Search

Introduction Increased post-marketing reports of interstitial lung disease in Japan have been recognized. An understanding of its regional groundings can be important for the global pharmacovigilance community. Objective The objective of this study was to explore the correlation between high rates of interstitial lung disease reporting and regulatory actions in Japan. Methods Post-marketing interstitial lung disease-related label changes and interstitial lung disease reports were classified by the anatomical therapeutic chemical classification groups of the suspected drugs. Regulatory actions for the top interstitial lung disease-reporting drugs were compared. The interstitial lung disease reporting patterns of protein kinase inhibitors were compared to those of methotrexate. Results Interstitial lung disease-related label changes predominantly occurred for drugs in the anatomical therapeutic chemical classification groups L, J, C, and herbal medicines. Interstitial lung disease was reported most frequently for L group, especially for the protein kinase inhibitors. The regulatory actions for those drugs with the highest number of interstitial lung disease reports (methotrexate, protease kinase inhibitors, gemcitabine, docetaxel) plus monoclonal antibodies were analyzed. The ratio of interstitial lung disease reports to all reports over time was initially high in the re-examination period, while it was constantly low after the period expired. The increase in interstitial lung disease reporting was observed for the drugs for which interstitial lung disease was designated as a priority item in the use-results survey. Methotrexate had more interstitial lung disease reports with multiple suspected drugs and fewer reports with high completeness than the protease kinase inhibitors. Conclusions The high rates of interstitial lung disease reporting derived from mainly the anatomical therapeutic chemical classification group L drugs. Interstitial lung disease is the targeted adverse drug reaction in the use-results survey mandated in the re-examination of those drugs. This system provides at least one explanation for the high reporting of interstitial lung disease in Japan. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40264-020-00968-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Introduction In the treatment of the individual patient, a vision is to achieve the best possible balance between benefit and harm. Such tailored therapy relies upon the identification and characterisation of risk factors for adverse drug reactions. Information relevant to risk factor considerations can be captured in adverse event reports and could be utilised in statistical signal detection. Objective The aim of this study was to explore whether statistical screening of a broad range of risk factors within a global database of adverse event reports could uncover signals of risk groups for adverse drug reactions. Methods Subgroup disproportionality analysis was applied to 15.4 million reports entered in VigiBase, the World Health Organization (WHO) global database of individual case safety reports, up to August 2017. Disproportionality analyses for drug–adverse event pairs were performed (1) in the full database and (2) across a range of subgroups defined by the following covariates: patient age, sex, body mass index, pregnancy, underlying condition, reporting country, and geographical region. Drug–adverse event pairs disproportionately over-reported in such subgroups, but not in the full database, and with a substantial difference between the two observed-to-expected ratios, were highlighted as statistical signals. These were further prioritised, through filtering and sorting, for clinical assessment, whereafter clinically relevant signals were communicated to the pharmacovigilance community and the public. Results Assessments were performed for 354 prioritised statistical signals, resulting in seven communicated signals describing previously unrecognised potential risk groups related to age (elderly), sex (male and female), body mass index (underweight and obese), and geographical region (Asia), all except one for already established adverse drug reactions. Important aspects considered in the assessments included an evaluation of the disproportionate over-reporting in the subgroup by reviewing alternative explanations and reporting patterns for similar drugs/adverse events/subgroups, and a search for plausible mechanisms to support the risk hypothesis. Conclusions This study reveals that it is possible to uncover signals of risk groups for adverse drug reactions through incorporation of broad risk factor screening into statistical signal detection in a global database of adverse event reports. Our findings suggest the potential to use such statistical methodologies for risk characterisation in subpopulations of concern. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40264-020-00957-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Introduction To improve therapeutic decision making, it is crucial that information regarding adverse drug reactions reaches patients. It is not enough to disseminate such findings through regulatory and scientific channels; targeted efforts to reach patients are necessary. One possible avenue is to collaborate with patient organizations. Objectives The aim of this pilot study was to explore how adverse drug reactions can be communicated through patient organizations. Methods A text describing a signal of levothyroxine and panic attacks was tailored to patients’ needs, in terms of language, style and content, with emphasis placed on what to do when experiencing the symptoms described. The signal was communicated via the Dutch thyroid organization’s digital newsletter, social media channels, website and print magazine. Results The digital newsletter was distributed to around 5000 subscribers. On Facebook, 13,820 people viewed the message, with 2346 clicks in the message, indicating an intention to read the whole post. The interactions on social media were positive, and the tone was respectful. Conclusion Patient organizations can help enable effective communication of adverse drug reactions to a relevant audience. The social media post generated more engagement than other communications from the patient organization, indicating a strong interest in this information. The additional patient experiences that were shared in the comments on social media further strengthened the original signal and its relevance to patients, creating an interesting feedback loop. The favourable experiences in this study support further consideration and exploration of this approach to communicate adverse drug reactions to patients.

Introduction Adverse event reporting patterns vary between countries, reflecting differences in reporting culture, clinical practice and underlying patient populations. Japan collects about 60,000 domestic adverse event reports yearly and shares serious reports with the World Health Organization (WHO) Programme for International Drug Monitoring in VigiBase, the WHO global database of individual case safety reports. Understanding these reports in the global context can be helpful for regulators worldwide and can aid hypothesis-generation for Japanese-specific vulnerabilities to adverse drug reactions. Objective The objective of this study was to explore differences in the reporting of adverse events between Japan and other countries. Methods vigiPoint is a method for data-driven exploration in pharmacovigilance. It outlines data subsets, pinpoints key features and facilitates expert review, using odds ratios subjected to statistical shrinkage to distinguish one data subset from another. Here, we compared 260,000 Japanese reports in E2B format classified as serious and received in VigiBase between 2013 and 2018 with 2.5 million reports from the rest of the world (of which 51% are from the USA). Reporting patterns for which the 99% credibility interval of the shrunk log-odds ratios were above 0.5 or below − 0.5 were flagged as key features. The shrinkage was set to the vigiPoint default corresponding to 1% of the size of the Japanese data subset. As a sensitivity analysis, additional vigiPoint comparisons were performed between Japan and, in turn, Africa, the Americas, the Americas except the USA and Canada, Asia and Europe. Results There were higher reporting rates in Japan from physicians (83% vs. 39%) and pharmacists (17% vs. 10%). It was also more common to see reports with more than five drugs per report (22% vs. 14%) and with a single adverse event (72% vs. 45%). More than half of the Japanese reports had a vigiGrade completeness score above 0.8 compared with about one in five from the rest of the world. There were more reports than expected for patients aged 70–89 years and fewer reports for adults aged 20–59 years. Adverse events reported more often in Japan included interstitial lung disease, abnormal hepatic function, decreased platelet count, decreased neutrophil count and drug eruption. Adverse events reported less often included death, fatigue, dyspnoea, pain and headache. Drugs reported more often in Japan included prednisolone, methotrexate and peginterferon alfa-2b. Drugs reported less often included rosiglitazone and adalimumab as well as blood substitutes and perfusion solutions. The findings were generally robust to the sensitivity analysis except for the less often reported drugs, many of which were rarely reported in most countries, except in the USA. Conclusion Analysis of Japanese adverse event reporting patterns in a global context has revealed key features that may reflect possible pharmaco-ethnic vulnerabilities in the Japanese, as well as differences in adverse event reporting and clinical practice. This knowledge is essential in the global collaboration of signal detection afforded by the WHO Programme for International Drug Monitoring. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40264-019-00861-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Over a period of 3 years, the European Union's Innovative Medicines Initiative WEB-RADR project has explored the value of social media (i.e., information exchanged through the internet, typically via online social networks) for identifying adverse events as well as for safety signal detection. Many patients and clinicians have taken to social media to discuss their positive and negative experiences of medications, creating a source of publicly available information that has the potential to provide insights into medicinal product safety concerns. The WEB-RADR project has developed a collaborative English language workspace for visualising and analysing social media data for a number of medicinal products. Further, novel text and data mining methods for social media analysis have been developed and evaluated. From this original research, several recommendations are presented with supporting rationale and consideration of the limitations. Recommendations for further research that extend beyond the scope of the current project are also presented.

Introduction Adverse drug reactions related to drug–drug interactions cause harm to patients. There is a body of research on signal detection for drug interactions in collections of individual case reports, but limited use in regular pharmacovigilance. Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of signal detection of drug–drug interactions in collections of individual case reports of suspected adverse drug reactions. Methods This study was conducted in VigiBase, the WHO global database of individual case safety reports. The data lock point was 31 August 2016, which provided 13.6 million reports for analysis after deduplication. Statistical signal detection was performed using a previously developed predictive model for possible drug interactions. The model accounts for an interaction disproportionality measure, expressed suspicion of an interaction by the reporter, potential for interaction through cytochrome P450 activity of drugs, and reported information indicative of unexpected therapeutic response or altered therapeutic effect. Triage filters focused the preliminary signal assessment on combinations relating to serious adverse events with case series of no more than 30 reports from at least two countries, with at least one report during the previous 2 years. Additional filters sought to eliminate already known drug interactions through text mining of standard literature sources. Preliminary signal assessment was performed by a multidisciplinary group of pharmacovigilance professionals from Uppsala Monitoring Centre and collaborating organizations, whereas in-depth signal assessment was performed by experienced pharmacovigilance assessors. Results We performed preliminary signal assessment for 407 unique drug pairs. Of these, 157 drug pairs were considered already known to interact, whereas 232 were closed after preliminary assessment for other reasons. Ten drug pairs were subjected to in-depth signal assessment and an additional eight were decided to be kept under review awaiting additional reports. The triage filters had a major impact in focusing our preliminary signal assessment on just 14% of the statistical signals generated by the predictive model for drug interactions. In-depth assessment led to three signals communicated with the broader pharmacovigilance community, six closed signals and one to be kept under review. Conclusion This study shows that signals of adverse drug interactions can be detected through broad statistical screening of individual case reports. It further shows that signal assessment related to possible drug interactions requires more detailed information on the temporal relationship between different drugs and the adverse event. Future research may consider whether interaction signal detection should be performed not for individual adverse event terms but for pairs of drugs across a spectrum of adverse events. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40264-020-00939-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Purpose To develop a method for data‐driven exploration in pharmacovigilance and illustrate its use by identifying the key features of individual case safety reports related to medication errors. Methods We propose vigiPoint, a method that contrasts the relative frequency of covariate values in a data subset of interest to those within one or more comparators, utilizing odds ratios with adaptive statistical shrinkage. Nested analyses identify higher order patterns, and permutation analysis is employed to protect against chance findings. For illustration, a total of 164 000 adverse event reports related to medication errors were characterized and contrasted to the other 7 833 000 reports in VigiBase, the WHO global database of individual case safety reports, as of May 2013. The initial scope included 2000 features, such as patient age groups, reporter qualifications, and countries of origin. Results vigiPoint highlighted 109 key features of medication error reports. The most prominent were that the vast majority of medication error reports were from the United States (89% compared with 49% for other reports in VigiBase); that the majority of reports were sent by consumers (53% vs 17% for other reports); that pharmacists (12% vs 5.3%) and lawyers (2.9% vs 1.5%) were overrepresented; and that there were more medication error reports than expected for patients aged 2‐11 years (10% vs 5.7%), particularly in Germany (16%). Conclusions vigiPoint effectively identified key features of medication error reports in VigiBase. More generally, it reduces lead times for analysis and ensures reproducibility and transparency. An important next step is to evaluate its use in other data.

Purpose vigiRank is a data-driven predictive model for emerging safety signals. In addition to disproportionate reporting patterns, it also accounts for the completeness, recency, and geographic spread of individual case reporting, as well as the availability of case narratives. Previous retrospective analysis suggested that vigiRank performed better than disproportionality analysis alone. The purpose of the present analysis was to evaluate its prospective performance. Methods The evaluation of vigiRank was based on real-world signal detection in VigiBase. In May 2014, vigiRank scores were computed for pairs of new drugs and WHO Adverse Reaction Terminology critical terms with at most 30 reports from at least 2 countries. Initial manual assessments were performed in order of descending score, selecting a subset of drug-adverse drug reaction pairs for in-depth expert assessment. The primary performance metric was the proportion of initial assessments that were decided signals during in-depth assessment. As comparator, the historical performance for disproportionality- guided signal detection in VigiBase was computed from a corresponding cohort of drug-adverse drug reaction pairs assessed between 2009 and 2013. During this period, the requirement for initial manual assessment was a positive lower endpoint of the 95% credibility interval of the Information Component measure of disproportionality, observed for the first time. Results 194 initial assessments suggested by vigiRank's ordering eventually resulted in 6 (3.1%) signals. Disproportionality analysis yielded 19 signals from 1592 initial assessments (1.2%; P

Over a period of 5 years, the Innovative Medicines Initiative PROTECT (Pharmacoepidemiological Research on Outcomes of Therapeutics by a European ConsorTium) project has addressed key research questions relevant to the science of safety signal detection. The results of studies conducted into quantitative signal detection in spontaneous reporting, clinical trial and electronic health records databases are summarised and 39 recommendations have been formulated, many based on comparative analyses across a range of databases (e.g. regulatory, pharmaceutical company). The recommendations point to pragmatic steps that those working in the pharmacovigilance community can take to improve signal detection practices, whether in a national or international agency or in a pharmaceutical company setting. PROTECT has also pointed to areas of potentially fruitful future research and some areas where further effort is likely to yield less.

The article "Communicating Adverse Drug Reaction Insights Through Patient Organizations: Experiences from a Pilot Study in the Netherlands", written by Linda Harmark, Gerda Weits, Rietje Meijer, Federica Santoro, G. Niklas Noren, Florence van Hunsel, was originally published electronically on 16 May 2020 without open access.

Introduction and Objective Social media has been proposed as a possibly useful data source for pharmacovigilance signal detection. This study primarily aimed to evaluate the performance of established statistical signal detection algorithms in Twitter/Facebook for a broad range of drugs and adverse events. Methods Performance was assessed using a reference set by Harpaz et al., consisting of 62 US Food and Drug Administration labelling changes, and an internal WEB-RADR reference set consisting of 200 validated safety signals. In total, 75 drugs were studied. Twitter/Facebook posts were retrieved for the period March 2012 to March 2015, and drugs/events were extracted from the posts. We retrieved 4.3 million and 2.0 million posts for the WEB-RADR and Harpaz drugs, respectively. Individual case reports were extracted from VigiBase for the same period. Disproportionality algorithms based on the Information Component or the Proportional Reporting Ratio and crude post/report counting were applied in Twitter/Facebook and VigiBase. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated, and the relative timing of alerting was analysed. Results Across all algorithms, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for Twitter/Facebook varied between 0.47 and 0.53 for the WEB-RADR reference set and between 0.48 and 0.53 for the Harpaz reference set. For VigiBase, the ranges were 0.64–0.69 and 0.55–0.67, respectively. In Twitter/Facebook, at best, 31 (16%) and four (6%) positive controls were detected prior to their index dates in the WEB-RADR and Harpaz references, respectively. In VigiBase, the corresponding numbers were 66 (33%) and 17 (27%). Conclusions Our results clearly suggest that broad-ranging statistical signal detection in Twitter and Facebook, using currently available methods for adverse event recognition, performs poorly and cannot be recommended at the expense of other pharmacovigilance activities. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40264-018-0699-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Disproportionality analyses are used in many organisations to identify adverse drug reactions (ADRs) from spontaneous report data. Reporting patterns vary over time, with patient demographics, and between different geographical regions, and therefore subgroup analyses or adjustment by stratification may be beneficial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of subgroup and stratified disproportionality analyses for a number of key covariates within spontaneous report databases of differing sizes and characteristics. Using a reference set of established ADRs, signal detection performance (sensitivity and precision) was compared for stratified, subgroup and crude (unadjusted) analyses within five spontaneous report databases (two company, one national and two international databases). Analyses were repeated for a range of covariates: age, sex, country/region of origin, calendar time period, event seriousness, vaccine/non-vaccine, reporter qualification and report source. Subgroup analyses consistently performed better than stratified analyses in all databases. Subgroup analyses also showed benefits in both sensitivity and precision over crude analyses for the larger international databases, whilst for the smaller databases a gain in precision tended to result in some loss of sensitivity. Additionally, stratified analyses did not increase sensitivity or precision beyond that associated with analytical artefacts of the analysis. The most promising subgroup covariates were age and region/country of origin, although this varied between databases. Subgroup analyses perform better than stratified analyses and should be considered over the latter in routine first-pass signal detection. Subgroup analyses are also clearly beneficial over crude analyses for larger databases, but further validation is required for smaller databases.

The past 10 years have seen the advent of smartphones and a massive increase in the use and influence of the internet and social media in our daily lives. The means by which we interact with one another and with the world’s information have fundamentally changed. Navigation is one example: when I drive from Uppsala to Stockholm, not only does my phone now direct me where to go, but its instructions adapt in real-time based on the current flow of traffic, as crowdsourced from the phones of fellow drivers. In health, we have seen the emerging movement of the quantified self where individuals track exercise and sleep patterns, along with information on diet, and aspects of their physical and mental state, with the intent of understanding what promotes their own good health and well-being (a daunting causal inference task!). So, too, have we seen the growth of internet communities where patients store and interact with their own health data, and share experiences, with the ultimate aim of learning from one another for better health outcomes. We have yet to see the full impact of these developments in pharmacovigilance, but movement has begun. The important role of patients in identifying, describing, and ultimately avoiding, harm from medicines is increasingly recognized [1, 2], and modern technologies are being explored to facilitate patient engagement [3]. Information on direct patient reports in pharmacovigilance differs in certain respects from information provided by health professionals, but has been found to be of complementary value [4]. Interestingly, in one study, direct patient reports in Denmark and Norway (collected electronically) were found to be better documented, on average, than reports from health professionals [5]. Mobile applications for spontaneous reporting are being piloted, and we have seen initiatives to use social media sites to stimulate submission of individual case reports [6]. This may add to our understanding of adverse drug reactions and provide opportunities to directly engage with and support patients [7], but also comes with challenges such as how to effectively protect sensitive information, account for selection biases, and minimise the risk of intended misuse [7, 8]. In parallel, patient-generated data on the internet is beginning to be explored as a primary basis for analysis of possible adverse drug reactions. In a paper recently published in Drug Safety, Freifeld et al. [9] described an analysis of Twitter microblog posts for references to drugs and adverse events, with comparison to reporting patterns in the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). Other researchers have explored online discussion fora and internet search patterns for similar purposes [10–12]. Together, these studies begin to accumulate evidence for the technical feasibility of identifying references to possible adverse drug reactions in patient-generated data on the internet, and of analysing these patterns to characterise and understand patients’ experiences and concerns. Such G. N. Noren (&) Uppsala Monitoring Centre, WHO Collaborating Centre for International Drug Monitoring, Box 1051, 751 40 Uppsala, Sweden e-mail: niklas.noren@who-umc.org

Background Detection of unknown risks with marketed medicines is key to securing the optimal care of individual patients and to reducing the societal burden from adverse drug reactions. Large collections of individual case reports remain the primary source of information and require effective analytics to guide clinical assessors towards likely drug safety signals. Disproportionality analysis is based solely on aggregate numbers of reports and naively disregards report quality and content. However, these latter features are the very fundament of the ensuing clinical assessment.

Pharmacovigilance seeks to detect and describe adverse drug reactions early. Ideally, we would like to see objective evidence that a chosen signal detection approach can be expected to be effective. The development and evaluation of evidence-based methods require benchmarks for signal detection performance, and recent years have seen unprecedented efforts to build such reference sets. Here, we argue that evaluation should be made against emerging and not established adverse drug reactions, and we present real-world examples that illustrate the relevance of this to pharmacovigilance methods development for both individual case reports and longitudinal health records. The establishment of broader reference sets of emerging safety signals must be made a top priority to achieve more effective pharmacovigilance methods development and evaluation.

Individual case reports of suspected harm from medicines are fundamental for signal detection in postmarketing surveillance. Their effective analysis requires reliable data and one challenge is report duplication. These are multiple unlinked records describing the same suspected adverse drug reaction (ADR) in a particular patient. They distort statistical screening and can mislead clinical assessment. Many organisations rely on rule-based detection, but probabilistic record matching is an alternative. The aim of this study was to evaluate probabilistic record matching for duplicate detection, and to characterise the main sources of duplicate reports within each data set. vigiMatch™, a published probabilistic record matching algorithm, was applied to the WHO global individual case safety reports database, VigiBase®, for reports submitted between 2000 and 2010. Reported drugs, ADRs, patient age, sex, country of origin, and date of onset were considered in the matching. Suspected duplicates for the UK, Denmark, and Spain were reviewed and classified by the respective national centre. This included evaluation to determine whether confirmed duplicates had already been identified by in-house, rule-based screening. Furthermore, each confirmed duplicate was classified with respect to the likely source of duplication. For each country, the proportions of suspected duplicates classified as confirmed duplicates, likely duplicates, otherwise related, and unrelated were obtained. The proportions of confirmed or likely duplicates that were not previously known by the national organisation were determined, and variations in the rates of suspected duplicates across subsets of reports were characterised. Overall, 2.5 % of the reports with sufficient information to be evaluated by vigiMatch were classified as suspected duplicates. The rates for the three countries considered in this study were 1.4 % (UK), 1.0 % (Denmark), and 0.7 % (Spain). Higher rates of suspected duplicates were observed for literature reports (11 %) and reports with fatal outcome (5 %), whereas a lower rate was observed for reports from consumers and non-health professionals (0.5 %). The predictive value for confirmed or likely duplicates among reports flagged as suspected duplicates by vigiMatch ranged from 86 % for the UK, to 64 % for Denmark and 33 % for Spain. The proportions of confirmed duplicates that were previously unknown to national centres ranged from 89 % for Spain, to 60 % for the UK and 38 % for Denmark, despite in-house duplicate detection processes in routine use. The proportion of unrelated cases among suspected duplicates were below 10 % for each national centre in the study. Probabilistic record matching, as implemented in vigiMatch, achieved good predictive value for confirmed or likely duplicates in each data source. Most of the false positives corresponded to otherwise related reports; less than 10 % were altogether unrelated. A substantial proportion of the correctly identified duplicates had not previously been detected by national centre activity. On one hand, vigiMatch highlighted duplicates that had been missed by rule-based methods, and on the other hand its lower total number of suspected duplicates to review improved the accuracy of manual review.

Individual case safety reports of suspected harm from medicines are fundamental to post-marketing surveillance. Their value is directly proportional to the amount of clinically relevant information they include. To improve the quality of the data, communication between stakeholders is essential and can be facilitated by a simple score and visualisation of the results.The objective of this study was to propose a measure of completeness and identify predictors of well-documented reports, globally.The Uppsala Monitoring Centre has developed the vigiGrade completeness score to measure the amount of clinically relevant information in structured format, without reflecting whether the information establishes causality between the drug and adverse event. The vigiGrade completeness score (C) starts at 1 for reports with information on time-to-onset, age, sex, indication, outcome, report type, dose, country, primary reporter and comments. For each missing dimension, a penalty is detracted which varies with clinical relevance. We classified reports with C0.8 as well-documented and identified all such reports in the WHO global individual case safety report database, VigiBase, from 2007 to January 2012. We utilised odds ratios with statistical shrinkage to identify subgroups with unexpectedly high proportions of well-documented reports.Altogether, 430,000 (13 %) of the studied reports achieved C0.8 in VigiBase. For VigiBase as a whole, the median completeness was 0.41 with an interquartile range of 0.26-0.63. Two out of three well-documented reports come from Europe, and two out of three from physicians. Among the countries with more than 1,000 reports in total, the highest rate of well-documented reports is 65 % in Italy. Tunisia, Spain, Portugal, Croatia and Denmark each have rates above 50 %, and another 20 countries have rates above 30 %. On the whole, 24 % of the reports from physicians are well-documented compared with only 4 % for consumers/non-health professionals. Notably, Denmark and Norway have more than 50 % well-documented reports from consumers/non-health professionals and higher rates than for physicians. The rate of well-documented reports for the E2B format is 11 % compared with 22 % for the older INTDIS (International Drug Information System) format. However, for E2B reports entered via the WHO programme's e-reporting system VigiFlow, the rate is 29 %.Overall, only one report in eight provides the desired level of information, but much higher proportions are observed for individual countries. Physicians and e-reporting tools also generate greater proportions of well-documented reports overall. Reports from consumers/non-health professionals in specific regions have excellent quality, which illustrates their potential for the future. vigiGrade has already provided valuable information by highlighting data quality issues both in Italy and the USA.

Background Individual case safety reports of suspected harm from medicines are fundamental to post-marketing surveillance. Their value is directly proportional to the amount of clinically relevant information they include. To improve the quality of the data, communication between stakeholders is essential and can be facilitated by a simple score and visualisation of the results. Objective The objective of this study was to propose a measure of completeness and identify predictors of well-documented reports, globally. Methods The Uppsala Monitoring Centre has developed the vigiGrade completeness score to measure the amount of clinically relevant information in structured format, without reflecting whether the information establishes causality between the drug and adverse event. The vigiGrade completeness score (C) starts at 1 for reports with information on time-to-onset, age, sex, indication, outcome, report type, dose, country, primary reporter and comments. For each missing dimension, a penalty is detracted which varies with clinical relevance. We classified reports with C > 0.8 as well-documented and identified all such reports in the WHO global individual case safety report database, VigiBase, from 2007 to January 2012. We utilised odds ratios with statistical shrinkage to identify subgroups with unexpectedly high proportions of well-documented reports. Results Altogether, 430,000 (13 %) of the studied reports achieved C > 0.8 in VigiBase. For VigiBase as a whole, the median completeness was 0.41 with an interquartile range of 0.26–0.63. Two out of three well-documented reports come from Europe, and two out of three from physicians. Among the countries with more than 1,000 reports in total, the highest rate of well-documented reports is 65 % in Italy. Tunisia, Spain, Portugal, Croatia and Denmark each have rates above 50 %, and another 20 countries have rates above 30 %. On the whole, 24 % of the reports from physicians are well-documented compared with only 4 % for consumers/non-health professionals. Notably, Denmark and Norway have more than 50 % well-documented reports from consumers/non-health professionals and higher rates than for physicians. The rate of well-documented reports for the E2B format is 11 % compared with 22 % for the older INTDIS (International Drug Information System) format. However, for E2B reports entered via the WHO programme’s e-reporting system VigiFlow, the rate is 29 %. Conclusion Overall, only one report in eight provides the desired level of information, but much higher proportions are observed for individual countries. Physicians and e-reporting tools also generate greater proportions of well-documented reports overall. Reports from consumers/non-health professionals in specific regions have excellent quality, which illustrates their potential for the future. vigiGrade has already provided valuable information by highlighting data quality issues both in Italy and the USA. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40264-013-0131-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

PurposeThis study aimed to develop an algorithm for uncovering associations masked by extreme reporting rates, characterize the occurrence of masking by influential outliers in two spontaneous reporting databases and evaluate the impact of outlier removal on disproportionality analysis. MethodsWe propose an algorithm that identifies influential outliers and carries out parallel analysis after their omission. It considers masking of drugs as well as of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), uses a direct measure of the masking effect and makes no assumptions regarding the number of outliers per drug or ADR. The occurrence of masking is characterized in the WHO Global Individual Case Safety Report database, VigiBase and a regional collection of reports from Shanghai, China. ResultsFor WHO-ART critical terms such as myocardial infarction, rhabdomyolysis and hypoglycaemia outlier removal led to a 25-50% increase in the number of Statistics of Disproportionate Reporting (SDR) and gains in time to detection of 1-2years, while keeping the rate of spurious SDRs from the parallel analysis at 1%. Twenty-three per cent of VigiBase and 18% of Shanghai SRS reports listed an influential outlier. Twenty-seven per cent of the ADRs and 5% of the drugs in VigiBase, and 2% of the ADRs and 3% of the drugs in Shanghai SRS were involved in an outlier. The overall increase in the number of SDRs for both datasets was 3%. ConclusionMasking by outliers has substantial impact on specific ADRs including, in VigiBase, rhabdomyolysis, myocardial infarction and hypoglycaemia. It is a local phenomenon involving a fair number of reports but yielding a limited number of additional SDRs.

Observational healthcare data offer the potential to identify adverse drug reactions that may be missed by spontaneous reporting. The self-controlled cohort analysis within the Temporal Pattern Discovery framework compares the observed-to-expected ratio of medical outcomes during post-exposure surveillance periods with those during a set of distinct pre-exposure control periods in the same patients. It utilizes an external control group to account for systematic differences between the different time periods, thus combining within- and between-patient confounder adjustment in a single measure. To evaluate the performance of the calibrated self-controlled cohort analysis within Temporal Pattern Discovery as a tool for risk identification in observational healthcare data. Different implementations of the calibrated self-controlled cohort analysis were applied to 399 drug-outcome pairs (165 positive and 234 negative test cases across 4 health outcomes of interest) in 5 real observational databases (four with administrative claims and one with electronic health records). Performance was evaluated on real data through sensitivity/specificity, the area under receiver operator characteristics curve (AUC), and bias. The calibrated self-controlled cohort analysis achieved good predictive accuracy across the outcomes and databases under study. The optimal design based on this reference set uses a 360 days surveillance period and a single control period 180 days prior to new prescriptions. It achieved an average AUC of 0.75 and AUC >0.70 in all but one scenario. A design with three separate control periods performed better for the electronic health records database and for acute renal failure across all data sets. The estimates for negative test cases were generally unbiased, but a minor negative bias of up to 0.2 on the RR-scale was observed with the configurations using multiple control periods, for acute liver injury and upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The calibrated self-controlled cohort analysis within Temporal Pattern Discovery shows promise as a tool for risk identification; it performs well at discriminating positive from negative test cases. The optimal parameter configuration may vary with the data set and medical outcome of interest.

Introduction A number of safety signals—complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS)—have emerged with human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, which share a similar pattern of symptomatology. Previous signal evaluations and epidemiological studies have largely relied on traditional methodologies and signals have been considered individually. Objective The aim of this study was to explore global reporting patterns for HPV vaccine for subgroups of reports with similar adverse event (AE) profiles. Methods All individual case safety reports (reports) for HPV vaccines in VigiBase® until 1 January 2015 were identified. A statistical cluster analysis algorithm was used to identify natural groupings based on AE profiles in a data-driven exploratory analysis. Clinical assessment of the clusters was performed to identify clusters relevant to current safety concerns. Results Overall, 54 clusters containing at least five reports were identified. The four largest clusters included 71 % of the analysed HPV reports and described AEs included in the product label. Four smaller clusters were identified to include case reports relevant to ongoing safety concerns (total of 694 cases). In all four of these clusters, the most commonly reported AE terms were headache and dizziness and fatigue or syncope; three of these four AE terms were reported in >50 % of the reports included in the clusters. These clusters had a higher proportion of serious cases compared with HPV reports overall (44–89 % in the clusters compared with 24 %). Furthermore, only a minority of reports included in these clusters included AE terms of diagnoses to explain these symptoms. Using proportional reporting ratios, the combination of headache and dizziness with either fatigue or syncope was found to be more commonly reported in HPV vaccine reports compared with non-HPV vaccine reports for females aged 9–25 years. This disproportionality remained when results were stratified by age and when those countries reporting the signals of CRPS (Japan) and POTS (Denmark) were excluded. Conclusions Cluster analysis reveals additional reports of AEs following HPV vaccination that are serious in nature and describe symptoms that overlap those reported in cases from the recent safety signals (POTS, CRPS, and CFS), but which do not report explicit diagnoses. While the causal association between HPV vaccination and these AEs remains uncertain, more extensive analyses of spontaneous reports can better identify the relevant case series for thorough signal evaluation. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40264-016-0456-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A large proportion of potential drug interactions are known from pre-authorization studies, but adverse drug reactions (ADRs) due to interactions (adverse drug interactions) are often first detected through astute observation in clinical practice. Individual case safety reports (ICSRs) are collected from broad patient populations and allow for the identification of groups of similar reports. Systematic screening for adverse drug interactions in ICSRs will require an understanding of which information on these reports can be suggestive of adverse drug interactions.The aim of the study was to identify what reported information may support the identification of drug interaction safety signals in collections of ICSRs.Three previously published safety signals of suspected adverse drug interactions were re-evaluated. To this end, 137 reports related to these signals were retrieved from the WHO Global ICSR Database, VigiBase™, and corresponding original reports were obtained from national pharmacovigilance centres. Criteria from an operational score for causality analysis of drug interactions of clinical cases, the Drug Interaction Probability Scale (DIPS), were applied to each of these reports with the aim of identifying what supportive information tends to be available in ICSRs. For three DIPS elements (plausible time course, resolution of the ADR after terminating the drug inducing the interaction without changes in affected drug therapy (positive dechallenge) and alternative causes of the reaction) we also compared the amount of information in VigiBase™ and in original reports, and in free text and structured data.Commonly fulfilled DIPS elements on reports supporting an adverse drug interaction signal were plausible time course (50 reports; 36%) and positive dechallenge (8 reports; 6%). Alternative causes for the observed adverse reaction were observed in 72 (53%) reports. We found limited differences between VigiBase™ and original reports for the structured data, although a substantial amount of additional information was available in free text in original reports.Information on plausible time courses and resolution of the adverse reaction upon withdrawal of the drug suspected to have induced the interaction may be a useful element in identifying suspected adverse drug interactions from ICSRs. Of these, plausible time course is by far the most commonly reported element in the three signals studied here. Our analysis also demonstrated the importance of sharing and analysing information available in free text where relevant clinical details are often available, such as those mentioned above, along with severity and dosage changes.

Background: Utilities of pertinent clinical outcomes are crucial variables for assessing the benefits and risks of drugs, but numerical data on utilities may be unreliable or altogether missing. We propose a method to incorporate qualitative information into a probabilistic decision analysis framework for quantitative benefit-risk assessment. Objective: To investigate whether conclusive results can be obtained when the only source of discriminating information on utilities is widely agreed upon qualitative relations, for example, ‘‘sepsis is worse than transient headache’’ or ‘‘alleviation of disease is better without than with complications.’’ Method: We used the structure and probabilities of 3 published models that were originally evaluated based on the standard metric of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs): terfenadine versus chlorpheniramine for the treatment of allergic rhinitis, MCV4 vaccination against meningococcal disease, and alosetron for irritable bowel syndrome. For each model, we identified clinically straightforward qualitative relations among the outcomes. Using Monte Carlo simulations, the resulting utility distributions were then combined with the previously specified probabilities, and the rate of preference in terms of expected utility was determined for each alternative. Results: Our approach conclusively favored MCV4 vaccination, and it was concordant with the QALY assessments for the MCV4 and terfenadine versus chlorpheniramine case studies. For alosetron, we found a possible unfavorable benefit-risk balance for highly risk-averse patients not identified in the original analysis. Conclusion: Incorporation of widely agreed upon qualitative information into quantitative benefit-risk assessment can provide for conclusive results. The methods presented should prove useful in both population and individual-level assessments, especially when numerical utility data are missing or unreliable, and constraints on time or money preclude its collection.

Adverse drug interaction surveillance in collections of Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) remains underdeveloped. Most efforts to date have focused on disproportionality analysis, but the empirical support for its value is based on isolated examples. Additionally, too little attention has been given to the potential value of the detailed content of ICSRs for improved adverse drug interaction surveillance.The aim of the study was to identify reporting patterns indicative of suspected adverse drug interactions before the drug interactions are generally established.A reference set of known adverse drug interactions and drug pairs not known to interact was constructed from information added to Stockley's Drug Interactions Alerts between the first quarter of 2007 and the third quarter of 2009. The reference set was used to systematically study differences in reporting patterns between adverse drug interactions before they are generally established and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to drug pairs that are not known to interact, in the WHO Global ICSR Database, VigiBase. The scope of the study included pharmacological properties such as common cytochrome P450 metabolism, explicit suspicions of drug interactions as noted by the reporter, clinical details such as dose and treatment overlap, and the lower limit of the 95% credibility interval of a three-way measure of disproportionality, Omega(025) (Ω(025)), based on the total number of reports on two drugs and one ADR together. Analyses were carried out including and excluding concomitant medicines.Five reporting patterns were highlighted as particularly strong indicators of adverse drug interactions before they are known: suspicion of interactions as noted by the reporter in a case narrative, the assignment of the two drugs as interacting or through an ADR term; co-reporting of effect increased with the drug pair; and, finally, an excess total number of reports on the ADR together with the two drugs, as measured by Ω(025). Overall, the inclusion of concomitant medicines led to a larger number of true adverse drug interactions being highlighted, but at a substantial decrease in the strength of most indicators. Notably, the inclusion of concomitant medicines completely eliminated the value of Ω(025) as an indicator of adverse drug interactions, in this systematic evaluation.Reported suspicion of interactions as noted by the reporter in a case narrative, the assignment of the two drugs as interacting or through an ADR term; co-reporting of effect increased with the drug pair and by the Ω(025) each provide unique information to highlight adverse drug interactions before they become known in the literature. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic analysis demonstrating the value of disproportionality analysis for adverse drug interactions using a comprehensive reference set, and the first study to consider a broader basis including clinical information for systematic drug interaction surveillance.

Medicines improve health and the chances of survival in a wide variety of conditions. At the same time, no substance with pharmacological effects is without hazard. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) can be associated with the intended pharmacological effect of the medicine (eg bleeding from warfarin)

Interaction between drug substances may yield excessive risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) when two drugs are taken in combination. Collections of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) related to suspected ADR incidents in clinical practice have proven to be very useful in post-marketing surveillance for pairwise drug--ADR associations, but have yet to reach their full potential for drug-drug interaction surveillance. In this paper, we implement and evaluate a shrinkage observed-to-expected ratio for exploratory analysis of suspected drug-drug interaction in ICSR data, based on comparison with an additive risk model. We argue that the limited success of previously proposed methods for drug-drug interaction detection based on ICSR data may be due to an underlying assumption that the absence of interaction is equivalent to having multiplicative risk factors. We provide empirical examples of established drug-drug interaction highlighted with our proposed approach that go undetected with logistic regression. A database wide screen for suspected drug-drug interaction in the entire WHO database is carried out to demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed approach. As always in the analysis of ICSRs, the clinical validity of hypotheses raised with the proposed method must be further reviewed and evaluated by subject matter experts.

Objective Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) models can predict adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and thus provide early warnings of potential hazards. Timely identification of potential safety concerns could protect patients and aid early diagnosis of ADRs among the exposed. Our objective was to determine whether global spontaneous reporting patterns might allow chemical substructures associated with Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS) to be identified and utilized for ADR prediction by QSAR models. Materials and Methods Using a reference set of 364 drugs having positive or negative reporting correlations with SJS in the VigiBase global repository of individual case safety reports (Uppsala Monitoring Center, Uppsala, Sweden), chemical descriptors were computed from drug molecular structures. Random Forest and Support Vector Machines methods were used to develop QSAR models, which were validated by external 5-fold cross validation. Models were employed for virtual screening of DrugBank to predict SJS actives and inactives, which were corroborated using knowledge bases like VigiBase, ChemoText, and MicroMedex (Truven Health Analytics Inc, Ann Arbor, Michigan). Results We developed QSAR models that could accurately predict if drugs were associated with SJS (area under the curve of 75%–81%). Our 10 most active and inactive predictions were substantiated by SJS reports (or lack thereof) in the literature. Discussion Interpretation of QSAR models in terms of significant chemical descriptors suggested novel SJS structural alerts. Conclusions We have demonstrated that QSAR models can accurately identify SJS active and inactive drugs. Requiring chemical structures only, QSAR models provide effective computational means to flag potentially harmful drugs for subsequent targeted surveillance and pharmacoepidemiologic investigations.

Post-marketing drug safety data sets are often massive, and entail problems with heterogeneity and selection bias. Nevertheless, quantitative methods have proven a very useful aid to help clinical experts in screening for previously unknown associations in these data sets. The WHO international drug safety database is the world's largest data set of its kind with over three million reports on suspected adverse drug reaction incidents. Since 1998, an exploratory data analysis method has been in routine use to screen for quantitative associations in this data set. This method was originally based on large sample approximations and limited to pairwise associations, but in this article we propose more accurate credibility interval estimates and extend the method to allow for the analysis of more complex quantitative associations. The accuracy of the proposed credibility intervals is evaluated through comparison to precise Monte Carlo simulations. In addition, we propose a Mantel-Haenszel-type adjustment to control for suspected confounders.

This article outlines a Bayesian bootstrap method for case based imprecision estimates in Bayes classification. We argue that this approach is an important complement to methods such as k-fold cross validation that are based on overall error rates. It is shown how case based imprecision estimates may be used to improve Bayes classifiers under asymmetrical loss functions. In addition, other approaches to making use of case based imprecision estimates are discussed and illustrated on two real world data sets. Contrary to the common assumption, Bayesian bootstrap simulations indicate that the uncertainty associated with the output of a Bayes classifier is often far from normally distributed.

The entire drug safety enterprise has a need to search, retrieve, evaluate, and synthesize scientific evidence more efficiently. This discovery and synthesis process would be greatly accelerated through access to a common framework that brings all relevant information sources together within a standardized structure. This presents an opportunity to establish an open-source community effort to develop a global knowledge base, one that brings together and standardizes all available information for all drugs and all health outcomes of interest (HOIs) from all electronic sources pertinent to drug safety. To make this vision a reality, we have established a workgroup within the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI, http://ohdsi.org) collaborative. The workgroup's mission is to develop an open-source standardized knowledge base for the effects of medical products and an efficient procedure for maintaining and expanding it. The knowledge base will make it simpler for practitioners to access, retrieve, and synthesize evidence so that they can reach a rigorous and accurate assessment of causal relationships between a given drug and HOI. Development of the knowledge base will proceed with the measureable goal of supporting an efficient and thorough evidence-based assessment of the effects of 1,000 active ingredients across 100 HOIs. This non-trivial task will result in a high-quality and generally applicable drug safety knowledge base. It will also yield a reference standard of drug-HOI pairs that will enable more advanced methodological research that empirically evaluates the performance of drug safety analysis methods.

Within pharmacovigilance, knowledge of time-to-onset (time from start of drug administration to onset of reaction) is important in causality assessment of drugs and suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and may indicate pharmacological mechanisms involved. It has been suggested that time-to-onset from individual case reports can be used for detection of safety signals. However, some ADRs only occur during treatment, while those that do occur later are less likely to be reported. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of treatment duration on the reported time-to-onset. Case reports from the WHO Global ICSR database, VigiBase, up until February 5(th) 2010 were the basis of this study. To examine the effect of duration of treatment on reported time-to-onset, angioedema and hepatitis were selected to represent short and long latency ADRs, respectively. The reported time-to-onset for each of these ADRs was contrasted for a set of drugs expected to be used short- or long-term, respectively. The study included 2,980 unique reports for angioedema and 1,159 for hepatitis. Median reported time-to-onset for angioedema in short-term treatments ranged 0-1 days (median 0.5), for angioedema in long-term treatments 0-26 days (median 8), for hepatitis in short-term treatments 4-12 days (median 7.5) and for hepatitis in long term treatments 19-73 days (median 28). Short-term treatments presented significantly shorter reported time-to-onset than long-term treatments. Of note is that reported time-to-onset for angioedema for long-term treatments (median value of medians being 8 days) was very similar to that of hepatitis for short-term treatments (median value of medians equal 7.5 days). The expected duration of treatment needs to be considered in the interpretation of reported time-to-onset and should be accounted for in signal detection method development and case evaluation.

As a first step towards implementing routine screening of safety issues specifically related to children at the Uppsala Monitoring Centre, this study was performed to explore reporting patterns of adverse reactions in children.The first aim of this study was to characterize and contrast child reports against adult reports in an overall drug and adverse reaction review. The second aim was to highlight increases in reporting of specific adverse reactions during recent years subdivided by age group.This was an exploratory study of internationally compiled individual case safety reports (ICSRs).Reports were extracted from the WHO global ICSR database, VigiBase, up until 5 February 2010. The reports in VigiBase originate from 97 countries and the likelihood that a medicine caused the adverse effect may vary from case to case. Suspected duplicate and vaccine reports were excluded from the analysis, as were reports with age not specified. The Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA®) and the WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification were used to group adverse reactions and drugs.In the general review, reports from 1968 to 5 February 2010 were divided into child (aged 0-17 years) and adult (≥ 18 years) age groups. To highlight increases in reporting rates of specific adverse reactions during recent years, reports from 2005 to February 2010 were compared with reports from 1995 to 1999. The ten adverse reactions with the greatest difference in the proportion of reports between the two time periods were reviewed. In the latter analysis, the reports were subdivided into age groups: neonates ≤ 27 days; infants 28 days-23 months; children 2-11 years; and adolescents 12-17 years.A total of 3,472,183 reports were included in the study, of which 7.7% (268,145) were reports for children (0-17 years). Fifty-three percent of the child reports were for males, whilst 39% of reports in the adult group were for males. The proportion of reports involving children among Asian reports was 14% and was 15% among reports from Africa and Latin America, including the Caribbean. Among reports from North America, Oceania and Europe, 7% of the reports involved children. For the ATC drug classification groups, the largest difference in percentage units between the child and adult groups was seen for the anti-infective (33 vs 15%), respiratory (11 vs 5%) and dermatological (12 vs 7%) drug groups. Skin reactions were most commonly reported for the children; these were recorded in 35% of all reports for children and 23% of all reports for adults. Medication error-related terms in the younger age groups were reported with an increased frequency during recent years. This was particularly noticeable for the infants aged 28 days-23 months, recorded with accidental overdose and drug toxicity. Reactions reported in suspected connection to medicines used for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorders (ADHD) completely dominated the 2- to 11-year age group and were also common for the adolescents. This study presents variations in the reporting pattern in different age groups in VigiBase which, in some cases, could be due to susceptibilities to specific drug-related problems in certain age groups. Other likely explanations might be common drug usage and childhood diseases in these age groups.Reports in VigiBase received internationally for more than 40 years reflect real concerns for children taking medicines. The study highlights adverse reactions with an increased reporting during recent years, particularly those connected to the introduction of ADHD medicines in the child population. To enhance patient safety, medication errors indicating administration and dosing difficulties of drugs, especially in the younger age groups, require further attention.

The introduction of database-wide disproportionality screening for signal detection in spontaneous reporting systems (SRS) sparked a renaissance in pharmacovigilance research notable for numerous peer reviewed research articles, three expert working groups/white papers, countless meetings, symposia, workshops, graduate school theses and aggressive promotion of proprietary software. In addition to expanding the pharmacovigilance toolkit, this research has yielded ancillary benefits beyond patient safety, including an increased awareness of data quality issues such as case report duplication, the importance of adverse event coding terminology, the proper definition of signal in drug safety, the logic of signal detection and an admonition that conflicts of interest, both intellectual and financial, may not only involve the ‘usual suspects’ such as software vendors, but also other stakeholders that may not normally come tomind, such as regulatory authorities. The absence of standard test beds for systematic evaluation of signal detection methodologies is an impediment to progress. A fundamental question is what steps of a comprehensive screening strategy to test and what to compare performance against. Herein, we discuss the value of data mining evaluation studies that continue to appear, and related issues, in the hope of facilitating pharmacovigilance system benchmarking and optimization. As a basis for discussion we focus on three recent performance evaluations published in Drug Safety (see table I).

Background and objectives: Automated screening for excessive adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting rates has proven useful as a tool to direct clinical review in large-scale drug safety signal detection. Some measures of disproportionality can be adjusted to eliminate any undue influence on the ADR reporting rate of covariates, such as patient age or country of origin, by using a weighted average of stratum-specific measures of disproportionality. Arguments have been made in favour of routine adjustment for a set of common potential confounders using stratification. The aim of this paper is to investigate the impact of using adjusted observed-to-expected ratios, as implemented for the Empirical Bayes Geometric Mean (EBGM) and the information component (IC) measures of disproportionality, for first-pass analysis of the WHO database. Methods: A simulation study was carried out to investigate the impact of simultaneous adjustment for several potential confounders based on stratification. Comparison between crude and adjusted observed-to-expected ratios were made based on random allocation of reports to a set of strata with a realistic distribution of stratum sizes. In a separate study, differences between the crude IC value and IC values adjusted for (combinations of) patient sex, age group, reporting quarter and country of origin, with respect to their concordance with a literature comparison were analysed. Comparison was made to the impact on signal detection performance of a triage criterion requiring reports from at least two countries before a drug-ADR pair was highlighted for clinical review. Results: The simulation study demonstrated a clear tendency of the adjusted observed-to-expected ratio to spurious (and considerable) underestimation relative to the crude one, in the presence of any very small strata in a stratified database. With carefully implemented stratification that did not yield any very small strata, this tendency could be avoided. Routine adjustment for potential confounders improved signal detection performance relative to the literature comparison, but the magnitude of the improvement was modest. The improvement from the triage criterion was more considerable. Discussion and conclusions: Our results indicate that first-pass screening based on observed-to-expected ratios adjusted with stratification may lead to missed signals in ADR surveillance, unless very small strata are avoided. In addition, the improvement in signal detection performance due to routine adjustment for a set of common confounders appears to be smaller than previously assumed. Other approaches to improving signal detection performance such as the development of refined triage criteria may be more promising areas for future research.

A recurrent neural network, modified to handle highly incomplete training data is described. Unsupervised pattern recognition is demonstrated in the WHO database of adverse drug reactions. Comparison is made to a well established method, AutoClass, and the performances of both methods is investigated on simulated data. The neural network method performs comparably to AutoClass in simulated data, and better than AutoClass in real world data. With its better scaling properties, the neural network is a promising tool for unsupervised pattern recognition in huge databases of incomplete observations.

Background Substandard medicines, whether the result of intentional manipulation or lack of compliance with good manufacturing practice (GMP) or good distribution practice (GDP), pose a significant potential threat to patient safety. Spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting systems can contribute to identification of quality problems that cause unwanted and/or harmful effects, and to identification of clusters of lack of efficacy. In 2011, the Uppsala Monitoring Centre (UMC) constructed a novel algorithm to identify reporting patterns suggestive of substandard medicines in spontaneous reporting, and applied it to VigiBase®, the World Health Organization’s global individual case safety report database. The algorithm identified some historical clusters related to substandard products, which were later able to be confirmed in the literature or by contact with national centres (NCs). As relevant and detailed information is often lacking in the VigiBase reports but might be available at the reporting NC, further evaluation of the algorithm was undertaken with involvement from NCs. Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of an algorithm that identifies clusters of potentially substandard medicines, when these are assessed directly at the NC concerned. Methods The algorithm identifies countries and time periods with disproportionately high reporting of product inadequacy. NCs with at least 20 clusters were eligible to participate in the study, and six NCs—those in the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, South Africa, the UK and the USA—were selected, taking into account the geographical spread and prevalence of recent clusters. The clusters were systematically assessed at the NCs, following a standardized protocol, and then compiled centrally at the UMC. The clusters were classified as ‘confirmed’, ‘potential’ or ‘unlikely’ substandard products; or as ‘confirmed not substandard’ when confirmed by an investigation; or as ‘indecisive’ when the information available did not allow a sound assessment even at the NC. Results The assessment of a total of 147 clusters resulted in 8 confirmed, 12 potential and 51 unlikely substandard products, and a further 19 clusters were confirmed as not substandard. Reflecting the difficulty of evaluating suspected substandard products retrospectively when additional information from the primary reporter, as well as samples, are no longer available, 57 clusters were classified as indecisive. Conclusion While application of the algorithm to VigiBase allowed identification of some substandard medicines, some key prerequisites have been identified that need to be fulfilled at the national level for the algorithm to be useful in practice. Such key factors are fast handling and transfer of incoming reports into VigiBase, detailed information on the product and its distribution channels, the possibility of contacting primary reporters for further information, availability of samples of suspected products and laboratory capacity to analyse suspected products. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40264-015-0271-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.