Department of Internal Medicine II, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Klinikum Hanau, Teaching Hospital of the Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University of Frankfurt/Main, Germany.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2011 Feb;59(1):1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2010.09.006. Epub 2010 Sep 18.
Since 1998 liver injury has been assumed in some patients after the use of kava (Piper methysticum G. Forster) as an anxyolytic herbal extract, but the regulatory causality evaluation of these cases was a matter of international and scientific debate. This review critically analyzes the regulatory issues of causality assessments of patients with primarily suspected kava hepatotoxicity and suggests recommendations for minimizing regulatory risks when assessing causality in these and other related cases. The various regulatory causality approaches were based on liver unspecific assessments such as ad hoc evaluations, the WHO scale using the definitions of the WHO Collaborating Centre for International Drug Monitoring, and the Naranjo scale. Due to their liver unspecificity, however, these causality approaches are not suitable for assessing cases of primarily assumed liver related adverse reactions by drugs and herbs including kava. Major problems emerged trough the combination of regulatory inappropriate causality assessment methods with the poor data quality as presented by the regulatory agency when reassessment was done and the resulting data were heavily criticized worldwide within the scientific community. Conversely, causality of cases with primarily assumed kava hepatotoxicity is best assessed by structured, quantitative and liver specific causality algorithms such as the scale of the CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences) or the main-test as its update. Future strategies should therefore focus on the implementation of structured, quantitative and liver specific causality assessment methods as regulatory standards to improve regulatory causality assessments for liver injury by drugs and herbs including kava.
自 1998 年以来,一些患者在使用卡瓦(Piper methysticum G. Forster)作为一种抗焦虑草药提取物后出现了肝损伤,但这些病例的监管因果关系评估是一个国际和科学争论的问题。本综述批判性地分析了主要怀疑卡瓦肝毒性的患者进行因果关系评估的监管问题,并提出了建议,以最大限度地降低在评估这些和其他相关病例中的监管风险。各种监管因果关系方法都是基于肝非特异性评估,例如特别评估、世界卫生组织(WHO)使用世界卫生组织国际药物监测合作中心定义的量表,以及 Naranjo 量表。然而,由于其肝非特异性,这些因果关系方法不适合评估主要假定与药物和草药(包括卡瓦)相关的肝不良反应的病例。主要问题出现在监管机构重新评估时,由于监管机构提供的不适当的因果关系评估方法和较差的数据质量,以及由此产生的大量数据在科学界受到了全球的严厉批评。相反,主要假定的卡瓦肝毒性病例的因果关系最好通过结构化、定量和肝特异性因果关系算法来评估,例如 CIOMS(国际医学组织理事会)量表或其更新的主要测试。因此,未来的策略应侧重于实施结构化、定量和肝特异性因果关系评估方法作为监管标准,以改善包括卡瓦在内的药物和草药引起的肝损伤的监管因果关系评估。