1
|
Patadia VK, Schuemie MJ, Coloma PM, Herings R, van der Lei J, Sturkenboom M, Trifirò G. Can Electronic Health Records Databases Complement Spontaneous Reporting System Databases? A Historical-Reconstruction of the Association of Rofecoxib and Acute Myocardial Infarction. Front Pharmacol 2018; 9:594. [PMID: 29928230 PMCID: PMC5997784 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2018.00594] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2018] [Accepted: 05/17/2018] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Several initiatives have assessed if mining electronic health records (EHRs) may accelerate the process of drug safety signal detection. In Europe, Exploring and Understanding Adverse Drug Reactions (EU-ADR) Project Focused on utilizing clinical data from EHRs of over 30 million patients from several European countries. Rofecoxib is a prescription COX-2 selective Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAID) approved in 1999. In September 2004, the manufacturer withdrew rofecoxib from the market because of safety concerns. In this study, we investigated if the signal concerning rofecoxib and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) could have been identified in EHR database (EU-ADR project) earlier than spontaneous reporting system (SRS), and in advance of rofecoxib withdrawal. Methods: Data from the EU-ADR project and WHO-VigiBase (for SRS) were used for the analysis. Signals were identified when respective statistics exceeded defined thresholds. The SRS analyses was conducted two ways- based on the date the AMI events with rofecoxib as a suspect medication were entered into the database and also the date that the AMI event occurred with exposure to rofecoxib. Results: Within the databases participating in EU-ADR it was possible to identify a strong signal concerning rofecoxib and AMI since Q3 2000 [RR LGPS = 4.5 (95% CI: 2.84–6.72)] and peaked to 4.8 in Q4 2000. In WHO-VigiBase, for AMI term grouping, the EB05 threshold of 2 was crossed in the Q4 2004 (EB05 = 2.94). Since then, the EB05 value increased consistently and peaked in Q3 2006 (EB05 = 48.3) and then again in Q2 2008 (EB05 = 48.5). About 93% (2260 out of 2422) of AMIs reported in WHO-VigiBase database actually occurred prior to the product withdrawal, however, they were reported after the risk minimization/risk communication efforts. Conclusion: In this study, EU-EHR databases were able to detect the AMI signal 4 years prior to the SRS database. We believe that for events that are consistently documented in EHR databases, such as serious events or events requiring in-patient medical intervention or hospitalization, the signal detection exercise in EHR would be beneficial for newly introduced medicinal products on the market, in addition to the SRS data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vaishali K Patadia
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.,Sanofi, Bridgewater, NJ, United States
| | - Martijn J Schuemie
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Preciosa M Coloma
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Johan van der Lei
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Miriam Sturkenboom
- Julius Global Health, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Gianluca Trifirò
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.,Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morphofunctional Imaging, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Patadia VK, Coloma P, Schuemie MJ, Herings R, Gini R, Mazzaglia G, Picelli G, Fornari C, Pedersen L, van der Lei J, Sturkenboom M, Trifirò G. Using real-world healthcare data for pharmacovigilance signal detection - the experience of the EU-ADR project. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol 2015; 8:95-102. [PMID: 25487079 DOI: 10.1586/17512433.2015.992878] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
A prospective pharmacovigilance signal detection study, comparing the real-world healthcare data (EU-ADR) and two spontaneous reporting system (SRS) databases, US FDA's Adverse Event Reporting System and WHO's Vigibase is reported. The study compared drug safety signals found in the EU-ADR and SRS databases. The potential for signal detection in the EU-ADR system was found to be dependent on frequency of the event and utilization of drugs in the general population. The EU-ADR system may have a greater potential for detecting signals for events occurring at higher frequency in general population and those that are commonly not considered as potentially a drug-induced event. Factors influencing various differences between the datasets are discussed along with potential limitations and applications to pharmacovigilance practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vaishali K Patadia
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
de Bie S, Coloma PM, Ferrajolo C, Verhamme KMC, Trifirò G, Schuemie MJ, Straus SMJM, Gini R, Herings R, Mazzaglia G, Picelli G, Ghirardi A, Pedersen L, Stricker BHC, van der Lei J, Sturkenboom MCJM. The role of electronic healthcare record databases in paediatric drug safety surveillance: a retrospective cohort study. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2015; 80:304-14. [PMID: 25683723 DOI: 10.1111/bcp.12610] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/22/2014] [Revised: 02/16/2015] [Accepted: 02/10/2015] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
AIM Electronic healthcare record (EHR)-based surveillance systems are increasingly being developed to support early detection of safety signals. It is unknown what the power of such a system is for surveillance among children and adolescents. In this paper we provide estimates of the number and classes of drugs, and incidence rates (IRs) of events, that can be monitored in children and adolescents (0-18 years). METHODS Data were obtained from seven population-based EHR databases in Denmark, Italy, and the Netherlands during the period 1996-2010. We estimated the number of drugs for which specific adverse events can be monitored as a function of actual drug use, minimally detectable relative risk (RR) and IRs for 10 events. RESULTS The population comprised 4 838 146 individuals (25 575 132 person years (PYs)), who were prescribed 2170 drugs (1 610 631 PYs drug-exposure). Half of the total drug-exposure in PYs was covered by only 18 drugs (0.8%). For a relatively frequent event like upper gastrointestinal bleeding there were 39 drugs for which an association with a RR ≥4, if present, could be investigated. The corresponding number of drugs was eight for a rare event like anaphylactic shock. CONCLUSION Drug use in children is rare and shows little variation. The number of drugs with enough exposure to detect rare adverse events in children and adolescents within an EHR-based surveillance system such as EU-ADR is limited. Use of additional sources of paediatric drug exposure information and global collaboration are imperative in order to optimize EHR data for paediatric safety surveillance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra de Bie
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Preciosa M Coloma
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Carmen Ferrajolo
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Campania Regional Center of Pharmacovigilance and Pharmacoepidemiology, Department of Experimental Medicine, Pharmacology Section, Second University of Naples, Naples, Italy
| | - Katia M C Verhamme
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Gianluca Trifirò
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine and Pharmacology, Section of Pharmacology, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - Martijn J Schuemie
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sabine M J M Straus
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Rosa Gini
- Agenzia Regionale di Sanità della Toscana, Florence, Italy
| | - Ron Herings
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,PHARMO Institute, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Gino Picelli
- Pedianet-Società Servizi Telematici SRL, Padova, Italy
| | - Arianna Ghirardi
- Department of Statistics, Universita di Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
| | - Lars Pedersen
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Bruno H C Stricker
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Inspectorate of Health Care, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | - Johan van der Lei
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Miriam C J M Sturkenboom
- Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|