ACE-Inhibitor Related Angioedema Is Not Sufficiently Reported to the Danish Adverse Drug Reactions Database
Received 13 February 2019
Accepted for publication 30 October 2019
Published 16 December 2019 Volume 2019:11 Pages 105—113
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Rajender R. Aparasu
Johan Emil Lundbek Cornwall,1 Anette Bygum,1,2 Eva Rye Rasmussen3
1Department of Dermatology and Allergy Centre, Odense University Hospital, Odense C 5000, Denmark; 2Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; 3Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery and Audiology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen 2100, Denmark
Correspondence: Johan Emil Lundbek Cornwall
Department of Dermatology and Allergy Centre, Odense University Hospital, J.B. Winsloewsvej 4, Entrance 142, Odense C 5000, Denmark
Tel +45 42172449
Purpose: The primary objective of this study was to calculate the report rate of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-related angioedema (ACEi-AE). Secondary objectives were to determine factors suspected to affect the likelihood of ACEi-AE being reported and to investigate potential differences in angioedema risks between different ACEis.
Patients and methods: Patient data from two cohorts comprising 176 patients with ACEi-AE were compared with report data from the Danish Adverse Drug Reactions Database, administered by the Danish Medicines Agency (DKMA). The study period was 1994–2015. Data were linked using unique personal identification numbers and birth dates. Cohort data and report data were compared with ACEi sales numbers from MedStat, an official database containing annual pharmaceutical drug sale data in Denmark.
Results: ACEi-AE was reported in two out of 176 cases resulting in a report rate of 1.1%, meaning that 98.9% of the cases were not reported. Since 1994, a total of 417 ACEi-AE reports were made to the DKMA. Fifty-eight percent of these were made by general practitioners or physicians with unknown workplaces and 35% by hospital staff. Enalapril and ramipril were the most sold ACEi’s in the study period (40.3% and 42.6%, respectively). Enalapril was associated with 54.7% of ACEi-AE reports while ramipril was associated with 14.2%. ACEi substance received was known for 141 cohort patients, of which 53.9% were prescribed enalapril and 17.0% received ramipril.
Conclusion: ACEi-AE was found to be severely underreported in Denmark, greatly limiting the available incidence data for this potentially life-threatening adverse reaction.
Keywords: edema, side-effect, adverse-effect, pharmacovigilance, antihypertensive, agent
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]