Katherine Donegan1, Rebecca Owen2, Helena Bird2, Brian Burch2, Alex Smith2, Phil Tregunno2. 1. Vigilance and Risk Management of Medicines, MHRA, 151 Buckingham Palace Road, London, SW1W 9SZ, UK. katherine.donegan@mhra.gov.uk. 2. Vigilance and Risk Management of Medicines, MHRA, 151 Buckingham Palace Road, London, SW1W 9SZ, UK.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Electronic healthcare record (EHR) databases are used within pharmacoepidemiology studies to confirm or refute safety signals arising from spontaneous adverse event reports. However, there has been limited routine use of such data earlier in the signal management process, to help rapidly contextualise signals and strengthen preliminary assessment or to inform decisions regarding action including the need for further studies. This study explores the value of EHR used in this way within a regulatory environment via an automated analysis platform. METHODS: Safety signals raised at the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) between July 2014 and June 2015 were individually reviewed by a multi-disciplinary team. They assessed the feasibility of identifying the exposure and event of interest using primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) within the Commonwealth Vigilance Workbench (CVW) Longitudinal Module platform, which was designed to facilitate routine descriptive analysis of signals using EHR. Three signals, where exposure and event could be well identified, were retrospectively analysed using the platform. RESULTS: Of 69 unique new signals, 20 were for drugs prescribed predominately in secondary care or available without prescription, which would not be identified in primary care. A further 17 were brand, formulation, or dose-specific issues, were related to mortality, were relevant only to a subgroup of patients, or were drug interactions, and hence could not be reviewed using the platform given its limitations. Analyses of exposure and incidence of the adverse event could be produced using CPRD within the CMV Longitudinal Module for 32 (46%) signals. The case studies demonstrated that the data provided supporting evidence for confirming initial assessment of the signal and deciding upon the need for further action. CONCLUSIONS: CPRD can routinely provide useful early insights into clinical context when assessing a large proportion of safety signals within a regulatory environment provided that a flexible approach is adopted within the analysis platform.
INTRODUCTION: Electronic healthcare record (EHR) databases are used within pharmacoepidemiology studies to confirm or refute safety signals arising from spontaneous adverse event reports. However, there has been limited routine use of such data earlier in the signal management process, to help rapidly contextualise signals and strengthen preliminary assessment or to inform decisions regarding action including the need for further studies. This study explores the value of EHR used in this way within a regulatory environment via an automated analysis platform. METHODS: Safety signals raised at the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) between July 2014 and June 2015 were individually reviewed by a multi-disciplinary team. They assessed the feasibility of identifying the exposure and event of interest using primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) within the Commonwealth Vigilance Workbench (CVW) Longitudinal Module platform, which was designed to facilitate routine descriptive analysis of signals using EHR. Three signals, where exposure and event could be well identified, were retrospectively analysed using the platform. RESULTS: Of 69 unique new signals, 20 were for drugs prescribed predominately in secondary care or available without prescription, which would not be identified in primary care. A further 17 were brand, formulation, or dose-specific issues, were related to mortality, were relevant only to a subgroup of patients, or were drug interactions, and hence could not be reviewed using the platform given its limitations. Analyses of exposure and incidence of the adverse event could be produced using CPRD within the CMV Longitudinal Module for 32 (46%) signals. The case studies demonstrated that the data provided supporting evidence for confirming initial assessment of the signal and deciding upon the need for further action. CONCLUSIONS: CPRD can routinely provide useful early insights into clinical context when assessing a large proportion of safety signals within a regulatory environment provided that a flexible approach is adopted within the analysis platform.
Authors: Gianluca Trifirò; Antoine Pariente; Preciosa M Coloma; Jan A Kors; Giovanni Polimeni; Ghada Miremont-Salamé; Maria Antonietta Catania; Francesco Salvo; Anaelle David; Nicholas Moore; Achille Patrizio Caputi; Miriam Sturkenboom; Mariam Molokhia; Julia Hippisley-Cox; Carlos Diaz Acedo; Johan van der Lei; Annie Fourrier-Reglat Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Gianmario Candore; Kristina Juhlin; Katrin Manlik; Bharat Thakrar; Naashika Quarcoo; Suzie Seabroke; Antoni Wisniewski; Jim Slattery Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Antoine Pariente; Fleur Gregoire; Annie Fourrier-Reglat; Françoise Haramburu; Nicholas Moore Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2007 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: S Cederholm; G Hill; A Asiimwe; A Bate; F Bhayat; G Persson Brobert; T Bergvall; D Ansell; K Star; G N Norén Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 5.606