Reports of hyperkalemia after publication of RALES - A pharmacovigilance study

Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety

Volumn 15, Issue 11, 2006, Pages 775-783

  Hauben, Manfred ^a,b,c   Reich, Lester ^a   Gerrits, Charles M ^d  

^a PFIZER INC   (United States)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c NEW YORK MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

^d TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS   (United States)

Author keywords

Adverse drug reactions; Data mining; Hyperkalemia; Spinolactone

Indexed keywords

DIPEPTIDYL CARBOXYPEPTIDASE INHIBITOR; POTASSIUM; SPIRONOLACTONE;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA BASE; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM; HEART ARREST; HEART FAILURE; HEART VENTRICLE FIBRILLATION; HEART VENTRICLE TACHYCARDIA; HUMAN; HYPERKALEMIA; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; MORBIDITY; MORTALITY; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; POTASSIUM BLOOD LEVEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SUDDEN DEATH; TIME SERIES ANALYSIS;

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION REPORTING SYSTEMS; ALGORITHMS; BAYES THEOREM; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CAUSALITY; DATA COLLECTION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DIURETICS; DRUG UTILIZATION; HEART FAILURE, CONGESTIVE; HUMANS; HYPERKALEMIA; MORBIDITY; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); ODDS RATIO; PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PRODUCT SURVEILLANCE, POSTMARKETING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPIRONOLACTONE; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION;

EID: 33751114892     PISSN: 10538569     EISSN: 10991557     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pds.1275     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Pitt B, Zannad F, Remme WJ, et al. The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patients with severe heart failure. Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 1999; 341(10): 709-717.
2. Juurlink DN, Mamdani MM, Lee DS, et al. Rates of hyperkalemia after publication of the Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study. N Engl J Med 2004; 351(6): 543-551.
3. Evans SJ, Waller PC, Davis S. Use of proportional reporting ratios (PRRs) for signal generation from spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2001; 16(6): 483-486.
4. Waller P, van Puijenbroek E, Egberts A, Evans S. The reporting odds ratio versus the proportional reporting ratio: 'deuce'. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2004; 13(8): 525-526; discussion 527-528.
5. van Puijenbroek E, Diemont W, van Grootheest K. Application of quantitative signal detection in the Dutch spontaneous reporting system for adverse drug reactions. Drug Saf 2003; 26(5): 293-301.
6. Szarfman A, Machado SG, O'Neill RT. Use of screening algorithms and computer systems to efficiently signal higher-than-expected combinations of drugs and events in the US FDA's spontaneous reports database. Drug Saf 2002; 25(6): 385-392.
7. Bate A, Lindquist M, Edwards IR, et al. A Bayesian neural network method for adverse drug reaction signal generation. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1998; 54(4): 315-321.
8. Hauben M, Reich L. Communication of findings in pharmacovigilance: use of the term 'signal' and the need for precision in its use. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 61(5-6): 479-480.
9. Hauben M. Application of an empiric Bayesian data mining algorithm to reports of pancreatitis associated with atypical antipsychotics. Pharmacotherapy 2004; 24(9): 1122-1129.
10. Hauben M. Trimethoprim-induced hyperkalaemia - lessons in data mining. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2004; 58(3): 338-339.
11. Hauben M, Reich L. Safety related drug-labelling changes: findings from two data mining algorithms. Drug Saf 2004; 27(10): 735-744.
12. Moseley J, Heeley S, Elkins-Daukes S, Evans S. Preliminary comparison of 2 signal detection methodologies in the UK regulatory authority spontaneous ADR database. Drug Saf 2004; 27: 950-951.
13. Hauben M, Madigan D, Gerrits CM, Walsh L, Van Puijenbroek EP. The role of data mining in pharmacovigilance. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2005; 4(5): 929-948.
14. Box GEP. Robustness in the strategy of scientific model building. In: Launer R, Wilkinson G, eds. Robustness in Statistics. Academic Press: New York, 1979.
15. Hauben M, Reich L, Gabbay F. Extension of points on clarifying terminology in drug safety. Drug Saf 2006; 29(3): 273-275.
16. http://www.fda.gov/cder/aers/default.htm [Accessed March 2005].
17. DuMouchel W. Bayesian data mining in large frequency tables, with an application to the fda spontaneous reporting system (with dicussion). Amer Stat 1999; 53: 177-202.
18. Bozkurt B, Agoston I, Knowlton AA. Complications of inappropriate use of spironolactone in heart failure: when an old medicine spirals out of new guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 41(2): 211-214.
19. Ghali WA, Cornuz J. Early uptake of research findings after fast-track publication. Lancet 2000; 355(9203): 579-580.
20. Majumdar S, McAlister F, Soumerai S. Synergy between publication and promotion: comparing adoption of new evidence in Canada and the United States. Am J Med 2003; 115: 467-472.
21. Trontell A. Expecting the unexpected-drug safety, pharmacovigilance, and the prepared mind. N Engl J Med 2004; 351(14): 1385-1387.
22. Hauben M, Patadia V, Gerrits C, Walsh L, Reich L. Data mining in pharmacovigilance: the need for a balanced perspective. Drug Saf 2005; 28(10): 835-842.