Drugs Associated with Hepatotoxicity and their Reporting Frequency of Liver Adverse Events in VigiBase (TM) Unified List Based on International Collaborative Work

BACKGROUND Challenges exist in the clinical diagnosis of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and in obtaining information on hepatotoxicity in humans. OBJECTIVE (i) To develop a unified list that combines drugs incriminated in well vetted or adjudicated DILI cases from many recognized sources and drugs that have been subjected to serious regulatory actions due to hepatotoxicity; and (ii) to supplement the drug list with data on reporting frequencies of liver events in the WHO individual case safety report database (VigiBase). DATA SOURCES AND EXTRACTION (i) Drugs identified as causes of DILI at three major DILI registries; (ii) drugs identified as causes of drug-induced acute liver failure (ALF) in six different data sources, including major ALF registries and previously published ALF studies; and (iii) drugs identified as being subjected to serious governmental regulatory actions due to their hepatotoxicity in Europe or the US were collected. The reporting frequency of adverse events was determined using VigiBase, computed as Empirical Bayes Geometric Mean (EBGM) with 90% confidence interval for two customized terms, 'overall liver injury' and 'ALF'. EBGM of >or=2 was considered a disproportional increase in reporting frequency. The identified drugs were then characterized in terms of regional divergence, published case reports, serious regulatory actions, and reporting frequency of 'overall liver injury' and 'ALF' calculated from VigiBase. DATA SYNTHESIS After excluding herbs, supplements and alternative medicines, a total of 385 individual drugs were identified; 319 drugs were identified in the three DILI registries, 107 from the six ALF registries (or studies) and 47 drugs that were subjected to suspension or withdrawal in the US or Europe due to their hepatotoxicity. The identified drugs varied significantly between Spain, the US and Sweden. Of the 319 drugs identified in the DILI registries of adjudicated cases, 93.4% were found in published case reports, 1.9% were suspended or withdrawn due to hepatotoxicity and 25.7% were also identified in the ALF registries/studies. In VigiBase, 30.4% of the 319 drugs were associated with disproportionally higher reporting frequency of 'overall liver injury' and 83.1% were associated with at least one reported case of ALF. CONCLUSIONS This newly developed list of drugs associated with hepatotoxicity and the multifaceted analysis on hepatotoxicity will aid in causality assessment and clinical diagnosis of DILI and will provide a basis for further characterization of hepatotoxicity.

International recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of patients with acquired hemophilia A.

Acquired hemophilia A (AHA) is a rare bleeding disorder characterized by autoantibodies directed against circulating coagulation factor (F) VIII. Typically, patients with no prior history of a bleeding disorder present with spontaneous bleeding and an isolated prolonged aPTT. AHA may, however, present without any bleeding symptoms, therefore an isolated prolonged aPTT should always be investigated further irrespective of the clinical findings. Control of acute bleeding is the first priority, and we recommend first-line therapy with bypassing agents such as recombinant activated FVII or activated prothrombin complex concentrate. Once the diagnosis has been achieved, immediate autoantibody eradication to reduce subsequent bleeding risk should be performed. We recommend initial treatment with corticosteroids or combination therapy with corticosteroids and cyclophosphamide and suggest second-line therapy with rituximab if first-line therapy fails or is contraindicated. In contrast to congenital hemophilia, no comparative studies exist to support treatment recommendations for patients with AHA, therefore treatment guidance must rely on the expertise and clinical experience of specialists in the field. The aim of this document is to provide a set of international practice guidelines based on our collective clinical experience in treating patients with AHA and contribute to improved care for this patient group.

International survey on skin patch test procedures, attitudes and interpretation.

BACKGROUND Skin patch test is the gold standard method in diagnosing contact allergy. Although used for more than 100 years, the patch test procedure is performed with variability around the world. A number of factors can influence the test results, namely the quality of reagents used, the timing of the application, the patch test series (allergens/haptens) that have been used for testing, the appropriate interpretation of the skin reactions or the evaluation of the patient's benefit. METHODS We performed an Internet -based survey with 38 questions covering the educational background of respondents, patch test methods and interpretation. The questionnaire was distributed among all representatives of national member societies of the World Allergy Organization (WAO), and the WAO Junior Members Group. RESULTS One hundred sixty-nine completed surveys were received from 47 countries. The majority of participants had more than 5 years of clinical practice (61 %) and routinely carried out patch tests (70 %). Both allergists and dermatologists were responsible for carrying out the patch tests. We could observe the use of many different guidelines regardless the geographical distribution. The use of home-made preparations was indicated by 47 % of participants and 73 % of the respondents performed 2 or 3 readings. Most of the responders indicated having patients with adverse reactions, including erythroderma (12 %); however, only 30 % of members completed a consent form before conducting the patch test. DISCUSSION The heterogeneity of patch test practices may be influenced by the level of awareness of clinical guidelines, different training backgrounds, accessibility to various types of devices, the patch test series (allergens/haptens) used for testing, type of clinical practice (public or private practice, clinical or research-based institution), infrastructure availability, financial/commercial implications and regulations among others. CONCLUSION There is a lack of a worldwide homogeneity of patch test procedures, and this raises concerns about the need for standardization and harmonization of this important diagnostic procedure.