ArticleCurrent drug safety2022
Event Monitoring and Evaluation by Community Pharmacists in Japan: A Pilot Study on Fenofibrate and Pemafibrate.
Article in Current drug safety, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
13 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Japan Pharmaceutical Association has conducted drug event monitoring to detect drug events related to pemafibrate. As there are a few studies on the safety of pemafibrate in clinical settings, a pilot study evaluating the association between drug use and detected events was performed in Japan.
aimsIn this study, the association between detected events and the use of pemafibrate, utilizing pharmacy records maintained by community pharmacists, was investigated. We identified the newuser cohort using a test and active comparison drug and collected the baseline information. An active comparison group comprising new users was used to assess the events.
methodsA retrospective cohort study using questionnaires regarding baseline and event data was conducted by community pharmacists belonging to the Japan Pharmaceutical Association. The incidence of event and estimated hazard ratio were calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model that was adjusted for confounding factors, such as age and sex.
resultsA total of 1294 patients using pemafibrate and 508 patients using fenofibrate were identified as new drug users. The most reported events involving suspected adverse reactions and add-on drugs were increased blood pressure and lipid-lowering effects with pemafibrate use, and nasopharyngitis, pruritus, dizziness, and lipid-lowering effects with fenofibrate use. No significant differences were found in commonly occurring events, except that an add-on anti-hypertensive drug has been used by pemafibrate users compared to fenofibrate users.
conclusionThis study conducted by pharmacists can facilitate the safety assessment of newly marketed drugs, as few drug use investigations with a comparator are carried out by the Japanese authority for pharmaceutical companies. However, further research is required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.