5PSQ-221 Safety profile of experimental therapies used in the COVID-19 pandemic based on data from the National Minimum Data Set
Background and importanceIn response to the COVID-19 pandemic, scientific societies and regulatory agencies quickly reviewed any available evidence to fill the therapeutic gap. In this context, many drugs were used with an uncertain benefit–risk profile that needs to be evaluated.Aim and objectivesT...
Saved in:
| Published in: | European journal of hospital pharmacy. Science and practice Vol. 28; no. Suppl 1; p. A163 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
London
BMJ Publishing Group LTD
01-03-2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background and importanceIn response to the COVID-19 pandemic, scientific societies and regulatory agencies quickly reviewed any available evidence to fill the therapeutic gap. In this context, many drugs were used with an uncertain benefit–risk profile that needs to be evaluated.Aim and objectivesTo analyse the safety profile of experimental therapies that were used at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.Material and methodsA retrospective observational study was conducted to analyse the safety profile of anti-COVID therapy accessible according to the protocols that were approved. Patients admitted with a COVID-19 diagnosis between March and May 2020 who had an adverse event (AE) coded in the discharge/death medical report were obtained from the National Minimum Data Set. The suspected drug was identified based on previous information. Those with AEs attributed to anti-COVID therapy were selected. The causal relationship was evaluated using Naranjo’s algorithm (NA).Results141 AEs were coded in 105 patients admitted with a diagnosis of COVID-19. 60.3% were attributed to anti-COVID therapy in 66 patients with a median age of 72 years (95% CI 68 to 76), 62.1% men (37.9% women). AE severity was: 63.5% mild, 29.4% moderate and 7.1% severe. 23.5% of AEs did not require intervention, 37.6% required pharmacological treatment, 35.3% suspension of the drug, 2.4% close monitoring and 1.2% dose reduction.Abstract 5PSQ-221 Table 1 AE n (%) Suspected drug n NA median (min–max) Causal relationship Gastrointestinal disorders 27 (31.8%) Lopinavir/ritonavir 26 6 (3–7) Probable Codeine 1 6 (6–6) Probable Blood glucose disorders 23 (27.0%) Glucocorticoid 20 5 (3–7) Probable Insulin 3 6 (3–3) Probable Hypertransaminasaemia 15 (17.6%) Azithromycin 6 5 (3–5) Probable Lopinavir/ritonavir 3 4 (4–4) Possible Hydroxychloroquine 3 3 (3–5) Possible Interferon beta-1a 3 3 (3–3) Possible Anaemia/thrombopenia 5 (5.9%) Heparin 3 9 (8–9) Definite Tocilizumab 2 6 (6–6) Probable Skin disorders 4 (4.7%) Hydroxychloroquine 1 6 (6–6) Probable Interferon beta-1a 1 6 (6–6) Probable Penicillin 1 6 (6–6) Probable Contrast agent 1 6 (6–6) Probable Cardiac disorders 4 (4.7%) Hydroxychloroquine 4 4 (3–4) Possible Metabolism disorders 4 (4.7%) Lopinavir/ritonavir 3 6 (3–6) Probable Renal failure 2 (2.4%) Contrast agent 2 3 (3–3) Possible Fever 1 (1.2%) Interferon beta-1a 1 6 (6–6) Probable Conclusion and relevanceNA established a probable drug–AE causal relationship for most events. Most AEs were moderate to mild in severity but 75% required medical intervention. Consequently, it is important to know the AE–drug relationship to ensure a favourable benefit–risk profile, especially for experimental therapies.References and/or acknowledgementsConflict of interestNo conflict of interest |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2047-9956 2047-9964 |
| DOI: | 10.1136/ejhpharm-2021-eahpconf.340 |