Search

Aim Methods Results Conclusions Often, organ transplantation is the only option to improve the life expectancy and quality of life of patients with terminal organ failure. Despite improved donor and organ assessment, a residual risk remains for transmitting infection, tumor, or other disease from the donor to recipients. Analysis, reporting, and managing of donor‐derived diseases through a vigilance and surveillance system (V&S) is mandatory in many countries. We report on suspected and proven/probable donor‐derived infections (DDI) in Germany over a period of 8 years (2016–2023).All incoming serious‐adverse‐event and serious‐adverse‐reaction (SAE/SAR) reports from 01.01.2016 to 31.12.2023 were evaluated for suspected DDI. Analysis of imputability followed the definition of the US Disease Transmission Advisory Committee (DTAC). Only probable and proven cases according to DTAC classification were defined as DDI.During the study period, 9771 donors in Germany donated post‐mortem organs to 27 919 recipients. In that period 612 SAE/SAR cases were reported, 377 (62%) involved infections. 41 cases were proven/probable DDI affecting 58 recipients (seven recipients died, 12%). Suspected infections were bacterial (182/377, 48%), fungal (135/377, 36%), viral (55/377, 15%), and parasitic (5/377, 1%). In case of bacterial DDI, no recipient died, but organ loss occurred in six recipients. In case of fungal or viral DDI, 19% (3/16) and 21% (3/14) of the recipients died, respectively.DDI are rare in solid organ transplantation (58/27 919, 0.21%), but when they occur, they are associated with high morbidity and mortality in affected recipients. Careful and detailed donor evaluation and a reliable V&S help improve recipient safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The effectiveness of psychological interventions is undisputed. But while in other fields of health care the safety of interventions is studied alongside effectiveness, adverse events (AEs) have only recently been assessed in clinical studies of psychological interventions. This critical review summarizes the definition, assessment and current research status of AEs of psychological interventions. Summary: AEs are defined as any untoward event or unfavorable change that occurs in the course of a psychological intervention. AEs that are caused by the intervention can be classified into side effects of correctly applied treatment, malpractice (i.e., incorrectly applied treatment) and unethical conduct (e.g., sexual abuse). Ideally, they are assessed by independent raters or alternatively by self-report questionnaires that should also cover serious adverse events (SAEs, e.g., suicide attempts or self-injurious behaviors). About 1 to 2 in 3 patients report at least 1 AE and results of meta-analyses suggest that treatments might differ in frequency and/or severity of AE and in treatment acceptability (measured as dropout rates). Key Messages: Measures of AEs and SAEs as well as more nuanced descriptions of dropout should be included in all clinical studies of psychological interventions. If this happens, we might learn that psychological interventions differ with respect to AEs, SAEs and acceptability. As many psychological interventions are about equally effective, they might one day be chosen based on differences in their safety profile rather than their differential effectiveness. Ideally, reducing AEs might also lead to more effective interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Method Conclusion A biovigilance program that has oversight of the entire organ and tissue donation and transplantation pathways underpins the quality and safety system in the United Kingdom.A synopsis of the microbiological characterization of potential deceased organ donors and the processes for notification and investigation of possible donor‐derived infections are described. A summary of the outcome of investigations performed over a 10‐year period and a subset data frame of 5 years showing the proportion of infection incidents in relation to other incident types are also presented.A single, centralized system overseeing the entire donation and transplantation pathway has become an essential part of transplantation practice across the United Kingdom. Revision of processes and management options, awareness of clinical conditions, and review of guidance are some examples of benefits gained over time. Transmission figures provided reflect the UK setting; these should be interpreted in context, as donor and recipient epidemiology differs across regions and nations. Despite a well‐established system in place, under reporting of cases continues to occur, with ongoing efforts to reassure professionals and patients of the true benefits of biovigilance in driving improvements in practice and patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Safety issues in AAV-based gene therapies may result from different mechanisms specific to the serotype- the transgene or the underlying condition. • Specific risk management plan should be put in place to prevent and to manage serious adverse events. • Safety events observed in humans are not reproduced in animal models and therefore require a strong collaboration between sponsors, investigators, regulators and patients community to be better understood and managed. Adeno-associated virus (AAV) gene therapies are demonstrating much promise in the area of neuromuscular disorders. There are now therapies in clinical trials or real-world use for several disorders including spinal muscular atrophy and Duchenne muscular dystrophy. However, there have been several concerning reports of serious adverse events, including deaths. Reporting and monitoring of these is not consistent between trials. Therefore, a group of clinicians, investigators, industry and patient representatives met the weekend of 17th–19th June 2022 to discuss safety issues arising from the use of these therapies. The group shared information on safety events across a spectrum of AAV gene therapy products, both in clinical trials and commercial use. Patterns of serious adverse events were identified and the group discussed methods of identification and management of these as well as new ways of improving information sharing across industry in order to improve the safety of these promising treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A review of the safety profile of exercise training in multiple sclerosis (MS) has not been conducted since 2013. Objective: We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise training published since 2013 and quantified estimated population risks of clinical relapse, adverse events (AE) and serious adverse event (SAE). Methods: Articles reporting safety outcomes from comparisons of exercise training with non-exercise among persons with MS were identified. The risk of bias was established from study's internal validity assessed using Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). Rates and estimated mean population relative risks (RRs; 95% confidence interval (CI)) of safety outcomes were calculated, and random-effects meta-analysis estimated the mean RR. Results: Forty-six interventions from 40 RCTs (N = 1780) yielded 46, 40 and 39 effects for relapse, AE, adverse effects and SAE, respectively. The mean population RRs ((95% CI), p -value) for relapse, AE and SAE were 0.95 ((0.61, 1.48), p = 0.82), 1.40 ((0.90, 2.19), p = 0.14) and 1.05 ((0.62, 1.80), p = 0.85), respectively. No significant heterogeneity is observed for any outcome. Conclusion: In studies that reported safety outcomes, there was no higher risk of relapse, AE, adverse effects or SAE for exercise training than the comparator. Exercise training may be promoted as safe and beneficial to persons with MS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundProgressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) is a rare and often lethal brain disorder caused by the common, typically benign polyomavirus 2, also known as JC virus (JCV). In a small percentage of immunosuppressed individuals, JCV is reactivated and infects the brain, causing devastating neurological defects. A wide range of immunosuppressed groups can develop PML, such as patients with: HIV/AIDS, hematological malignancies (e.g., leukemias, lymphomas, and multiple myeloma), autoimmune disorders (e.g., psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, and systemic lupus erythematosus), and organ transplants. In some patients, iatrogenic (i.e., drug-induced) PML occurs as a serious adverse event from exposure to immunosuppressant therapies used to treat their disease (e.g., hematological malignancies and multiple sclerosis). While JCV infection and immunosuppression are necessary, they are not sufficient to cause PML.MethodsWe hypothesized that patients may also have a genetic susceptibility from the presence of rare deleterious genetic variants in immune-relevant genes (e.g., those that cause inborn errors of immunity). In our prior genetic study of 184 PML cases, we discovered 19 candidate PML risk variants. In the current study of another 152 cases, we validated 4 of 19 variants in both population controls (gnomAD 3.1) and matched controls (JCV+ multiple sclerosis patients on a PML-linked drug ≥ 2 years).ResultsThe four variants, found in immune system genes with strong biological links, are: C8B, 1-57409459-C-A, rs139498867; LY9 (alias SLAMF3), 1-160769595-AG-A, rs763811636; FCN2, 9-137779251-G-A, rs76267164; STXBP2, 19-7712287-G-C, rs35490401. Carriers of any one of these variants are shown to be at high risk of PML when drug-exposed PML cases are compared to drug-exposed matched controls: P value = 3.50E-06, OR = 8.7 [3.7-20.6]. Measures of clinical validity and utility compare favorably to other genetic risk tests, such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 screening for breast cancer risk and HLA-B*15:02 pharmacogenetic screening for pharmacovigilance of carbamazepine to prevent Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis.ConclusionFor the first time, a PML genetic risk test can be implemented for screening patients taking or considering treatment with a PML-linked drug in order to decrease the incidence of PML and enable safer use of highly effective therapies used to treat their underlying disease.

Abstract The varicella vaccination program has an excellent safety record. The vaccine virus, like its wild‐type counterpart, can enter latency and later reactivate as herpes zoster. A lesser known but serious adverse event following reactivation is varicella vaccine meningitis. We investigate that adverse event. We performed a literature search using the PubMed and Google Scholar search engines to locate all published cases of varicella vaccine meningitis. We continued the search through January 2023. We found 17 cases of varicella vaccine meningitis. The first case was published in 2003, and the last case was published in 2023. The children lived in the United States, Greece, Germany, Switzerland, and Japan. Among the 17 cases, 14 were immunocompetent; nine of the 17 were adolescents. One potential risk factor was the administration of corticosteroids three to four weeks before the onset of meningitis. Varicella vaccine meningitis is a rare but one of the more serious adverse events that occurs several years following varicella vaccination. In immunocompetent children, this complication is treatable with a single course of intravenous acyclovir after hospitalization.

The reporting of serious adverse events (SAE) and serious adverse reactions (SAR) is an essential part of an effective vigilance and surveillance system (V&S) in organ donation and transplantation. All SAE and SAR reported to the German organ procurement organization (DSO) between 2016 and 2022 were analyzed. In case of a possible transmission of a disease to one or more recipients, an assessment of imputability was done according to the grading system of the US Disease Transmission Advisory Committee (DTAC). 543 SAE and SAR cases were reported to the DSO and analyzed in detail. 53 of the 543 reports (9.8%) were proven or probable (P/P) transmissions of infectious diseases, malignancies or other diseases to 75 recipients. Infections were the most frequently reported P/P disease transmission occurrences (30/53, 57%). In case of disease transmission, the mortality of the recipients was high (17/75, 23%), especially when a malignant disease was transmitted (11/22, 50 %). Donor-Derived disease transmission is a rare event (53/8,519; 0.6 %), but when it occurs can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Varicella vaccine meningitis is an uncommon delayed adverse event of vaccination. Varicella vaccine meningitis has been diagnosed in 12 children, of whom 3 were immunocompromised. We now report two additional cases of vaccine meningitis in twice-immunized immunocompetent children and we perform further testing on a prior third case. We used three methods to diagnose or investigate cases of varicella vaccine meningitis, none of which have been used previously on this disease. These include metagenomic next-generation sequencing and cytokine multiplex profiling of cerebrospinal fluid and immunology exome analysis of white blood cells. In one new case, the diagnosis was confirmed by metagenomic next-generation sequencing of cerebrospinal fluid. Both varicella vaccine virus and human herpesvirus 7 DNA were detected. We performed cytokine multiplex profiling on the cerebrospinal fluid of two cases and found ten elevated biomarkers: interferon gamma, interleukins IL-1RA, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-17F, chemokines CXCL-9, CXCL-10, CCL-2, and G-CSF. In a second new case, we performed immunology exome sequencing on a panel of 356 genes, but no errors were found. After a review of all 14 cases, we concluded that (i) there is no common explanation for this adverse event, but (ii) ingestion of an oral corticosteroid burst 3-4 weeks before onset of vaccine meningitis may be a risk factor in some cases.

Abstract Introduction Although messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines have been developed and widely utilized to mitigate the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, it is essential to describe the adverse events (AEs) following immunization. This study aimed to identify the patterns associated with serious AE reports after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in the World Health Organization (WHO)’s global scale database (VigiBase). Methods This study performed a latent class analysis (LCA) of reports of serious AEs following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination from VigiBase between December 28, 2020 , and February 28, 2022 (N = 312878). The Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) System Organ Class (SOC) terms were selected for LCA. The reporting characteristics in accordance with the cluster were described. We used a multinomial logistic regression model to estimate the association between potential factors and each cluster. Results Five clusters of AE reports were distinguished through LCA: infection AEs (cluster 1), cardiac AEs (cluster 2), respiratory/thrombotic AEs (cluster 3), systemic AEs (cluster 4), and nervous system AEs (cluster 5). Compared to cluster 4, cluster 2 had a higher proportion of males (OR 2.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.87–3.09), and cluster 1 had a longer time to onset than other AEs (≥ 14 days) (OR 16.2; 95% CI 15.5–16.9). Conclusion Using LCA, we found five clusters of serious AEs following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Each cluster was distinguished by potential factors such as age, gender, region, and time to onset. We suggest that monitoring should carefully consider the patterns of young males with cardiac AEs and elderly individuals with thrombosis after respiratory AEs. Our findings could contribute to enhancing understanding of safety profiles and establishing management strategies for serious AEs of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Graphical Abstract

Introduction: Although messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines have been developed and widely utilized to mitigate the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, it is essential to describe the adverse events (AEs) following immunization. This study aimed to identify the patterns associated with serious AE reports after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in the World Health Organization (WHO)'s global scale database (VigiBase). Methods: This study performed a latent class analysis (LCA) of reports of serious AEs following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination from VigiBase between December 28, 2020 , and February 28, 2022 (N = 312878). The Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) System Organ Class (SOC) terms were selected for LCA. The reporting characteristics in accordance with the cluster were described. We used a multinomial logistic regression model to estimate the association between potential factors and each cluster. Results: Five clusters of AE reports were distinguished through LCA: infection AEs (cluster 1), cardiac AEs (cluster 2), respiratory/thrombotic AEs (cluster 3), systemic AEs (cluster 4), and nervous system AEs (cluster 5). Compared to cluster 4, cluster 2 had a higher proportion of males (OR 2.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.87–3.09), and cluster 1 had a longer time to onset than other AEs (≥ 14 days) (OR 16.2; 95% CI 15.5–16.9). Conclusion: Using LCA, we found five clusters of serious AEs following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Each cluster was distinguished by potential factors such as age, gender, region, and time to onset. We suggest that monitoring should carefully consider the patterns of young males with cardiac AEs and elderly individuals with thrombosis after respiratory AEs. Our findings could contribute to enhancing understanding of safety profiles and establishing management strategies for serious AEs of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acupuncture is widely accepted as a therapeutic treatment by patients and healthcare providers globally. The safety record has been well established in acupuncture practice although some rare adverse events (AEs) were reported in the literature. While acupuncture-related AEs are generally defined as any undesirable event that occurs in patients during acupuncture treatment that may or may not be associated with the treatment, acupuncture-related adverse reactions (ARs) are defined as any undesirable or harmful reaction induced by trained practitioners practicing acupuncture treatment with standard doses. In this review, we clarify the relationship between AEs and ARs. Furthermore, we compile a list of acupuncture-related AEs reported in systematic reviews and meta-analysis articles. We find that serious acupuncture-related AEs are rare, with serious AEs occurring at a rate of approximately 0.04-0.08 per 10,000 treatments. The most likely serious AEs are pneumothorax, central and peripheral nerve injuries, heart injuries, abdominal organ injuries, infections, and needle breakage. Commonly reported minor AEs include bruising, hematoma, or bleeding at the needling site, as well as vasovagal reactions such as tiredness, dizziness, fainting, or residual pain at insertion points. The analysis identifies contributing factors for serious AEs being deep needle penetration, incorrect acupoint selection, and improper needle manipulation. It also addresses infections caused by contaminated needles, environmental factors, and inadequate skin disinfection. Moreover, other serious AEs, like needle breakage, are mostly due to aggressive manipulation and repeated reheating. Importantly, most acupuncture-related AEs are preventable. To avoid such AEs, acupuncturists in clinical practice should carefully select needling areas, be aware of cautions and contraindications of acupuncture, maintain safe acupuncture depth and hygiene, and strictly adhere to standard operating procedures.

Abstract Background There has been an exponential growth in the number of clinical research studies regarding exercise training in multiple sclerosis, and literature reviews and meta-analyses have documented the many benefits of exercise training. This research further requires careful review for documenting the safety of exercise training in multiple sclerosis, as clarity on safety represents a major hurdle in the clinical prescription of exercise behaviour. Objectives To enhance understanding of the feasibility of exercise in multiple sclerosis, we (1) provide a protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis that summarises rates and risks of clinical relapse, adverse events (i.e., an unfavourable outcome that occurs during the intervention delivery time period), and serious adverse events (i.e., an untoward occurrence that results in death or is life threatening, requires hospitalisation, or results in disability during the intervention delivery time period), as well as retention, adherence, and compliance, from randomised controlled trials of exercise training in persons with multiple sclerosis; and (2) identify moderators of relapse, adverse events, and serious adverse event rates. Methods Eight field-relevant databases will be searched electronically. Studies that involve a randomised controlled trial of exercise training (with non-exercise, non-pharmacological, comparator), report on safety outcomes, and include adults with multiple sclerosis will be included. Rates and relative risks of the three primary outcomes (relapse, adverse event, and serious adverse event) will be calculated and reported each with standard error and 95% confidence interval. Random-effects meta-analysis will estimate mean population relative risk for outcomes. Potential sources of variability, including participant characteristics, features of the exercise stimulus, and comparison condition, will be examined with random-effects meta-regression with maximum likelihood estimation. Discussion The results from this systematic review and meta-analysis will inform and guide healthcare practitioners, researchers, and policymakers on the safety of exercise training in persons with multiple sclerosis. Where possible, we will identify the impact of exercise type, exercise delivery style, participant disability level, and the prescription of exercise guidelines, on the safety of exercise training. The result will identify critical information on the safety of exercise in persons with multiple sclerosis, while also identifying gaps in research and setting priorities for future enquiries. Systematic review registration PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020190544

Abstract Background/aims Serious adverse event reporting guidelines have largely been developed for pharmaceutical trials. There is evidence that serious adverse events, such as psychological distress, can also occur in non-pharmaceutical trials. Managing serious adverse event reporting and monitoring in palliative care non-pharmaceutical trials can be particularly challenging. This is because patients living with advanced malignant or non-malignant disease have a high risk of hospitalisation and/or death as a result of progression of their disease rather than due to the trial intervention or procedures. This paper presents a number of recommendations for managing serious adverse event reporting that are drawn from two palliative care non-pharmacological trials. Methods The recommendations were iteratively developed across a number of exemplar trials. This included examining national and international safety reporting guidance, reviewing serious adverse event reporting procedures from other pharmacological and non-pharmacological trials, a review of the literature and collaboration between the ACTION study team and Data Safety Monitoring Committee. These two groups included expertise in oncology, palliative care, statistics and medical ethics and this collaboration led to the development of serious adverse event reporting procedures. Results The recommendations included; allowing adequate time at the study planning stage to develop serious adverse event reporting procedures, especially in multi-national studies or research naïve settings; reviewing the level of trial oversight required; defining what a serious adverse event is in your trial based on your study population; development and implementation of standard operating procedures and training; refining the reporting procedures during the trial if necessary and publishing serious adverse events in findings papers. Conclusions There is a need for researchers to share their experiences of managing this challenging aspect of trial conduct. This will ensure that the processes for managing serious adverse event reporting are continually refined and improved so optimising patient safety. Trial registration ACTION trial registration number: ISRCTN63110516 (date of registration 03/10/2014). Namaste trial registration number: ISRCTN14948133 (date of registration 04/10/2017).

Abstract Background Although adverse event (AE) monitoring in trials focusses on medical events, social outcomes may be important in public or social care trials. We describe our approach to reporting and categorising medical and other AE reports, using a case study trial. We explore predictors of medical and social AEs, and develop a model for conceptualising safety monitoring. Methods The Building Blocks randomised controlled trial of specialist home visiting recruited 1618 first-time mothers aged 19 years or under at 18 English sites. Event reports collected during follow-up were independently reviewed and categorised as either Medical (standard Good Clinical Practice definition), or Social (trial-specific definition). A retrospectively developed system was created to classify AEs. Univariate analyses explored the association between baseline participant and study characteristics and the subsequent reporting of events. Factors significantly associated at this stage were progressed to binary logistic regressions to assess independent predictors. Results A classification system was derived for reported AEs that distinguished between Medical or Social AEs. One thousand, three hundred and fifteen event reports were obtained for mothers or their babies (1033 Medical, 257 Social). Allocation to the trial intervention arm was associated with increased likelihood of Medical rather than Social AE reporting. Poorer baseline psycho-social status predicted both Medical and Social events, and poorer psycho-social status better predicted Social rather than Medical events. Baseline predictors of Social AEs included being younger at recruitment (OR = 0.78 (CI = 0.67 to 0.90), p = 0.001), receiving benefits (OR = 1.60 (CI = 1.09 to 2.35), p = 0.016), and having a higher antisocial behaviour score (OR = 1.22 (CI = 1.09 to 1.36), p

A recent increase in the number of safety signals of varying quality being submitted to the national and industry databases calls for the development of formalized search and analysis algorithms. The aim of the study was to develop an approach to identification and evaluation of safety signals in the database of an expert institution containing notifications of serious adverse events (SAE) that occurred during clinical trials. A specific feature of this approach is that it can be used in limited databases which, unlike international databases containing millions of reports (VigiBase, EudraVigilance), preclude the use of statistical methods for measurement of disproportionality. The proposed approach consists in evaluation of several criteria: two discriminatory ones (the geographic location of the clinical trial site and the type of report — whether it belongs to clinical trial documents other than the CIOMS form), and four expert criteria (whether a serious adverse event is a serious adverse reaction, whether the serious adverse reaction is predictable or not, the degree of reliability of the cause-effect relationship, and the benefit-risk ratio). The application of this approach resulted in the development of the «Signals» module of the expert institution’s SAE database. The «Signals» module is designed to calculate the rating of safety signals which can be used for conclusive identification and management of safety signals, and provides basis for scientifically well-grounded expert decisions on the need for administrative action on the clinical trial or its further monitoring. The developed approach can be used in the industry, national, and international pre- and postauthorization pharmacovigilance databases.

Biovigilance is the systematic monitoring of serious adverse reactions and events (SARE) that ensures the quality and safety of tissues and cells for human application in medically assisted reproduction (MAR). The Notify Library is an open access database launched by the World Health Organization and supported by the Italian National Transplant Centre (CNT) that has collected information on documented adverse occurrences in transplantation, transfusion and MAR. It is not a SARE register, but rather a collection of SARE types identified primarily by review of published articles and case reports from national or regional vigilance programmes. The Notify Library includes many well-documented records of adverse occurrences in MAR treatment, representing a useful tool for MAR operators in the evaluation of the risks associated with the clinical application of reproductive tissues and cells. It is updated with new records when a new type of incident is reported for the first time. All incident types described might have teaching value during the risk management carried out by a MAR centre. Sharing lessons learned from these incidents represents an important didactic opportunity that can help MAR centres to improve their processes and to achieve higher standards of quality and safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There has been an exponential growth in the number of clinical research studies regarding exercise training in multiple sclerosis, and literature reviews and meta-analyses have documented the many benefits of exercise training. This research further requires careful review for documenting the safety of exercise training in multiple sclerosis, as clarity on safety represents a major hurdle in the clinical prescription of exercise behaviour. Objectives: To enhance understanding of the feasibility of exercise in multiple sclerosis, we (1) provide a protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis that summarises rates and risks of clinical relapse, adverse events (i.e., an unfavourable outcome that occurs during the intervention delivery time period), and serious adverse events (i.e., an untoward occurrence that results in death or is life threatening, requires hospitalisation, or results in disability during the intervention delivery time period), as well as retention, adherence, and compliance, from randomised controlled trials of exercise training in persons with multiple sclerosis; and (2) identify moderators of relapse, adverse events, and serious adverse event rates. Methods: Eight field-relevant databases will be searched electronically. Studies that involve a randomised controlled trial of exercise training (with non-exercise, non-pharmacological, comparator), report on safety outcomes, and include adults with multiple sclerosis will be included. Rates and relative risks of the three primary outcomes (relapse, adverse event, and serious adverse event) will be calculated and reported each with standard error and 95% confidence interval. Random-effects meta-analysis will estimate mean population relative risk for outcomes. Potential sources of variability, including participant characteristics, features of the exercise stimulus, and comparison condition, will be examined with random-effects meta-regression with maximum likelihood estimation. Discussion: The results from this systematic review and meta-analysis will inform and guide healthcare practitioners, researchers, and policymakers on the safety of exercise training in persons with multiple sclerosis. Where possible, we will identify the impact of exercise type, exercise delivery style, participant disability level, and the prescription of exercise guidelines, on the safety of exercise training. The result will identify critical information on the safety of exercise in persons with multiple sclerosis, while also identifying gaps in research and setting priorities for future enquiries. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020190544 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: In antidepressant trials for pediatric patients with depression or anxiety disorders, the risk of suicidal events and other severe psychiatric adverse events such as aggression and agitation is increased with antidepressants relative to placebo. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether largely mentally healthy adolescents treated for a non-psychiatric condition are also at increased risk of suicidality and other severe psychiatric disorders. METHODS: This is a re-analysis of a placebo-controlled duloxetine trial for juvenile fibromyalgia based on the main journal article and additional data published in the online supplementary material and on ClinicalTrials.gov. Both serious adverse events related to psychiatric disorders and adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation were defined as severe treatment-emergent psychiatric adverse events. RESULTS: We found that a significant portion of adolescents had treatment-emergent suicidal ideation and behaviour as well as other severe psychiatric adverse events with duloxetine, but no such events were recorded on placebo. The incidence of severe treatment-emergent psychiatric adverse events was statistically significantly higher with duloxetine as compared to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Antidepressants may put adolescents at risk of suicidality and other severe psychiatric disorders even when the treatment indication is not depression or anxiety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundBardoxolone methyl, an Nrf2-activating and nuclear factor-κB-inhibiting semisynthetic oleanane triterpenoid compound, was evaluated in a phase 3 trial (BEACON) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and stage 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD). The trial was terminated because of an increase in heart failure events in the bardoxolone methyl group, many of which appeared related to fluid retention. Thus, additional analyses were conducted to explain these serious adverse events.MethodsPatients (n = 2,185) were randomized to receive once-daily bardoxolone methyl (20 mg) or placebo. Twenty-four-hour urine collections were analyzed in a subset of the BEACON population and from a separate, open-label pharmacology study in patients with stage 3b/4 CKD and T2DM administered 20 mg bardoxolone methyl once daily for 56 consecutive days.ResultsBardoxolone-methyl-treated patients in the BEACON substudy had a clinically meaningful reduction in urine volume and sodium excretion at week 4 relative to baseline (p < 0.05), and a separate study revealed that decreased sodium excretion and urine output occurred in some patients with stage 4 CKD but not those with stage 3b CKD. The clinical phenotype of fluid overload and heart failure in BEACON was similar to that observed with endothelin receptor antagonists in advanced CKD patients, and preclinical data demonstrate that bardoxolone methyl modifies endothelin signaling.ConclusionsThe totality of the evidence suggests that through modulation of the endothelin pathway, bardoxolone methyl may pharmacologically promote acute sodium and volume retention and increase blood pressure in patients with more advanced CKD.

Background: Intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering may offer protective effects against major adverse cardiac event (MACE) but is also associated with a greater risk of a serious adverse event (SAE). The risk-benefit profile of intensive versus standard BP control has not been comprehensively assessed. Methods: Four studies were identified from a systematic literature search for randomized controlled trials comparing intensive versus standard BP lowering that reported both MACE and SAE endpoints. A previously described statistical approach was applied to characterize the efficacy-safety tradeoff of BP control. The bivariate outcome was computed to quantitatively assess the net clinical benefit (NCB) of intensive BP lowering as compared to standard treatment, with positive values indicating increased risks and negative values indicating decreased risks. Results: Data from the SPRINT trial demonstrated that intensive strategy was superior in MACE but inferior in SAE, thereby eroding the NCB (bivariate outcome: 0.33% [−0.50% to 1.21%]). Intensive strategy from the SPS3 trial fulfilled non-inferiority in both MACE and SAE but did not reach a favorable NCB (−1.31% [−2.25% to 0.01%]). The ACCORD trial suggested that intensive strategy was non-inferior in MACE but inferior in SAE (−0.19% [−0.79% to 1.37%]). Results from the VALISH trial were inconclusive for SAE but suggested non-inferiority in MACE (−1.19% [−3.24% to 0.68%]). Conclusions: Compared to the standard blood pressure target, pooled data from randomized controlled trials suggest that intensive strategy did not achieve a net clinical benefit when weighing the benefit of MACE reduction against the risk of SAE under the bivariate framework.Abbreviations: Blood pressure (BP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), major adverse cardiac event (MACE), net clinical benefit (NCB), serious adverse event (SAE), systolic blood pressure (SBP).

Purpose: Improving the safety of general wards is a key to reducing serious adverse events in the postoperative period. We investigated the characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of postoperative patients managed by a rapid response system (RRS) in Japan to improve postoperative management. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed cases requiring RRS intervention that were included in the In-Hospital Emergency Registry in Japan. We analyzed data reported by 34 Japanese hospitals between January 2014 and March 2018, mainly focusing on postoperative patients for whom the RRS was activated within 7 days of surgery. Non-postoperative patients, for whom the RRS was activated in all other settings, were used for comparison as necessary. Results: There were 609 (12.7%) postoperative patients among the total patients in the registry. The major criteria were staff concerns (30.2%) and low oxygen saturation (29.7%). Hypotension, tachycardia, and inability to contact physicians were observed as triggers significantly more frequently in postoperative patients when compared with non-postoperative patients. Among RRS activations within 7 days of surgery, 68.9% of activations occurred within postoperative day 3. The ordering of tests (46.8%) and fluid bolus (34.6%) were major interventions that were performed significantly more frequently in postoperative patients when compared with non-postoperative patients. The rate of RRS activations resulting in ICU care was 32.8%. The mortality rate at 1 month was 16.2%. Conclusion: Approximately, 70% of the RRS activations occurred within postoperative day 3. Circulatory problems were a more frequent cause of RRS activation in the postoperative group than in the non-postoperative group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim The rapid response system (RRS) is an in‐hospital medical safety system. To date, not much is known about patient disposition after RRS activation, especially discharge home. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence, characteristics, and outcomes of patients with adverse events who required RRS activation. Methods Retrospective data from the In‐Hospital Emergency Registry in Japan collected from April 2016 to November 2020 were eligible for our analysis. We divided patients into Home Discharge, Transfer, and Death groups. The primary outcome was the prevalence of direct discharge home, and independently associated factors were determined using multivariable logistic regression. Results We enrolled 2,043 patients who met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of discharge home was 45.7%; 934 patients were included in the Home Discharge group. Age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95–0.97), malignancy (AOR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.48–0.99), oxygen administration before RRS (AOR 0.49; 95% CI, 0.36–0.66), cerebral performance category score on admission (AOR 0.38; 95% CI, 0.26–0.56), do not attempt resuscitation order before RRS (AOR 0.17; 95% CI, 0.10–0.29), RRS call for respiratory failure (AOR 0.50; 95% CI, 0.34–0.72), RRS call for stroke (AOR 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03–0.37), and intubation (AOR 0.20; 95% CI, 0.12–0.34) were independently negative, and RRS call for anaphylaxis (AOR 15.3; 95% CI, 2.72–86.3) was positively associated with discharge home. Conclusion Less than half of the in‐hospital patients under RRS activation could discharge home. Patients’ conditions before RRS activation, disorders requiring RRS activation, and intubation were factors that affected direct discharge home.

Background/aims: Serious adverse event reporting guidelines have largely been developed for pharmaceutical trials. There is evidence that serious adverse events, such as psychological distress, can also occur in non-pharmaceutical trials. Managing serious adverse event reporting and monitoring in palliative care non-pharmaceutical trials can be particularly challenging. This is because patients living with advanced malignant or non-malignant disease have a high risk of hospitalisation and/or death as a result of progression of their disease rather than due to the trial intervention or procedures. This paper presents a number of recommendations for managing serious adverse event reporting that are drawn from two palliative care non-pharmacological trials. Methods: The recommendations were iteratively developed across a number of exemplar trials. This included examining national and international safety reporting guidance, reviewing serious adverse event reporting procedures from other pharmacological and non-pharmacological trials, a review of the literature and collaboration between the ACTION study team and Data Safety Monitoring Committee. These two groups included expertise in oncology, palliative care, statistics and medical ethics and this collaboration led to the development of serious adverse event reporting procedures. Results: The recommendations included; allowing adequate time at the study planning stage to develop serious adverse event reporting procedures, especially in multi-national studies or research naïve settings; reviewing the level of trial oversight required; defining what a serious adverse event is in your trial based on your study population; development and implementation of standard operating procedures and training; refining the reporting procedures during the trial if necessary and publishing serious adverse events in findings papers. Conclusions: There is a need for researchers to share their experiences of managing this challenging aspect of trial conduct. This will ensure that the processes for managing serious adverse event reporting are continually refined and improved so optimising patient safety. Trial registration: ACTION trial registration number: ISRCTN63110516 (date of registration 03/10/2014). Namaste trial registration number: ISRCTN14948133 (date of registration 04/10/2017). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A tetravalent live-attenuated 3-dose vaccine composed of chimeras of yellow fever 17D and the four dengue viruses (CYD, also called Dengvaxia) completed phase 3 clinical testing in over 35,000 children leading to a recommendation that vaccine be administered to >/ = 9 year-olds residing in highly dengue- endemic countries. When clinical trial results were assessed 2 years after the first dose, vaccine efficacy among seropositives was high, but among seronegatives efficacy was marginal. Breakthrough dengue hospitalizations of vaccinated children occurred continuously over a period of 4–5 years post 3rd dose in an age distribution suggesting these children had been vaccinated when seronegative. This surmise was validated recently when the manufacturer reported that dengue NS1 IgG antibodies were absent in sera from hospitalized vaccinated children, an observation consistent with their having received Dengvaxia when seronegative. Based upon published efficacy data and in compliance with initial published recommendations by the manufacturer and WHO the Philippine government undertook to vaccinate 800,000-plus 9 year-olds starting in April 2016. Eighteen months later, dengue hospitalizations and a deaths were reported among vaccinated children. The benefits of administering Dengvaxia predicted by the manufacturer, WHO and others derive from scoring dengue hospitalizations of vaccinated children as vaccine failures rather than as vaccine enhanced dengue disease. Recommended regimens for administration of Dengvaxia should have been structured to warn of and avoid serious adverse events.

The article presents the results of the Scientific Centre for Expert Evaluation of Medicinal Products», Ministry of Health of Russia of the analysis and generalization of materials on the safety of clinical trials of medicines for medical use (including international multi-center clinical trials), permits for which were issued by the Ministry of Health of Russia. Study materials consist of 38273 submissions of developers of medicines, containing information about 62462 the occurrence of serious adverse events and serious adverse reactions to new drugs, and safety update reports from 1 July 2012 to 31 December 2016. The results of the analysis and generalization of obtained with the use of modern methods of investigation allowed the authors to establish the existence of quantitative and qualitative problems with material of safety clinical studies in 2012-2013. It is shown that already in 2013 the complex was developed and implemented measures helped to solve the identified problems: to increase by 22 times the number of clinical trial materials received from the Russian clinical centers and eliminate problems with the quality of the submissions, which is currently equally acceptable for all developers and organizations conducting clinical research. Recommendations for effective analysis and synthesis of the material safety clinical studies of medicinal products by the regulatory authorities, allowing to quickly make evidence-based decisions in relation to the preparation of recommendations for adoption of administrative decisions in the field of pharmacovigilance and clinical research.

One of the reasons that a research molecule undergoes through different phases of clinical trials is to establish the safety and efficacy of the drug. To establish the safety profile of any drug, the most important aspect is to evaluate every adverse event (AE) that a clinical trial individual experiences. This detail is provided by any investigator or sponsor through the narratives that is prepared post the analysis of a serious AE. The purpose of this article is to emphasize the importance of these narratives.

Varicella vaccine meningitis is an uncommon delayed adverse event of vaccination. Varicella vaccine meningitis has been diagnosed in 12 children, of whom 3 were immunocompromised. We now report two additional cases of vaccine meningitis in twice-immunized immunocompetent children and we perform further testing on a prior third case. We used three methods to diagnose or investigate cases of varicella vaccine meningitis, none of which have been used previously on this disease. These include metagenomic next-generation sequencing and cytokine multiplex profiling of cerebrospinal fluid and immunology exome analysis of white blood cells. In one new case, the diagnosis was confirmed by metagenomic next-generation sequencing of cerebrospinal fluid. Both varicella vaccine virus and human herpesvirus 7 DNA were detected. We performed cytokine multiplex profiling on the cerebrospinal fluid of two cases and found ten elevated biomarkers: interferon gamma, interleukins IL-1RA, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-17F, chemokines CXCL-9, CXCL-10, CCL-2, and G-CSF. In a second new case, we performed immunology exome sequencing on a panel of 356 genes, but no errors were found. After a review of all 14 cases, we concluded that (i) there is no common explanation for this adverse event, but (ii) ingestion of an oral corticosteroid burst 3–4 weeks before onset of vaccine meningitis may be a risk factor in some cases.

The market for products featuring hemp extracts is large and growing larger. However, safety concerns have been raised by medical and regulatory agencies. Post marketing surveillance of full spectrum hemp extract (FSHE) products manufactured and distributed by CV Sciences (CVSI) and traded under the brand PlusCBD™ was conducted over a 2-year period (2018-2019). The safety of these products was assessed by analyzing adverse events reports. From a total of approximately five million product units sold during the 2-year period, 1,429 (0.03%) adverse events (AE) were reported in 1,151 unique customers. Of those, only two were classified as serious AEs. For orally ingested products, the most common types of AEs reported were gastrointestinal (e.g. abdominal discomfort), while for topically applied products, the most reports mentioned dermatological symptoms (e.g. rashes). There has been no evidence of liver toxicity associated with CVSI products. Based on this longitudinal dataset, the products manufactured using CVSI's proprietary processes are safe and well tolerated at the recommended doses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To assess the incidence rate and type of serious adverse events (SAE) in children with rheumatic inflammatory diseases treated with the interleukin 6 blocker tocilizumab (TCZ). A retrospective review of all consecutive patients diagnosed with an inflammatory rheumatic disease and receiving at least one dose of TCZ was performed in two French tertiary pediatric rheumatology centers between 01/2007 and 06/2019. SAE were defined as a life-threatening event and/or an event requiring hospital admission, leading to permanent disability or treatment discontinuation. One hundred four children (64 female) were included. Most children suffered from systemic (n = 43) or polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (n = 43). Median age at TCZ start was 8.9 years (IQR 4.7 – 12.1), most children had received prednisone (81%), and/or a biologic agent (84%) prior to TCZ. Median TCZ treatment duration was 1.6 years (IQR 0.5 – 2.7), total TCZ exposure 215 patient years. Thirty-three SAE were observed in 26 (25%) children (SAE 15.3/100 patient years), mostly infections and infusion reactions. Children with SAE were significantly younger at disease onset (p = 0.034) and TCZ initiation (p = 0.016). Children experiencing infusion reactions were more likely to have systemic JIA or another autoinflammatory disease (p = 0.021), they all had active disease. At last follow up, 61 (59%) children remained on TCZ. In this cohort, SAE and most commonly serious infections were observed in a quarter of children. Severe infusion reactions were associated with persistently active autoinflammatory disease. Ongoing careful monitoring of TCZ-treated patients, especially young children with marked systemic inflammation is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) is a rare demyelinating disorder of the brain caused by reactivation of the JC virus (JCV), a polyomavirus that infects at least 60% of the population but is asymptomatic or results in benign symptoms in most people. PML occurs as a secondary disease in a variety of disorders or as a serious adverse event from immunosuppressant agents, but is mainly found in three groups: HIV-infected patients, patients with hematological malignancies, or multiple sclerosis (MS) patients on the immunosuppressant therapy natalizumab. It is severely debilitating and is deadly in ~50% HIV cases, ~90% of hematological malignancy cases, and ~24% of MS-natalizumab cases. A PML risk prediction test would have clinical utility in all at risk patient groups but would be particularly beneficial in patients considering therapy with immunosuppressant agents known to cause PML, such as natalizumab, rituximab, and others. While a JC antibody test is currently used in the clinical decision process for natalizumab, it is suboptimal because of its low specificity and requirement to periodically retest patients for seroconversion or to assess if a patient's JCV index has increased. Whereas a high specificity genetic risk prediction test comprising host genetic risk variants (i.e., germline variants occurring at higher frequency in PML patients compared to the general population) could be administered one time to provide clinicians with additional risk prediction information that is independent of JCV serostatus. Prior PML case reports support the hypothesis that PML risk is greater in patients with a genetically caused immunodeficiency disorder. To identify germline PML risk variants, we performed exome sequencing on 185 PML cases (70 in a discovery cohort and 115 in a replication cohort) and used the gnomAD variant database for interpretation. Our study yielded 19 rare variants (maximum allele frequency of 0.02 in gnomAD ethnically matched populations) that impact 17 immune function genes (10 are known to cause inborn errors of immunity). Modeling of these variants in a PML genetic risk test for MS patients considering natalizumab treatment indicates that at least a quarter of PML cases may be preventable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dietary supplement marketers assure the safety of their products by complying with current good manufacturing practices and a host of federal regulations, including those enforced by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Post-market surveillance is a key part of identifying safety problems associated with dietary supplement products. FDA requires dietary supplement marketers to provide a domestic address or phone number on product labels for consumers, family members, or health care professionals to report adverse events (AEs) associated with product use and to report all serious adverse events (SAEs) to the agency within 15 business days of receipt. We aimed to evaluate the characteristics of AEs reported with dietary supplement use, including dietary supplement type and Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) system organ class (SOC) that occur with reported SAEs. A total of 41,121 unique adverse event cases reported to two large, U.S.-based dietary supplement marketers in a 2.5-year period (March 1, 2014–August 31, 2016) were assessed for seriousness using established criteria. Each SAE was assigned one or more MedDRA preferred terms and system organ classes (SOC). The types of supplements most responsible for SAEs were assessed. Of the 41,121 AE cases reported, 203 (0.48%) were SAEs. SAEs tended to occur with products marketed for weight loss (69.0%) and glycemic control (19.2%). SAEs occurred most commonly in the cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, and nervous system disorder SOCs. The percentage of SAEs reported to dietary supplement marketers is low, predominantly among consumers of two types of supplements. Further study is needed among a larger cohort of supplement users to determine causal associations between types of supplement products and serious adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: Epidural analgesia is an effective, established perioperative intervention in all age‐groups. In children, however, epidural‐related data are limited compared to the adult population. The aim of this study was to examine the use of pediatric epidural analgesia in our institution and, thereby, add to the existing data pool. Methodology: Patients who received epidural analgesia as part of their perioperative management between 1996 and 2016 at Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK, were studied to determine how epidural practice has changed over time, associated incidence of serious adverse events, complications, and patient/parent satisfaction. Epidural use and monitoring were in accordance with standard hospital protocols. Data were prospectively collected and entered into a secure database by trained personnel. These data were subsequently extracted for retrospective analysis. Results: A total of 3876 patients were included. The median age was 4.4 years (range 1 day to 20 years), and the median weight was 20.3 kg. Across all age‐groups, the lumbar region was the most common site of epidural insertion while urology (42.2%) and general surgery (37.3%) were the specialities for which it was most utilized. Over the study period, the number of epidurals performed declined while the number of surgical procedures performed simultaneously increased. The infusate most commonly used was local anesthetic with preservative‐free morphine (71.9%). In 923 (23.2%) patients, systemic opioids were additionally used for analgesic management by means of patient‐controlled analgesia or nurse‐controlled analgesia. There was one serious adverse event in the form of permanent nerve injury, giving an overall incidence of approximately 1:3800. Other complications included postoperative nausea and vomiting (35.9%), urinary retention (4.4%), and pruritus (31%). Overall global satisfaction with the service was generally high, with 95% providing a rating of "very good" or "good." Conclusion: This study evaluated two decades of epidural practice in our institution. Epidural analgesia remains a safe, effective option for postoperative analgesia, but its use has declined over time, and this trend is likely to continue. Rates of serious adverse events and complications were low and comparable to those published in other similar studies. Global satisfaction among patients/parents remains high. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Described four cases of illness in children hospitalized for one month after vaccination with live vaccines. In all cases the options considered in differential diagnosis between vaccinates reaction; undercurrents infections; separately shown the possibility of development of mumps in post-vaccination period vaccination party. The difficulties of differential diagnostics of diseases of post-vaccination period were analyzed. The necessity of laboratory examination in such cases to establish the etiological factor. The comparison of the system of registration of such events in the Russian Federation and abroad. The need to change the system of registration of adverse events in post-vaccination period.

Background: Although adverse event (AE) monitoring in trials focusses on medical events, social outcomes may be important in public or social care trials. We describe our approach to reporting and categorising medical and other AE reports, using a case study trial. We explore predictors of medical and social AEs, and develop a model for conceptualising safety monitoring.Methods: The Building Blocks randomised controlled trial of specialist home visiting recruited 1618 first-time mothers aged 19 years or under at 18 English sites. Event reports collected during follow-up were independently reviewed and categorised as either Medical (standard Good Clinical Practice definition), or Social (trial-specific definition). A retrospectively developed system was created to classify AEs. Univariate analyses explored the association between baseline participant and study characteristics and the subsequent reporting of events. Factors significantly associated at this stage were progressed to binary logistic regressions to assess independent predictors.Results: A classification system was derived for reported AEs that distinguished between Medical or Social AEs. One thousand, three hundred and fifteen event reports were obtained for mothers or their babies (1033 Medical, 257 Social). Allocation to the trial intervention arm was associated with increased likelihood of Medical rather than Social AE reporting. Poorer baseline psycho-social status predicted both Medical and Social events, and poorer psycho-social status better predicted Social rather than Medical events. Baseline predictors of Social AEs included being younger at recruitment (OR = 0.78 (CI = 0.67 to 0.90), p = 0.001), receiving benefits (OR = 1.60 (CI = 1.09 to 2.35), p = 0.016), and having a higher antisocial behaviour score (OR = 1.22 (CI = 1.09 to 1.36), p < 0.001). Baseline predictors of Medical AEs included having a limiting long-term illness (OR = 1.37 (CI = 1.01 to 1.88), p = 0.046), poorer mental health (OR = 1.03 (CI = 1.01 to 1.05), p = 0.004), and being in the intervention arm of the trial (OR = 1.34 (CI = 1.07 to 1.70), p = 0.012).Conclusions: Continuity between baseline and subsequent adverse experiences was expected despite potentially beneficial intervention impact. We hypothesise that excess events reported for intervention-arm participants is likely attributable to surveillance bias. We interpreted our findings against a new model that explicates processes that may drive event occurrence, presentation and reporting. Focussing only upon Medical events may miss the well-being and social circumstances that are important for interpreting intervention safety and participant management.Trial Registration: ISRCTN, ID: ISRCTN23019866. Registered on 20 April 2009. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Molecular target anticancer drugs are commonly used in various forms of cancers. It is a concern that the risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) and fatal adverse events (FAEs) of molecular target drugs are increasing. An up-to-date meta-analysis of all Phase II/III/IV randomized trials of molecular target anticancer drugs was conducted to calculate the increased risk of SAEs and FAEs. A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to April 6, 2017, was conducted. The study enrolled Phase II/III/IV randomized trials of cancer that compared molecular target drugs alone versus placebo or performed single-arm analysis of molecular target drugs. Data on SAEs and FAEs were extracted from the included studies and pooled to compute risk ratio (RR), the overall incidence, and 95% confidence interval (CI). In this meta-analysis, a total of 19,965 and 26,642 patients in randomized 53 and 65 Phase II/II/IV trials were included in the analysis of SAEs and FAEs associated with molecular target anticancer drug, respectively. There were significant differences in the relationship of molecular target anticancer drugs with SAEs (RR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.35–1.82, P < 0.01, I² = 81%) and FAEs (RR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.19–1.91, P < 0.01, I² = 0%) compared to placebo. The overall incidence of SAEs and FAEs was 0.269 (95% CI = 0.262–0.276, P < 0.01) and 0.023 (95% CI = 0.020–0.025, P < 0.01), respectively. Molecular target anticancer drugs significantly increased the risk of SAEs and FAEs. For patients taking molecular target drugs, efforts are needed to prevent the occurrence of SAEs and FAEs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical trial related injury and serious adverse events (SAE) are a major area of concern. In all such scenarios the investigator is responsible for medical care of the trial participant and also ethically bound to report the event to all the stakeholders of the clinical trial. The trial sponsor is responsible for ongoing safety evaluation of the investigational product, reporting and compensating the participant in case of any SAE. The Ethics Committee and regulatory body of the country are to uphold the ethical principles of beneficence, justice, non-maleficence in such cases. Any unwanted and noxious effect of a drug when used in recommended doses is an adverse drug reaction (ADR) whereas if causal association is not yet established it is termed adverse event (AE). An AE or ADR that is associated with death, in-patient hospitalization, prolongation of hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly, or is otherwise life threatening is termed as an SAE. The principal investigator reports the event to the licensing authority (DCGI), sponsor and Chairperson of the Ethics Committee (EC) within 24 hours of occurrence of the SAE. This report is furthered by a detailed report by both the investigator and the EC and given to the DCGI who then gives a final decision on the amount of compensation to be given by the sponsor or the sponsor's representative to the grieving party.

Objective To evaluate whether polypharmacy is associated with treatment response and serious adverse events (SAEs) in patients with RA using data from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register (BSRBR-RA). Methods The BSRBR-RA is a prospective observational cohort study of biologic therapy starters and a DMARD comparator arm. A logistic regression model was used to calculate the odds of a EULAR 'good response' after 12 months of biologic therapy by medication count. Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify risk of SAEs. The utility of the models were compared with the Rheumatic Disease Comorbidity Index using Receiver Operator Characteristic and Harrell's C statistic. Results The analysis included 22 005 patients, of which 83% were initiated on biologics. Each additional medication reduced the odds of a EULAR good response by 8% [odds ratios 0.92 (95% CI 0.91, 0.93) P < 0.001] and 3% in the adjusted model [adjusted odds ratios 0.97 (95% CI 0.95, 0.98) P < 0.001]. The Receiver Operator Characteristic demonstrated significantly greater areas under the curve with the polypharmacy model than the Rheumatic Disease Comorbidity Index. There were 12 547 SAEs reported in 7286 patients. Each additional medication equated to a 13% increased risk of an SAE [hazard ratio 1.13 (95% CI 1.12, 1.13) P < 0.001] and 6% in the adjusted model [adjusted hazard ratio 1.06 (95% CI 1.05, 1.07) P < 0.001]. Predictive values for SAEs were comparable between the polypharmacy and Rheumatic Disease Comorbidity Index model. Conclusion Polypharmacy is a simple but valuable predictor of clinical outcomes in patients with RA. This study supports medication count as a valid measure for use in epidemiologic analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: A retrospective review of 281 consecutive cases of adult spine deformity (ASD) surgery (age 55 ± 19 yrs, 91% female, follow-up 4.3 ± 1.9 yrs) from a multicenter database.Objective: To compare the value and predictive ability of the 5-item modified frailty index (mFI-5) to the conventional 11-item modified frailty index (mFI-11) for severe adverse events (SAEs).Summary Of Background Data: Several recent studies have described associations between frailty and surgical complications. However, the predictive power and usefulness of the mFI-5 have not been proven.Methods: SAEs were defined as: Clavien-Dindo grade >3, reoperation required, deterioration of motor function at discharge, or new motor deficit within 2 years. The patients' frailty was categorized by the mFI-5 and mFI-11 (robust, prefrail, or frail). Spearman's rho was used to assess correlation between the mFI-5 and mFI-11. Univariate and multivariate Poisson regression analyses were conducted to analyze the relative risk of mFI-5 and mFI-11 as a predictor for SAEs in ASD surgery. Age, sex, and baseline sagittal alignment (Schwab-SRS classification subcategories) were used to adjust the baseline variance of the patients.Results: Of the 281 patients, 63 (22%) had developed SAE at 2 years. The weighted Kappa ratio between the mFI-5 and mFI-11 was 0.87, indicating excellent concordance across ASD surgery. Frailty was associated with increased total complications, perioperative complications, implant-related complications, and SAEs. Adjusted and unadjusted models showed similar c-statistics for mFI-5 and mFI-11 and a strong predictive ability for SAEs in ASD surgery. As the mFI-5 increased from 0 to ≥2, the rate of SAEs increased from 17% to 63% (P < 0.01), and the relative risk was 2.2 (95% CI: 1.3-3.7).Conclusion: The mFI-5 and the mFI-11 were equally effective predictors of SEA development in ASD surgery. The evaluation of patient frailty using mFI-5 may help surgeons optimize procedures and counsel patients.Level Of Evidence: 4. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: During labour, remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia is used as an alternative to neuraxial analgesia. Remifentanil is associated with hypoventilation and respiratory depression but the frequency of serious maternal and neonatal adverse events is unknown. The aim of this study was to estimate the number of serious adverse events attributed to the use of remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia during labour in The Netherlands and to investigate the circumstances (e.g. monitoring, practice deviations) of these events and the subsequent management.Methods: In a nationwide survey among obstetricians, anaesthetists and clinical midwives the frequency of serious adverse events was assessed. A questionnaire was sent by email to all 61 Dutch hospitals in which remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia is, or has been, available for labour analgesia. All reported cases were assessed independently by two expert teams.Results: We received information from all hospitals. After independent assessments, 17 cases of single maternal desaturation; 10 maternal cases of apnoea, bradycardia and/or cardiac arrest; and two neonatal cases of respiratory depression, over a period of more than 10 years of remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia use, were identified as a serious adverse event. All serious adverse events were resolved without irreversible damage.Conclusions: The risk of a potentially life-threatening serious adverse event attributed to remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia seems to be low. All patients recovered without deficit. Adherence to strict monitoring and the attendance of trained healthcare providers is required to safely use remifentanil for labour analgesia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Introduction Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a well-established curative treatment for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from colorectal cancer (CRC) and pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP). The study's aim was to present a single center's initial experience with CRS and HIPEC and report the postoperative morbidity in elderly patients. Methods A retrospective observational study was conducted of all patients with peritoneally disseminated colorectal cancer or pseudomyxoma peritonei undergoing CRS and HIPEC between March 2014 and March 2017. Patient characteristics and the peri- and postoperative course were reviewed. Elderly patients were defined as those aged ≥ 65 years. Postoperative complications were classified according to the Serious Adverse Event (SAE) grading system. Results 122 patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC were split into two groups based on age (< 65 years versus ≥ 65 years) at the time of surgery. Both groups were comparable for ASA score, Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI), procedure time and blood loss. Serious Adverse Event (SAE) grade > 3 morbidity was 26.7% in the elderly group as opposed to 10.4% in the younger group (p = 0.034). Both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that age was a significant risk factor (OR = 3.2, 95% CI 1.1–9.4, p = 0.033) for severe postoperative morbidity (SAE > 3). Conclusion This retrospective study showed advanced age to be a significant risk factor for SAE > 3, after undergoing CRS and HIPEC. The initial institutional experience resembles previously published literature in terms of severe postoperative morbidity in elderly patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering may offer protective effects against major adverse cardiac event (MACE) but is also associated with a greater risk of a serious adverse event (SAE). The risk-benefit profile of intensive versus standard BP control has not been comprehensively assessed. Methods: Four studies were identified from a systematic literature search for randomized controlled trials comparing intensive versus standard BP lowering that reported both MACE and SAE endpoints. A previously described statistical approach was applied to characterize the efficacy-safety tradeoff of BP control. The bivariate outcome was computed to quantitatively assess the net clinical benefit (NCB) of intensive BP lowering as compared to standard treatment, with positive values indicating increased risks and negative values indicating decreased risks. Results: Data from the SPRINT trial demonstrated that intensive strategy was superior in MACE but inferior in SAE, thereby eroding the NCB (bivariate outcome: 0.33% [−0.50% to 1.21%]). Intensive strategy from the SPS3 trial fulfilled non-inferiority in both MACE and SAE but did not reach a favorable NCB (−1.31% [−2.25% to 0.01%]). The ACCORD trial suggested that intensive strategy was non-inferior in MACE but inferior in SAE (−0.19% [−0.79% to 1.37%]). Results from the VALISH trial were inconclusive for SAE but suggested non-inferiority in MACE (−1.19% [−3.24% to 0.68%]). Conclusions: Compared to the standard blood pressure target, pooled data from randomized controlled trials suggest that intensive strategy did not achieve a net clinical benefit when weighing the benefit of MACE reduction against the risk of SAE under the bivariate framework.Abbreviations: Blood pressure (BP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), major adverse cardiac event (MACE), net clinical benefit (NCB), serious adverse event (SAE), systolic blood pressure (SBP). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Introduction The constant development of ambulatory surgery (AS) raises the problem of monitoring patients after discharge and the risk of death in the case of delays in the management of a serious complication. Patients and methods The aim of this retrospective study was to describe the deaths observed within the 30-day period following AS declared to the SHAM insurance (Société hospitalière d’assurance mutuelle) over the last 10 years. Results During the study period 33,962 claims were surgery-related and 11 were for deaths after AS. Two of the death claims were excluded from our study because they occurred after the first month. The surgeries concerned were tonsilectomy (3), cataract (2), inguinal hernia (2), varicose vein stripping (1) and laparoscopy (1). Death occurred on average 5.4 days after the AS, in intensive care (3), during hospitalisation (2), with emergency medical services (1), in an emergency department (1) or at home (2). Anaesthesia was directly implicated in 3 cases: anaphylactic shock (Diamox), pneumoperitoneum (gastric swelling) and hemoperitoneum (mismanagement of anticoagulants). 1 case was due to a pulmonary embolism and 5 to a surgical cause. Discussion–conclusion There was only one case where the complication was aggravated due to the delay of care provision and this was because of a lack of information on the complications requiring an emergency return (abdominal pain after laparoscopy). In all the other cases, death would also probably have occurred during conventional hospitalisation, either because it was unavoidable or because the patient was too far from the surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Phase I clinical trial is the first exposure of investigational medicinal product in humans and it sets the pillar for further clinical development. Substantial attention has been paid to the first in human clinical trials after TeGenero TGN1412 disaster in 2006 which led to serious toxicity including multi-organ failure in 6 healthy volunteers. Since then many recommendation and guidelines have been formulated for the safe and rational conduct of such trials. In January 2016, another catastrophe occurred in France during Phase I trial of BIA 10-2474, a fatty acid amide hydrolase inhibitor, which led to one death and caused serious neurological damage in few other healthy volunteers. This review will focus on potential issues in BIA 10-2474 trial, possible measures that should have been taken during trials to prevent this disaster and potential safety measures for the rational and safe conduct of Phase I trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]