THU0637-HPR THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN THE RECALL PERIOD AND THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION ABOUT REPORTED ADVERSE DRUG REACTIONS BY PATIENTS USING BIOLOGICALS
Authors: A. Laurijssen, J. Van Lint, B. Van den Bemt, L. Beijer, N. Jessurun
Journal: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2020)

Background: In order to monitor the safety of medicines pharmacovigilance, it is important that patients report their adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Theoretically, the quality of the reported information might be affected by the elapsed time between the onset of the ADR and the moment of reporting. Real-life evidence demonstrating a negative relationship between this recall period and the quality of reported ADRs is however lacking. Objectives: To assess the effect of recall period on the amount of information that patients report about their ADR (information density) in patients using a biologic for an immune-mediated inflammatory disease (IMID). Methods: The Dutch Biologic Monitor is a multi-center cohort ADR monitoring system collecting data on reported ADRs by patients using a biologic for an IMID. Per patient, every first unique reported ADR between 1 February 2017 and 1 September 2019 was eligible. ADR reports were selected by stratified random sampling based on length of recall period and biologic. The recall period was defined by the number of days between the onset and reporting date of the ADR. The amount of information in an ADR report (information density) was determined based on eleven domains: specification, location, frequency, time-to-onset, course, causality, cause or consequence, health care professional (HCP) visits, HCP action, patient action and ADR burden. Information density was calculated by the number of reported domains divided by the number of domains deemed relevant in the ADR report. The association between the information density of the ADR reports and different recall periods was compared using a one-way ANOVA test. One-way ANOVA and independent t-tests were used to assess the impact of gender, age, type biologic and burden of the ADR on the information density of the reported ADRs. Results: Out of 1109 reported ADRs by 531 IMID patients, we included 402 ADR reports of 294 patients (55%) (see table 1). Included reports were equally divided over seven different recall periods: 0-1, 1-2, 2-4, 4-8, 8-12, 12-26 and 26-52 weeks. Results have shown no association between the information density in patient-reported ADRs and the length of recall period (p=0.805) (figure 1). However, the proportion of reported information about HCP visits for the ADR increased with increasing recall period: 0-1 week (14%), 1-2 weeks (24%), 2-4 weeks (34%), 4-8 weeks (40%), 8-12 weeks (48%), 12-26 weeks (50%) and 26-52 weeks (46%). Table 1. Characteristics of included patients with adverse drug reactions Characteristics (N=294 ) N (% ) Gender (female) 202 (69%) Age (years) (mean ± SD) 53 ± 13 Smoking 59 (20%) BMI (kg/m 2 ) (mean ± SD) 25.7 ± 5.3 Reported ARDs (mean ± SD) 1.4 ± 0.8 Indication Rheumatoid arthritis 129 (44%) Psoriatic arthritis 51 (17%) Axial spondyloarthritis 43 (15%) Crohn’s disease 42 (14%) Other indications 29 (10%) Biologic Adalimumab 97 (33%) Etanercept 72 (24%) Infliximab 27 (9%) Tocilizumab 16 (5%) Secukinumab 15 (5%) Rituximab 14 (5%) Other biologics 53 (18%) Female patients reported more information about their ADR (p=0.002), whereas the patient’s age was not associated with information density (p=0.221). Etanercept (ETA) users report significantly more information than adalimumab (ADA) users (p=0.019). The number of patients using other biologics was too low for further analysis. A higher ADR burden tended (p=0.120) to result in more reported ADR information (figure 2). Conclusion: The length of recall period did not affect the amount of information that patients report about their ADR(s). The recall period was longer for patients reporting information about their HCP visit. Furthermore, female patients tend to report more information about their ADR than male patients and ETA-users tend to report more than ADA-users. Disclosure of Interests: Alexandra Laurijssen: None declared, Jette van Lint: None declared, Bart van den Bemt Grant/research support from: UCB, Pfizer and Abbvie, Consultant of: Delivered consultancy work for UCB, Novartis and Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Pfizer, AbbVie, UCB, Biogen and Sandoz., Lilian Beijer: None declared, Naomi Jessurun: None declared