Skip to main content

Good Pharmacovigilance Practices (GPPs)

BayBiotech.NET
Pharmacovigilance is a branch that involves the identification and evaluation of safety signals generated by the usage of a medical product.

Safety Signal: is a concern raised when excess of adverse events are observed compared
to what would be expected with a product's use. Signals can arise from collection of post marketing data, preclinical data and events associated with other products in the same pharmacologic class.

Even a single well-documented case report can be viewed as a signal, particularly if the report describes an event that is extremely rare in the absence of drug use.

Signals indicate the need for further investigation, which may or may not lead to the conclusion that the product caused the event.

After a signal is identified, it should be further assessed to determine whether it represents
a potential safety risk and whether other action should be taken.

Good Pharmacovigilance Practice is based on acquiring complete data from
spontaneous adverse event reports, also known as case reports.

In order to understand and interpret the adverse events, good and well documented reports are emphasized following Good Reporting Practice guidelines:

Good Reporting Practices

A good and well documented Case reports of adverse events submitted to the sponsor and FDA, as well as reports from the medical literature or clinical studies, may generate signals of adverse effects of drugs.

A good quality report is critical for appropriate evaluation of the adverse events caused by the usage of the product.

FDA recommends that reasonable attempts be made to obtain complete information for case assessment during initial contacts and subsequent follow-up, especially for serious events.

Sponsors may use trained and well informed health care practitioners to query reporters.

Computer-assisted interview technology, targeted questionnaires, or other methods developed to target specific events can help focus the line of questioning.

When the report is from a consumer, it is often important to obtain permission to
contact the health care practitioner familiar with the patient’s adverse event to obtain further
medical information and to retrieve relevant medical records, as needed.

It is further recommended that the most aggressive follow-up efforts be directed towards serious
adverse event reports, especially of adverse events not known to occur with the drug.


To find out more about FDA’s guidelines on Good Pharmacovigilance Practices follow the link as under:
http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/6359OCC.htm

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Risk Based Clinical Monitoring

BayBiotech.NET FDA's recommendation of Risk Based Monitoring of Clinical Trials , as published in their Draft Guidance in August 2011. For the first time, FDA provided guidance on monitoring of clinical investigations in 1988 which was recently withdrawn, stated that the “most effective way” to monitor an investigation was to “maintain personal contact between the monitor and the investigator throughout the clinical investigation.” At the time the guidance was issued, sponsors had only limited ways to effect meaningful communication with investigators other than through on-site visits.   This guidance recommends an assessment by the sponsor for the need of 100% on-site monitoring. Such an assessment may be based on the complexity of the study protocol and not be generally applicable to all trial types. It explains the importance of remote monitoring facilitated by the use of electronic data capture system (EDC) and also emphasizes the need of the identifying crit...

FDA Launches Medical Device and Radiation-Emitting Product Transparency Web Site

BayBiotech.NET On April 19th, 2010 FDA launched he Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) Transparency Web site in support of the agency’s Transparency Initiative. The Web site makes available new information about CDRH’s decision-making processes and displays this information in a more user-friendly format. The site includes new information such as basic information about medical devices and how FDA regulates those products, information about medical devices before and after the products are on the market, in a searchable database, information about the clinical studies and trials conducted to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of certain medical devices, memos from FDA employees explaining the reasons for the agency's decisions about medical device manufacturer requests to make a significant change in components, materials, design, specification, software, color additive, and labeling of a medical device as well as a step-by-step guide for manufacturers of...

eCTD Submission Specifications

BayBiotech.NET The electronic Common Technical Document (eCTD) is an interface for the pharmaceutical industry to agency transfer of regulatory information. eCTD technical document format development was done by International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) Multidisciplinary Group 2 Expert Working Group (ICH M2 EWG). Details on the specification for the ICH eCTD can be found in the guidance document M2 eCTD: Electronic Common Technical Document Specification. Currently, eCTD is the preferred format for electronic submissions by U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Although originally the CTD and the eCTD were designed for marketing applications, they could apply equally to other submission types, including INDs, master files, advertising material, and promotional labeling. In June 2008, FDA has issued guidelines for organizing the electronic regulatory document filing using the eCTD tools. This guidance discusses issues related to the electronic submission of applications for hum...