SynthesisDrug safety2012
Impact of regulatory guidances and drug regulation on risk minimization interventions in drug safety: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Drug safety, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTherapeutic risk management has received growing interest in recent years, particularly since the publication of regulatory guidances in 2005 and 2006, paralleled with a change in drug regulation. The characteristics of risk minimization interventions (RMIs) that have been implemented or approved remain inadequately explored.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to review RMIs published in the literature or posted on regulatory agency websites over the past 10 years, and to assess whether publication of regulatory guidances on risk management is associated with changes in the number and types of interventions.
methodsSources were searched for RMIs published/posted between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2009. For the literature search, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were used using key words related to drug safety (i.e. 'drug toxicity') and the individual RMI names. The website review involved searches of major regulatory authority websites such as the European Medicines Agency, US FDA, Health Canada, the UK's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, Japan's Pharmaceutical and Medical Devices Agency and Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration. The following eligibility criteria were applied for inclusion in the review: published/posted between the years 2000 and 2009, inclusive; involving drug products; use in humans; and involving RMIs, or tools used to increase the reporting of adverse events (AEs). Natural healthcare products, devices, diagnostic chemicals, pregnancy registries without follow-up, medication errors and products not used as therapy for illness were not retained. For each source, the following characteristics were extracted: nature of the intervention, target population, therapeutic area, AE(s) of special interest, country/regulatory agency and year of publication.
resultsA total of 119 unique interventions were identified in the literature (54 published in 2000-4 and 65 published in 2005-9). Interventions included educational material (n = 37; 31%), black-box warnings (n = 22; 19%) and therapeutic drug monitoring (n = 11; 9%). The website review produced a total of 1112 interventions: 326 posted between the years 2000 and 2004, and 786 between the years 2005 and 2009. The main interventions observed were: educational material (n = 956; 86%), black-box warnings (n = 45; 4%) and withdrawals (n = 39; 4%). LIMITATIONS: Additional regulatory resource websites were available in the post-guidances periods that were not available in the earlier years of the pre-guidances periods, and may bias the post-guidances results. Also, not all global regulatory websites were searched. Finally, only English-language websites were searched, limiting the variation of RMIs observed. Classification and categorizing for this particular review may not be consistent with future reviews by other researchers.
conclusionThe US is the sole region with a substantial increase in published RMIs during the post-guidances period, while the EU, Japan and the US all indicated an increase in the number of interventions on their websites.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22702638What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.