The side effect profile of Clozapine in real world data of three large mental health hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Mining the data contained within Electronic Health Records (EHRs) can potentially generate a greater understanding of medication effects in the real world, complementing what we know from Randomised control trials (RCTs). We Propose a text mining approach to detect adverse events and medication episodes from the clinical text to enhance our understanding of adverse effects related to Clozapine, the most effective antipsychotic drug for the management of treatment-resistant schizophrenia, but underutilised due to concerns over its side effects.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used data from de-identified EHRs of three mental health trusts in the UK (>50 million documents, over 500,000 patients, 2835 of which were prescribed Clozapine). We explored the prevalence of 33 adverse effects by age, gender, ethnicity, smoking status and admission type three months before and after the patients started Clozapine treatment. Where possible, we compared the prevalence of adverse effects with those reported in the Side Effects Resource (SIDER).
RESULTS: Sedation, fatigue, agitation, dizziness, hypersalivation, weight gain, tachycardia, headache, constipation and confusion were amongst the highest recorded Clozapine adverse effect in the three months following the start of treatment. Higher percentages of all adverse effects were found in the first month of Clozapine therapy. Using a significance level of (p< 0.05) our chi-square tests show a significant association between most of the ADRs and smoking status and hospital admission, and some in gender, ethnicity and age groups in all trusts hospitals. Later we combined the data from the three trusts hospitals to estimate the average effect of ADRs in each monthly interval. In gender and ethnicity, the results show significant association in 7 out of 33 ADRs, smoking status shows significant association in 21 out of 33 ADRs and hospital admission shows the significant association in 30 out of 33 ADRs.
CONCLUSION: A better understanding of how drugs work in the real world can complement clinical trials.

Introduction

Adverse Drugs Reactions (ADRs) are troublesome, potentially life-threatening, and associated with more extended hospital stays. Improving our ability to detect these unwanted effects can lead to a greater understanding of individual risks and better patient management, which would help reduce the burden on healthcare providers [1-3]. Clinical trials provide the first insight into ADR profiles before a drug is available to the public. Once the drug is on the market, new ADRs and medication errors are spontaneously reported by physicians and pharmacists through a number of schemes (e.g. the YellowCard scheme used by the UK Medicine Health Regulatory Agency, MHRA, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) in the US [4]). However, these spontaneous reporting systems have limitations. There can be under-reporting of observed ADRs, as well as no reporting of ADRs that are perceived as non-serious. It is possible that many novel ADRs are never entered into the system because it is challenging to establish a causal link between the drug and adverse events. The data collected in Electronic Health Records (EHRs) as part of routine care may provide additional insight into adverse events in real-world settings as well as potentially identifying new positive indications of drugs [5].

Clozapine is a atypical, also known as second-generation, antipsychotic drug. It is widely recognised as the gold standard in the treatment of schizophrenia and the most effective antipsychotic drug in the management of treatment-resistant schizophrenia [6, 7]. Nevertheless, Clozapine is an underutilised medication [8] with only 54% of all eligible patients being prescribed Clozapine in the UK [9]. One of the primary reasons for its limited use is the concern over its side effects, some of which are potentially fatal and require frequent monitoring [10]. Two common side effects associated with Clozapine are weight gain and hypoglycaemia, which together can lead to type II diabetes [11, 12]. Others include abdominal pain, agitation, akathisia, amnesia, blurred vision, confusion, constipation, convulsions, delirium, delusion, diarrhoea, dizziness, dry mouth, enuresis, fatigue, fever, headache, heartburn, hallucination, hyperkinesia, hypersalivation, hypertension, hypotension, insomnia, nausea, rash, restlessness, seizures, sleeplessness, sweating, syncope, tachycardia, tremor, vomiting and decrease in White blood cells (WBC) [13-16]. These side effects can be dose-related [17, 18]. A more acute side effect is agranulocytosis, a severe and dangerous lowered WBC count. Therefore, as soon as the patient starts taking Clozapine, blood monitoring begins to determine whether or not the patient is at risk of agranulocytosis [10, 19–21]. Other severe but rare side effects include myocarditis, neutropenia, cardiomyopathy, Creatinine Phosphokinase (CPK) increase, hepatic narcosis and Steven Johnson Syndrome (SJS) [22].

Several studies have report Clozapine-induced ADRs, but those are generally limited by the duration of the study (6 weeks to 2 years), cohort size (31 to 110 patients) and the number of the ADRs discussed (1 to 18) [23-28]. Limited work has been done to characterise a large population of patients experiencing Clozapine-induced ADRs.

In addition, little work has been done to understand the relationship between age and Clozapine-induced ADRs. The literature suggests that there is a positive relationship between age and Clozapine-induced ADRs such as weight gain and cardiovascular risks, mainly myocarditis and cardiomyopathy [29, 30]. In young patients, several short-term and long-term studies have reported Clozapine-induced ADRs in different hospital settings. However, those only cover a single or a few ADRs at a time, rather than a range of ADRs [31-39].

Schizophrenia patients are more likely to be smokers as compared to patients with other psychiatric disorders [40]. They are more likely to be heavy smokers (25 or more cigarettes daily) compared with only 11% of the general population of smokers [41, 42]. The chemicals in cigarette smoke induce enzymes that accelerate the metabolism of antipsychotic drugs [43, 44], requiring a higher dosage of Clozapine in smokers compared to non-smokers. There is no study showing comprehensive profiling of Clozapine-induced ADRs in the smoker vs non-smoker patient populations.

Males and Females exhibit different responses to drug treatment [45, 46]. Studies suggest that women are at a higher risk of ADRs than men, and ADR-related hospital admissions are more common in females and older patients [47, 48]. Some studies suggest that weight gain, hypertension, dyslipidemia and other metabolic synderomes are more prevalent in female Clozapine patients, whereas cardiac-related ADRs such as arrhythmia, QT prolongation are more prevalent in males [49, 50].

Although often ignored, ethnicity plays a significant role in response to psychotropic medication [51, 52]. Studies suggest Clozapine is used much less in the black population compared to any other ethnicity due to the lower normal range of WBC count [52, 53]. Clozapine is also known to cause Type II diabetes in the black and Asian population [12, 54, 55].

We developed a natural language processing (NLP) pipeline, ADEPt [56] to detect and validate mentions of adverse drug events in free-text mental health clinical notes. The ADEPt is equipped with an improved rule-based, ADE dictionary and modified ConText algorithm and distinguish from positive to negative mentions of ADEs, from current to past ADEs occurrences by applying temporal reasoning and from general to patient-specific ADEs mentions.

In this paper, we combine information about adverse drug events using the ADEPt pipeline with medication episodes mined from clinical text to enhance the understanding of adverse effects related to Clozapine. We also characterise the population experiencing ADRs with Clozapine and compare the results with the Side Effects Resource (SIDER) [57], complementing what is already known about demographics, smoking status and hospital admissions, and to find out how different subgroups are most likely to experience ADRs when administered Clozapine.

Material and methods

Data sources

We obtained data from the Clinical Record Interactive Search (CRIS) system, a de-identified version of the EHR of three large mental health National Health Services (NHS) Foundation Trusts in the UK, made available for research through a patient-led model of governance and oversight [58]: i) the South London and Maudsley (SLAM) NHS Foundation Trust is one of the largest mental health care providers in Europe serving a population over 1.4 million residents in four major hospitals London [59], ii) the Camden and Islington (C&I) NHS Foundation Trust provides mental health services in North London [60, 61] and iii) Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, which covers a geographic catchment area containing 1.9 million UK residents [62]. The Trust is a group or network of hospitals that work together to deliver a range of services to their catchement area. Both SLAM and C&I trusts represent large, mixed, multicultural areas of London, UK.

SLAM data came from patients who received care from January 2007 to December 2016; Camden & Islington data came from patients who received care from June 2009 to December 2015, and Oxford data came from patients who received care from January 2010 to December 2014.

The combined data of the three trusts comprises over 500,000 patient records and over 50 million documents. We used both the unstructured and structured data within the EHRs to identify periods of on-off Clozapine medication, and then to identify subsequent Clozapine-induced ADRs.

Mining medication start and stop dates

Using the General Architecture for Text Engineering (GATE) medication NLP application [59], a Natural Language processing system that has been repeatedly used in drug-related studies [59, 63, 64], we developed an algorithm to infer periods of ‘on-treatment’ medication episodes.

We created a drug dictionary using 260 drugs commonly used in the psychiatric hospitals for Mental, Behavioural and Neurodevelopmental Disorders. The drug dictionary consists of 11 drug categories: Antidepressants, Antidiabetics, Antiepileptics, Antihypertensives, Antipsychotics, Anti-Dementia, Hypnotics & Anxiolytics, Lipid Regulatory, Mood Stabilizers, Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory and Anti-Parkinson. We used the British National Formulary (BNF) and electronic Medicines Compendium (eMC) [65, 66] to generate a robust list of all available brand names. In order to increase coverage, we included brand names that have been discontinued, as these may be present in the clinical notes. The algorithm has been previously used in a dementia study to identify trajectories of cognitive decline in the SLAM EHR [67].

The algorithm works in two stages. In the first stage, it maps all brand names onto the generic names of the drugs. In the second stage, the algorithm sorts the records by date and measures the length of the interval between consecutive dates. These dates include prescription dates and positive mentions of a drug in the clinical notes, indicating that a patient is taking/continuing a particular drug. We extracted dated of positive mentions of medications using a specialised GATE NLP application [59, 63, 64].

We set the threshold for determining a medication episode between two consecutive prescribing dates to 42 days (6 weeks). Although the common practice for prescribing psychotropic drugs is 28 days (4 weeks), they can be prescribed for 42 days based on patient availability. If the gap between two consecutive dates is less than 42 days (6 weeks), the algorithm searches for the next date until it finds the date where the difference between two dates is greater than 42 days, or no data point is available. In each episode, the algorithm counts the number of data points it used to conclude an episode. Once the difference between two dates is over 42 days, the algorithm concludes the episode using the last available date, and subsequently starts a new episode. The duration threshold can be changed according to the prescribing practices associated with the medication being studied.

Mining adverse events from clinical text

We used our Adverse Drug Event annotation Pipeline ADEPt to mine ADEs from the free-text data. We applied the pipeline to extract 66 ADEs on the Oxford data and 110 ADEs from the SLAM and C&I data (more recent work used a larger ADE dictionary).

Associations between medications & ADRs: Formulating an ADR timeline

We set out to uncover associations between medication episodes and adverse events by combining the medication timeline with the adverse events mined by the ADEPt pipeline. This is done in a number of steps: First, multiple discussions of an ADE on a given day are collapsed into a single event, filtering out negative mentions accordingly. The ADR algorithm then queries the medication timeline to identify drugs that the patient was taking at the time of an adverse event and then creates an ADR event.

Statistical analysis

The study used the chi-square statistical test with Bonferroni correction to quantify the significance of ADR associations in relation to gender, ethnic background, age, and smoking and hospital status. The data taken into account was based on a monthly interval after starting the drug clozapine. R programming language version 3.2.4 was used to conduct statistical analysis.

Clozapine cohort and associated variables

Once periods of prescribing and associated possible ADRs have been identified, the prevalence of ADEs across different subpopulations within the EHR was explored. As such, age, gender, ethnicity, smoking status, hospital admissions (inpatient/outpatient) were extracted for each patient in each Trust, where data was available. Although efforts were taken to replicate the study in all three NHS Trusts, the identification and extraction of age groups, smoking status and inpatient/outpatient status in Oxford NHS Trust data was not successful.

We retrieved the date of birth, gender, ethnicity, smoking status, hospital admission and diagnosis from each trust. A patient’s age was calculated using the date the patients started Clozapine and was further divided into eight distinct categories. Gender and ethnicity were derived from the latest entry recorded in each NHS trust. The ethnicity was divided into four major groups, white, black, Asians and others. Smoking status was calculated six months before and after the date that the patient started Clozapine. Hospital admission status was measured by looking into the patient admission and discharge data. If the patient started the Clozapine during their hospital admission, we classified them as an inpatient.

We established six categories of diagnoses according to using ICD-10 codes. Three of these categories came from Serious Mental Illness (SMI), Schizophrenia (ICD-10: F20-F29) excluding (ICD-10: F25), Schizoaffective (ICD-10: F25) and Bipolar (ICD-10: F31). The other three categories were any mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders (ICD-10: F01-F99) excluding SMI patients, any other diagnosis and diagnosis not available. We collected diagnoses six months before and after the first prescription of Clozapine. Where we were unable to identify records of diagnosis during a year period, we increased the time span until a diagnosis was established for a patient. We compared our results to SIDER where possible, to understand the prevalence of Clozapine-related ADRs in the real-world EHR data we have collected.

Results

We identified 2835 patients who have taken Clozapine for at least three months in three large mental health trusts. Table 1 gives the cohort characteristics of the three trusts with respect to gender, ethnic background, age groups, smoking status, hospital admission and diagnosis.

Table 1

Cohort characteristics of the three NHS trusts, showing a breakdown of gender, ethnic background, age groups, smoking status, hospital admission and diagnosis.

Cohort	SLAM	Camden & Islington	Oxford	Total
Size	1760	561	514	2835
Gender
Male	1167	357	342	1866
	66.3%	63.6%	66.5%
Female	593	204	172	969
	33.7%	36.3%	33.4%
Ethnic Background
White	821	347	426	1594
	46%	62%	83%
Black	704	120	20	844
	40%	21.39%	4%
Asian	93	41	41	175
	5.3%	7.31%	8%
Other	142	53	27	222
	8%	9.45%	5.25%
Age Group
Under 21	57		12	69
	3.2%		2.33%
21–30	422	27	96	545
	24%	4.81%	18.68%
31–40	488	141	155	784
	28%	25.13%	30.16%
41–50	479	168	126	773
	27%	30%	24.51%
51–60	233	135	98	466
	13%	24%	19%
61–70	62	67	22	151
	3.5%	12%	4.28%
71–80	18	21	4	43
	1%	3.74%	0.78%
Above 80	1	2	1	4
	0.06%	0.35%	0.19%
Smoking Status
Smoker	1039	360		1399
	59%	64%
Non-Smoker	721	201		922
	41%	36%
Hospital Admission
Inpatient	737	114		851
	42%	20%
Outpatient	1023	447		1470
	58%	80%
Diagnosis
Schizophrenia (ICD-10: F20-F29) excluding (ICD-10: F25)	1355	411	356	2122
	77%	73%	69%	75%
Schizoaffective (ICD-10: F25)	260	45	61	366
	15%	8%	12%	13%
Bipolar (ICD-10: F31)	44	26	11	81
	3%	5%	2%	3%
Any mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders (ICD-10: F01-F99) excluding SMI patients	32	17	11	60
	2%	3%	2%	2%
Any other Diagnosis	54	42	39	135
Excluding (ICD-10: F01-F99)	2%	7%	8%	5%
Diagnosis	15	21	36	72
Not Available	1%	4%	7%	2%

The ADR algorithm was implemented across the three NHS trusts and was evaluated in SLAM and Camden & Islington to assess its performance in detecting associations between drugs and ADEs; access limitations prohibited evaluation in the Oxford trust. A set of 300 cases were randomly selected from each trust, and manual validation was carried out by two annotators in SLAM and one annotator in C&I reading through the clinical notes according to the following criteria:

The presence of ADE is a true positive.

The associated medication episode annotation was a true positive.

The algorithm achieved a 0.89 Positive Predictive Value (PPV) in SLAM and a 0.87 PPV in C&I. The False Discovery Rate (FDR) was 0.1 in SLAM and 0.12 in C&I.

In SLAM, the level of agreement between the two annotators for ADEs 93% and kappa (κ = 0.56) and for drugs 94% and kappa (κ = 0.56) was achieved.

SIDER contains side effects information from RCTs and systems such as the FAERS [4]. As of January 2018, SIDER contained 23 different sources on Clozapine adverse effects such as post-marketing, FDA, labels, Medsafe and Health Canada. Although SIDER collates data from a number of sources, much of its data is from RCTs, which are typically run on small and narrow populations, with little information on how medications work in real-world settings. The study results were compared with SIDER where possible; to understand the prevalence of Clozapine-induced ADRs in the real-world EHR data.

The comparison results with SIDER are summarised in Table 2 for 33 ADRs. The results show the percentages of patients by ADR in each trust (SLAM, Camden & Islington and Oxford) and SIDER. The results are stratified into monthly intervals from the initiation of Clozapine treatment, three months prospective and three months retrospective. The columns (Three Months Early, Two Months Early, One Month Early, One Month Later, Two Months Later, and Three Months Later) show the percentages in each monthly interval. The last two columns (SIDER Low End and SIDER High End) show the SIDER reporting from different clinical trials and FDA studies. The complete results stratified into monthly intervals are provided in the (S1 Table) for gender, ethnicity, age groups, smoking status and hospital admissions.

Table 2

The results are shown in percentages (%) and broken down by ADRs, Hospitals (SLAM, Camden & Islington and Oxford) and SIDER.

ADR	Trust	Three Months Early	Two Months Early	One Month Early	One Month Later	Two Months Later	Three Months Later	SIDER Low End	SIDER High End
Agitation	SLAM	17.61	22.10	26.53	46.59	32.56	26.99
	Camden & Islington	13.37	17.83	18.36	43.14	28.34	21.03
	Oxford (n = 514)	14.59	15.76	16.34	34.24	25.10	20.62
	SIDER							4.00
Fatigue	SLAM	12.67	14.83	15.85	43.58	35.80	30.51
	Camden & Islington	10.34	12.30	13.37	41.18	29.23	26.56
	Oxford (n = 514)	9.73	11.87	12.06	35.21	27.43	26.85
	SIDER
Sedation	SLAM	12.67	12.16	14.83	43.86	35.51	29.83
	Camden & Islington	5.17	9.09	9.09	38.15	26.56	21.93
	Oxford (n = 514)	7.20	8.37	9.34	31.52	21.40	18.48
	SIDER							25.00	46.00
Dizziness	SLAM	2.78	4.20	4.09	16.59	13.13	11.19
	Camden & Islington	3.21	3.39	3.74	18.18	13.73	9.09
	Oxford (n = 514)	3.89	4.09	4.47	17.70	13.04	10.12
	SIDER							12.00	27.00
Hypersalivation	SLAM	1.19	1.48	2.10	14.32	13.24	11.31
	Camden & Islington	1.07	1.43	0.53	14.26	6.95	7.66
	Oxford (n = 514)	0.97	0.78	1.56	12.65	10.70	5.84
	SIDER							1.00	48.00
Feeling sick	SLAM	4.66	4.94	6.48	14.32	11.19	9.09
	Camden & Islington	3.74	3.92	3.03	10.52	7.13	7.66
	Oxford (n = 514)	3.89	5.25	5.06	14.20	9.73	7.20
	SIDER
Weight gain	SLAM	3.75	4.43	5.06	15.34	10.91	10.34
	Camden & Islington	2.50	3.39	1.96	11.76	6.60	6.24
	Oxford (n = 514)	3.50	3.31	3.70	11.28	9.92	7.78
	SIDER							4.00	56.00
Tachycardia	SLAM	2.27	2.05	2.50	15.40	12.95	9.94
	Camden & Islington	1.43	1.43	0.89	11.23	8.38	6.95
	Oxford (n = 514)	0.78	1.36	1.56	10.89	10.51	7.59
	SIDER							11.00	25.00
Confusion	SLAM	4.72	5.51	6.08	13.92	8.47	6.76
	Camden & Islington	3.57	6.24	5.53	12.66	6.77	5.88
	Oxford (n = 514)	2.53	3.89	3.89	9.92	6.42	5.25
	SIDER							3.00
Constipation	SLAM	1.76	1.99	2.16	12.27	11.70	9.49
	Camden & Islington	1.07	2.50	1.78	11.41	7.13	5.70
	Oxford (n = 514)	0.58	0.97	1.36	10.31	7.78	7.78
	SIDER							10.00	25.00
Headache	SLAM	4.20	4.55	5.45	12.44	8.18	5.91
	Camden & Islington	2.32	3.57	4.28	9.27	6.42	4.63
	Oxford (n = 514)	3.89	3.89	4.09	10.89	8.37	7.59
	SIDER
Insomnia	SLAM	3.92	4.03	5.17	10.40	6.48	4.03
	Camden & Islington	3.57	3.39	3.74	8.91	3.39	4.28
	Oxford (n = 514)	5.84	4.86	5.84	8.37	6.81	4.09
	SIDER							20.00	33.00
Hyperprolactinaemia	SLAM	3.18	3.64	4.20	8.52	5.06	4.15
	Camden & Islington	1.60	1.78	2.67	8.20	4.10	3.57
	Oxford (n = 514)	3.70	4.09	4.28	8.75	4.47	4.86
	SIDER
Shaking	SLAM	3.13	2.95	3.92	9.55	5.40	5.06
	Camden & Islington	1.78	1.96	3.74	6.06	3.92	2.85
	Oxford (n = 514)	2.92	3.31	3.89	7.78	4.47	4.86
	SIDER
Vomiting	SLAM	2.56	2.50	3.01	8.86	6.82	5.00
	Camden & Islington	2.14	2.50	2.85	6.77	4.99	4.63
	Oxford (n = 514)	1.75	2.72	2.92	7.59	5.25	5.06
	SIDER							3.00	17.00
Hypertension	SLAM	2.05	2.22	3.13	9.15	5.74	4.60
	Camden & Islington	0.71	0.71	1.60	7.13	4.63	2.67
	Oxford (n = 514)	1.36	1.36	1.56	5.06	4.28	2.14
	SIDER							4.00	12.00
Abdominal pain	SLAM	1.88	1.99	2.56	8.01	6.02	4.72
	Camden & Islington	0.89	0.89	1.60	3.92	3.57	3.39
	Oxford (n = 514)	1.75	1.36	1.75	7.39	4.47	5.64
	SIDER							4.00
Convulsion	SLAM	1.36	1.70	1.82	7.05	4.94	4.03
	Camden & Islington	0.53	0.53	0.36	2.85	2.14	1.07
	Oxford (n = 514)	1.36	1.36	1.56	6.42	3.11	2.72
	SIDER							3.00
Backache	SLAM	1.14	1.59	2.44	4.94	3.35	2.73
	Camden & Islington	1.43	1.25	1.96	5.35	3.03	3.03
	Oxford (n = 514)	1.17	1.17	1.36	5.84	3.89	2.92
	SIDER							5.00
Nausea	SLAM	1.14	1.08	1.19	6.08	5.23	3.69
	Camden & Islington	0.89	1.43	0.36	4.63	3.57	3.57
	Oxford (n = 514)	0.97	0.58	1.36	4.86	3.70	2.92
	SIDER							3.00	17.00
Hypotension	SLAM	0.51	0.97	0.80	5.00	2.95	2.56
	Camden & Islington	0.18	0.53	0.18	3.57	2.32	1.78
	Oxford (n = 514)	0.58	0.78	0.78	5.64	3.50	2.92
	SIDER							9.00	38.00
Fever	SLAM	1.02	1.14	1.65	6.36	4.43	3.13
	Camden & Islington	0.89	0.89	0.53	3.74	2.67	0.89
	Oxford (n = 514)	0.39	0.78	0.58	3.11	2.72	2.33
	SIDER							4.00	13.00
Enuresis	SLAM	1.02	0.80	1.25	4.20	3.92	3.24
	Camden & Islington	0.71	1.07	1.07	4.10	1.43	1.25
	Oxford (n = 514)	1.36	0.58	1.36	4.86	4.47	3.50
	SIDER
Dry mouth	SLAM	1.08	1.53	1.65	4.66	3.69	2.33
	Camden & Islington	1.25	1.25	1.07	3.92	2.14	0.89
	Oxford (n = 514)	1.36	1.36	1.56	3.89	1.36	2.33
	SIDER							5.00	20.00
Diarrhoea	SLAM	1.08	1.31	1.36	4.72	3.58	2.56
	Camden & Islington	0.71	1.25	0.18	3.03	3.39	3.03
	Oxford (n = 514)	1.17	0.78	1.36	4.09	3.70	2.53
	SIDER							2.00
Rash	SLAM	1.25	1.59	2.05	3.64	2.95	2.27
	Camden & Islington	1.25	1.25	0.89	4.28	1.96	2.14
	Oxford (n = 514)	0.97	1.17	1.17	3.70	2.33	1.36
	SIDER
Dyspepsia	SLAM	0.74	1.08	0.91	3.92	3.13	3.69
	Camden & Islington	0.36	0.53	0.53	4.10	2.67	2.50
	Oxford (n = 514)	0.19	0.58	0.78	3.50	4.09	3.70
	SIDER							8.00	14.00
Stomach pain	SLAM	1.93	1.76	1.93	4.94	3.52	3.52
	Camden & Islington	0.89	1.25	0.89	3.39	2.85	2.14
	Oxford (n = 514)	1.56	0.78	0.78	2.14	0.97	0.97
	SIDER
Sweating	SLAM	1.08	0.97	1.36	4.43	4.26	2.84
	Camden & Islington	0.53	0.53	0.53	2.85	2.14	1.96
	Oxford (n = 514)	1.17	0.97	0.97	2.72	1.36	1.95
	SIDER							6.00
Tremor	SLAM	1.48	1.99	2.95	5.51	3.52	3.47
	Camden & Islington	1.60	1.78	2.14	3.92	1.96	2.14
	SIDER							6.00
Neutropenia	SLAM	0.80	0.80	0.74	5.34	2.73	2.61
	Camden & Islington	0.00	0.18	0.53	1.60	0.89	1.07
	SIDER
Akathisia	SLAM	0.80	0.91	0.74	2.67	1.36	0.80
	Camden & Islington	0.00	0.53	0.00	1.25	1.07	0.53
	Oxford (n = 514)	0.97	0.78	0.97	1.36	1.17	0.97
	SIDER							3.00
Blurred vision	SLAM	0.34	0.91	0.63	2.05	1.25	1.02
	Camden & Islington	0.89	0.53	0.71	1.25	0.36	0.89
	Oxford (n = 514)	0.19	0.39	0.39	1.56	1.56	1.17
	SIDER							5.00
	Legend	0	10	20	30	40	50

The columns (Three Months Early, Two Months Early, One Month Early, One Month Later, Two Months Later, and Three Months Later) shows the percentages in each monthly interval. The last two columns (SIDER Low End and SIDER High End) shows the SIDER reporting.

The statistical analysis was first carried out separately for each of the trust. To prevent influence of cofounder such as age, gender, ethnicity, smoking status and hospital admission were performed individually.

The results are available in (S2 Table). The p-value of the test is adjusted through Bonferroni correction. Gender and ethnicity showed no significant association with any ADRs. Age group showed significant association with agitation, fatigue, feeling sick, sedation and tachycardia. In hospital admission, of the 33 ADRs, 15 were found to have a significant association (abdominal pain, agitation, confusion, dizziness, diarrhoea, fatigue, headache, hypersalivation, hypotension, hypertension, insomnia, sedation, tachycardia, tremor and vomiting). Smoking status showed that of the 33 ADRs, 8 were found to have a significant association (abdominal pain, agitation, confusion, dizziness, diarrhoea, fatigue, sedation and tachycardia).

The datasets from the three Trusts were later combined, and the chi-square statistical test was performed to estimate the average effect of ADRs in each monthly interval. The combined analysis showed a significant frequency distribution after Bonferroni p-value adjustment in the categorical variables (gender, ethnicity, age group, hospital admissions and smoking status) and a number of the ADRs as follows:

Gender showed significant associations (See Fig 1) with backache, constipation, diarrhoea, fatigue, feeling sick, hyperprolactinaemia and stomach pain. The results demonstrate that dizziness, weight gain, constipation, abdominal pain, backache, diarrhoea, hypotension, hyperprolactinemia, fatigue, and enuresis were more prevalent in females.

Fig 1

Frequency distribution of statistically significant ADRs (after Bonferroni p-value adjustment) from the combined analysis in gender for three months after starting the drug Clozapine.

Ethnic background showed no significant associations with any ADRs.

Age group showed significant associations (See Fig 2) with agitation, fatigue, feeling sick, sedation, shaking, tachycardia and weight gain. The results show that agitation, sedation, dizziness, insomnia, convulsions, tachycardia and tremor were more prevalent in patients under 30 years of age. ADRs such as dry mouth, enuresis and hyperprolactinemia were prevalent in patients over 40 years of age, and dizziness, hypotension and hypertension were more prevalent in patients who are over 60 years old.

Fig 2

Frequency distribution of statistically significant ADRs (after Bonferroni p-value adjustment) from the combined analysis in age groups for three months after starting the drug Clozapine.

Hospital admission showed significant associations (See Fig 3) with abdominal pain, agitation, akathisia, backache, confusion, constipation, convulsion, diarrhoea, dizziness, dry mouth, dyspepsia, enuresis, fatigue, feeling sick, fever, headache, hyperprolactinemia, hypersalivation, hypertension, hypotension, insomnia, nausea, rash, sedation, shaking, stomach pain, sweating, tachycardia, tremor, vomiting and weight gain.

Fig 3

Frequency distribution of statistically significant ADRs (after Bonferroni p-value adjustment) from the combined analysis in hospital admission for three months after starting the drug Clozapine.

Smoking status showed associations (See Fig 4) with abdominal pain, agitation, backache, confusion, convulsion, diarrhoea, dizziness, dyspepsia, enuresis, fatigue, feeling sick, fever, headache, insomnia, sedation, shaking, stomach pain, sweating, tachycardia, vomiting and weight gain. The complete results are available in (S3 Table).

Fig 4

Frequency distribution of statistically significant ADRs (after Bonferroni p-value adjustment) from the combined analysis in smoking status for three months after starting the drug Clozapine.

Discussion

The study presents a medication continuity timeline (start and stop dates) for patients under Clozapine treatment to obtained detailed insight of Clozapine-induced ADRs using data from three large UK-based mental health Trusts comprising over 50 million documents and over half a million patients. The study uses the ADEPt NLP pipeline [56] to extract ADEs from free-text psychiatric EHRs, as well as a set of algorithms for creating a medication continuity timeline. The timeline was used to investigate associations between medications and ADEs, characterising ADR susceptibility with respect to patient demographics, hospital admission and smoking status. Furthermore, the medication algorithm was used to assert the start date and measure the length of drug therapies. We used Clozapine as a use case, but the current work can be replicated on any psychotropic drug.

The algorithm found 2835 patients in the three trusts that started and continued Clozapine treatment for at least three months. The work presented in this paper has been run inclusively on all available ADEs in the ADEPt pipeline. We selected 33 ADRs to explore further as these were known side effects associated with Clozapine. We compared our results with SIDER, an online side effect resource. SIDER only reports on 25 out of the 33 ADRs. The 8 ADRs not reported in SIDER are fatigue, feeling sick, headache, hyperprolactinemia, weight loss, shaking, rash and stomach pain. These 8 ADRs show interesting results across the three trusts, as shown in Table 2. The prevalence of ADRs was assessed over gender, ethnic background, age groups, smoking status and hospital admission.

We stratified the data using demographics information, mainly gender, ethnic background, age groups, hospital admission and smoking status. Sedation, fatigue, agitation, hypersalivation, tachycardia, constipation, dizziness and weight gain are the most common [68-72] and most highly-recorded ADRs in all three NHS trusts. When comparing hospital admission data (inpatient vs outpatient), our results show that the inpatient group have a higher recording of any ADRs when the patient starts Clozapine therapy compared to the outpatient group. This is due to the inpatient group being more frequently monitored and recorded by clinicians. A similar pattern is observed when comparing smoking status (smoker vs non-smoker).

Rare ADRs such as agranulocytosis, myocarditis, SJS, cardiomyopathy and pericarditis are reported in the analysis. However, rare ADRs require much attention before they can be declared as positive. Currently, we are manually validating our results on agranulocytosis, myocarditis and neutropenia in parallel studies by going through the clinical notes to improve our assertions.

We also acknowledge that the results still may be specific to the UK in some way. SLAM and C&I trusts are based in London, the population are from very mixed backgrounds, and ethnicities and Oxford trust population are more homogenous. Therefore we believe the results are specific to the UK but may not cover all UK specific concerns.

Limitation

This study was first conducted and evaluated using SLAM’s psychiatric clinical notes. In SLAM, evaluation of each step was carried out manually by at least two annotators, and an inter-annotator agreement was achieved where possible. Due to limited resources, several challenges were faced when implementing the work in C&I and Oxford Trusts. The ADEPt pipeline and ADR timeline were not manually validated in Oxford Trust and the results presented in the C&I Trust are based on a single annotator. Although the proposed work has shown good results, lower precision and recall were found in rare ADEs as they are frequently recorded as warnings, potential and suspected occurrences.

Future work

Ongoing work focuses on extending the analyses to longer periods of time, other drugs such as Lurasidone, drug-drug interaction of Clozapine, adding more patient-related features such as Body Mass Index (BMI), education, mobility, employment status, welfare benefits, homelessness, blood results and alcohol use. We are also planning to apply for this work on other drugs. Current work is underway on the antipsychotic Lurasidone and drug-drug interaction of Clozapine.

Conclusion

ADR extraction from the free-text clinical documents can help clinicians and researchers to predict risks and interventions of drug administration. Often under-utilised due to the fatal nature of ADR, Clozapine is the most effective drug for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. A number of limited studies report Clozapine-induced ADRs. One of its kind in terms of cohort size and the variety of ADRs, this study characterises and provides insight into Clozapine-induced ADRs on a large population of patients across three large mental health hospitals. As well as providing novel findings, the proposed method demonstrates the utility of wider ADR extraction beyond Clozapine, and the study can be replicated using any psychotropic drug. In the future, this work will be expanded to define extended periods of on-treatment episodes, other drugs and more patient-related features in the statistical analysis.

Clozapine–gender differences (%).

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

Chi square statistics (χ2).

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

Combine analysis.

(PDF)

Click here for additional data file.

29 Jun 2020

PONE-D-20-04570

The side effect profile of Clozapine in real world data of three large mental health hospitals

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Iqbal,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 13 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Vincenzo De Luca

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please note that PLOS ONE has guidelines on software sharing (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/materials-and-software-sharing#loc-sharing-software).

Accordingly, we encourage you to make the code for the algorithm described in your manuscript publicly available, if it has not been published in full previously.

3. We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

4. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Iqbal et al. have undertaken the evaluation of side effect profile of clozapine using patient notes from three different hospitals in the UK.

Such endeavors are typically implemented via reaching large enough samples size. In addition, data should be generalizable, and therefore replication studies in an independent cohort are usually conducted to ensure clinical value. Replication also serves as a test of reproducibility of obtained findings. In the current study, authors used de-identified Electronic Health Records and included notes from 2,835 patients admitted into three mental health trusts in the UK. Side effects of clozapine were monitored for 3 months after the initiation of the medication. It was shown that most common side effects during 3-month period were relatively non-specific: sedation, fatigue, agitation, dizziness, hypersalivation, weight gain, tachycardia, headache, constipation, and confusion. To search for discrepancy between obtained findings and established side effect profile of clozapine, authors compared their data with the SIDER database. For most side effects, numbers were more or less similar, but several unexpected results appear to stand out (described in detail in a following paragraph). Statistics seems to be performed appropriately.

Regarding significance, clozapine is a last resort antipsychotic commonly used in patients with refractory SCZ who failed 3 trials with different antipsychotics. Clozapine is notorious for its side effect profile. Among most feared side effects are agranulocytosis, weight gain, seizures, myocarditis, and QT prolongation, all of which requiring careful monitoring. Even though screening of patient notes is generally deemed inferior to established follow-ups on clinical trials such as FAERS etc. (in part due to lack of consistency and absence of clearly set evaluation criteria), blatant discrepancies between established numbers and numbers in routine clinical practice are typically visible. Such discrepancies might be of clinical significance if, for instance, there are new side effects or frequency of established adverse reactions is different, as it may suggest additional or different monitoring strategies. Authors obtained some interesting findings. For example, it was shown that weight gain occurred mostly during the first month, a phenomenon which may deserve further investigation. Incidence of insomnia appeared to be less than previously thought. Furthermore, number of patients who complained of dry mouth and/or blurred vision was less suggesting that anticholinergic effects of clozapine could have been overestimated. Authors also detected higher incidence of diarrhea which is also suggestive of relatively weak anticholinergic activity of clozapine. Of note, agitation was shown to be more prevalent than previously shown. Less incidence of hypotension and dyspepsia may represent notable findings as well. Also, more precise numbers were obtained for hypersalivation and weight gain. Some of these data may have a potential to shift the emphasis in monitoring. Reviewer would select the weight gain (which was shown to be most prominent during first month) and higher incidence of agitation as deserving a follow-up investigation. Different numbers were also obtained for confusion, but confusion is somewhat subjective criterion, so that these data should be interpreted with caution.

Reviewer has several concerns, though. The biggest concern is the lack of a replication cohort. As mentioned in a previous paragraph, in case of confusion as well as other subjective side effects (such as insomnia and dyspepsia), there might be a lot of discrepancies between departments and hospitals, as criteria for subjective side effects may differ among providers and specialties. Furthermore, there is a possibility of Berkson bias, as it is unclear to what extent data obtained in the UK are generalizable. It has been known that genetic architecture plays an important role in pathogenesis of psychotic disorders as well as in pharmacodynamics of clozapine, and it is not unlikely that obtained data may not be generalizable and/or replicated. Second, authors may want to clarify why 3-month period was selected for observation. Among most clinically significant side effects are agranulocytosis, myocarditis, and seizures, and these effects may take longer to develop.

There are also few minor comments. To what extend it is OK to use SIDER database as the only reference? The latest version of SIDER (4.1) was released in 2015, and data on side effects of clozapine listed there might be somewhat outdated. Could results be compared to an additional database? Furthermore, Table 2 appears to be redundant, numbers from this table likely could be given in the text in parentheses. Authors also may want to describe statistics in a more detail, especially how adjustments to potential confounders were made. Figures 1 and 2 seem to be redundant, and authors may consider removing them.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

16 Nov 2020

Dear Reviewer,

We hope that we have addressed all of the reviewer's’ concerns and feel that the paper has been substantially improved. Please see the attached copy of manuscript labeled ‘Revised manuscript with Track Changes’ and revised paper without track changes.

Kind Regards

Ehtesham Iqbal

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

23 Nov 2020

The side effect profile of Clozapine in real world data of three large mental health hospitals

PONE-D-20-04570R1

Dear Dr. Iqbal,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Vincenzo De Luca

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

27 Nov 2020

PONE-D-20-04570R1

The side effect profile of Clozapine in real world data of three large mental health hospitals

Dear Dr. Iqbal:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Vincenzo De Luca

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE