Characterization of hypersensitivity reactions reported among Andrographis paniculata users in Thailand using Health Product Vigilance Center (HPVC) database

• Main Authors: Wimon Suwankesawong, Surasak Saokaew, Unchalee Permsuwan, Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk
• Format: Journal
• Published: 2018
• Online Access: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84964312847&origin=inward; http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/44927
• Institution: Chiang Mai University

© 2014 Suwankesawong et al. Background: Andrographis paniculata (andrographis) is one of the herbal products that are widely used for various indications. Hypersensitivity reactions have been reported among subjects receiving Andrographis paniculata in Thailand. Understanding of characteristics of patients, adverse events, and clinical outcomes is essential for ensuring population safety. This study aimed to describe the characteristics of hypersensitivity reactions reported in patients receiving andrographis containing products in Thailand using national pharmacovigilance database. Methods: Thai Vigibase data from February 2001 to December 2012 involving andrographis products were used. This database includes the reports submitted through the spontaneous reporting system and intensive monitoring programmes. The database contained patient characteristic, adverse events associated with andrographis products, and details on seriousness, causality, and clinical outcomes. Case reports were included for final analysis if they met the inclusion criteria; 1) reports with andrographis being the only suspected cause, 2) reports with terms consistent with the constellation of hypersensitivity reactions, and 3) reports with terms considered critical terms according to WHO criteria. Descriptive statistics were used. Results: A total of 248 case reports of andrographis-associated adverse events were identified. Only 106 case reports specified andrographis herbal product as the only suspected drug and reported at least one term consistent with constellation of hypersensitivity reactions. Most case reports (89%) came from spontaneous reporting system with no previously documented history of drug allergy (88%). Of these, 18 case reports were classified as serious with 16 cases requiring hospitalization. For final assessment, the case reports with terms consistent with constellation of hypersensitivity reactions and critical terms were included. Thirteen case reports met such criteria including anaphylactic shock (n = 5), anaphylactic reaction (n = 4) and angioedema (n = 4). Time to development of symptoms ranged from 5 minutes to 1 day. The doses of andrographis used varied from 352 mg to 1,750 mg. Causality assessment of 13 case reports were certain (n = 3), probable (n = 8) and possible (n = 2). Conclusions: Our findings suggested that hypersensitivity reactions have been reported among patients receiving Andrographis paniculata. Healthcare professionals should be aware of this potential risk. Further investigation of the causal relationship is needed; meanwhile including hypersensitivity reactions for andrographis product labeling should be considered.