ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
Has risk management plan system influenced the speed of package insert revisions in Japan?
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The system of Risk Management Plan in Japan (J-RMP) is a relatively new system, implemented in 2013; thus, its effect on safety measures is still unclear. One of the purposes of J-RMP is to enhance the postmarketing safety measures to be ensured by publishing J-RMP and sharing information on risk management among healthcare professionals. We hypothesized that this might enable information about postmarketing adverse events to be accumulated rapidly, potentially accelerating the identification of adverse reactions (ARs). Herein, we focused on the speed of adding clinically significant ARs (CSARs) to package inserts (PIs) as an indicator of the rapidity of AR identification, investigated the impact of the J-RMP system on PI revisions. Methods: We investigated the "Notice of Revision of Precautions" on the website of Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), targeting PI revisions with the addition of CSARs from April 2003 to March 2023, which corresponds to 10 years before and after J-RMP implementation in April 2013. We created an original database from public information of PMDA and investigated the speed of adding CSARs to PIs. Results: Comparing the time lapse from drug approvals to PI revisions after J-RMP implementation (149 cases) to that before implementation (318 cases), the median value was 32 months for both. Regarding the time lapse when the additional CSARs were listed and unlisted as safety concerns at the time of approvals, it was 35 months vs. 32 months (14 cases vs. 126 cases, Discussion and conclusions: This study revealed that the rapidity of risk identification as ARs was not affected by J-RMP, and it may be affected by the characteristics of each AR and each drug therapeutic category. It is expected that other J-RMP benefits, such as risk prevention before the occurrence, will be utilized to further develop strategies for the effective utilization of the J-RMP for safety measures in Japan.
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.