The Evolution of the Periodic Safety Update Report

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 141-143
Author(s):  
Michael D. Blum
Keyword(s):  
Periodic Safety ◽  
Periodic Safety Update Report

scholarly journals EU MDR 2017/745 will reduce the Risk of Medical Devices. Does MDCG got it Right?

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 33-36
Author(s):  
Vidya Sagar ◽  
Piyush Patel ◽  
Avni Rana ◽  
Bhavin Trivedi ◽  
Deepak Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
European Database ◽  
Periodic Safety ◽  
Post Market ◽  
Periodic Safety Update Report ◽  
Medical Device Regulation

Under the new European Union Medical Device Regulation (EU MDR), framed by Medical Device Coordination Group (MDCG), for each device manufacturers must have a documented risk management plan, identify and analyse the known and foreseeable hazards, estimate and evaluate the associated risks and eliminate or control those risks. In contrast with the MDD, the new EU MDR contains an explicit obligation in the new Article 10 (2), that manufacturers establish, document, implement and maintain a system for risk management. The detailed requirements of which are listed in the new Annex I Chapter I. Compared to MDD there is more emphasis on Post Market Surveillance (PMS) activities with the inclusion of European Databank or European Database for Medical Devices (EUDAMED) and mandatory submission of Periodic Safety Update Report (PSUR) to all the actors in the possession with the medical devices. A poll conducted by Aegis Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad, India concludes that the relevant annexures and sections in MDR 2017/745 have more emphasis on PMS, Vigilance, PSUR, EUDAMED, tracking, Implantation card etc. that are directed in regard to the safety of the Medical Device.

Overview of Periodic Safety Update Reports: Where Have We Reached?

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-11
Author(s):  
Ruchika Sharma ◽  
Kamal Kant ◽  
Anoop Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Medicinal Product ◽  
Risk Evaluation ◽  
Future Perspectives ◽  
Evaluation Report ◽  
European Legislation ◽  
Benefit Risk Assessment ◽  
Periodic Safety ◽  
Periodic Safety Update Report

Periodic safety update report (PSUR) is now known as the Periodic Benefit-Risk Evaluation Report (PBRER). In July 2012, as per the new European Legislation, 16 Good Pharmacovigilance Practices (GVP) modules came into effect by replacing Vol 9A guidelines. GVP module VII provides the guidance for the preparation, submission and assessment of PSURs. There are twice as many sections to the new PSUR as compared to ICH E2C (R1) document and Volume 9A PSUR guidelines. The new legislation mainly focuses on benefit-risk assessment of medicinal product and promises much more, but after more than 6 years, how much new lesiglation is able to deliver is still unclear. In the literature, various articles have been published regarding the new Legislation module VII but none of them have highlighted the differences between old and new Legislation, How successful are we? What challenges are we facing? The understanding all these points is the need of the hour for Pharmacovigilance audience which will be helpful to implement the Pharmacovigilance (PV) in a more efficient and effective way. Thus, in this article, we have explained the differences between new and old Legislation and when they come into play. Finally, this article provides a brief examination of current challenges and future perspectives of periodic safety update reporting.

scholarly journals 14. Postmarketing Safety Experience With MenACWY-TT

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S131-S131
Author(s):  
Lidia Serra ◽  
Susan Mather ◽  
Cindy Burman ◽  
Chris Webber
Keyword(s):  
Safety Data ◽  
The United States ◽  
System Organ Class ◽  
Vaccination Site ◽  
Safety Database ◽  
Periodic Safety ◽  
Periodic Safety Update Report ◽  
Procedural Complications ◽  
Site Pain ◽  
Effectiveness Data

Abstract Background MenACWY-TT (Nimenrix®), a quadrivalent meningococcal tetanus toxoid conjugate vaccine, was first licensed in 2012 and is available in 82 countries but not in the United States. MenACWY-TT is administered in infants as a 2 + 1 (6 weeks to < 6 months of age) or 1 + 1 (6 to < 12 months of age) schedule with the booster dose at 12 months of age, and from 12 months of age as a single dose. In addition to its widespread use to protect against meningococcal serogroups A, C, W, and Y, MenACWY-TT is a constituent of an investigational pentavalent meningococcal (MenABCWY) vaccine currently undergoing clinical development. Methods Using the MenACWY-TT Periodic Safety Update Report (PSUR) with format and content in accordance with Good Pharmacovigilance Practice Module VII and International Council for Harmonisation Guideline E2C, for data up to April 19, 2020, postmarketing safety experience with MenACWY-TT is considered. The PSUR data included herein are spontaneous adverse events (AEs) from the Pfizer safety database. AEs were coded by system organ class (SOC) and preferred term (PT) using MedDRA v.22.1J. Results The cumulative estimated exposure of MenACWY-TT was nearly 26 million doses, with the majority administered in 0- to 16-year-olds and in the Western European Union (Figure 1). Over the reporting period, 13,301 cumulative AEs occurred. The most common SOCs in the reporting period were general disorders and administration site conditions (n=5169; 39%); nervous system disorders (n=1986; 15%); injury, poisoning and procedural complications (n=1266; 10%); and gastrointestinal disorders (n=1031; 8%) (Figure 2). By PT, the most common AEs were pyrexia (n=1613; 12%), headache (n=738; 6%), and vaccination site pain (n=394; 3%) (Figure 3). Of the 3299 serious AEs reported, the most common were pyrexia (n=317; 10%) and headache (n=209; 6%). Conclusion Based on cumulative safety data in conjunction with existing efficacy and effectiveness data, the benefit-risk profile of MenACWY-TT remains favorable and is consistent with the safety profile of MenACWY-TT established in clinical studies. Disclosures Lidia Serra, MS, Pfizer Inc (Employee, Shareholder) Susan Mather, MD, Pfizer Inc (Employee, Shareholder) Cindy Burman, PharmD, Pfizer Inc (Employee, Shareholder) Chris Webber, MD, Pfizer (Employee, Shareholder)

Globalization of the Safety Sections of the Periodic Safety Update Report

1999 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 887-898
Author(s):  
Stephen L. Klincewicz ◽  
John A. Clark ◽  
Barry D. C. Arnold ◽  
Edmundo N. Muniz ◽  
Mark K. Blake
Keyword(s):  
Periodic Safety ◽  
Periodic Safety Update Report

scholarly journals Preparation of a periodic safety update report

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. K. Romanov ◽  
R. N. Alyautdin ◽  
S. V. Glagolev ◽  
V. A. Polivanov ◽  
A. E. Krasheninnikov
Keyword(s):  
Periodic Safety ◽  
Periodic Safety Update Report

How to Apply the Human Factor to Periodic Safety Update Reports

Drug Safety ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 33 (10) ◽  
pp. 811-820 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian David Edwards ◽  
Giovanni Furlan
Keyword(s):  
Human Factor ◽  
Periodic Safety
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document