Pharmacovigilance And Drug-Induced Toxicities: A Clinical Perspective

Year : 2024 | Volume : 14 | Issue : 03 | Page : 17 30
    By

    Robin Sijo,

  • Jenefa Melcy,

  • Kamalesh,

  • Shivani,

  • Jagath,

  1. PharmD Intern, Department of Pharmacy, Cherraan’s College of Pharmacy, Tamil Nadu, India
  2. PharmD Intern, Department of Pharmacy, Cherraan’s College of Pharmacy, Tamil Nadu, India
  3. PharmD Intern, Department of Pharmacy, Cherraan’s College of Pharmacy, Tamil Nadu, India
  4. PharmD Intern, Department of Pharmacy, Cherraan’s College of Pharmacy, Tamil Nadu, India
  5. PharmD Intern, Department of Pharmacy, Cherraan’s College of Pharmacy, Tamil Nadu, India

Abstract

Pharmacovigilance, which aims to detect, assess, and prevent medication-induced toxicities and adverse drug reactions (ADRs), is a crucial part of healthcare. This study examines the several kinds of drug-induced toxicities, such as idiosyncratic, dose-dependent, and allergic reactions, and emphasizes the function of clinical pharmacists in the tracking and treatment of these illnesses. Pharmacovigilance systems are crucial because they can identify and handle drug-related safety issues that might not surface during clinical trials. This is especially true in the post-marketing phase. One important component of tailoring medication treatments to reduce adverse drug reactions is pharmacogenetics, which focuses on genetic variations influencing drug metabolism. Drug interactions with other drugs and how they affect toxicities are also looked at. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning are examples of technological breakthroughs that are positioned by automating data analysis and forecasting possible toxicities, you can transform ADR detection. International cooperation and real-time monitoring systems are essential for improving pharmacovigilance initiatives globally and guaranteeing prompt ADR reporting and handling. The need for proactive pharmacovigilance strategies to enhance patient safety, maximize therapeutic outcomes, and save healthcare costs is highlighted by this research. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning represent transformative advancements that enhance pharmacovigilance by automating data analysis and predicting potential adverse drug reactions (ADRs). By leveraging these technologies, the detection of ADRs can be significantly improved, facilitating timely responses and interventions. Moreover, fostering international collaboration and establishing real-time monitoring systems are critical for bolstering global pharmacovigilance efforts, ensuring that ADRs are reported and managed promptly. This research underscores the necessity of adopting proactive pharmacovigilance strategies to enhance patient safety, optimize therapeutic outcomes, and reduce healthcare costs, ultimately leading to more effective healthcare delivery and improved public health outcomes.

Keywords: Pharmacovigilance, Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs), Pharmacogenetics, Drug-Induced Toxicities, Patient Safety

[This article belongs to Research and Reviews: A Journal of Toxicology ]

How to cite this article:
Robin Sijo, Jenefa Melcy, Kamalesh, Shivani, Jagath. Pharmacovigilance And Drug-Induced Toxicities: A Clinical Perspective. Research and Reviews: A Journal of Toxicology. 2024; 14(03):17-30.
How to cite this URL:
Robin Sijo, Jenefa Melcy, Kamalesh, Shivani, Jagath. Pharmacovigilance And Drug-Induced Toxicities: A Clinical Perspective. Research and Reviews: A Journal of Toxicology. 2024; 14(03):17-30. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/rrjot/article=2024/view=190422


References

  1. World Health Organization. Pharmacovigilance. [Internet]. Available from: https://www.who.int/activities/pharmacovigilance
  2. Edwards IR, Aronson JK. Adverse drug reactions: definitions, diagnosis, and management. Lancet. 2000 Sep 16;356(9237):1251–6.
  3. Davies LE, Spiers G, Kingston A, Todd A, Adamson J, Hanratty B. Adverse outcomes of polypharmacy in older people: systematic review of reviews. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020 Feb;21(2):181–7.
  4. Andrade RJ, Chalasani N, Björnsson ES, et al. Drug-induced liver injury. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2019 Mar 21;5(1):58.
  5. Eid M, Alotaybi J, Alanazi MA, Hadadi SM, Alanazi K, Alotaibi AT. The role of clinical pharmacy in improving medication management within the primary care team. [Internet]. Available from: https://mavink.com
  6. Maclure M. The case-crossover design: a method for studying transient exposures. Annu Rev Public Health. 1991; 12:331–53.
  7. Pharmacovigilance system flow chart. Mavink.com [Internet]. 2023. Available from: https://mavink.com/pharmacovigilance-system
  8. Chidiac AS, Buckley NA, Noghrehchi F, Cairns R. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) overdose and hepatotoxicity: mechanism, treatment, prevention measures, and estimates of burden of disease. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2023 May;19(5):297–317.
  9. Leeder JS. Mechanisms of idiosyncratic hypersensitivity reactions to antiepileptic drugs. Epilepsia. 1998;39 Suppl 7–12.
  10. Casimir-Brown RS, Kennard L, Kayode OS, Siew LQC, Makris M, Tsilochristou O, et al. Piperacillin-Tazobactam hypersensitivity: a large, multicenter analysis. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021 May;9(5):2001–9.
  11. Travis LB, Gospodarowicz M, Curtis RE, Clarke EA, Andersson M, Glimelius B, et al. Lung cancer following chemotherapy and radiotherapy for Hodgkin’s disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002 Feb 6;94(3):182–92.
  12. Vargesson N. Thalidomide-induced teratogenesis: history and mechanisms. Birth Defects Res C Embryo Today. 2015 Jun;105(2):140–56.
  13. Domper Arnal MJ, Hijos-Mallada G, Lanas A. Gastrointestinal and cardiovascular adverse events associated with NSAIDs. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2022 Mar;21(3):373–84.
  14. Khairnar SI, Kulkarni YA, Singh K. Cardiotoxicity linked to anticancer agents and cardioprotective strategy. Arch Pharm Res. 2022 Oct;45(10):704–30.
  15. Zhao L, Zhang B. Doxorubicin induces cardiotoxicity through upregulation of death receptors mediated apoptosis in cardiomyocytes. Sci Rep. 2017 Dec 15;7(1):44735.
  16. Gitlin M. Lithium side effects and toxicity: prevalence and management strategies. Int J Bipolar Disord. 2016 Jan;4(1):27.
  17. Zaccara G, Franciotta D, Perucca E. Idiosyncratic adverse reactions to antiepileptic drugs. Epilepsia. 2007 Jul;48(7):1223–44.
  18. Shrestha O, Pant P, Devkota N, Gurung D, Shrestha DB. Carbamazepine-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis and Stevens-Johnson syndrome overlapping during pregnancy in a South-East Asian patient: a case report. Ann Med Surg. 2021 Aug; 68:102624.
  19. Thompson PD, Clarkson P, Karas RH. Statin-associated myopathy. JAMA. 2003 Apr 2;289(13):1681–90.
  20. Rowland M, Tozer TN. Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: concepts and applications. 4th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2011.
  21. Eichelbaum M, Ingelman-Sundberg M, Evans WE. Pharmacogenomics and individualized drug therapy. Annu Rev Med. 2006; 57:119–37.
  22. Roberts AG, Gibbs ME. Mechanisms and the clinical relevance of complex drug-drug interactions. Clin Pharmacol. 2018 Sep 27; 10:123–34.
  23. World Health Organization. The safety of medicines in public health programmes: pharmacovigilance an essential tool. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2006. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/9241593915
  24. Singh P, Vaishnav Y, Verma S. Development of pharmacovigilance system in India and paradigm of pharmacovigilance research: an overview. Curr Drug Saf. 2023;18(4):448–64.
  25. S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Public Dashboard. [Internet]. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/questions-and-answers-fdas-adverse-event-reporting-system-faers/fda-adverse-event-reporting-system-faers-public-dashboard
  26. Endrikat J, Vogtlaender K, Dohanish S, Balzer T, Breuer J. Safety of gadobutrol: results from 42 clinical phase II to IV studies and postmarketing surveillance after 29 million applications. Invest Radiol. 2016 Sep;51(9):537–43.
  27. Hazell L, Shakir SAW. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2006 May;29(5):385–96.
  28. European Medicines Agency. EudraVigilance system overview. 2016. Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory/research-development/pharmacovigilance/eudravigilance
  29. VigiBase: WHO’s global database. Uppsala Monitoring Centre [Internet]. Available from: https://www.who-umc.org/global-pharmacovigilance/vigibase/
  30. Al Dweik R, Stacey D, Kohen D, Yaya S. Factors affecting patient reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Apr;83(4):875–83.
  31. World Health Organization. The role of the WHO programme on international drug monitoring in coordinating worldwide drug safety. Available from: https://www.who.int/teams/regulation-prequalification/pharmacovigilance
  32. Kabore L, Millet P, Fofana S, Berdai D, Adam C, Haramburu F. Pharmacovigilance systems in developing countries: an evaluative case study in Burkina Faso. Drug Saf. 2013 May;36(5):349–58.
  33. Harpaz R, Vilar S, DuMouchel W, et al. Combining signals from spontaneous reports and electronic health records for detection of adverse drug reactions. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013 May 1;20(3):413–9.
  34. Wang SV, Schneeweiss S. Assessing and interpreting real-world evidence studies: introductory points for new reviewers. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2022 Jan;111(1):145–9.
  35. Alqurbi M, Atiah M. The role of clinical pharmacists in reducing adverse drug reactions. Int J Med Dev Ctries. 2020;4(1):236–9.
  36. Banerjee P. Pharma technology latest regulatory guidelines and the process of ADR reporting in India. World Res J Pharmacovigil. 2018;1(1).
  37. Prakash J, Sachdeva R, Shrivastava TP, Jayachandran CV, Sahu A. Adverse event reporting tools and regulatory measures in India through outcome of pharmacovigilance programme of India. Indian J Pharmacol. 2021 Mar–Apr;53(2):143–52.
  38. Combi C, Zorzi M, Pozzani G, Moretti U, Arzenton E. From narrative descriptions to MedDRA: automagically encoding adverse drug reactions. J Biomed Inform. 2018 Aug; 84:184–99.
  39. George J, Dsouza PL, Jahnavi Y, Singh H, Kumar PA. Databases and tools for signal detection of drugs in post-marketing surveillance. In: Signal analysis in pharmacovigilance. 1st ed. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2024. p. 12.
  40. Kumar A, Khan H. Signal detection and their assessment in pharmacovigilance. Open Pharm Sci J. 2015;2(1):66–73.
  41. Sahu A, Das NR. ADR monitoring and reporting in India. Indian J Pharm Pract. 2024;17(3):198–204.
  42. Akhideno PE, Fasipe OJ, Isah AO, Owhin OS. Economic burden, impact, and consequence of adverse drug reactions among medical inpatients in clinical practice. J Clin Sci. 2018 Oct–Dec;15(4):186–93.
  43. Herbert V. Medical, legal and ethical considerations in the use of drugs having undesirable side effects. Am J Clin Nutr. 1975 May;28(5):555–60.
  44. Endrikat J, Vogtlaender K, Dohanish S, Balzer T, Breuer J. Safety of gadobutrol: results from 42 clinical phase II to IV studies and postmarketing surveillance after 29 million applications. Invest Radiol. 2016 Sep;51(9):537–43.
  45. Sultana J, Cutroneo P, Trifirò G. Clinical and economic burden of adverse drug reactions. J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2013;4(Suppl 1)–7.
  46. Gyllensten H, Rehnberg C, Jönsson A, Petzold M, Carlsten A, Andersson Sundell K. Cost of illness of patient-reported adverse drug events: a population-based cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open. 2013;3, doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002574.
  47. Aronson JK. Post-marketing drug withdrawals: pharmacovigilance success, regulatory problems. Therapie. 2017 Oct;72(5):555–61. doi:10.1016/j.therap.2017.02.005.
  48. Shetty A, Dubey A, Matcheswala A, Bangera S. Pharmacovigilance systems and strategies: importance of post-marketing surveillance for ensuring drug safety and patient health in Europe, United States, and India. Published online 2023.
  49. Onakpoya IJ, Heneghan CJ, Aronson JK. Post-marketing withdrawal of 462 medicinal products because of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review of the world literature. BMC Med. 2016;14(1):10. doi:10.1186/s12916-016-0553-2.
  50. Babai S, Auclert L, Le-Louët H. Safety data and withdrawal of hepatotoxic drugs. Therapie. 2021;76(6):715–23. doi: 10.1016/j.therap.2021.08.006.
  51. Furberg CD, Pitt B. Withdrawal of cerivastatin from the world market. Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med. 2001;2(5):205–7.
  52. Czernichow S, Batty D. Withdrawal of sibutramine for weight loss: where does this leave clinicians? Obes Facts. 2010;3(3):155–6.
  53. Lessons from the withdrawal of rofecoxib. BMJ. 2004 Oct 16;329:867–8.
  54. Vargesson N, Stephens T. Thalidomide: history, withdrawal, renaissance, and safety concerns. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2021 Dec;20(12):1455–7.
  55. Harpaz R, DuMouchel W, Shah NH, Madigan D, Ryan P, Friedman C. Novel data-mining methodologies for adverse drug event discovery and analysis. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012 Jun;91(6):1010–21.
  56. Wu S, Roberts K, Datta S, et al. Deep learning in clinical natural language processing: a methodical review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020 Mar;27(3):457–70.
  57. Swen JJ, Nijenhuis M, de Boer A, et al. Pharmacogenetics: from bench to byte—an update of guidelines. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011 May;89(5):662–73.
  58. Relling MV, Evans WE. Pharmacogenomics in the clinic. Nature. 2015 Oct;526(7573):343–50.
  59. World Health Organization (WHO). The WHO programme for international drug monitoring. Published 2021. Available from: https://www.who.int/teams/regulation-prequalification/pharmacovigilance
  60. Van Boxtel CJ, Santoso B, Edwards IR, editors. Drug benefits and risks: international textbook of clinical pharmacology. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2008.
  61. Reddy S. Benefits of AI & automation in pharmacovigilance. Birlasoft Life Sci. 2021 Jul 13. Available from: https://www.birlasoft.com/articles/benefits-of-ai-automation-in-pharmacovigilance.
Regular Issue Subscription Review Article
Volume 14
Issue 03
Received 21/10/2024
Accepted 22/10/2024
Published 19/11/2024
Publication Time 29 Days
245


My IP

PlumX Metrics