Role of Pharmacovigilance in Monitoring of Adverse Drug Reaction: A Case Study Approach

An Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) is an harmful or unintended or unwanted response of drug taken at normal human dose. Drugs can save our lives. Sometimes they can also cause harm. This happens when medicines have effects at normal doses. The World Heath Organization (WHO) says that an adverse drug reaction is a response to a drug that we do not expect and that happens at normal doses used by people. In trials these ADR can be very serious. Pharmacovigilance is the process of finding these problems and keeping patients safe. Every year thousands of drug reactions happen all around the world. Some drugs are even  banned completely because of this. For example, Thalidomide caused birth defects in the 1960s. Rofecoxib caused heart attacks in 2004. These tragedies show us why it is so important to monitor drug reactions. Pharmacovigilance uses tools like the World Health Organization causality assessment to decide if a drug caused harm. This helps doctor s make choices when it comes to treating patients. Adverse drug reactions a problem and pharmacovigilance is the key to solving it.

India started the Pharmacovigilance Programme of India (PvPI) in 2010 under the Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission. This program collects reports of drug reactions from more than 250 Adverse Drug Monitoring Centres across India. When clinical trails are being done they must report any drug reactions within 14 days to the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO). This system has caught problems with drugs like Nimesulide and Pioglitazone early on. Clinical trials for diabetes like the one called IN004 have risks. Drugs used to treat diabetes can often cause ADRs, such as high blood sugar and high triglycerides . Data from hospitals shows that 10 to 20 % of patients get mild to adverse drug reactions. Most of the time these reactions can be. The patient will be okay but severe cases need to be taken care of right away. The Pharmacovigilance Programme of India uses a scale to assess causality of drug reactions: Certain, Probable, Possible, Unlikely and Unassessable. The data from In004 trials shows that most of the cases were classified as Unlikely, which is typical for trails that are being closely monitored. Adverse Drug Reactions are concern in India and the Pharmacovigilance Programme of India is working to address this issue.

This paper looks at data from a clinical trial called IN004 SARO. 21.003. The data shows events that happened to subjects in the trails. These events include triglycerides, high blood sugar and the common cold. We looked at how severe these events were what happened to the patients and how the causality of the drug reactions was assessed. Our goals were to show how pharmacovigilance can monitor drug reactions in real time to demonstrate how the World Health Organization causality assessment is used and to prove that structured reporting can help prevent patient harm. The study found that high triglycerides were then common adverse drug reactions. One subject, IN0040019 had case of high triglycerides that got better after treatment. Most of the events were not related to the study drug, which shows that the trial was being closely monitored and problems were caught early. Using data from the IN004 trial we looked at the patterns of drug reactions how patients responded to treatment and the pharmacovigilance processes that were used. This research helps fill the gap between what students learn in school and what actually happens in hospitals. The results will help future pharmacists understand how to manage drug reactions, in the real world. The IN004 study is an example of how pharmacovigilance can be used to keep patients safe.

Figure 1. Difference Between ADR, ADE, and Side EffectsFigure

CONCEPT OF PHARMACOVIGILANCE:

Pharmacovigilance is an important branch of healthcare that focuses on the detection, assessment, understanding, and prevention of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and other medicine- related problems. The term Pharmacovigilance is derived from the Greek word “pharmakon”, meaning drug and the Latin word “vigilare”, meaning to keep watch. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines Pharmacovigilance as the science and activities associated with identifying and preventing harmful effects caused by medicines.

The need for Pharmacovigilance has increased significantly due to the growing use of Pharmaceutical products worldwide. Although medicines undergo extensive clinical testing before approval, certain adverse reactions may appear only after the drug is widely used in large populations. Clinical Trials are usually conducted under controlled conditions and may not detect rare, delayed or population-specific adverse effects. Therefore, continuous monitoring after marketing approval is essential to ensure patient safety.

Pharmacovigilance systems collects safety information from hospitals, healthcare professionals, patients, clinical trials and post-marketing surveillance programmes. The collected data are analyzed to identify possible safety signals and evaluate the relationship between a drug and an observed adverse event. Effective pharmacovigilance practices support safer prescribing, rational use of medicines, and timely regulatory actions when necessary.

In recent years, pharmacovigilance has expanded beyond conventional ADR reporting and now includes monitoring of vaccines, biological products, herbal medicines and medical devices. Technological advancements such electronic health records and digital reporting systems have further strengthened pharmacovigilance activities and improved drug safety monitoring worldwide

Figure 2. Key Goals of Pharmacovigilance

METHODS FOR ADVERSE DRUG REACTION (ADRs) MONITORING:

Monitoring of Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is an essential component of pharmacovigilance and plays a significant role in ensuring medication safety. Various methods are used to identify, evaluate and prevent harmful drugs-related effects in patients. These monitoring systems help healthcare professionals detect previously unknown reactions and assess the safety profile of medicines during clinical use.

1. Spontaneous Reporting System:

The spontaneous reporting system is one of the most widely used methods for monitoring adverse drug reactions. In this approach, healthcare professionals such as physicians, pharmacists, and nurses voluntarily report suspected ADRs to pharmacovigilance centres or regulatory authorities. Patients may also submit reports in certain reporting systems. This method is especially useful for detecting rare, serious, and previously unknown adverse reactions. That may not be identified during clinical trials. Despite its importance spontaneous reporting is often affected by underreporting, incomplete documentation, and lack of awareness among healthcare providers.

2. Active Surveillance:

Active surveillance involves systematic and continuous monitoring of patients to identify adverse drug reactions. Unlike passive reporting systems, this method actively collects safety data through direct follow-up, patient interviews, or regular clinical assessment. Active surveillance provides more reliable information regarding the frequency and severity of ADRs because patients are closely observed during treatment. This method is commonly used in hospitals, specialized clinics, and post-marketing safety studies.

3. Cohort Event Monitoring:

Cohort event monitoring is a prospective observational method used to evaluate the safety profile of medicines in a defined group of patients. Individuals receiving a particular drug are followed over a specific period to record adverse events and treatment outcomes. This method is useful for identifying patterns of drug-related problems in real-world clinical practice. Cohort studies provide valuable information regarding long-term safety and incidence of ADRs in larger populations.

4. Prescription Event Monitoring:

Prescription event monitoring is a pharmacovigilance technique in which patients receiving a newly marketed medicine are monitored through prescription records. Information regarding adverse events is collected from prescribing healthcare professionals after the drug has been dispensed. This method helps identify uncommon or delayed adverse effects associated with routine clinical use. It is particularly useful for evaluating the safety of medicines after marketing approval.

5. Hospital-Based Monitoring:

Hospital-based monitoring is an important pharmacovigilance approach because hospitalized patients often receive multiple medications and require continuous clinical observation. Healthcare professionals monitor patients for suspected ADRs during treatment and document adverse events accordingly. This method allows early identification and management of serious reactions, thereby reducing complications and improving patient safety. Clinical pharmacists play a significant role in strengthening hospital pharmacovigilance activities.

6. Electronic Databases and Data Mining:

Technological advancements have important pharmacovigilance through then use of electronic health records computerized databases, and data mining techniques. Large volumes of patient safety data can be analyzed rapidly to identify possible safety signals and trends. Data mining methods help detect unusual patterns of adverse events that may indicate previously unrecognized drug-related risks. These systems support faster and more efficient pharmacovigilance activities.

7. Causality Assessment Methods:

Causality assessment methods are used to determine the likelihood that a suspected drug caused a particular adverse event. Various standardized tools, including the WHO- Uppsala Monitoring Centre (UMC) scale, are commonly used for this purpose. These methods evaluate factors such temporal association, response after drug withdrawal, alternative causes, and previous evidence related to the reaction. Causality assessment improves the accuracy and reliability of ADR reporting and supports better clinical decision-making.

Figure 3. Major Pharmacovigilance Activities Used in ADR Monitoring

Pharmacovigilance plays an essential role in improving drug safety by enabling early detection, assessment, and prevention of adverse drug reactions. The present review highlights the significance of ADR monitoring system in both clinical trials and routine healthcare practice. Although medicines provide therapeutic benefits, they may also produce undesirable effects that can affect patient compliance, treatment outcomes, and overall quality of life. Continuous pharmacovigilance activities therefore remain important for ensuring the safe and rational use of medicines.

The case study findings from the Phase IV clinical trial of Saroglitazar in patients with Non- alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease demonstrated the practical application of pharmacovigilance in hospital setting. Most reported adverse events were mild to moderate in severity and improved after appropriate in clinical management. Hypertriglyceridemia and hyperglycemia were among the commonly observed reactions during the study. Causality assessment using the WHO-Uppsala Monitoring Centre (WHO-UMC) scale helped determine the possible relationship between the study drug and reported adverse events. Most reactions were categorized as unlikely or unassessable, indicating the importance of systematic evaluation before establishing direct drug association.

The study also emphasizes the value of accurate ADR documentation and timely reporting in reducing potential drug-related risks. Hospital-based monitoring systems and clinical trial pharmacovigilance programmes contribute significantly to patient safety by supporting early identification and management of adverse events. Strengthening awareness among healthcare professionals regarding ADR reporting can further improve the effectiveness of pharmacovigilance systems.

CONCLUSION:

Pharmacovigilance is a vital part of healthcare that focuses on ensuring the safe and effective use of medicines through continuous monitoring of adverse drug reactions. Proper identification, evaluation, and reporting of ADRs help in reducing drug-related complications and improving overall patient safety. Effective pharmacovigilance practices also support healthcare professionals in making informed therapeutic decisions and promoting rational use of medicines.

The present review and case study emphasize the significance of ADR monitoring during Phase IV clinical trials involving Saroglitazar therapy in patients with Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. The reported adverse events were systematically monitored and assessed using established pharmacovigilance methods, including causality assessment tools. Most reactions observed during the study were mild to moderate in severity and responded well to appropriate clinical management and follow-up.

The findings demonstrate that structured ADR reporting systems and regular patient monitoring are essential for early detection of potential drug-related risks. Strengthening pharmacovigilance activities in hospitals and clinical research settings can contribute significantly to safer treatment practices, better healthcare outcomes and enhanced patient care in the future.

REFERENCES

1. World Health Organization. The Importance of Pharmacovigilance: Safety Monitoring of Medicinal Products. Geneva: WHO; 2002.
2. World Health Organization. Safety of Medicines: A Guide to Detecting and Reporting Adverse Drug Reactions. Geneva: WHO; 2002.
3. Edwards IR, Aronson JK. Adverse drug reactions: definitions, diagnosis, and management. Lancet. 2000; 356(9237): 1255-1259.
4. Gupta SK. Pharmacovigilance in India. Indian J Pharmacol. 2005; 37(6): 347-349.
5. Pharmacovigilance Programme of India (PvPI). Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India.
6. Uppsala Monitoring Centre. The Use of the WHO-UMC System for Standardised Case Causality Assessment. Sweden: UMC.
7. Lazarou 3, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients. JAMA. 1998;279(15): 1200-1205.
8. Pirmohamed M, James S, MeakinS, et al. Adverse drug reactions as cause of admission to hospital. BMJ. 2004;329:15-19.
9. Rawlins MD, Thompson JW. Pathogenesis of adverse drug reactions. In: Davies DM, editor. Textbook of Adverse Drug Reactions. Oxford University Press; 1977.
10. Hartigan-Go K. Pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction reporting. WHO Drug Information. 2002;16(2):117-120.
11. Arulmani R, Rajendra SD, Suresh B. Adverse Drug reaction monitoring in secondary care hospital in South India. Br J Clin Pharmacol, 2008;65(2):210-216.
12. Jose J, Rao PG. Pattern of adverse drug reactions notified by spontaneous reporting in an Indian tertiary care teaching hospital, Pharmacol Res. 2006;54(3):226-233.
13. Waller PC. An Introduction to Pharmacovigilance. Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.
14. Tripathi KD. Essentials of Medical Pharmacology. 8th ed. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers; 2018.
15. Rang HP, Dale MM, Ritter JM, Flower RJ. Rang and Dale’s Pharmacology, 8th ed. Elsevier; 2016.
16. Parthasarathi G, Nyfort-Hansen K, Nahata MC. A Textbook of Clinical Pharmacy Practice.
17. World Health Organization. WHO Technical Report Series: International Drug Monitoring. Geneva: WHO.
18. Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO), Guidance for Industry on Pharmacovigilance Requirements.
19. Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission. National Coordination Centre-Pharmacovigilance Programme of India.
20. Gupta YK, Nayak RP. Pharmacovigilance in India: present scenario and future challenges. Drug Saf. 2014;37(10):799-806.
21. Kalaiselvan V, Thota P, Singh GN. Pharmacovigilance Programme of India: recent developments and future perspectives. Indian J Pharmacol. 2016;48(6):624-628.
22. Meher BR. Materiovigilance: an Indian perspective. Perspect Clin Res. 2018;9(4):175-178.
23. Sharma HL, Sharma KK. Principles of Pharmacology. 3rd ed. Hyderabad: Paras Medical Publisher; 2017.
24. International Council of Harmonization (ICH). Clinical Safety Data Management: Definitions and Standards for Expedited Reporting E2A.
25. International Council Harmonization (ICH). Pharmacovigilance Planning E2E.
26. Meyboom RH, Egberts AC, Edwards IR, Hekster YA, de Koning FH, Gribnau FW. Principles of signal detection in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf. 1997;16(6):355-365.
27. Hauben M, Aronson JK. Defining ‘signal’ and its subtypes in pharmacovigilance based on a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2009;32(2) :99-110.
28. Strom BL. Pharmacoepidemiology. 5th ed. Wiley; 2012.
29. Mann RD, Andrews EB. Pharmacovigilance. 2nd ed. Wiley-Blackwell; 2007.
30. WHO Collaborating Centre of International Drug Monitoring. Safety Monitoring of Medicinal Products; Guidelines for Setting up and Running a Pharmacovigilance Centre. Uppsala, Sweden.
31. Zydus Lifesciences Ltd. Clinical Trial Protocol: IN004_SARO.21.003 Phase IV Study of Saroglitazar in NAFLD Patients. Version 05;2022.
32. Kaul U, Parmar D, Manjunath K, Shah M, Parmar K, Patil KP, New dual peroxisome proliferator activated receptor agonist-saroglitazar in diabetic dyslipidemia and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Expert Opin Investing Drugs. 2019;28(2):125-131.
33. Gawrieh S, Noureddin M, Loo N, et al. Saroglitazar for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis: current evidence and future directions. Hepatol Int. 2021;15(3):512-521.
34. Younossi M, Koenig AB, Abdelatif D, Fazel Y, Henry L, Wymer M. Global epidemiology of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology. 2016;64(1):73-84.
35. Chalasani N, Younossi Z, Lavine JE, et al. The diagnosis and management of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: practice guidance. Hepatology. 2018:67(1):328-357.
36. Kalra S, Joshi A, Parmar D. Saroglitazar: a novel therapy for diabetic dyslipidemia. J Pak Med Assoc. 2015;65(9):1014-1016.
37. Singh GN, Chaudhari BG. Pharmacovigilance: an overview. J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2010;1(1):1-3.
38. Rehan HS, Chopra D, Kakkar AK. Physician’s guide to pharmacovigilance terminology and causality assessment. Eur J Intern Med. 2009;20(1):3-8.
39. Naranjo CA, Busto U, Sellers EM, et al. A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions. Clin Pharmacol Ther, 1981;30(2):239-245.
40. World Health Organization. Pharmacovigilance Indicators: A Practical Manual for the Assessment of Pharmacovigilance Systems. Geneva: WHO; 2015