ArticleBMC health services research2022
Analysis and enhancement of risk management for ethnic differences in antineoplastic drugs in Japan.
Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Challenges in Implementing Revocation of Oncology Drugs Under Conditional Early Approval in Japan: Regulatory Insights From Comparisons With FDA/EMA.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluation of Characteristics and Ethnic Sensitivity for FDA-Approved Drugs with Racial and Ethnic Differences in Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Efficacy.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRisk management in the post-marketing phase is crucial to minimize health problems caused by drugs. Because ethnic factors may affect drug safety, the objective of this study was to explore concrete approaches to reflecting ethnic factors in risk management under multi-regional drug development.
methodsWe assessed Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) review reports on antineoplastic drugs approved as new molecular entities in the last 10 years to identify any differences in the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to myelosuppression, hepatic impairment, renal impairment, and interstitial lung disease between Japanese and non-Japanese populations. In addition, we investigated how those ADRs were handled in the labeling of each drug.
resultsIn total, 44 drugs were available for comparing the incidence of ADRs between Japanese and non-Japanese populations. Of these, 32 drugs had a higher incidence of ADRs in the Japanese population. However, the incidence of ADRs in the Japanese population was described in the labeling for 7 drugs, and only the incidence in the overall population in multi-regional phase III trials was described in the labeling for the remaining 25 drugs. Of these 25 drugs, two drugs were immediately placed under emergency safety control measures after approval because of the high incidence of ADRs in Japanese patients.
conclusionsFor drugs that might cause serious ADRs and with a higher incidence in the Japanese population, information should be provided on the incidence in the Japanese population as well as in the overall population.
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.