Specialist Cohort Event Monitoring Studies: A New Study Method for Risk Management in Pharmacovigilance

Drug Safety

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 153-163

  Layton, Deborah ^a,b   Shakir, Saad A W ^a,b  

^a DRUG SAFETY RESEARCH UNIT   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; OFF LABEL DRUG USE; PATIENT CARE; PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK MANAGEMENT; SECONDARY HEALTH CARE; SIGNAL DETECTION; STUDY DESIGN; ADVERSE DRUG REACTION; COHORT ANALYSIS; DRUG LEGISLATION; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; POSTMARKETING SURVEILLANCE; PROCEDURES;

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION REPORTING SYSTEMS; COHORT STUDIES; DRUG-RELATED SIDE EFFECTS AND ADVERSE REACTIONS; HUMANS; LEGISLATION, DRUG; PHARMACOVIGILANCE; PRODUCT SURVEILLANCE, POSTMARKETING; RESEARCH DESIGN; RISK MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84925490663     PISSN: 01145916     EISSN: 11791942     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40264-014-0260-x     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. European Medicines Agency (EMA). Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices (GVP) module viii—post-authorisation safety studies (rev 1). EMA/813938/2011. London: EMA, 19 April 2013.
2. European Network of Centres of Excellence for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCEPP). Guide on methodological standards in pharmacoepidemiology (revision 2). EMA/95098/2010. London: ENCEPP, 18 June 2013.
3. Layton D, Hazell L, Shakir SA. Modified prescription-event monitoring studies: a tool for pharmacovigilance and risk management. Drug Saf. 2011.
4. Layton D, Shakir SAW. Prescription-event monitoring. In: Strom BL, Kimmel SE, Hennessy S, editors. Pharmacoepidemiology, 5th edn. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2011. p. 301–330.
5. Suissa S. Immortal time bias in observational studies of drug effects. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2007;16(3):241–9.
6. Royal College of Physicians of London. Guidelines on the practice of Ethical Committees in Medical Research involving Human Subjects, 4th edn. 2007. https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/guidelines-practice-ethics-committees-medical-research.pdf. Accessed 30 Dec 2014.
7. General Medical Council. Good practice in prescribing and managing medicines and devices. 2013. http://www.gmc-uk.org/Prescribing_Guidance__2013__50955425.pdf. Accessed 23 Dec 2013.
8. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) and World Health Organization (WHO), Geneva. International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects. 2002. http://www.cioms.ch/publications/layout_guide2002.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec 2013.
9. British Medical Association Board of Science, British Medical Association Science & Education. Reporting adverse drug reactions. A Guide for healthcare professionals. London: British Medical Association Board of Science, British Medical Association Science & Education; 2006. http://bmaopac.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/exlibris/aleph/a21_1/apache_media/GYVFNJ1RT2PFNDUJ8IUKPUNTFVRF8G.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec 2013.
10. Epstein M. Guidelines for good pharmacoepidemiology practices (GPP). Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2005;14(8):589–95.
11. Department of Health. Eligibility criteria for NIHR Clinical Research Network support. London: Department of Health; 2013. http://www.crn.nihr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/About%20the%20CRN/Eligibility%20Criteria%20for%20NIHRCRN%20support.pdf. Accessed 17 Nov 2014.
12. European Network of Centres of Excellence for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCEPP). E-register of studies. A cohort study to monitor the safety and use of prolonged-release quetiapine. 2014. http://www.encepp.eu/encepp/viewResource.htm?id=5412. Accessed 20 Jan 2014.
13. European Network of Centres of Excellence for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCEPP). E-register of studies. An observational post-authorisation safety specialist cohort monitoring study (SCEM) to monitor the safety and utilisation of asenapine (Sycrest) in the mental health trust setting in England. 2014. http://www.encepp.eu/encepp/viewResource.htm?id=5323. Accessed 30 Dec 2014.
14. ®) for the prevention of stroke in patients with AF, treatment of DVT and PE, and the prevention of recurrent DVT and PE in the secondary care hospital setting in England and Wales. 2014. http://www.encepp.eu/encepp/viewResource.htm?id=5320. Accessed 30 Dec 2014.
15. Establishing requirements for the use of terms for reporting adverse drug reactions (ADR). Consultant, Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS), World Health Organization. Mater Med Pol 1993;25(1):45–6.
16. Farrington CP. Control without separate controls: evaluation of vaccine safety using case-only methods. Vaccine 2004;22(15-16):2064–70.
17. Groves R. Non response rates and non-response bias in household surveys. Public Opin Q Spec Issue. 2006;70(5):646–75.
18. Chapter 3. Registry Design. p. 53-72. In: Gliklich RE, Dreyer NA, editors. Registries for evaluating patient Ooutcomes: a user’s guide. 2nd edition (Prepared by Outcome DEcIDE Center [Outcome Sciences, Inc. d/b/a Outcome] under Contract No. HHSA29020050035I TO3.). AHRQ Publication No.10-EHC049. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2010. http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/ehc/products/74/531/Registries%202nd%20ed%20final%20to%20Eisenberg%209-15-10.pdf. Accessed 01 Dec 2013.
19. Rubin DB. Inference and missing data. Biometrika. 1976;63(3):581–92.
20. Schouten B, Cobben F, Bethlehem J. Indicators for the representativeness of survey response. Survey Methodol. 2009;35(1):101–13.
21. Groves R, Peytcheva E. The impact of non-response rates on non-response bias: a meta-analysis. Public Opin Q. 2008;72(2):167–89.
22. National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence. Medicines and prescribing support from NICE. 2014. http://www.nice.org.uk/about/nice-communities/medicines-and-prescribing. Accessed 9 April 2014.
23. Groenewegen PP, Leufkens HG, Spreeuwenberg P, Worm W. Neighbourhood characteristics and use of benzodiazepines in the Netherlands. Soc Sci Med. 1999;48(12):1701–11.
24. Schulman S, Kearon C. Definition of major bleeding in clinical investigations of antihemostatic medicinal products in non-surgical patients. J Thromb Haemost 2005;3(4):692-4.