Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics · 2021
Risk comparison of beta-lactam-induced anaphylaxis: Therapeutic stratification analysis in a Vietnamese pharmacovigilance database.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nguyen Khac-Dung, Vu Dinh-Hoa, Nguyen Hoang-Anh, Dao Van-Tu, Montastruc Jean-Louis, Bagheri Haleh
Аннотация
WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: There is limited data on the specific risks of anaphylaxis induced by beta-lactam drugs. The aim of this study was to compare the risks of reporting beta-lactam-induced anaphylaxis using the national pharmacovigilance database of Vietnam (NPDV).
METHODS: The multivariate generalised linear regression model was applied for signal generation and comparison of beta-lactams.
RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2016, there were 2,921 reports of anaphylaxis (19.93%) from 14,655 spontaneous reports of beta-lactam use in the NDPV. Anaphylaxis signal generation was also found for the subgroup J01D (cephalosporins and carbapenems) (ROR = 1.27 [1.16-1.39]) and beta-lactamase-sensitive penicillins (ROR = 1.74 [1.27-2.35]). In the third generation cephalosporin subgroup, different risks were identified for the following combinations of beta-lactams: 1) cefotaxime with cefoperazone+sulbactam; 2) cefixime/cefpodoxime/cefdinir with cefoperazone+sulbactam or ceftizoxime/cefoperazone/ceftazidime/ceftriaxone/cefotaxime. For the second generation cephalosporin subgroup, different risks were found for cefotiam compared to cefmetazole, cefaclor, cefamandole and cefuroxime.
WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: These findings identified and highlighted the different anaphylactic risks caused by various beta-lactams in the main subgroups.
METHODS: The multivariate generalised linear regression model was applied for signal generation and comparison of beta-lactams.
RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2016, there were 2,921 reports of anaphylaxis (19.93%) from 14,655 spontaneous reports of beta-lactam use in the NDPV. Anaphylaxis signal generation was also found for the subgroup J01D (cephalosporins and carbapenems) (ROR = 1.27 [1.16-1.39]) and beta-lactamase-sensitive penicillins (ROR = 1.74 [1.27-2.35]). In the third generation cephalosporin subgroup, different risks were identified for the following combinations of beta-lactams: 1) cefotaxime with cefoperazone+sulbactam; 2) cefixime/cefpodoxime/cefdinir with cefoperazone+sulbactam or ceftizoxime/cefoperazone/ceftazidime/ceftriaxone/cefotaxime. For the second generation cephalosporin subgroup, different risks were found for cefotiam compared to cefmetazole, cefaclor, cefamandole and cefuroxime.
WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: These findings identified and highlighted the different anaphylactic risks caused by various beta-lactams in the main subgroups.