Saibal Das1, Sapan K Behera1, Alphienes S Xavier1, Srinivas Velupula1, Steven A Dkhar1, Sandhiya Selvarajan2. 1. Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, 605 006, India. 2. Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, 605 006, India. sandhiyaselvarajan@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The causality assessment of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) remains a challenge and eagerly awaits the development of reliable hepatotoxicity biomarkers. None of the different available algorithms used for the causality assessment of DILI has been universally accepted as the gold standard. This study was conducted to examine the agreement among different causality assessment scales in reporting DILI. METHODS: The World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Center (WHO-UMC), Naranjo, Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM), Maria & Victorino (M & V) and Digestive Disease Week-Japan (DDW-J) assessment scales were used to compare the causalities in all the reported cases of DILI in our adverse drug reaction (ADR) monitoring centre from January 2014 to June 2017. The probability of the causality assessment was classified as 'definite', 'probable', 'possible' and 'unlikely'. The agreement obtained among the causality assessments was analysed using the weighted kappa (κ w) test. RESULTS: A total of 33 cases of DILI were included in our analyses. Anti-tubercular therapy (ATT) and methotrexate were the drugs that most commonly caused DILI. The overall agreement among the different scales was poor. The best agreement was found between RUCAM and DDW-J scales (κ w: 0.685). CONCLUSION: There were discrepancies among the different causality scales in assessing DILI. This might be due to the different definitions of causality criteria and subjective variability during assessment. A personalised assessment scale incorporating the latest information on specific risk factors and evidence-based criteria for DILI is warranted.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The causality assessment of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) remains a challenge and eagerly awaits the development of reliable hepatotoxicity biomarkers. None of the different available algorithms used for the causality assessment of DILI has been universally accepted as the gold standard. This study was conducted to examine the agreement among different causality assessment scales in reporting DILI. METHODS: The World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Center (WHO-UMC), Naranjo, Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM), Maria & Victorino (M & V) and Digestive Disease Week-Japan (DDW-J) assessment scales were used to compare the causalities in all the reported cases of DILI in our adverse drug reaction (ADR) monitoring centre from January 2014 to June 2017. The probability of the causality assessment was classified as 'definite', 'probable', 'possible' and 'unlikely'. The agreement obtained among the causality assessments was analysed using the weighted kappa (κ w) test. RESULTS: A total of 33 cases of DILI were included in our analyses. Anti-tubercular therapy (ATT) and methotrexate were the drugs that most commonly caused DILI. The overall agreement among the different scales was poor. The best agreement was found between RUCAM and DDW-J scales (κ w: 0.685). CONCLUSION: There were discrepancies among the different causality scales in assessing DILI. This might be due to the different definitions of causality criteria and subjective variability during assessment. A personalised assessment scale incorporating the latest information on specific risk factors and evidence-based criteria for DILI is warranted.
Authors: Ana Filipa Macedo; Francisco Batel Marques; Carlos Fontes Ribeiro; Frederico Teixeira Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: George Ostapowicz; Robert J Fontana; Frank V Schiødt; Anne Larson; Timothy J Davern; Steven H B Han; Timothy M McCashland; A Obaid Shakil; J Eileen Hay; Linda Hynan; Jeffrey S Crippin; Andres T Blei; Grace Samuel; Joan Reisch; William M Lee Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2002-12-17 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Raúl J Andrade; M Isabel Lucena; M Carmen Fernández; Gloria Pelaez; Ketevan Pachkoria; Elena García-Ruiz; Beatriz García-Muñoz; Rocio González-Grande; Angeles Pizarro; José Antonio Durán; Manuel Jiménez; Luis Rodrigo; Manuel Romero-Gomez; José María Navarro; Ramón Planas; Joan Costa; Africa Borras; Aina Soler; Javier Salmerón; Rafael Martin-Vivaldi Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Theophilus A Adegbuyi; Joseph O Fadare; Ebisola J Araromi; Abayomi O Sijuade; Iyanu Bankole; Ilesanmi K Fasuba; Rachel A Alabi Journal: Hosp Pharm Date: 2020-09-18