Pharmacovigilance is intended to provide early detection of warning signals to minimize the impact and spread of adverse drug reactions. For the system to be effective, there must be rapid reporting of adverse events to a central review function which must quickly recognize the signals and act upon them. Both the quantity and the quality of adverse event reports must be improved. Education in clinical pharmacology should be restored to prominence in the medical school curriculum. Prescribers and those who care for patients need to understand the purpose of a central reporting system and be encouraged to file complete reports. Collaboration between the medical profession, pharmaceutical companies, and regulatory agencies is required if improvements in the quantity and quality of adverse event reports are to appear.
Spriet-PourraCAuricheM.Drug withdrawal from sale. 2nd edition. Scrip Reports.Richmond, England: PJB Publications Ltd.; 1994.
2.
LazarouJPomeranzBHCoreyPNIncidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients. JAMA.1998;279:1200–1205.
3.
JeffordsJ.Foreign marketing questions posed to Henney. The Tan Sheet.1998;6(37):9.
4.
MooreTJPsatyBMFurbergCDTime to act on drug safety. JAMA.1998;279:1571–1573.
5.
WoodAJJSteinCMWoosleyR.Making medicines safer—the need for an independent drug safety board. New Engl J Med.1998;339:1851–1854.
6.
HaggardN.Adverse event reporting will track company compliance with regs. The Pink Sheet.1998;60(44):7.
7.
FDA.Electronic adverse event filing could be phased in over four years. The Pink Sheet.1998;60(45):29.
8.
FinneyDJThe design and logic of a monitor of drug use. J Chron Dis.1965;18:77–98.
9.
ScottHDThatcher-RenshawARosenbaumSEWatersWJGreenMAndrewsLGFaichGAPhysician reporting of adverse drug reactions. Results of the Rhode Island adverse drug reaction reporting project. JAMA.1990;263:1785–1788.
10.
KlincewiczSLClarkJAArellanoFMSource patterns and utility of spontaneous reports to a US manufacturer. Int J Pharm Med.1999;13:17–23.
11.
RoutledgeP.150 years of pharmacovigilance. Lancet.1998;351:1200–1201.
12.
GrossFHInmanWHW, eds. In Drug Monitoring.Orlando, FL: Academic Press; 1997.
13.
VereDWDrug adverse reactions as masqueraders. Adv Drug React Bull.1976;60:208–211.
14.
Koch-WeserJSellersEMZacestR.The ambiguity of adverse drug reactions. Euro J Clin Pharmacol.1977;11:75–78.
15.
RoutledgePABialasMCHoughtonJEWoodsF.Adverse drug reactions: the great masqueraders. Drug Inf J.1998;32:79–84.
16.
KarchFESmithCLKerznerBMazzulloJMWeintraubMLasagnaL.Adverse drug reactions—a matter of opinion. Clin Pharmacol Ther.1976;19: 489–492.
17.
ScottHDRosenbaumSEWatersWJColtAMAndrewsLGJuergensJPFaichGARhode Island physicians recognition and reporting of adverse drug reactions. Rhode Island Med J.1987;70:311–316.
18.
BurnumJFThe misinformation era: the fall of the medical record. Ann Int Med.1989;110:482–484.
19.
FreidinRBGoldmanLCecilRRPatient-physician concordance in problem identification in the primary care setting. Ann Int Med.1980;93:490–493.
20.
BrodyDSPhysician recognition of behavioral, psychological, and social aspects of medical care. Arch Int Med.1980;140:1286–1289.
21.
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences.Guidelines for preparing core clinical-safety information on drugs. Report of CIOMS Working Groups III and V. CIOMS, Geneva, Switzerland, 1999:30.
22.
FriedS.“Less Than One Percent,” In Bitter Pills: Inside the hazardous world of legal drugs.Bantam Books; New York, NY: 1998:40.
23.
BerdeB.Co-operation within and between pharmaceutical companies. In Drug Monitoring.GrossFInmanWHW, eds. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1977;145–152.
24.
DunlopDMThe assessment of the safety of drugs and the role of government in their control. J Clin Pharmacol.1967;7:184–192.
25.
KesslerDAIntroducing MEDWatch: a new approach to reporting medication and device adverse effects and product problems. JAMA.1993;260: 2765–2768.
26.
GrossF.The thorny path of clinical pharmacology. Clin Pharmacol Ther.1978;24:383–394.
27.
GrossF.The second was a setback. Euro J Clin Pharmacol.1983;25:429–430.
28.
NierenbergDWClinical pharmacology instruction for all medical students. Clin Pharmacol Ther.1986;40:483–487.
29.
BenowitzNLBirthing of clinical pharmacologists. Clin Pharmacol Ther.1997;62:587–591.
30.
VestalREThe clinical pharmacologist: an endangered species?Clin Pharmacol Ther.1998;64:471–476.
31.
WHO Collaborating Centre for International Drug Monitoring.Definitions. Brit Med J.1992,304:465.
32.
SaxonA.Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to betalactam antibiotics. Ann Int Med.1987,107:204–215.
33.
SackettDLClinical disagreement: I. How often it occurs and why. Can Med Assoc J.1980;123: 499–504.
34.
MiremontGHaramburuFBégaudBPéréJCDangoumauJ.Adverse drug reactions: physicians opinions versus a causality assessment method. Eur J Clin Pharm.1994;46:285–289.
35.
BrewerTColditzGAPostmarketing surveillance and adverse drug reactions. Current perspectives and future needs. JAMA.1999;281:824–829.
36.
LangrethR.Recall of popular Roche drug raises questions on testing, approval process. Wall Street Journal.1998; June 10:B 16.
37.
JeffreyNALangrethR. Viagra's lesson: new drags, unknown risks. Wall Street Journal. 1998; June 10: B 1 and B 16.
38.
TanouyeE.American Home withdraws new drug to ease pain, after death of 4 patients. Wall Street Journal.1998; June 23:A 3 and A 8.
39.
BarrettA.The big hole in the drug safety net. Business Week.1998; July 6:37.
40.
CastleWMLewisJAPostmarketing surveillance of adverse drug reactions. Brit Med J.1984;288: 1458–1459.
41.
TaussigHBA study of the German outbreak of phocomelia. JAMA.1962;180:1106–1114.
42.
BurtRAPEven side effects can have silver linings. Pharmaceut Exec.1986;6:86.
