Literature DB >> 25829948

Mining severe drug-drug interaction adverse events using Semantic Web technologies: a case study.

Guoqian Jiang1, Hongfang Liu1, Harold R Solbrig1, Christopher G Chute1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are a major contributing factor for unexpected adverse drug events (ADEs). However, few of knowledge resources cover the severity information of ADEs that is critical for prioritizing the medical need. The objective of the study is to develop and evaluate a Semantic Web-based approach for mining severe DDI-induced ADEs.
METHODS: We utilized a normalized FDA Adverse Event Report System (AERS) dataset and performed a case study of three frequently prescribed cardiovascular drugs: Warfarin, Clopidogrel and Simvastatin. We extracted putative DDI-ADE pairs and their associated outcome codes. We developed a pipeline to filter the associations using ADE datasets from SIDER and PharmGKB. We also performed a signal enrichment using electronic medical records (EMR) data. We leveraged the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event (CTCAE) grading system and classified the DDI-induced ADEs into the CTCAE in the Web Ontology Language (OWL).
RESULTS: We identified 601 DDI-ADE pairs for the three drugs using the filtering pipeline, of which 61 pairs are in Grade 5, 56 pairs in Grade 4 and 484 pairs in Grade 3. Among 601 pairs, the signals of 59 DDI-ADE pairs were identified from the EMR data.
CONCLUSIONS: The approach developed could be generalized to detect the signals of putative severe ADEs induced by DDIs in other drug domains and would be useful for supporting translational and pharmacovigilance study of severe ADEs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adverse drug event; Data mining; Drug-drug Interaction; Electronic medical records; Semantic web technology

Year:  2015        PMID: 25829948      PMCID: PMC4379609          DOI: 10.1186/s13040-015-0044-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BioData Min        ISSN: 1756-0381            Impact factor:   2.522


Introduction

Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are a major contributing factor for unexpected adverse drug events (ADEs) [1]. A semantically coded knowledge base of DDI-induced ADEs with severity information is critical for clinical decision support systems and translational research applications. In particular, there is emerging interest in investigating genetic susceptibility of DDI-induced ADEs and developing genetic tests to identify all those at risk of ADEs prior to prescribing potentially dangerous medication [2,3], in which the severity information is essential for prioritizing the medical need to evaluate the potential impact of pharmacogenomics information in reducing ADEs [4]. However, few of knowledge resources cover severity information of ADEs. While recognizing, explaining and ultimately predicting DDIs constitute a huge challenge for medicine and public health, informatics-based approaches are increasingly used in dealing with the challenge [5]. Semantic Web technologies provide a scalable framework for data standardization and data integration from heterogeneous resources. For instance, Samwald et al. [6] developed a Semantic Web-based knowledge base for query answering and decision support in clinical pharmacogenetics, in which three dataset components are integrated. In our previous and ongoing study, we developed a standardized knowledge base of ADEs known as ADEpedia (http://adepedia.org) leveraging Semantic Web technologies [7]. The ADEpedia is intended to integrate existing known ADE knowledge for drug safety surveillance from disparate resources such as Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Structured Product Labeling (SPL) [7], FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) [8], and the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) [9]. The objective of the study is to develop and evaluate a Semantic Web-based approach for mining severe DDI-induced ADEs. We utilized a normalized FDA AERS dataset and performed a case study of three frequently prescribed cardiovascular drugs: Warfarin, Clopidogrel and Simvastatin. We extracted putative DDI-ADE pairs and their associated outcome codes. We developed a pipeline to filter the associations using ADE datasets from SIDER and PharmGKB. We also performed a signal enrichment using electronic medical records (EMR) data. We leveraged the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event (CTCAE) grading system and classified the DDI-induced ADEs into the CTCAE in the Web Ontology Language (OWL).

Background

FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS)

FDA AERS is a database that provides information on adverse event and medication error reports submitted to FDA [10]. By the definition of FDA, the “serious” means that one or more of the following outcomes were documented in the report: death (DE), hospitalization (HO), life threatening (LT), disability (DS), congenital anomaly (CA) and/or other (OT) serious outcome. In our previous study, we produced a normalized AERS dataset known as AERS-DM [11]. The dataset contains 4,639,613 unique putative Drug-ADE pairs in which the drugs are represented by RxNorm [12] codes and the putative ADEs are represented by MedDRA [13] codes. The data set also contains the unique ID number (known as ISR) for each corresponding AERS report, which is a primary link field between the AERS data file. We used the ISR field to identify the outcome codes of each AERS report. Table 1 shows the outcome code definitions in AERS database.
Table 1

Outcome code definitions in AERS database

Outcome codeDefinition
DEDeath
LTLife-Threatening
HOHospitalization - Initial or Prolonged
DSDisability
CACongenital Anomaly
RIRequired Intervention to Prevent Permanent Impairment/Damage
OTOther
Outcome code definitions in AERS database

Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event (CTCAE)

CTCAE is a widely accepted, standard grading scale for adverse events throughout the oncology research community [14]. The current released version is CTCAE 4.0. This version contains 764 AE terms and 26 “Other, specify” options for reporting text terms not listed in CTCAE. Each AE term is associated with a 5-point severity scale. The AE terms are grouped by MedDRA Primary SOC classes. In the CTCAE, “Grade” refers to the severity of the adverse event (AE). The CTCAE displays Grades 1 through 5 with unique clinical descriptions of severity for each AE based on a general guideline. Table 2 shows the grade definitions in the CTCAE grading system.
Table 2

Grade definitions in the CTCAE grading system

GradeDefinition
Grade 1Mild; asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated.
Grade 2Moderate; minimal, local or noninvasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental ADL*.
Grade 3Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care ADL**.
Grade 4Life-threatening consequences; urgent intervention indicated.
Grade 5Death related to AE.

Note: Activities of Daily Living (ADL); *Instrumental ADL refer to preparing meals, shopping for groceries or clothes, using the telephone, managing money, etc.; **Self care ADL refer to bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications, and not bedridden.

Grade definitions in the CTCAE grading system Note: Activities of Daily Living (ADL); *Instrumental ADL refer to preparing meals, shopping for groceries or clothes, using the telephone, managing money, etc.; **Self care ADL refer to bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications, and not bedridden.

ADE datasets

SIDER (SIDe Effect Resource) is a public, computer-readable side effect resource that contains information on marketed medicines and their recorded adverse drug reactions [15]. The information is extracted from public documents and package inserts, in particular, from the US FDA Structured Product Labels (SPLs). The current version was released on October 17, 2012. PharmGKB DDI-ADE Dataset is a database of DDI side effects based on FDA AERS reporting data [16], in which the confounding factors for prediction of the side effects are corrected through leveraging covariates in observational clinical data [17].

Semantic Web technologies

The World Wide Web consortium (W3C) is the main standards body for the World Wide Web [18]. The goal of the W3C is to develop interoperable technologies and tools as well as specifications and guidelines to lead the web to its full potential. The resource description framework (RDF), web ontology language (OWL), and SPARQL (a recursive acronym for SPARQL Protocol and RDF Query Language) specifications have all achieved the level of W3C recommendations, and are becoming generally accepted and widely used. RDF is a model of directed, labeled graphs that use a set of triples. Each triple is modeled in the form of subject, predicate and object. SPARQL is a standard query language for RDF graphs. OWL is a standard ontology language used for ontology modeling.

Methods

We utilized a normalized AERS dataset known as AERS-DM that was produced in a previous study [11]. The dataset contains 4,639,613 unique putative Drug-ADE pairs in which the drugs are represented by RxNorm codes and the putative ADEs are represented by MedDRA codes. The AERS-DM dataset is organized in two database files in the Tab Separated Values (TSV) format and accessible at: http://informatics.mayo.edu/adepedia/index.php/Download. Figure 1 shows the system architecture of our approach. We first extracted a subset of putative DDI-ADE pairs (in which only two drugs are listed on a report) with their associated outcome codes from original AERS-DM dataset.
Figure 1

System architecture.

System architecture. Second, we developed a filtering pipeline that comprises three datasets. The first dataset is a subset of original AERS-DM in which only one drug is listed on a report. This dataset was used to build a knowledge base of severe ADEs in a previous study. The second dataset is the SIDER 2 dataset. Table 3 shows a list of drug-ADE pair examples from the dataset, in which drug names are coded in STICH ID (http://stitch.embl.de) and ADE names are coded in MedDRA. We excluded the putative DDI-ADE pairs based on the Drug-ADE pairs of the two datasets. The filtering would ensure that the reported ADEs could not be explained by a single drug effect. The third dataset is a PharmGKB dataset that is used as “silver” standard. Table 4 shows a list of DDI-ADE examples from the dataset, in which drug names are coded in STICH ID and ADE names are coded in UMLS Concept Unique Identifiers (CUIs).
Table 3

A list of Drug-ADE examples from SIDER dataset, in which drug names are coded in STICH ID and ADE names are coded in MedDRA

stitch_id1stitch_id2UMLS_con cept_idDrug_nameside_effect_nameMedDRA_conscept_typeUMLS_concept_idMEDDRA_side_effect_name
−100003914−39468C0038454Levobunololcerebrovascular accidentLLTC0038454Cerebrovascular accident
−100003914−39468C0038454Levobunololcerebrovascular accidentPTC0038454Cerebrovascular accident
−100003914−39468C0015230LevobunololrashLLTC0038454Rash
−100003914−39468C0015230LevobunololrashPTC0015230Rash
−100003914−39468C0015230LevobunololrashPTC0015230Dermatitis
−100003914−39468C0033377LevobunololptosisLLTC0011603Ptosis
−100003914−39468C0033377LevobunololptosisPTC0033377Eyelid ptosis
−100003914−39468C0033377LevobunololptosisPTC0005745Uterovaginal prolapse
−100003914−39468C0030554LevobunololparesthesiaLLTC0156353Paraesthesia
−100003914−39468C0030554LevobunololparesthesiaPTC0030554Paraesthesia
−100003914−39468C0006266LevobunololbronchospasLLTC0006266Bronhospasm
−100003914−39468C0006266LevobunololbronchospasPTC0006266Bronhospasm
−100003914−39468C1145670Levobunololrespiratory failureLLTC1145670Respiratory failure
−100003914−39468C1145670Levobunololrespiratory failurePTC1145670Respiratory failure
−100003914−39468C0027424Levobunololnasal congestionLLTC0027424Nasal congestion
−100003914−39468C0027424Levobunololnasal congestionPTC0027424Nasal congestion
−100003914−39468C0023380LevobunolollethargyLLTC0023380Lethargy
−100003914−39468C0023380LevobunolollethargyPTC0023380Lethargy
−100003914−39468C0947912LevobunololmyastheniaLLTC0947912Mysathenia
−100003914−39468C0947912LevobunololmyastheniaPTC0151786Muscular weakness
Table 4

A list of DDI-ADE examples from PharmGKB dataset, in which drug names are coded in STICH ID and ADE names are coded in UMLS CUI

stitch_id1stitch_id2drug1drug2event_umls_idevent_name
CID000000085CID000000206carnitinegalatoseC0004623Bacterial infection
CID000000085CID000000206carnitinegalatoseC0015967body temperature increased
CID000000085CID000000206carnitinegalatoseC0018932haematochezia
CID000000085CID000000206carnitinegalatoseC0020433Bilirubinaemia
CID000000085CID000000206carnitinegalatoseC0022346icterus
CID000000085CID000000206carnitinegalatoseC0026946fungal disease
CID000000085CID000000206carnitinegalatoseC0030305panreatitis
CID000000085CID000000206carnitinegalatoseC0040034thrombpcytopenia
CID000000085CID000000206carnitinegalatoseC0085605Hepatic failure
CID000000085CID000000206carnitinegalatoseC0151766Abnormal LFTs
CID000000085CID000000206carnitinegalatoseC0243026sepsis
CID000000085CID000000271carnitinegalatoseC0002792anaphylactic reaction
CID000000085CID000000271carnitinegalatoseC0002871anaemia
CID000000085CID000000271carnitinegalatoseC0002962angina
CID000000085CID000000271carnitinegalatoseC0004238AFIB
CID000000085CID000000271carnitinegalatoseC0010054arteriosclerotic disease
CID000000085CID000000271carnitinegalatoseC0010200Cough
CID000000085CID000000271carnitinegalatoseC0012833dizziness
CID000000085CID000000271carnitinegalatoseC0013404Difficulty breathing
CID000000085CID000000271carnitinegalatoseC0015802femur fracture
A list of Drug-ADE examples from SIDER dataset, in which drug names are coded in STICH ID and ADE names are coded in MedDRA A list of DDI-ADE examples from PharmGKB dataset, in which drug names are coded in STICH ID and ADE names are coded in UMLS CUI Third, we converted all the datasets used in this study into the Semantic Web RDF format and loaded them into an open source RDF store known as 4store [19]. We established a SPARQL endpoint that provides standard query services against the RDF store. And then we developed the extraction and filtering algorithms using Java-based Jena ARQ APIs [20]. Third, to enrich the signals of the DDI-induced ADEs, we used the NLP-processed EMR data of a cohort of 138 k patients with health home care provided by Mayo Clinic Rochester where medications and problems have been extracted and normalized to RxNorm codes and the UMLS concepts from the current medication and problem list sections of clinical notes using MedXN and MedTagger (http://www.ohnlp.org/). For each DDI-induced ADE triples (D1, D2, P), we obtained the number of patients who are administrated with any of the two drugs or both (i.e., N(D1), N(D2), and N(D1,D2)) and the number of patients with putative ADEs (i.e., N(D1,P), N(D2,P), and N(D1,D2,P) after taking the drugs. An occurrence of problem P is considered as putative ADE if it happens within 36 days of drug administration [17] and there is no occurrence of P in the EMR before the drug administration. We then developed the following metric to measure the signal enrichment of DDI-induced ADE: Finally, we developed the mappings between AERS outcome codes and CTCAE grades and classified the filtered DDI-ADEs into the CTCAE. We asserted that DE in AERS corresponds to Grade 5 in CTCAE; LT corresponds to Grade 4; the rest of outcome codes (HO, DS, CA, RI and OT) correspond to Grade 3. In this study, we utilized the CTCAE version 4.0 [14] rendered in OWL format. Figure 2 shows a screenshot of a Protégé4 environment displaying the categories and severity grades in CTCAE classification.
Figure 2

The categories and severity grades of CTCAE classification in a Protégé 4 environment.

The categories and severity grades of CTCAE classification in a Protégé 4 environment.

Results

We were able to extract a set of putative DDI-ADE pairs and their associated outcome codes for the three target drugs: Warfarin, Clopidogrel and Simvastatin from normalized AERS-DM dataset. We then filtered the putative DDI-ADE pairs using the filtering pipeline based on three datasets. Table 5 shows the number of filtered DDI-ADE pairs for each target drug. In total, 601 pairs were filtered. Of them, 61 pairs are classified in Grade 5, 56 pairs in Grade 4 and 484 pairs in Grade 3. Table 6 shows a list of filtered DDI-ADE pair examples for the drug “Simvastatin”, in which, drugs are coded in RxNorm RxCUIs and ADEs are coded in MedDRA codes.
Table 5

The number of filtered DDI-ADE pairs for three drugs

DrugNumber of DDI-ADE Pairs
Grade 5Grade 4Grade 3
Warfarin3211157
Clopidogrel1729166
Simvastatin1216161
Total6156484
Table 6

A list of filtered DDI-ADE pairs for the drug “Simvastatin” classified by CTCAE grades

CTCAE gradeAERS outome codeDrug code by RxCUIDrug nameDrug code by RxCUIDrug nameADE code by MedDRAADE name
Grede 5DE36567Simvastatin1191Aspirin10002906Aortic stenosis
Grede 5DE253198Risiglitazone maleate36567Simvastatin10006580Bundle branch block left
Grede 5DE36567Simvastatin203160Losartan Potassium10007515Cardiac arrest
Grede 5DE36567Simvastatin1191Aspirin10010071Coma
Grede 5DE253198Risiglitazone maleate36567Simvastatin10012689Diabetic retinoathy
Grede 4LT36567Simvastatin203029Tegretol10002948Aphasia
Grede 4LT36567Simvastatin203029Tegretol10003119Arrhythmia
Grede 4LT253198Amiodarone hydrochloride316675Simvastatin 80 MG10006002Bone pain
Grede 4LT36567Simvastatin225807exelon10007515Cardiac arrest
Grede 4LT36567Simvastatin203029Tegretol10012455Dematitis exfoliative
Grede 3DS36567Simvastatin1191Aspirin10012455Dematitis exfoliative
Grede 3DS36567Simvastatin190465Viagra10018429Glucose tolerance impaired
Grede 3DS36567Simvastatin83367Atorvastatin10020765Hypersomia
Grede 3DS36567Simvastatin35296Ramipril10050295Intervertebral disc protrusion
Grede 3DS253198Gemfibrozil 600 MG316675Simvastatin 80 MG10000486Acidosis
The number of filtered DDI-ADE pairs for three drugs A list of filtered DDI-ADE pairs for the drug “Simvastatin” classified by CTCAE grades For the signal enrichment using the EMR data, we found that, there are 89 drug pairs prescribed concomitantly in 9.5 k patients, accounting for 6.9% of all patients in the EMR dataset we used. Out of 601 putative DDI-ADE pairs, the signals of 59 (D1, D2, P) pairs were identified. Table 7 shows the detailed statistics of those pairs occurred in no less than five patients.
Table 7

A list of putative DDI-ADE pairs signaled in the EMR data

D1 (RxCUI)D2(RxCUI)P (MedDRA)ADE NameN(D1)N(D2)N(D1,D2)N(D1,P)N(D2,PN(D1,D2,P)Score(DI,D2,P)
Aspirin (1191)Simvastatin (36567)10002906Aortic stenosis381497494292610434154.991
Zocor (196503)Simvastatin (36567)10038428Renal disorder1089474941472405674.550
Simvastatin (36567)atorvastatin (83367)10028417Myasthenia gravis74942841828421054.409
Warfarin (11289)Digoxin (3407)10013887Dysathria6330192764143764.36
Aspirin (1191)Simvastatin (36567)10015090Epistaxis38149749429261262894.257
gabapentin (25480)Simvastatin (36567)10019245Hearing impsored46837494280357053.935
Plavix (174742)Simvastatin (36567)10017955Gastrointestinal heamorrhage47697494642544293.88
Aspirin (1191)clopidogrel (32968)10037423Pulmunary oedema3814914361291142883.338
Aspirin (1191)clopidogrel (32968)10005191Blister Dyspnoea exertion3814914361291135973.048
Amlodipine (17767)Simvastatin (36567)10013971Dyspnoea exertional278674945616289112995
Aspirin (1191)Simvastatin (36567)10047924Wheezing381497494292635473272.969
Lantus (261551)Simvastatin (36567)10012680Diabetic neuropathy18837494329392052.63
Aspirin (1191)clopidogrel (32968)10038428Renal disorder3814914361291175962.452
Lantus (261551)clopidogrel (32968)10040882Skin lesion381491436129126921162.024
Aspirin (1191)clopidogrel (32968)10046555Urinary retention381491436129129216111.757
Aspirin (1191)clopidogrel (32968)10061623Adverse drug reaction381491436129136820151.549
Simvastatin (36567)Norvasc (58927)10017076fracture749434163181395961.219

D1 - drug1, D2 - drug 2, P - problem, N – number, and Score – enrichment score.

A list of putative DDI-ADE pairs signaled in the EMR data D1 - drug1, D2 - drug 2, P - problem, N – number, and Score – enrichment score. For integrating the filtered DDI-ADE pairs with the CTCAE, we produced an OWL rendering for each pair, asserting the filtered DDI-ADEs under AE terms in CTCAE (see Figure 3 for an example).
Figure 3

The OWL representation of an example DDI-ADE.

The OWL representation of an example DDI-ADE.

Discussion

In a previous study, we used a similar Semantic Web-based approach to build a knowledge base of severe ADEs using the FDA AERS reporting data [8]. In this study, we focused on mining the DDI-induced ADEs and their severity information, and configured the filtering pipeline differently using a collection of ADE datasets. The standardization of ADE datasets is essential for enabling interoperability and comparability among heterogeneous data sources. We used a normalized AERS dataset, in which the drug names are normalized using standard drug ontologies RxNorm and NDF-RT and the ADEs are normalized using MedDRA, whereas the datasets from SIDER and PharmGKB used STITCH compound IDs to code drug names and used UMLS CUIs to code ADEs. Apparently, the solid mappings between RxNorm codes and STITCH IDs would be required in future, which will be part of our research efforts in constructing a standardized drug and pharmacological class network [21]. We also tested the signals of putative DDI-ADE pairs filtered by the pipeline using a large EMR data. We were able to detect some strong signals indicated by the enrichment score as illustrated in Table 7. This would potentially provide a very useful tool for the knowledge-driven detection of the DDI-induced ADEs from the EMR, though a rigorous patient chart review with a panel of clinicians would be needed in future to verify the signals to establish the causality of the drug-drug interaction. For measuring the severity of ADEs, we used the CTCAE severity grading system. We found that the AERS outcome codes used to record serious patient outcomes in the AERS reporting data correspond well to the CTCAE Grades 3 to 5. Semantic Web OWL rendering of the DDI-ADE dataset provides seamless integration with the CTCAE itself, enabling a standard infrastructure for automatic classification of ADEs based on the severity conditions specified in the CTCAE. There are several limitations in this study. First, we used the logic that a putative DDI-ADE combination is extracted if there exists an AERS report involving two drugs and the ADE. We understand that the AERS reports themselves do not make it easy to report concomitant drugs and these are known to be under-reported. This means the putative DDI-ADE pairs extracted in this study only reflect a portion of all DDI interactions and should not be considered as a comprehensive list. Second, the PharmGKB “silver standard” itself contains signals that have not been validated for causality. This is part of the reasons why we introduce the EMR-based signal enrichment metric in this study. Third, some signals identified from EMR data may not be valid and further rigorous validation approach will be needed in future to filter them out.

Conclusions

In summary, we developed a Semantic Web-based approach to mine severe DDI-induced ADEs. The dataset produced in this study will be publicly available from our ADEpedia website (http://adepedia.org). The approach developed could be generalized to detect the signals from EMR for putative severe ADEs induced by DDIs in other drug domains and would be useful for supporting translational and pharmacovigilance study of severe ADEs.

Consent

Informed consent of the use of EMRs for general research was provided by each subject with charts being included in the study. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Committee of the Mayo Clinic as Exempt (Mayo IRB Number: 12-009059).
  16 in total

1.  ADEpedia: a scalable and standardized knowledge base of Adverse Drug Events using semantic web technology.

Authors:  Guoqian Jiang; Harold R Solbrig; Christopher G Chute
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2011-10-22

Review 2.  Hospitalisations and emergency department visits due to drug-drug interactions: a literature review.

Authors:  Matthijs L Becker; Marjon Kallewaard; Peter W J Caspers; Loes E Visser; Hubert G M Leufkens; Bruno H Ch Stricker
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 2.890

3.  Building a knowledge base of severe adverse drug events based on AERS reporting data using semantic web technologies.

Authors:  Guoqian Jiang; Liwei Wang; Hongfang Liu; Harold R Solbrig; Christopher G Chute
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2013

4.  A novel signal detection algorithm for identifying hidden drug-drug interactions in adverse event reports.

Authors:  Nicholas P Tatonetti; Guy Haskin Fernald; Russ B Altman
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  Data visualization speeds review of potential adverse drug events in patients on multiple medications.

Authors:  Jon D Duke; Xiaochun Li; Shaun J Grannis
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2009-12-06       Impact factor: 6.317

Review 6.  Genomics and drug response.

Authors:  Liewei Wang; Howard L McLeod; Richard M Weinshilboum
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Standardized drug and pharmacological class network construction.

Authors:  Qian Zhu; Guoqian Jiang; Liwei Wang; Christopher G Chute
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2013

8.  Standardizing adverse drug event reporting data.

Authors:  Liwei Wang; Guoqian Jiang; Dingcheng Li; Hongfang Liu
Journal:  J Biomed Semantics       Date:  2014-08-12

9.  A side effect resource to capture phenotypic effects of drugs.

Authors:  Michael Kuhn; Monica Campillos; Ivica Letunic; Lars Juhl Jensen; Peer Bork
Journal:  Mol Syst Biol       Date:  2010-01-19       Impact factor: 11.429

10.  ADEpedia 2.0: Integration of Normalized Adverse Drug Events (ADEs) Knowledge from the UMLS.

Authors:  Guoqian Jiang; Hongfang Liu; Harold R Solbrig; Christopher G Chute
Journal:  AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc       Date:  2013-03-18
View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Big data analytics to improve cardiovascular care: promise and challenges.

Authors:  John S Rumsfeld; Karen E Joynt; Thomas M Maddox
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 32.419

2.  Drug-drug interaction discovery and demystification using Semantic Web technologies.

Authors:  Adeeb Noor; Abdullah Assiri; Serkan Ayvaz; Connor Clark; Michel Dumontier
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Proton Pump Inhibitors and the Risk for Fracture at Specific Sites: Data Mining of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System.

Authors:  Liwei Wang; Mei Li; Yuying Cao; Zhengqi Han; Xueju Wang; Elizabeth J Atkinson; Hongfang Liu; Shreyasee Amin
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Spontaneous Reports of Serious Adverse Drug Reactions Resulting From Drug-Drug Interactions: An Analysis From the French Pharmacovigilance Database.

Authors:  Louis Létinier; Amandine Ferreira; Alexandre Marceron; Marina Babin; Joëlle Micallef; Ghada Miremont-Salamé; Antoine Pariente
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2021-03-24       Impact factor: 5.810

5.  A bibliometric analysis and visualization of medical data mining research.

Authors:  Yuanzhang Hu; Zeyun Yu; Xiaoen Cheng; Yue Luo; Chuanbiao Wen
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-05-29       Impact factor: 1.817

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.