METHODS: This cross-sectional survey collected data from May 2014 to December 2015. Questionnaires seeking to collect information on resources, processes, roles and responsibility, and functions of PV systems were sent to relevant persons in the ASEAN countries. Functions of PV centers were measured using the minimum World Health Organization requirements for a functional national PV system. Performances of PV centers were measured by the following: (1) the indicators related to the average number of individual case safety reports (ICSR); (2) presence of signal detection activities and subsequent action; and (3) contribution to the global vigilance database.
RESULTS: Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam completed the survey. PV systems in four surveyed countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand) achieved all aspects of the World Health Organization minimum requirement for a functional national PV system; the remaining countries were deemed to have unclear communication strategies and/or no official advisory committee. Average numbers of recent ICSR national returns ranged from 7 to 3817 reports/year/million population; three countries (Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand) demonstrated good performance in reporting system and reported signal detection activities and subsequent actions. All participating countries had submitted ICSRs to the Uppsala Monitoring Center during the survey period (2013-2015).
CONCLUSIONS: Four participating countries had functional PV systems. PV capacity, functionality, and legislative framework varied depending on local healthcare ecosystem networks. Implementing effective communication strategies and/or technical assistance from the advisory committee are needed to strengthen PV in ASEAN. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
METHODS: We used data from the TREAT Asia HIV Observational Database. Patients were included if they started antiretroviral therapy during or after 2003, had a serum creatinine measurement at antiretroviral therapy initiation (baseline), and had at least 2 follow-up creatinine measurements taken ≥3 months apart. Patients with a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≤60 mL/min/1.73 m2 were excluded. Chronic kidney disease was defined as 2 consecutive eGFR values ≤60 mL/min/1.73 m2 taken ≥3 months apart. Generalized estimating equations were used to identify factors associated with eGFR change. Competing risk regression adjusted for study site, age and sex, and cumulative incidence plots were used to evaluate factors associated with chronic kidney disease (CKD).
RESULTS: Of 2547 patients eligible for this analysis, tenofovir was being used by 703 (27.6%) at baseline. Tenofovir use, high baseline eGFR, advanced HIV disease stage, and low nadir CD4 were associated with a decrease in eGFR during follow-up. Chronic kidney disease occurred at a rate of 3.4 per 1000 patient/years. Factors associated with CKD were tenofovir use, old age, low baseline eGFR, low nadir CD4, and protease inhibitor use.
CONCLUSIONS: There is an urgent need to enhance renal monitoring and management capacity among at-risk groups in Asia and improve access to less nephrotoxic antiretrovirals.
METHODS: A modified questionnaire was sent to the PV team heads of 21 PV agencies based in the APEC countries, between June 28 and September 12, 2017, to gather information on the structure, process, and outcome of PV status in these countries.
RESULTS: Of the 21 APEC countries, 15 responded. We found harmonized laws and regulations for general PV and risk management systems. However, variations were found in PV structure: for example, 11 out of 15 countries had national regulatory representatives responsible for PV in pharmaceutical companies, while four did not. For PV process, discrepancies were also found in the source type of adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports and reporting of medication errors and therapeutic ineffectiveness in cumulative ADR reports. With respect to PV outcomes, among countries that performed active surveillance, the United States of America was more active, with hundreds of projects including additional pharmacoepidemiological studies etc. Among the nine countries that responded, Japan had the greatest number of product label changes followed by Taiwan, Malaysia, and Korea.
CONCLUSION: We have identified substantial variations in the structures, processes, and outcomes of PV status among the countries of the APEC region. Therefore, efforts to reduce variations in the PV administration and regulation are warranted for harmonization of PV within the APEC region.