In pharmacovigilance, disproportionality analyses based on individual case safety reports are widely used to detect safety signals. Unfortunately, publishing disproportionality analyses lacks specific guidelines, often leading to incomplete and ambiguous reporting, and carries the risk of incorrect conclusions when data are not placed in the correct context. The REporting of A Disproportionality analysis for drUg Safety signal detection using individual case safety reports in PharmacoVigilance (READUS-PV) statement was developed to address this issue by promoting transparent and comprehensive reporting of disproportionality studies. While the statement paper explains in greater detail the procedure followed to develop these guidelines, with this explanation paper we present the 14 items retained for READUS-PV guidelines, together with an in-depth explanation of their rationale and bullet points to illustrate their practical implementation. Our primary objective is to foster the adoption of the READUS-PV guidelines among authors, editors, peer reviewers, and readers of disproportionality analyses. Enhancing transparency, completeness, and accuracy of reporting, as well as proper interpretation of their results, READUS-PV guidelines will ultimately facilitate evidence-based decision making in pharmacovigilance.

Background and aim Disproportionality analyses using reports of suspected adverse drug reactions are the most commonly used quantitative methods for detecting safety signals in pharmacovigilance. However, their methods and results are generally poorly reported in published articles and existing guidelines do not capture the specific features of disproportionality analyses. We here describe the development of a guideline (REporting of A Disproportionality analysis for drUg Safety signal detection using individual case safety reports in PharmacoVigilance [READUS-PV]) for reporting the results of disproportionality analyses in articles and abstracts. Methods We established a group of 34 international experts from universities, the pharmaceutical industry, and regulatory agencies, with expertise in pharmacovigilance, disproportionality analyses, and assessment of safety signals. We followed a three-step process to develop the checklist: (1) an open-text survey to generate a first list of items; (2) an online Delphi method to select and rephrase the most important items; (3) a final online consensus meeting. Results Among the panel members, 33 experts responded to round 1 and 30 to round 2 of the Delphi and 25 participated to the consensus meeting. Overall, 60 recommendations for the main body of the manuscript and 13 recommendations for the abstracts were retained by participants after the Delphi method. After merging of some items together and the online consensus meeting, the READUS-PV guidelines comprise a checklist of 32 recommendations, in 14 items, for the reporting of disproportionality analyses in the main body text and four items, comprising 12 recommendations, for abstracts. Conclusions The READUS-PV guidelines will support authors, editors, peer-reviewers, and users of disproportionality analyses using individual case safety report databases. Adopting these guidelines will lead to more transparent, comprehensive, and accurate reporting and interpretation of disproportionality analyses, facilitating the integration with other sources of evidence.

Sleepiness at the wheel is widely believed to be a cause of motor vehicle accidents. Nevertheless, a systematic review of studies investigating this relationship has not yet been published. The objective of this study was to quantify the relationship between sleepiness at the wheel and motor vehicle accidents. A systematic review was performed using Medline, Scopus and ISI Web of Science. The outcome measure of interest was motor vehicle accident defined as involving four or two wheeled vehicles in road traffic, professional and non-professional drivers, with or without objective consequences. The exposure was sleepiness at the wheel defined as self-reported sleepiness at the wheel. Studies were included if they provided adjusted risk estimates of motor vehicles accidents related to sleepiness at the wheel. Risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were extracted and pooled as odds ratios (OR) using a random-effect model. Heterogeneity was quantified using Q statistics and the I² index. The potential causes of heterogeneity were investigated using meta-regressions. Ten cross-sectional studies (51,520 subjects), six case-control studies (4,904 subjects), and one cohort study (13,674 subjects) were included. Sleepiness at the wheel was associated with an increased risk of motor vehicle accidents (pooled OR 2.51 [95%CI 1.87; 3.39]). A significant heterogeneity was found between the individual risk estimates (Q =93.21; I² = 83%). Sleepiness at the wheel increases the risk of motor vehicle accidents and should be considered when investigating fitness to drive. Further studies are required to explore the nature of this relationship.

Introduction: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. They are associated with healthcare costs due to hospital admissions or prolonged length of stay, as well as additional interventions. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of observational studies to evaluate the economic impact of preventable ADRs. Areas covered: Published observational research investigating the cost of preventable ADRs in Western countries (limited to the USA and European countries). Expert opinion: Several reviews have been carried out in the field of the ADR epidemiology but fewer reviews have investigated the economic impact of ADRs, and at the time of writing, none has focused on preventable ADRs. The reason why future research should focus on the costs of preventable ADRs is that both the costs and the negative clinical outcomes are preventable, and as such, are a key point of public health policy action. Nevertheless, the present review highlights an important and sobering limitation of published research on the cost of preventable ADRs, of which the major limitation is the heterogeneity in methods and in reporting which limit what can be known through the summarizing work of a systematic review.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), the treatment of choice for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), can be associated to cardiovascular (CV) adverse events (AEs). A case/non-case study was performed using AE reports registered in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database to compare the risk of CV event reports related to TKIs indicated in the management of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Disproportionality of CV event-related TKIs was computed using the Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR) as a measure of potential risk increase. Nilotinib accounts for more than half of reported cases related to TKIs. Signal of Disproportionate Reporting (SDR) was found for cardiac failure, ischemic heart disease, cardiac arrhythmias, torsade de pointes/QT prolongation, hypertension, and pulmonary hypertension. Dasatinib and bosutinib were related to the highest disproportionality for cardiac failure. Nilotinib was associated with the highest SDR for ischemic heart disease, torsade de pointes/QT prolongation and cardiac arrhythmias. Only ponatinib was related to an SDR for hypertension, while dasatinib and imatinib were related to pulmonary hypertension. In the context of CML, TKIs have different safety profiles related to CV events, among which nilotinib seems particularly related to. These results claim for a revision of its CV safety profile mainly for the risk of torsade de pointes/QT prolongation.