Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19722725›Full record

ReviewDrug safety2009

Pharmacovigilance of biopharmaceuticals: challenges remain.

Thijs J Giezen, Aukje K Mantel-Teeuwisse, Hubert G M Leufkens

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Biologics in Dermatology: Off-Label Indications.Indian dermatology online journal
    Review
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Thijs J GiezenUtrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacotherapy, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. t.j.giezen@uu.nl
Aukje K Mantel-Teeuwisse
Hubert G M Leufkens
Medicines Evaluation Board · NLUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biopharmaceuticals are important treatment options for a variety of chronic and sometimes life-threatening diseases. Compared with the traditional small molecule drugs, biopharmaceuticals have specific characteristics, which might also influence their safety profile. They have, for example, a complex production process, limited predictability of preclinical to clinical data, a high potential for immunogenicity, and adverse events can often be related to an exaggerated pharmacology. The limited predictability of preclinical to clinical data and the known limitations of randomized controlled trials results in limited knowledge of the safety profile of biopharmaceuticals at the point of their approval, underlining the need for pharmacovigilance. Due to their specific characteristics, pharmacovigilance activities required for biopharmaceuticals might differ from those required for small molecules. This review discusses characteristics and potential challenges with the pharmacovigilance and risk management of biopharmaceuticals as compared with small molecules, and proposes remedies for some of the emerging problems. Spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is important in the detection of new, rare and/or serious ADRs. However, causality assessment remains complicated because of concomitant diseases or drugs. This is particularly the case with biopharmaceuticals, as they are often indicated to treat severe and/or life-threatening diseases in patients who often have other diseases and are treated with concomitant medication. Proactive risk management has been implemented in the EU by the obligatory submission of an EU risk management plan (EU-RMP). In this, the (potential) risks should be described and pharmacovigilance activities proposed. Pharmacovigilance activities can be either routine or additional (post-authorization safety studies [PASS]) activities. During safety assessment, stakeholders are encouraged to use knowledge obtained with biopharmaceuticals with a comparable pharmacology. PASS of biopharmaceuticals with a comparable pharmacology may therefore be used to complement each other. Since biopharmaceuticals are often used in a specialized hospital setting, it is expected that large population-based databases will contain limited information on biopharmaceuticals. Registries have therefore been shown to be an important tool to obtain pharmacovigilance data. Since small changes in the production and purification process might alter the safety profile, activities to improve traceability of the specific biopharmaceutical responsible for the ADR should be taken into account. Key messages in safety management of biopharmaceuticals remain: be prepared for the unexpected, be aware of confounding by disease (severity) and maintain exposure ascertainment/traceability throughout the logistical chain.

Indexed as

BiopharmaceuticsPharmacoepidemiologyAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAnimalsBiological ProductsCausalityHumansRegistriesRisk ManagementSafetyBiological Products

Identifiers

PMID19722725
OpenAlexW2013300449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.