IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/drugsa/v43y2020i3d10.1007_s40264-019-00891-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The UK BIO-TRAC Study: A Cross-Sectional Study of Product and Batch Traceability for Biologics in Clinical Practice and Electronic Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting in the UK

Author

Listed:
  • Kevin Klein

    (Lygature
    Utrecht University
    Exon Consultancy)

  • Lorna Hazell

    (Drug Safety Research Unit (DSRU)
    University of Portsmouth)

  • Pieter Stolk

    (Lygature
    Utrecht University
    Exon Consultancy)

  • Saad Shakir

    (Drug Safety Research Unit (DSRU)
    University of Portsmouth)

Abstract

Introduction Due to the complexity of biologics and the inherent challenges for manufacturing, it is important to know the specific brand name and batch number of suspected biologics in adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports. Objective The aim of this study was to assess the extent to which biologics are traceable by brand name and batch number in UK hospital practice and in ADRs reported by patients and healthcare professionals. Methods We performed an online hospital pharmacist survey to capture information on how specific product details are recorded during the processes of prescribing, dispensing and administration of biologics in routine UK hospital practice. We also assessed the proportion of ADR reports specifying brand name and batch number from electronic ADR reports submitted to the UK national spontaneous reporting database, the Yellow Card Scheme, between 1 January 2009 and 30 September 2017. Results Brand name recording in routine hospital processes ranged from 79 to 91%, whereas batch numbers were less routinely recorded, ranging from 38 to 58%. Paper-based recording of product details was more commonly used for recording information. A total of 6108 electronic ADR reports were submitted to the Yellow Card Scheme for recombinant biologics, of which 38% and 15%, respectively, had an identifiable brand name and batch numbers. Whereas batch number traceability in electronic ADR reports improved slightly after the implementation of the European Union pharmacovigilance legislation in 2012, no improvement of brand name traceability was observed. Conclusion Brand name and batch number traceability for biologics in UK ADR reports are generally low. Shortcomings in the systematic recording of product details in UK clinical practice may contribute to the limited traceability.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin Klein & Lorna Hazell & Pieter Stolk & Saad Shakir, 2020. "The UK BIO-TRAC Study: A Cross-Sectional Study of Product and Batch Traceability for Biologics in Clinical Practice and Electronic Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting in the UK," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 255-263, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s40264-019-00891-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s40264-019-00891-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-019-00891-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40264-019-00891-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joanne Barnes & Jane L. Sheridan & Christine Yang Dong & Linda Härmark & Sunita Vohra & Mira Harrison-Woolrych, 2020. "Evaluation of a Web-Based, ‘Purchase Event’ Intensive Monitoring Method for Pharmacovigilance of Natural Health Products: Lessons and Insights from Development Work in New Zealand," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(10), pages 981-998, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s40264-019-00891-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.