IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/drugsa/v43y2020i12d10.1007_s40264-020-01000-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sex Differences in Reported Adverse Drug Reactions to COVID-19 Drugs in a Global Database of Individual Case Safety Reports

Author

Listed:
  • Alem Zekarias

    (Uppsala Monitoring Centre)

  • Sarah Watson

    (Uppsala Monitoring Centre)

  • Sara Hedfors Vidlin

    (Uppsala Monitoring Centre)

  • Birgitta Grundmark

    (Uppsala Monitoring Centre)

Abstract

Introduction In late 2019, a new coronavirus—severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)—was discovered in Wuhan, China, and the World Health Organization later declared coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) a pandemic. Numerous drugs have been repurposed and investigated for therapeutic effectiveness in the disease, including those from “Solidarity,” an international clinical trial (azithromycin, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, the fixed combination lopinavir/ritonavir, and remdesivir). Objective Our objective was to evaluate adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting for drugs when used in the treatment of COVID-19 compared with use for other indications, specifically focussing on sex differences. Method We extracted reports on COVID-19-specific treatments from the global ADR database, VigiBase, using an algorithm developed to identify reports that listed COVID-19 as the indication. The Solidarity trial drugs were included, as were any drugs reported ≥ 100 times. We performed a descriptive comparison of reports for the same drugs used in non-COVID-19 indications. The data lock point date was 7 June 2020. Results In total, 2573 reports were identified for drugs used in the treatment of COVID-19. In order of frequency, the most reported ADRs were electrocardiogram QT-prolonged, diarrhoea, nausea, hepatitis, and vomiting in males and diarrhoea, electrocardiogram QT-prolonged, nausea, vomiting, and upper abdominal pain in females. Other hepatic and kidney-related events were included in the top ten ADRs in males, whereas no hepatic or renal terms were reported for females. COVID-19-related reporting patterns differed from non-pandemic reporting for these drugs. Conclusion Review of a global database of suspected ADR reports revealed sex differences in the reporting patterns for drugs used in the treatment of COVID-19. Patterns of ADR sex differences need further elucidation.

Suggested Citation

  • Alem Zekarias & Sarah Watson & Sara Hedfors Vidlin & Birgitta Grundmark, 2020. "Sex Differences in Reported Adverse Drug Reactions to COVID-19 Drugs in a Global Database of Individual Case Safety Reports," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(12), pages 1309-1314, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:12:d:10.1007_s40264-020-01000-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s40264-020-01000-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-020-01000-8
    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/s40264-020-01000-8?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. Elena Rocca & Oskar Gauffin & Ruth Savage & Sara Hedfors Vidlin & Birgitta Grundmark, 2021. "Remdesivir in the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Analysis of Spontaneous Reports in VigiBase During 2020," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 44(9), pages 987-998, September.
    2. Catia Marzolini & Felix Stader & Anne Leuppi-Taegtmeyer & Marcel Stoeckle & Manuel Battegay & Parham Sendi, 2021. "Sex Differences in Lopinavir Concentrations and Occurrence of Marked QTc Prolongation Episodes in Patients with COVID-19," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 255-257, February.

    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:12:d:10.1007_s40264-020-01000-8. 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.