Search

Objective: Improving mechanisms to detect adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is key to strengthening post-marketing drug safety surveillance. Signal detection is presently unimodal, relying on a single information source. Multimodal signal detection is based on jointly analyzing multiple information sources. Building on, and expanding the work done in prior studies, the aim of the article is to further research on multimodal signal detection, explore its potential benefits, and propose methods for its construction and evaluation., Material and Methods: Four data sources are investigated; FDA's adverse event reporting system, insurance claims, the MEDLINE citation database, and the logs of major Web search engines. Published methods are used to generate and combine signals from each data source. Two distinct reference benchmarks corresponding to well-established and recently labeled ADRs respectively are used to evaluate the performance of multimodal signal detection in terms of area under the ROC curve (AUC) and lead-time-to-detection, with the latter relative to labeling revision dates., Results: Limited to our reference benchmarks, multimodal signal detection provides AUC improvements ranging from 0.04 to 0.09 based on a widely used evaluation benchmark, and a comparative added lead-time of 7-22 months relative to labeling revision dates from a time-indexed benchmark., Conclusions: The results support the notion that utilizing and jointly analyzing multiple data sources may lead to improved signal detection. Given certain data and benchmark limitations, the early stage of development, and the complexity of ADRs, it is currently not possible to make definitive statements about the ultimate utility of the concept. Continued development of multimodal signal detection requires a deeper understanding the data sources used, additional benchmarks, and further research on methods to generate and synthesize signals., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: Several studies have demonstrated the ability to detect adverse events potentially related to multiple drug exposure via data mining. However, the number of putative associations produced by such computational approaches is typically large, making experimental validation difficult. We theorized that those potential associations for which there is evidence from multiple complementary sources are more likely to be true, and explored this idea using a published database of drug-drug-adverse event associations derived from electronic health records (EHRs)., Methods: We prioritized drug-drug-event associations derived from EHRs using four sources of information: (1) public databases, (2) sources of spontaneous reports, (3) literature, and (4) non-EHR drug-drug interaction (DDI) prediction methods. After pre-filtering the associations by removing those found in public databases, we devised a ranking for associations based on the support from the remaining sources, and evaluated the results of this rank-based prioritization., Results: We collected information for 5983 putative EHR-derived drug-drug-event associations involving 345 drugs and ten adverse events from four data sources and four prediction methods. Only seven drug-drug-event associations (<0.5 %) had support from the majority of evidence sources, and about one third (1777) had support from at least one of the evidence sources., Conclusions: Our proof-of-concept method for scoring putative drug-drug-event associations from EHRs offers a systematic and reproducible way of prioritizing associations for further study. Our findings also quantify the agreement (or lack thereof) among complementary sources of evidence for drug-drug-event associations and highlight the challenges of developing a robust approach for prioritizing signals of these associations.

Undetected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) pose a major burden on the health system. Data mining methodologies designed to identify signals of novel ADRs are of deep importance for drug safety surveillance. The development and evaluation of these methodologies requires proper reference benchmarks. While progress has recently been made in developing such benchmarks, our understanding of the performance characteristics of the data mining methodologies is limited because existing benchmarks do not support prospective performance evaluations. We address this shortcoming by providing a reference standard to support prospective performance evaluations. The reference standard was systematically curated from drug labeling revisions, such as new warnings, which were issued and communicated by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2013. The reference standard includes 62 positive test cases and 75 negative controls, and covers 44 drugs and 38 events. We provide usage guidance and empirical support for the reference standard by applying it to analyze two data sources commonly mined for drug safety surveillance.