Izyan A Wahab1, Nicole L Pratt, Lisa M Kalisch, Elizabeth E Roughead. 1. School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, Quality Use of Medicines and Pharmacy Research Centre, Sansom Institute, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia, ayyiy001@mymail.unisa.edu.au.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The objective of post-marketing surveillance of medicines is to rapidly detect adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Early ADR detection will enable policy makers and health professionals to recognise adverse events that may not have been identified in pre-marketing clinical trials. Multiple methods exist for ADR signal detection. Traditional quantitative methods employed in spontaneous reports data have include reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR) and Bayesian techniques. With the development of administrative health claims databases, additional methods such as sequence symmetry analysis (SSA) may be able to be employed routinely to confirm ADR signals. OBJECTIVE AND METHOD: We tested the time to signal detection of quantitative ADR signalling methods in a health claims database (SSA) and in a spontaneous reporting database (ROR, PRR, Bayesian confidence propagation neural network) for rofecoxib-induced myocardial infarction and rosiglitazone-induced heart failure. RESULTS: This study demonstrated that all four signalling methods detected safety signals within 1-3 years of market entry or subsidisation of the medicines, and for both cases the signals were detected before post-marketing clinical trial results. By contrast, the trial results and subsequent warning or withdrawal were published 5-7 years after first marketing of these medicines. CONCLUSION: This case study highlights that a post-marketing quantitative method utilising administrative claims data can be a complementary tool to traditional quantitative methods employed in spontaneous reports that may help to verify safety signals detected in spontaneous reporting data.
INTRODUCTION: The objective of post-marketing surveillance of medicines is to rapidly detect adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Early ADR detection will enable policy makers and health professionals to recognise adverse events that may not have been identified in pre-marketing clinical trials. Multiple methods exist for ADR signal detection. Traditional quantitative methods employed in spontaneous reports data have include reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR) and Bayesian techniques. With the development of administrative health claims databases, additional methods such as sequence symmetry analysis (SSA) may be able to be employed routinely to confirm ADR signals. OBJECTIVE AND METHOD: We tested the time to signal detection of quantitative ADR signalling methods in a health claims database (SSA) and in a spontaneous reporting database (ROR, PRR, Bayesian confidence propagation neural network) for rofecoxib-induced myocardial infarction and rosiglitazone-induced heart failure. RESULTS: This study demonstrated that all four signalling methods detected safety signals within 1-3 years of market entry or subsidisation of the medicines, and for both cases the signals were detected before post-marketing clinical trial results. By contrast, the trial results and subsequent warning or withdrawal were published 5-7 years after first marketing of these medicines. CONCLUSION: This case study highlights that a post-marketing quantitative method utilising administrative claims data can be a complementary tool to traditional quantitative methods employed in spontaneous reports that may help to verify safety signals detected in spontaneous reporting data.
Authors: Karen E Lasser; Paul D Allen; Steffie J Woolhandler; David U Himmelstein; Sidney M Wolfe; David H Bor Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-05-01 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Gillian E Caughey; Elizabeth E Roughead; Nicole Pratt; Graeme Killer; Andrew L Gilbert Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2011-11-07 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Robert S Bresalier; Robert S Sandler; Hui Quan; James A Bolognese; Bettina Oxenius; Kevin Horgan; Christopher Lines; Robert Riddell; Dion Morton; Angel Lanas; Marvin A Konstam; John A Baron Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-02-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: A Bate; M Lindquist; I R Edwards; S Olsson; R Orre; A Lansner; R M De Freitas Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 1998-06 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Kimberly Hersom; Maureen P Neary; Hugh P Levaux; Winslow Klaskala; John S Strauss Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: Ann S Doherty; Faiza Shahid; Frank Moriarty; Fiona Boland; Barbara Clyne; Tobias Dreischulte; Tom Fahey; Seán P Kennelly; Emma Wallace Journal: Pharmacol Res Perspect Date: 2022-10
Authors: Elizabeth E Roughead; Esther W Chan; Nam-Kyong Choi; Michio Kimura; Tomomi Kimura; Kiyoshi Kubota; Edward Chia-Cheng Lai; Kenneth K C Man; Tuan Anh Nguyen; Nobuhiro Ooba; Byung-Joo Park; Tsugumichi Sato; Ju-Young Shin; TongTong Wang; Jenna Griffiths; Ian C K Wong; Yea-Huei Kao Yang; Nicole L Pratt Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 5.606