Top

Drug Safety

Published in:

01-04-2010 | Original Research Article

Adverse Drug Reactions in the Paediatric Population in Denmark

A Retrospective Analysis of Reports Made to the Danish Medicines Agency from 1998 to 2007

Authors: Associate Professor Lise Aagaard, Camilla Blicher Weber, Ebba Holme Hansen

Published in: Drug Safety | Issue 4/2010

Abstract

Background: The potential risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the paediatric population has become a public health concern and regulatory agencies in Europe and the US have acknowledged that there is a need for more research in this area. Spontaneous reporting systems can provide important new information about ADRs.

Objective: To characterize ADRs in children reported in Denmark over a period of one decade.

Methods: We analysed ADRs reported to the Danish Medicines Agency from 1998 to 2007 for individuals aged from birth to 17 years. Data were analysed with respect to time, age and sex, category of ADR (System Organ Class [SOC]), seriousness, suspected medicines (level 2 of the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical [ATC] Classification System) and type of reporter.

Results: 2437 ADR reports corresponding to 4500 ADRs were analysed. On average, 234 ADR reports were submitted annually, corresponding to approximately two ADRs per report. From 2003 to 2005, an increasing number of ADRs submitted per report were observed, but after 2005 the reporting rate decreased. One-half of ADRs were reported for infants from birth to 2 years of age. Similar total numbers of ADRs were reported for boys and girls. The majority of ADRs reported were from the following SOCs: general disorders and administration site conditions (31%), skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (18%) and nervous system disorders (15%). Reports encompassed medicines from ATC group J: vaccines and anti-infectives for systemic use (65%); and ATC group N: nervous system (17%). On average, 42% of ADRs were classified as serious. ATC group N had the highest proportion of ADRs that were classified as serious. Although physicians reported approximately 90% of the ADRs, a relatively large proportion of serious ADRs were reported by other sources.

Conclusion: In Denmark, the ADR reporting rate in the paediatric population has declined since 2005. The majority of ADRs reported in young children were reported for vaccines and anti-infectives, but also a high number of serious ADRs were reported for medicines from ATC group N. The Danish Medicines Agency should monitor prescribing patterns more tightly to identify potential risks in the paediatric population in relation to the evolving pattern of medicine use among children.

Le J, Nguyen T, Law AV, et al. Adverse drug reactions among children over a 10-year period. Pediatrics 2006; 118: 555–62PubMedCrossRef

Temple ME, Robinson RF, Miller JC, et al. Frequency and preventability of adverse drug reactions in paediatric patients. Drug Saf 2004; 27: 819–29PubMedCrossRef

FDA Modernization Act of 1997 [online]. Available from URL:http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/Overview/MedicalDeviceProvisionsofFDAModernizationAct/ucm136671.htm [Accessed 2009 Oct 7]

Regulation EC No. 1901/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council of 12 December 2006 on Medicinal Products for Paediatric Use and Amending Regulation [online]. Available from URL http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/pharmaceuticals/eudralex/vol-1/reg_2006_1901/reg_2006_1901_en.pdf [Assessed 2009 Oct 7]

Hansen EH. Technology assessment in a user perspective: experiences with drug technology. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1992; 8: 150–65PubMedCrossRef

Aagaard L, Soendergaad B, Stenver DI, et al. Knowledge creation about ADRs: turning the perspective from the rearview mirror to the projector? Br J Clin Pharmacol 2008; 65: 364–76PubMedCrossRef

Keinonen T, Miettinen P, Saano V, et al. Clinical trials in children and healthy volunteers: quality and characteristics of notifications reviewed by the regulatory agencies inFinland. Paed Perinat Drug Ther 2003; 5: 175–82CrossRef

Sammons HM, Choorara I. Clinical trials of medication in children, 1996–2002. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 61: 165–7PubMedCrossRef

Impicciatore P, Choonara I, Clarkson A, et al. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in paediatric in/out-patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2001; 52: 77–83PubMedCrossRef

10.

Meyboom RH. Adverse reactions to drugs in children, experiences with “spontaneous monitoring” in the Netherlands. Bratisl Lek Listy 1991; 92: 554–59PubMed

11.

Morales-Olivas FJ, Martinez-Mir I, Ferrer JM, et al. Adverse drug reactions in children reported by means of the yellow card in Spain. J Clin Epidemiol 2000; 53: 1076–80PubMedCrossRef

12.

Moore TJ, Weiss SR, Kaplan S, et al. Reported adverse drug events in infants and children under 2 years of age. Pediatrics 2002; 110: e53 339CrossRef

13.

Kimland E, Rane A, Ufer M, et al. Paediatric adverse drug reactions reported in Sweden from 1987 to 2001. Pharm Drug Saf 2005; 14: 493–99CrossRef

14.

Carleton BC, Smith MA, Gelin MN, et al. Paediatric adverse drug reaction reporting: understanding and future directions. Can J Clin Pharmacol 2007; 14: e45–57PubMed

15.

Ackers R, Murray ML, Besag FMC, et al. Prioritizing children’s medicines for research: a pharmacoepidemiological study of antiepileptic drugs. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2006; 63: 689–97CrossRef

16.

van de Vrie-Hoekstra NW, de Vries TW, van den Berg PB, et al. Antiepileptic drug utilization in children from 1997–2005: a study from the Netherlands. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2008; 64: 1013–20PubMedCrossRef

17.

Aagaard L, Soendergaard B, Andersen E, et al. Creating knowledge about adverse drug reactions: a critical analysis of the Danish reporting system from 1968 to 2005. Soc Sci Med 2007; 65: 1296–309PubMedCrossRef

18.

Roden S. Good case management and reporting practices. In: Mann RD, Andrews EB, editors. CIOMS working groups and their contribution to pharmacovigilance. Chapter V. Middlesex: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2007

19.

Aagaard L, Stenver DI, Hansen EH. Structures and processes in spontaneous reporting systems: a comparative study of Australia and Denmark. Pharm World Sci 2008; 30: 563–70PubMedCrossRef

20.

Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities [online]. Available from URL: http://www.meddramsso.com [Accessed 2008 Aug 20]

21.

Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research. Assessment of the European community system of pharmacovigilance, 2004 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.isi.fraunhofer.De/t/projekte/medpharm-e-rt-eurovigilance.htm [Accessed 2009 Dec 31]

22.

Aagaard L, Nielsen LH, Hansen EH. Consumer reporting of adverse drug reactions: a retrospective analysis of the Danish adverse drug reaction database from 2004 to 2006. Drug Saf 2009; 32: 1067–74PubMedCrossRef

23.

Aagaard L, Thirstrup S, Hansen EH. Opening the white boxes: the licensing documentation of efficacy and safety of psychotropic medicines for children. Pharm Drug Saf 2009; 18: 401–11CrossRef

24.

Cheung A, Sacks D, Dewa CS, et al. Paediatric prescribing practices and the FDA black-box warning on anti-depressants. J Dev Behav Pediatr 2008; 29: 213–5PubMedCrossRef

25.

European Medicines Agency finalises review of antidepressants in children and adolescents (ref. EMEA/CHMP/ 128918/2005 corr. London, 25 April 2005 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/press/pr/12891805en.pdf [Accessed 2010 Jan 29]

26.

Press release: meeting highlights from the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (ref. EMEA/431407/2007). London, 19 July 2007 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/press/pr/43140707en.pdf [Accessed 2010 Jan 29]

27.

Sanghera N, Chan PY, Khaki ZF, et al. Interventions of hospital pharmacists in improving drug therapy in children: a systematic literature review. Drug Saf 2006; 29: 1031–47PubMedCrossRef

28.

Sturkenboom CJM, Verhamme KMC, Nicolosi A, et al. Drug use in children: cohort study in three European countries. BMJ 2008; 24: 337: a2245

29.

de Langen J, van Hunsel F, Passier A, et al. Adverse drug reaction reporting by patients in the Netherlands: three years of experience. Drug Saf 2008; 31: 515–24PubMedCrossRef

30.

Schirm E, Tobi H, van Puijenbroek EP, et al. Reported adverse drug reactions and their determinants in Dutch children outside the hospital. Pharm Drug Saf 2004; 13: 159–65CrossRef

Title: Adverse Drug Reactions in the Paediatric Population in Denmark
A Retrospective Analysis of Reports Made to the Danish Medicines Agency from 1998 to 2007
Authors: Associate Professor Lise Aagaard
Camilla Blicher Weber
Ebba Holme Hansen
Publication date: 01-04-2010
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: Drug Safety / Issue 4/2010
Print ISSN: 0114-5916
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1942
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/11319100-000000000-00000

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Adverse Drug Reactions in the Paediatric Population in Denmark

A Retrospective Analysis of Reports Made to the Danish Medicines Agency from 1998 to 2007

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2010

Isotretinoin Use and Compliance with the Dutch Pregnancy Prevention Programme

Antimicrobials and the Risk of Torsades de Pointes

Psychiatric Adverse Events in Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials of Varenicline

First, Catch Your Signal!

Is There Still a Role for Desmopressin in Children with Primary Monosymptomatic Nocturnal Enuresis?

Cerebrovascular Accidents in Elderly People Treated with Antipsychotic Drugs