The existence of a notoriety bias has an impact on measures of disproportionality. The detection of pharmacovigilance signals might be delayed. It is advisable to list all drugs being taken when an adverse drug reaction occurs, and not only those known to be associated with the observed reaction.

We aimed at detecting a signal of an increased risk of cancer in patients treated with TNF inhibitor (TNFi) and nonbiological immunosuppressant (NBIS), compared with NBIS alone for autoimmune diseases. Secondly, we aimed at comparing this risk between the different TNFis. We conducted a disproportionality analysis (case/noncase study) from the French National PharmacoVigilance Database. We selected all the reports of serious adverse drug reactions from 2000 to 2010 in patients treated with NBIS for labeled indications of TNFi. Cases were all the reports of cancer that occurred after a minimal 3-month exposure to NBIS. Noncases were all the other reports. We searched for exposure to TNFi and calculated reporting odds ratios (RORs), stratified by condition and type of cancer and adjusted by age, gender, history of cancer, type of NBIS and year of reporting. Of the 1918 reports included in the study population, 217 were cases (135 solid and 82 blood cancers). A safety signal was found in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (ROR: 5.43, 95% CI[3.52-8.38]) particularly for nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) (20.17[2.49-163.36]), and in psoriasis/psoriatic arthritis (3.45[1.09-10.92]). No signal was found in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) and ankylosing spondylitis, whatever the type of cancer. There was no difference between TNFis. This study puts the argument of an increased risk of cancer (particularly NMSC) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis exposed to TNFi and NBIS compared with NBIS alone, but not in IBD and ankylosing spondylitis patients. No signal was detected for melanoma potentially related to the lack of power. The signal seems similar whatever the TNFi.

Background and Objectives: Hallucinations are sensory perceptions which occur without external stimuli. There are associated with psychiatric disease but also can be related to organic disease and drug or toxic exposure. The purpose of our study was to investigate the association between exposure to medications and the reporting of hallucinations using data from the spontaneous-reporting French Pharmacovigilance Database (FPVD). Methods: We used the case/noncase method in the FPVD. Cases were all the observations of hallucination with the LLT term "perception disturbances", registered into the FPVD from January 1985 to Jan 2013. Data were expressed as odds ratio (OR) with their 95% confidence intervals. Results: Among the 469,181 reports of adverse effects recorded between 1985 and 2013, 4,086 are hallucinations. For about 50% of these hallucinations were experimented by patient older than 65 years old. A statistically significant OR was found with several medications included rasagiline (OR 17.6 [95%CI 10.4-29.8]), zolpidem (OR 12.9 [95%CI 11.3-14.8]), methylphenidate (OR 9.3 [95%CI 5.9-14.6]) and baclofene (OR 5.4 [95%CI 3.7-7.8]). An increased risk of hallucinations was also observed with non central nervous system drugs, including ertapenem (OR 24.0 [95%CI 14.2-40.5]), voriconazole (OR 12.9[95%CI 10.2-16.5]) and valacyclovir (OR 9.1 [95%CI 6.9-11. 9]). Conclusions: This pharmacoepidemiological study describes an association between drugs and hallucinations. This relationship involves not only some already suspected drugs but also other drugs less known to induce such an adverse reaction. Despite the mandatory limits of this kind of study, these data should lead to special precautions in patient at risk.

IntroductionMethylphenidate is a piperidine derivative structurally and pharmacologically similar to amphetamine. Methylphenidate is indicated for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children aged 6 years of age and over when remedial measures alone prove insufficient. In adults, its indication, except in narcolepsy, is not defined. Methylphenidate received regulatory approval almost sixty years ago with a first registration in Switzerland in October 1954.ObjectiveTo evaluate the off-label use of methylphenidate and its characteristics from a database of spontaneous reports.MethodsThis study analysed data from the French Pharmacovigilance Database of adverse drug reactions spontaneously reported by health professionals from 1985 to December 2011. Off-label use was evaluated according to age.ResultsIn the French Pharmacovigilance database, 181 cases of adverse drug reactions were reported with methylphenidate. Neuropsychiatric effects were the most frequent adverse event reported (41%) followed by cardiovascular and cutaneous side effects (14%). 143 reports concerned children (113 boys, 30 girls, mean age 10.6 ± 3.3 years) of which 46 (30%) were off-label uses. There were 38 adults (20 men, 18 women), of which 32 (88%) off-label use. In adults, methylphenidate was prescribed for depression, and this practice was associated with serious adverse events of drug dependence, overdose and suicide attempt. Overall, off-label use was detected in 43% (78/181) of all cases reported.ConclusionMore than 40% of the patients with drug reactions received methylphenidate for off-label indications. Additional long-term exposures and independent clinical studies are necessary to establish the long-term profile safety of methylphenidate.

This underestimated adverse drug reaction is a class effect, time to onset is most often less than 1 year and outcome seems favorable after ARB discontinuation. The case/non-case approach highlights a potential safety signal. The SmPC of ARBs should be updated, increased awareness among healthcare professionals is warranted.