Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37822427›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

Pharmacovigilance Study of Anticancer Drugs in a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in North India: A Retrospective Study.

Raj Kumar, Amita Jindal, Pardeep Garg, Amandeep Kaur, Sumir Kumar, Rakesh Tilak Raj, Simrandeep Singh

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Raj KumarPharmacology and Therapeutics, Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Baba Farid University of Health Sciences, Faridkot, IND.
Amita JindalPharmacology and Therapeutics, Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Baba Farid University of Health Sciences, Faridkot, IND.
Pardeep GargRadiation Oncology, Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Baba Farid University of Health Sciences, Faridkot, IND.
Amandeep KaurPharmacology and Therapeutics, Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Baba Farid University of Health Sciences, Faridkot, IND.
Sumir KumarDermatology, Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Baba Farid University of Health Sciences, Faridkot, IND.
Rakesh Tilak RajDermatology, Government Medical College, Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Amritsar, IND.
Simrandeep SinghOncology, Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Baba Farid University of Health Sciences, Faridkot, IND.
Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital · INGuru Nanak Dev University · INGovernment Medical College, Amritsar · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAnticancer agents are responsible for a majority of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in cancer patients. ADR reporting with anticancer drugs is very rare in India due to the lack of awareness and knowledge about the Pharmacovigilance Programme of India. Hence, this study was done to assess the pattern of ADRs with anticancer agents in cancer patients and to increase awareness about ADR monitoring among healthcare professionals. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis is an observational, retrospective and non-interventional study conducted in an ADR monitoring centre (AMC) in Govt. Guru Gobind Singh Medical College and Hospital, Faridkot, Punjab, North India. Voluntarily reported ADR forms with anticancer drugs as suspected drugs over a period of seven years from January 2016 to December 2022 were analyzed. Various parameters were analyzed, which include demographic details of the patients, type of ADR, department reporting ADR and suspected drug. Causality assessment, severity assessment and preventability assessment were done according to the World Health Organization Uppsala Monitoring Centre (WHO-UMC) scale, modified Hartwig and Siegel scale and modified Schumock and Thornton scale, respectively.

resultsThe maximum numbers of ADRs were reported in the age group of 41-60 years (68.29%) and in females (59.75%). The maximum number of ADRs was reported with the use of taxanes (docetaxel and paclitaxel) (24.39%), targeted drugs (geftinib, imatinib, bortezomib, bevacizumab, rituximab and pazopanib) (24.39%) and platinum co-ordination complexes (cisplatin, oxaliplatin and carboplatin) (17.07%). Majority of the ADRs reported were shivering and ADRs on the skin. Majority of the ADRs were probable (64.70%), mild in nature (85.29%), definitely preventable (45.58%) and probably preventable (45.58%).

conclusionADR monitoring is needed to increase the outcome of anticancer drug treatment in cancer patients. The quality of treatment in cancer patients can be improved through the timely management of these ADRs. It is a need of the present era to inform healthcare professionals about the Pharmacovigilance Programme to increase the reporting of ADRs due to anticancer drugs.

Indexed as

anticancer agentschemotherapy adverse effectsdermatological side effectsdrug-related adverse reactionsmodified hartwig and siegel scalemodified schumock and thornton scalemolecular targeted drugstaxaneswho-umc causality assessment scale

Identifiers

PMID37822427
PMCPMC10562879
OpenAlexW4386583173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.