Filing Sources after Oral P2Y12 Platelet Inhibitors to the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).

Background: The US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) is a global passive surveillance database that relies on voluntary reporting by health care professionals and consumers as well as required mandatory reporting by pharmaceutical manufacturers. However, the initial filers and comparative patterns for oral P2Y12 platelet inhibitor reporting are unknown. We assessed who generated original FAERS reports for clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor in 2015.

Methods: From the FAERS database we extracted and examined adverse event cases coreported with oral P2Y12 platelet inhibitors. All adverse event filing originating sources were dichotomized into consumers, lawyers, pharmacists, physicians, other health care professionals, and unknown.

Results: Overall, 2015 annual adverse events were more commonly coreported with clopidogrel (n = 13,234) with known source filers (n = 12,818, or 96.9%) than with prasugrel (2,896; 98.9% out of 2,927 cases) or ticagrelor (2,163, or 82.3%, out of 2,627 cases, respectively). Overall, most adverse events were filed by consumers (8,336, or 44.4%), followed by physicians (5,290, or 28.2%), other health care professionals (2,997, or 16.0%), pharmacists (1,125, or 6.0%), and finally by lawyers (129, or 0.7%). The origin of 811 (4.7%) initial reports remains unknown. The adverse event filing sources differ among drugs. While adverse events coreported with clopidogrel and prasugrel were commonly originated by patients (40.4 and 84.3%, respectively), most frequently ticagrelor reports (42.5%) were filed by physicians.

Conclusion: The reporting quality and initial sources differ among oral P2Y12 platelet inhibitors in FAERS. The ticagrelor surveillance in 2015 was inadequate when compared to clopidogrel and prasugrel. Patients filed most adverse events for clopidogrel and prasugrel, while physicians originated most ticagrelor complaints. These differences justify stricter compliance control for ticagrelor manufacturers and may be attributed to the confusion of treating physicians with unexpected fatal, cardiac, and thrombotic adverse events linked to ticagrelor.