PFD report

Andrew Cook · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 18 Jun 2021•Northamptonshire

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
4

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
14

Described in responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Report evidence summary

Concerns raised4

  1. Failure of clinicians to recognise PEG synonyms
  2. Under-reporting of PEG allergy
  3. Failure of medical product information to clearly identify PEG existence, dose and molecular weight
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate product safety warnings about serious hazards
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Actions described in response An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.10

  1. Action

    Appraise feedback from the public consultation, including feedback on proposed medical-device labelling requirements.

    Stated by Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory AgencyStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 3 August 2021.
  2. Action

    Work with UK Approved Bodies to communicate the importance of clear PEG labelling.

    Stated by Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory AgencyStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 3 August 2021.
  3. Action

    Engage medical-device manufacturers and other stakeholders to develop clear PEG/macrogol labelling guidelines.

    Stated by Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory AgencyStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 3 August 2021.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure of clinicians to recognise PEG synonyms

Wider context from the report

“(3) There is inconsistency and potential confusion in nomenclature. For example, PEG can be referred to as “Macrogol”, “polyethylene oxide” (PEO) or “polyoxyethylene” (POE). Nomenclature may also vary between countries. There was evidence that clinicians reviewing product information in urgent situations are not aware of the various synonyms. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Under-reporting of PEG allergy

Wider context from the report

“(1) PEG allergy is rare but may be under-reported. PEGs are ubiquitous and more research into their effect as allergens is required. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure of medical product information to clearly identify PEG existence, dose and molecular weight

Wider context from the report

“(2) Whether the existence, dose and molecular weight of PEG should be made clear on medical product information (such as the Instructions For Use, data sheets, packaging and marketing information). The existence of PEG in the equipment (in this case, the Sion and Sion Blue guidewires manufactured by Asahi Intecc) was not apparent from the packaging or product information available to the clinicians. PEGs are available in various molecular weights. There was expert evidence that reaction to PEG may depend on the dose and exact molecular weight to which an individual is exposed. It was acknowledged that labelling can have negative effects and therefore needs to be considered with care. Labelling also requires coordination with other national regulators. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate product safety warnings about serious hazards.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Inconsistent PEG nomenclature

Wider context from the report

“(3) There is inconsistency and potential confusion in nomenclature. For example, PEG can be referred to as “Macrogol”, “polyethylene oxide” (PEO) or “polyoxyethylene” (POE). Nomenclature may also vary between countries. There was evidence that clinicians reviewing product information in urgent situations are not aware of the various synonyms. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Appraise feedback from the public consultation, including feedback on proposed medical-device labelling requirements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The MHRA will appraise the feedback received from the public consultation of the UK medical devices legislation including the Chapter relating to labelling so that we may create a world-leading regime that continues to prioritise patient safety. These actions combined with the measures above, will minimise risk associated with PEG allergy while ensuring continued access to devices from those patients who will benefit.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 5 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Work with UK Approved Bodies to communicate the importance of clear PEG labelling.

Verbatim wording from the response

“1. The MHRA will work with UK ABs to communicate the importance of appropriate clear labelling with respect to PEG.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 4 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Engage medical-device manufacturers and other stakeholders to develop clear PEG/macrogol labelling guidelines.

Verbatim wording from the response

“2. We will continue to engage with relevant stakeholders, in particular the medical device manufacturers, to develop clear guidelines on labelling requirements for PEG/macrogol.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 4 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Publicise PEG safety messages through patient groups, medical societies, healthcare colleges, manufacturer associations and safety-message alerts.

Verbatim wording from the response

“To further publicise these safety messages, the MHRA will utilise relevant patient representative groups, major medical professional societies/colleges, and appropriate healthcare manufacturer trade associations to further publicise this safety issue. In combination with standard alerts to subscribers of our safety message webpage, this will ensure a greater reach to patients, public and health care system.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 4 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Review requirements for disclosing PEG molecular weight and quantity, consulting patient representatives, clinical experts and industry.

Verbatim wording from the response

“3. Concerning the need for additional detail on the labelling of PEG regarding the its molecular weight and amount/quantity used, we will need to undertake a longer-term programme of review. The MHRA will discuss these points with patient representative groups, clinical experts, and industry.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 4 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Issue a Drug Safety Update linking to the Devices Safety Information webpage and highlighting PEG nomenclature variations in medicines.

Verbatim wording from the response

“3. We recognise the need to raise awareness of this safety issue to patients, public and healthcare professionals relating to medical devices and medicines. - The MHRA plan to launch a Devices Safety Information (DSI) webpage specifically on PEG/macrogol in medical devices to highlight its potential to illicit allergic type reactions, and to raise awareness of nomenclature variations. - We also plan to issue a Drug Safety Update (DSU) that links directly to the DSI webpage (above) to reinforce this message as well as raise awareness of the different names for PEG compounds in medicines.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 4 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Continue reviewing PEG exposure data, seek external expert views and use the findings to develop labelling advice for devices and medicines.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Conclusion The MHRA will continue to collect and review information from a range of data sources on PEG exposure including via our adverse incident (Yellow Card) reporting system and database, as well as independent scientific publications. This information will form part of an ongoing review in which we will seek views of external experts, that will aid us in the development of labelling advice for PEG in medical devices and medicines, specifically the balance of benefits and risks to patients and other users of medical devices.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 5 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Launch a Devices Safety Information webpage explaining PEG/macrogol risks in medical devices and nomenclature variations.

Verbatim wording from the response

“3. We recognise the need to raise awareness of this safety issue to patients, public and healthcare professionals relating to medical devices and medicines. - The MHRA plan to launch a Devices Safety Information (DSI) webpage specifically on PEG/macrogol in medical devices to highlight its potential to illicit allergic type reactions, and to raise awareness of nomenclature variations. - We also plan to issue a Drug Safety Update (DSU) that links directly to the DSI webpage (above) to reinforce this message as well as raise awareness of the different names for PEG compounds in medicines.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 4 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Appraise UK medical-device and medicines legislation on minimum ingredient-labelling requirements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“4. The MHRA will continue to perform ongoing appraisal of the current medical devices and medicines UK legislation with regards to expectations on minimum labelling requirements relating to ingredients.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 4 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Review PEG nomenclature challenges and engage global stakeholders, including WHO and the IMDRF.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Concern 3: We will review the challenges relating to nomenclature.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 5 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.4

  1. 1

    Discuss PEG labelling requirements with international regulators to support compatible future UK requirements.

    Stated by Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory AgencyStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 3 August 2021.
  2. 2

    Share relevant PEG safety information with national regulators where necessary and appropriate.

    Stated by Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory AgencyStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 3 August 2021.
  3. 3

    Launch the public consultation on the future UK medical-device regulatory framework.

    Stated by Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory AgencyStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 3 August 2021.
  4. 4

    Continue regulatory work with UK Approved Bodies to ensure manufacturers meet medical-device safety-data monitoring and reporting obligations.

    Stated by Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory AgencyStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 3 August 2021.

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Discuss PEG labelling requirements with international regulators to support compatible future UK requirements.

Verbatim wording from the response

“5. MHRA will seek to discuss labelling requirements with other regulators internationally, to ensure any future UK requirements do not adversely or significantly conflict with other global requirements that could compromise UK patient safety.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 5 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Share relevant PEG safety information with national regulators where necessary and appropriate.

Verbatim wording from the response

“6. Where necessary and appropriate, the MHRA will communicate and share information with other national regulators to protect patients worldwide.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 5 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Launch the public consultation on the future UK medical-device regulatory framework.

Verbatim wording from the response

“On 16 September we launched a public consultation on future of medical device regulation; giving everyone the opportunity to contribute to the improvement of the regulatory framework and therefore patient safety in the future. https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/consultation-on-the-future-regulation-of-medical-devices-in-the-united-kingdom”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 4 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Continue regulatory work with UK Approved Bodies to ensure manufacturers meet medical-device safety-data monitoring and reporting obligations.

Verbatim wording from the response

“2. As part of the medical device legislation, manufacturers are required to monitor, collect, and review safety data on their devices in the post market phase. Through our ongoing regulatory work with UK Approved Bodies (UK ABs - independent assessment/certification bodies) the MHRA will continue to ensure that manufacturers meet their legislative obligations.”

Source location

2021-0258-Response-from-MHRA_Published
Page 4 · response
Published 3 August 2021

Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Official responses located
1/1

Data last updated 7 September 2026