The Therapeutic Goods Administration is strengthening pharmacovigilance, but strategies to encourage the conduct of pharmacoepidemiological research in Australia are needed
For four decades, spontaneous reporting has been the main mechanism by which adverse drug reactions are identified after a medicine is released onto the market, and the Australian program has been exceptionally effective. However, spontaneous reporting programs are limited in their ability to identify an association between a drug and an outcome that is common among the users independent of drug use, and they are not sufficiently sensitive to detect a small increase in the risk of certain rare events. In particular, the increasing long-term use of medication for prevention and control of chronic disease in otherwise healthy individuals presents a challenge to which current postmarketing surveillance mechanisms cannot effectively respond. For example, spontaneous reporting cannot detect an increased rate of myocardial infarction associated with hormone replacement therapy, rosiglitazone or rofecoxib; demonstration of these associations requires large, long-term randomised controlled trials.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC.
- 1. Therapeutic Goods Administration. Reform of legislation and regulatory framework. TGA News 2008; (57): 1. http://www.tga.gov.au/docs/html/tganews/news57/tganews57.htm (accessed Dec 2008).
- 2. Hunt L. Regulatory reform for the prescription medicines sector. Canberra: Therapeutic Goods Administration, 2008. http://www.tga.gov.au/regreform/080724prespm.pdf (accessed Jan 2009).
- 3. Therapeutic Goods Administration. Module 1: administrative information and prescribing information for Australia. Canberra: TGA, 2008. http://www.tga.gov.au/docs/pdf/euguide/tgamod1.pdf (accessed Jul 2009).
- 4. United States Food and Drug Administration. Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) IV. Drug safety five-year plan. Draft. Silver Spring, Md: FDA, 2008. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ForIndustry/UserFees/Prescription DrugUserFee/ucm093946.pdf (accessed Jul 2009).
- 5. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. Guideline on risk management systems for medicinal products for human use. London: European Medicines Agency, 2005. http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/euleg/9626805en.pdf (accessed Dec 2008).
- 6. Bombardier C, Laine L, Reicin A, et al. Comparison of upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib and naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. VIGOR Study Group. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 1520-1528.
- 7. Bresalier RS, Sandler RS, Quan H, et al. Cardiovascular events associated with rofecoxib in a colorectal adenoma chemoprevention trial. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 1092-1102.
- 8. United States Food and Drug Administration. Vioxx (rofecoxib) questions and answers. Silver Spring, Md: FDA, 2009. http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsandProviders/ucm106290.htm (accessed Jul 2009).
- 9. Health Research Council of New Zealand. Product vigilance joint initiative. Auckland: Health Research Council of New Zealand, 2008. http://www.hrc.govt.nz/root/pages_policy/Product_Vigilance_Joint_Initiative.html (accessed Jan 2009).
- 10. Psaty BM, Kronmal RA. Reporting mortality findings in trials of rofecoxib for Alzheimer disease or cognitive impairment. A case study based on documents from rofecoxib litigation. JAMA 2008; 299: 1813-1817.
- 11. Psaty BM, Furberg CD, Ray WA, Weiss NS. Potential for conflict of interest in the evaluation of suspected adverse drug reactions: use of cerivastatin and risk of rhabdomyolysis. JAMA 2004; 292: 2622-2631.
- 12. Armstrong BK, Kricker A. Record linkage — a vision renewed. Aust N Z J Public Health 1999; 23: 451-452.