Open AccessDoes Industry‐Conducted All‐Case Surveillance of Newly Approved Oncology Drugs Contribute to the Revision of Package Inserts in Japan?
Author(s) -
Suzuki Akiyuki,
Sato Hitoshi,
Sasaki Yasutsuna
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
clinical and translational science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.303
H-Index - 44
eISSN - 1752-8062
pISSN - 1752-8054
DOI - 10.1111/cts.12644
Subject(s) - package insert , medicine , adverse effect , agency (philosophy) , drug approval , food and drug administration , pharmaceutical industry , regulatory agency , drug , intensive care medicine , pharmacology , epistemology , public administration , political science , philosophy
In Japan, the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency requires all‐case surveillance studies (ACSS) for many novel oncology drugs as a condition for approval. However, this is a major burden on the pharmaceutical industry and clinicians. The objective of this analysis was to investigate whether ACSS can contribute essential new information on severe adverse drug reactions, which are necessary to revise the package inserts of drugs. All oncology drugs for which ACSS were required from January 2006–September 2015 found on the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency website were reviewed, and the influence of ACSS on the package insert content was evaluated. Most of the package insert revisions regarding serious treatment‐related adverse events were based on spontaneous reports from clinicians. The contribution of ACSS results to the revision of package inserts is limited and comes at the cost of financial resources and labor. An alternative, more efficient adverse‐event reporting system is necessary.