reporting pattern in Turkey: analysis of the national database in the context of the first pharmacovigilance legislation. Drugs Real World Outcomes 2016;3(1):33-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40801-015-0054-1
Mouton JP, Njuguna C, Kramer N, et al. Adverse drug reactions causing admission to medical wards: a cross-sectional survey at 4 hospitals in South Africa. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95(19):e3437. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000003437
Rosli R, Ming LC, Abd Aziz N,et al. A Retrospective analysis of spontaneous adverse drug reactions reports relating to paediatric patients. PLoS One 2016;11(6):e0155385. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0155385
Avert. HIV and Aids in South Africa. 3 July, 2020. (Accessed 27 November 2020). https://www.avert.org/about-hiv-aids
SAHPRA (South African Health Products Regulatory Authority). Post-marketing reporting of adverse drug reactions to human medicines in South Africa. 30 January, 2020. (Accessed 5 November 2020). https://www.sahpra.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/2.33_ADR_reporting_postmarketing_v6_Jan2020.pdf
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 H Steyn
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Licensing Information
The SAMJ is published under an Attribution-Non Commercial International Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License. Under this license, authors agree to make articles available to users, without permission or fees, for any lawful, non-commercial purpose. Users may read, copy, or re-use published content as long as the author and original place of publication are properly cited.
Exceptions to this license model is allowed for UKRI and research funded by organisations requiring that research be published open-access without embargo, under a CC-BY licence. As per the journals archiving policy, authors are permitted to self-archive the author-accepted manuscript (AAM) in a repository.
Publishing Rights
Authors grant the Publisher the exclusive right to publish, display, reproduce and/or distribute the Work in print and electronic format and in any medium known or hereafter developed, including for commercial use. The Author also agrees that the Publisher may retain in print or electronic format more than one copy of the Work for the purpose of preservation, security and back-up.
