Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Drug Safety 10/2005

01-10-2005 | Leading Article

Impact Analysis of Signals Detected from Spontaneous Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Data

Authors: Dr Patrick Waller, Emma Heeley, Jane Moseley

Published in: Drug Safety | Issue 10/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

This paper describes a new method of prioritising signals of potential adverse drug reactions (ADRs) detected from spontaneous reports that is called impact analysis. This is an interim step between signal detection and detailed signal evaluation. Using mathematical screening tools, large numbers of signals may now be detected from spontaneous ADR databases. Regulatory authorities need to rapidly prioritise them and focus on those that are most likely to require significant action. Using two scores ranging from one to 100, each with three input variables, signals may be categorised in terms of the strength of evidence (E) and the potential public health impact (P). In a two-by-two figure with empirically derived cut-off points of ten (the logarithmic mean) for each score, signals are placed in one of four categories (A–D) that are ranked according to their priority (A being the highest and D the lowest). A sensitivity analysis is then performed that tests the robustness of the categorisation in relation to each of the six input variables. A computer program has been written to facilitate the process and reduce error. Further work is required to test the feasibility and value of impact analysis in practice.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Waller PC, Wood SM. Regulatory aspects of adverse drug reactions. In: Davies DM, Ferner RE, de Glanville H, editors. Davies's textbook of adverse drug reactions. 5th ed. London: Chapman & Hall Medical, 1998: 20–28 Waller PC, Wood SM. Regulatory aspects of adverse drug reactions. In: Davies DM, Ferner RE, de Glanville H, editors. Davies's textbook of adverse drug reactions. 5th ed. London: Chapman & Hall Medical, 1998: 20–28
2.
go back to reference World Health Organisation definition of a signal [online]. Available from URL: u]http://www.who-umc.org/defs.html [Accessed 2004 Aug 31] World Health Organisation definition of a signal [online]. Available from URL: u]http://​www.​who-umc.​org/​defs.​html [Accessed 2004 Aug 31]
3.
go back to reference Meyboom RHB, Egberts ACG, Edwards IR, et al. Principles of signal detection in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 1997; 16: 355–65PubMedCrossRef Meyboom RHB, Egberts ACG, Edwards IR, et al. Principles of signal detection in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 1997; 16: 355–65PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Gould AL. Practical pharmacovigilance analysis strategies. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003; 12: 559–74PubMedCrossRef Gould AL. Practical pharmacovigilance analysis strategies. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003; 12: 559–74PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Evans SJW, Waller PC, Davis S. Use of proportional reporting ratios (PRRs) for signal generation from spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2001; 10: 483–6PubMedCrossRef Evans SJW, Waller PC, Davis S. Use of proportional reporting ratios (PRRs) for signal generation from spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2001; 10: 483–6PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Meyboom RH, Lindquist M, Egberts AC, et al. Signal selection and follow-up in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 2002; 25: 459–65PubMedCrossRef Meyboom RH, Lindquist M, Egberts AC, et al. Signal selection and follow-up in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 2002; 25: 459–65PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Bright RA, Nelson RC. Automated support for pharmacovigilance: a proposed system. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2002; 11: 121–5PubMedCrossRef Bright RA, Nelson RC. Automated support for pharmacovigilance: a proposed system. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2002; 11: 121–5PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference van Puijenbroek EP, van Grootheest K, Diemont WL, et al. Determinants of signal selection in a spontaneous reporting system for adverse drug reactions. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2001; 52: 579–86PubMedCrossRef van Puijenbroek EP, van Grootheest K, Diemont WL, et al. Determinants of signal selection in a spontaneous reporting system for adverse drug reactions. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2001; 52: 579–86PubMedCrossRef
9.
10.
go back to reference Stahl M, Lindquist M, Edwards IR, et al. Introducing triage logic as a new strategy for the detection of signals in the WHO drug monitoring database. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2004; 13: 355–63PubMedCrossRef Stahl M, Lindquist M, Edwards IR, et al. Introducing triage logic as a new strategy for the detection of signals in the WHO drug monitoring database. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2004; 13: 355–63PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Waller PC, Evans SJW. A model for the future conduct of pharmacovigilance. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003; 12: 17–29PubMedCrossRef Waller PC, Evans SJW. A model for the future conduct of pharmacovigilance. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003; 12: 17–29PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Impact Analysis of Signals Detected from Spontaneous Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Data
Authors
Dr Patrick Waller
Emma Heeley
Jane Moseley
Publication date
01-10-2005
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Drug Safety / Issue 10/2005
Print ISSN: 0114-5916
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1942
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00002018-200528100-00002

Other articles of this Issue 10/2005

Drug Safety 10/2005 Go to the issue